Rejects Lawsuit Against Fadli Zon Who Denies 1998 Mass Rapes

The decision of the Jakarta State Administrative Court (PTUN) not to accept the lawsuit against Fadli Zon has sparked criticism from the Coalition of Civil Society Against Impunity. The coalition, as the plaintiffs, views the ruling as a failure of the judiciary to deliver justice for the victims of the mass rapes during the May 1998 riots. One of the plaintiffs, Kusmiyati, the mother of a victim killed in the 1998 events, expressed her disappointment over the decision. She stated that she witnessed the violence firsthand, having seen many female rape victims in the hospital while searching for her son, who was later confirmed dead. Now, she has filed a lawsuit through the PTUN and questioned the course of the trial. “I saw it with my own eyes, oh God. This is my child (she was looking for her son in the hospital at that time -ed), and this is rape. They were raped and then burned. Why was our trial yesterday thwarted?” said Kusmiyati at a press conference at the National Commission on Violence Against Women, on Wednesday (22/4/2026). “No matter how long it takes, hope should not be lost along the way. No matter how long, as plaintiffs, this history must not be erased,” said Kusmiyati. According to her, efforts to demand recognition and justice will continue. “We will fight until our last breath,” she emphasised. The Jakarta PTUN stated that it could not accept the lawsuit and granted the defendant’s exception regarding absolute competence. In its verdict, the court deemed itself not authorised to adjudicate the case because the object of the dispute, namely Fadli Zon’s statements via press release and social media, did not meet the elements of a State Administrative Decision. “The Jakarta State Administrative Court has no absolute authority to adjudicate this dispute,” stated the panel of judges’ considerations. The PTUN also assessed that the statements did not produce concrete, individual, and final legal effects, thus falling outside the scope of dispute objects. On that basis, the lawsuit was declared inadmissible, and the plaintiffs were ordered to bear the costs of the case.