Press release
15 June 2019

Lawyer: KPK's Request that Sjamsul Nursalim Come Mislead

Request of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) that Sjamsul Nursalim (SN) and Itjih Nursalim present and fulfill investigators’ call to follow the examination process of alleged corruption cases in issuing a Certificate of Bank Indonesia Liquidity Assistance (SKL BLBI) has disturbed the image the husband and wife. Although, Sjamsul and Itjih are currently named as suspects.

Maqdir Ismail, Sjamsul’s attorney said, the calling of the KPK seemed to indicate that Sjamsul and Itjih had committed criminal acts as alleged, without legal process. Though Sjamsul and Itjih have never been examined as potential suspects as required by the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK). Maqdir claimed that the completion of the BLBI BDNI obligation by Sjamsul Nursalim based on the civil agreement (MSAA) made between the government and Sjamsul was completed. In addition, the approach to settling the BLL SKL case is a civil, not criminal, domain. “This is proof that the KPK does not respect the law and legal process,” Maqdir said in a press release received in Jakarta on Friday (6/14/2019).

Maqdir Ismail also requested that the KPK be open by proving that Sjamsul and Itjih had harmed state finances in the BDNI BLBI case for legal purposes. The KPK must show Sjamsul has misrepresented farmer debt based on a civil court decision. Because, the BLBI BDNI settlement is carried out by civil mechanism through the making of the MSAA Agreement. Not only that, Maqdir also asked the KPK to confirm the government to take legal action against Sjamsul regarding the BLBI settlement. This, said Maqdir, is important because Sjamsul Nursalim’s BLBI settlement is based on MSAA and Presidential Instruction No. 8/2002. In addition, the government’s statement in the House of Representatives in 2008, as well as government guarantees in release and discharge stated that the government would not carry out or prosecute all legal actions or implement any legal rights that the government might have against SN in connection with the BLBI settlement based on MSAA.

“The KPK must also prove that the emergence of state finances amounted to Rp. 4.58 trillion due to the signing of the MSAA by the government and SN. Because the government has never stated that Sjamsul has not carried out all of its obligations in accordance with the MSAA. since 1999, “said Maqdir Ismail.

Maqdir Ismail claimed that Sjamsul was not involved in the write-off or sale of farmers’ debts. That is fully the authority of the government. According to Maqdir, it is unfair if Sjamsul is again linked to being abolished or even asked to be responsible for the difference in sales of the debt of Dipasena farmers. Moreover, all guarantees of 22,000 farms have been entirely handed over to third parties.

Not only that, Maqdir also questioned the sale of all assets received by the government in connection with the BLBI settlement during the crisis period, almost all of them were carried out with a value far lower than the value of their receipts. Maqdir also blamed the results of the 2002 BPK investigative audit and the 2006 BPK audit which stated that Sjamsul had completed all of its obligations on BLBI and other related matters based on MSAA.

According to Maqdir, a closer audit has a higher proof value and that should be used when referring to the principle of proof law. Meanwhile, said Maqdir, the 2017 BPK investigative audit did not refer to the 2002 BPK investigative audit and 2006 BPK audit, and instead used unilateral evidence and information from the KPK without first testing and verifying it. “Until now, the KPK and BPK have not explained why they ignored the 2002 and 2006 BPK audits, even though both were very decisive evidence,” explained Maqdir Ismail.

It is known that the KPK has determined Sjamsul and his wife Itjih Nursalim as suspects in a case of alleged corruption in the issuance of SKL BLBI. This stipulation is a development of the case of the former Head of the Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency (IBRA), Syafruddin Arsyad Temenggung who has been sentenced to 15 years in prison and a fine of Rp 1 billion subsidiaries 3 months imprisonment by the DKI High Court in the appeal decision. In this case, Sjamsul and Itjih were allegedly enriched or benefited by Rp. 4.58 trillion. For a crime he allegedly committed, Sjamsul and Itjih were allegedly in violation of Article 2 paragraph (1) or Article 3 of Law Number 31 Year 1999 as amended by Act Number 20 of 2001 concerning Eradication of Corruption Crimes in conjunction with Article 55 paragraph (1 ) 1st Criminal Code.