Pretrial Hearing: Former HSU Chief Prosecutor Demands Rp 100 Billion in Compensation from KPK
Former Hulu Sungai Utara (HSU) chief prosecutor Albertinus P Napitupulu has filed a pretrial motion relating to the seizure of assets in a suspected extortion case. In one of the petition’s demands, Albertinus has asked the judge to order the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) to pay Rp 100 billion in compensation.
The pretrial hearing was held at the South Jakarta District Court on Friday (20 February 2026). The case is registered under number 8/Pid.Pra/2026/PN JKT.SEL, classified as a challenge to the legality of the seizure.
“From the Petitioner, regarding this motion — would you like it read out or how shall we proceed?” asked Tri Retnaningsih, the sole presiding judge of the pretrial hearing at the South Jakarta District Court.
“With your permission, Your Honour, it may be deemed as read,” replied Albertinus’s lawyer, Syam Wijaya.
The judge then enquired whether the KPK, as the respondent, was prepared to respond to the pretrial motion. The KPK’s Legal Bureau team stated it would submit its response on Monday (23 February).
“And from the Respondent regarding the response?” the judge asked.
“We respectfully request Monday (23 February 2026), Your Honour,” answered the KPK Legal Bureau team.
The judge then closed the hearing and asked both Albertinus’s counsel and the KPK to adhere to the agreed hearing schedule. According to the timeline, closing arguments for this pretrial case are scheduled for Friday (27 February) and the verdict for Monday (2 March).
“The hearing is adjourned as I have previously outlined. The session is hereby concluded and closed,” the judge stated.
According to the Case Tracking Information System (SIPP) of the South Jakarta District Court, there are 12 points in the pretrial petition. Albertinus has asked the pretrial judge to declare the seizure, arrest, designation as suspect, and detention carried out by the KPK to be unlawful.
Albertinus has also asked the pretrial judge to order the KPK to release him immediately from detention. He further requests that the judge order the KPK to pay Rp 100 billion in compensation.
The full 12 points of Albertinus’s pretrial petition are as follows:
Grant the Petitioner’s pretrial motion in its entirety.
Declare the arrest carried out by the Respondent against the Petitioner to be unlawful and invalid under the law, with all attendant legal consequences.
Declare the detention carried out by the Respondent against the Petitioner to be unlawful and invalid under the law, with all attendant legal consequences.
Declare the designation as suspect carried out by the Respondent against the Petitioner to be unlawful and invalid under the law, with all attendant legal consequences.
Declare the searches carried out by the Respondent at the Petitioner’s office, official residence, and private residence to be unlawful, invalid under the law, and without legal force, with all attendant legal consequences.
Declare the seizure of items carried out by the Respondent from the Petitioner’s office, official residence, and private residence to be unlawful and invalid under the law, with all attendant legal consequences.
Order the Respondent to immediately release the Petitioner from state detention upon the granting of this ruling.
Order the Respondent to return all items (documents, cash, mobile phones, and other belongings) seized or confiscated from the Petitioner and the Petitioner’s family to their original state.
Order the Respondent to immediately unblock all bank accounts belonging to the Petitioner.
Order the Respondent to rehabilitate and restore the Petitioner’s dignity and standing — as a prosecutor, as a parent, as a husband, as a member of society, and as a human being — to their original state in accordance with prevailing legal provisions, and to issue a public apology for a full month through both print and electronic media.
Order the Respondent to pay the Petitioner compensation in the amount of Rp 100,000,000,000 in cash.
Costs arising under the law.
Alternatively, should the judge of the South Jakarta District Court examining this case hold a different view, the Petitioner requests a just ruling in accordance with the law and proper judicial procedure (ex aequo et bono).