Nadiem's Lawyer Reveals Reasons for Coordinated Absence from Chromebook Trial

Nadiem Makarim’s legal team has spoken out regarding their absence from today’s hearing in the alleged corruption case concerning the procurement of Chromebook laptops and Chrome Device Management (CDM). Nadiem’s lawyer stated that they had received information that Nadiem has been ill since being placed in detention. “We regret the prosecutors’ attitude in forcing Nadiem to be brought to court by force, even though he is unwell. Even in his ill state, Nadiem has not been allowed to see the doctor and hospital that usually treat him, where he has received care and undergone four surgeries,” said Nadiem Makarim’s lawyer, Ari Yusuf Amir, when contacted on Wednesday (22/4/2026). “The prosecutors’ insistence on this is a serious human rights violation; there must be an evaluation and firm action. Because we received information that Nadiem is ill, we did not attend the hearing,” he added. Ari stated that Nadiem’s health condition had already been explained in previous hearings by the doctor treating him. He assessed that the prosecutors were forcing Nadiem to be brought to today’s hearing. “In the previous hearing, the prosecutor’s doctor and the specialist who operated on Nadiem were present, explaining how severe Nadiem’s health condition is. However, the request to change his detention status so he can receive full treatment has not been responded to by the judge; even today, in his ill condition, he is being forced to be brought to the Central District Court,” he said. Furthermore, Ari alluded to the judge’s determination that if Nadiem is ill, he should be immediately taken to the hospital. He said that Nadiem is a judicial detainee, not a prosecutor’s detainee. “In fact, there was a previous judge’s determination conveyed in the hearing that if Nadiem is ill, he should simply be taken to the hospital that usually treats him. Since Nadiem is a judicial detainee, not a prosecutor’s detainee, the prosecutors are obliged to carry it out. This action not only violates human rights but is also contempt of court,” he said. For information, today’s hearing agenda for Nadiem was the examination of witnesses or experts to mitigate from Nadiem and his advocacy team. However, no lawyers for Nadiem were present in the courtroom at the Central Jakarta District Court. “In accordance with the schedule that has been determined and agreed upon between the public prosecutor and the defendant as well as the legal counsel, today is the agenda for examining witnesses or experts to be presented by the defendant or legal counsel. However, in accordance with the determined schedule today, we the public prosecutors have attended, but the legal counsel did not,” said the prosecutor at the Central Jakarta Corruption Court, on Wednesday (22/4). After deliberation, the panel of judges decided to postpone the hearing until Monday (27/4) due to the absence of Nadiem’s advocacy team and consideration of his health condition. The judge hopes for professionalism from Nadiem’s advocacy team. “With the hope that we certainly expect professionalism from fellow advocates to attend as well; of course, with these postponements, the panel of judges determines the stages of the trial. Thus, we adjourn until Monday, 27 April 2026, for the opportunity for the defendant and advocates to propose witnesses or experts. The hearing is declared closed,” said the chief judge Purwanto S Abdullah. In this case, Nadiem is accused of corruption related to the procurement of Chromebook laptops during his tenure as Minister of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology. The project is said to have caused a state loss of Rp 2.1 trillion. The prosecutors stated that the calculation of the state loss of Rp 2.1 trillion comes from the overpricing of Chromebooks amounting to Rp 1,567,888,662,716.74 (1.5 trillion). Then, the procurement of unnecessary and unbeneficial CDM amounting to USD 44,054,426 or equivalent to approximately Rp 621,387,678,730.00 (621 billion). Besides Nadiem, there are three other defendants in this case. They are Sri Wahyuningsih, as the former Director of Primary Schools in the Directorate General of Early Childhood Education, Basic Education, and Secondary Education in 2020-2021; Mulyatsyah, as the former Director of Junior High Schools in the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology in 2020; and Ibrahim Arief (IBAM), as a consultant for the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology during Nadiem’s era.