Nadiem's Side Claims All Elements Unproven in Chromebook Case

Jakarta, VIVA - The trial concerning the alleged corruption in the procurement of Chromebooks at the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology on Wednesday, 6 May 2026, featured several expert witnesses who scrutinised the substance of the indictment, particularly regarding the calculation of state losses, which was deemed to lack a strong legal basis.

The legal advisory team for the defendant, former Minister of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology Nadiem Makarim, comprising Dodi S. Abdulkadir and Ari Yusuf Amir, argued that the trial facts demonstrate that the criminal elements in the case are not fulfilled.

Ari Yusuf Amir stated that from the outset of the trial, no malicious intent (mens rea) or unlawful acts were found in the Chromebook procurement process.

“Essentially, we are grateful, Alhamdulillah, that in the early testimonies yesterday, we obtained facts showing no mens rea, no malicious intent in this case. Then it developed further in the trial that there were no unlawful acts; everything was procedural. Today, Alhamdulillah, it was further emphasised that there is no such thing as state financial loss. So this is no case, truly no case. All elements are unproven,” said Ari Yusuf Amir to reporters on Thursday, 7 May 2026.

The expert witnesses presented in the trial included former Chairman of the BPK RI for the 2019–2022 period, Dr. Agung Firman Sampurna, Expert in State Administrative Law Prof. Dr. I Gede Pantja Astawa, and Expert in Business Law Prof. Dr. Nindyo Pramono.

In his testimony, Agung Firman Sampurna stated that the Audit Results Report (LHA) on state losses submitted by the prosecutors does not meet the absolute requirements for calculating state losses.

According to him, the calculation of state losses can only be conducted by the Financial Audit Board (BPK) as stipulated in the constitution, Supreme Court Circular (SEMA) Number 6 of 2016, and Constitutional Court Decision Number 28 of 2026.

“In brief, we can conclude that the LHA on state losses from the Chromebook procurement at the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology does not meet three absolute requirements: first, it was not conducted by the state audit institution with constitutional mandate. Second, the investigative audit procedure used for calculating state losses is not based on a predicate. And third, the method of calculating state losses used does not align with the characteristics of the procured goods,” said Agung.