Roy Suryo Files Third Pretrial Motion in Jokowi Diploma Case

Roy Suryo has once again filed a pretrial motion at the South Jakarta District Court. This time, Roy is seeking compensation from the Metro Jaya Police regarding the legal handling of the Jokowi diploma case. The petition was registered with the court on Wednesday, 15 July 2026, under case number 118/Pid.Pra/2026/PN JKT.SEL, with the case classification concerning ‘Compensation’. The first defendant is the Metro Jaya Police Chief, cq the Director of General Criminal Investigation of the Metro Jaya Police, cq the Head of the State Security Sub-Directorate, cq the Investigation Team. Meanwhile, the second defendant is the Head of the Jakarta High Prosecutor’s Office, cq the Assistant for General Crimes at the Jakarta High Prosecutor’s Office, cq the Head of the South Jakarta District Attorney’s Office, cq the Public Prosecutor Team. ‘Case classification: compensation,’ as reported on the South Jakarta District Court’s Case Tracking Information System page on Thursday (16/7). A member of Roy Suryo’s legal team, Abdul Gofur Sangaji, confirmed that they had again filed a pretrial motion at the South Jakarta District Court. ‘I will spill a little that yesterday we also registered a third pretrial motion. The case registration number has been issued, a single pretrial judge has been appointed, and the trial schedule for the third pretrial has also been released,’ Gofur told reporters on Thursday. However, Gofur has not yet elaborated on the reasons for this pretrial motion, including the details of the petition. ‘The point is we have also submitted a third pretrial motion and this is not ne bis in idem,’ he said. For context, this is the third time Roy has filed a pretrial motion at the South Jakarta District Court regarding the case of the alleged fake diploma of the 7th President of the Republic of Indonesia, Joko Widodo (Jokowi). The first motion sought to test the legality of the search and arrest. The single judge at the South Jakarta District Court partially granted Roy’s motion, ruling that the forced measures were procedurally flawed and therefore should be declared legally invalid. Regarding the detention, the judge opined that the action did not meet the subjective requirements and thus should be declared invalid. However, in that ruling, the judge rejected Roy’s request for the restoration of his honour and dignity. The second motion sought to test the legality of his naming as a suspect, and this case is still ongoing at the South Jakarta District Court.