News Update
Attorney Endang Hadrian Argues Corruption Charges in Warnasari Port Access Project Are Premature
Jakarta — Dr. H. Endang Hadrian, S.H., M.H., counsel for one of the defendants in the alleged corruption case concerning the Warnasari Port Access Development Project, argued during court proceedings that the criminal prosecution was initiated prematurely and before the underlying civil dispute had reached a final and binding resolution.
According to Dr. Endang Hadrian, evidence presented during the proceedings showed that the Integrated Design and Build Construction Agreement for the Warnasari Port Access Project (Phase II), dated 22 January 2021, was signed by Ir. Tb. Abu Bakar Rasyid, President Director of PT Arkindo, together with witness Jhony Husban.
Dr. Endang further argued that, based on the evidence presented, Jhony Husban was the individual who allegedly used the name of PT Arkindo to participate in the procurement process. He also submitted that the tender documents containing the allegedly inaccurate information were prepared and submitted by Jhony Husban, a fact which, according to the defense, was also acknowledged in the Public Prosecutor's indictment.
Following the exception hearing (eksepsi), Dr. Endang stated that the criminal proceedings appeared to be premature, as they were closely connected to an ongoing contractual dispute arising from Contract No. 003/HK–PCM/I/2021, dated 20 January 2021, between PT Pelabuhan Cilegon Mandiri and the PT Arkindo–PT Marina Cipta Pratama Joint Operation (KSO).
He explained that the related civil dispute had previously been decided in favor of PT Arkindo–PT Marina Cipta Kreasi KSO by the Serang District Court under Decision No. 121/Pdt.G/2023/PN.Srg dated 12 April 2023, a judgment subsequently affirmed by the Banten High Court in Decision No. 175/PDT/2023/PT.BTN dated 20 July 2023. At the time of the criminal proceedings, however, the civil case was still undergoing cassation review before the Supreme Court of Indonesia.
According to Dr. Endang Hadrian, the Public Prosecutor should have awaited a final and legally binding judgment in the civil proceedings before pursuing the criminal prosecution, as the contractual issues remained unresolved.
Dr. Endang also questioned the allegation of state financial losses amounting to IDR 7,001,544,764, arguing that the indictment did not specify which legally authorized institution had determined the existence and amount of such losses.
He referred to the Law on the Audit Board of the Republic of Indonesia (BPK) and Supreme Court Circular Letter No. 4 of 2016, which provide that the authority to determine the existence of state financial losses rests with the Audit Board of Indonesia (BPK).
Dr. Endang expressed hope that the Panel of Judges would carefully consider the legal and factual issues raised during the exception proceedings, including the findings in the Serang District Court's civil judgment, which, according to the defense, indicated that the criminal proceedings should await the conclusion of the civil litigation. He argued that continuing the criminal prosecution before the civil dispute reached a final and binding resolution could create the appearance that the case had been initiated prematurely.
This matter reflects Endang Hadrian & Partners' experience in representing clients in complex litigation involving public procurement, construction contracts, corruption allegations, and the interaction between civil and criminal proceedings under Indonesian law.
