The year 2024 was a dynamic period in Indonesia’s fight against corruption. Various law enforcement, including the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), the Attorney General’s Office, and the Indonesian National Police (POLRI), demonstrated varying performances in handling corruption cases involving public officials, the private sector, and corporations. Throughout the year, law enforcement efforts faced numerous challenges, ranging from arguably political obstacles to likely internal dynamics.
In addition to prosecuting individuals, this year also saw attention to corporation, with several companies facing charges for corrupt practices that are detrimental to the state finance. Several high-profile cases emerged, involving high-rank officials and cross-sector corruption, emphasizing the challenges encountered in combating corruption in Indonesia. This report will summarize key developments in corruption eradication throughout 2024, highlighting achievements, challenges, and reflections on the effectiveness of anti-corruption policies implemented during the year.
- Performance of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK)
Law enforcement against Corruption
As one of the three prongs of corruption eradication strategy, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) is carrying out a series of enforcement efforts to provide a deterrent effect on perpetrators of corruption crimes. In 2024, the most common corruption modes handled by the KPK were Procurement of goods/services; Gratification/bribery; Extortion/Embezzlement; Money laundering; Obstruction of justice.[1] According to KPK’s statistical data as of December 31, 2024, the KPK has carried out enforcement efforts, including 73 cases of investigation, 154 cases of inquiry, 90 cases of prosecution, 91 cases with final and binding verdict (inkracht), and 108 cases of execution.[2]
During 2024, the KPK also faced several lawsuit, including pre-trial, civil, State Administrative Court (PTUN), and public information disputes, with a total of 75 cases. Of the 75 cases, 27 of them were pre-trial cases, with 26 cases declared completed, and 1 case in process.[3]
Assets Recovery
The KPK continues to demonstrate a commitment to eradicating corruption through the asset recovery. In 2024, the KPK has recovered Rp731,549,197,475 in state financial losses through asset recovery. The KPK has also handed over confiscated goods through a grant or Utilization of State Property process to ministries/agencies/regional governments, including 159 confiscated land, buildings, and vehicles. The asset recovery process is carried out in an integrated manner, by tracking the assets of suspects/defendants/convicts, managing evidence in the form of seizures and confiscated items, assessing the asset value to determine the amount of state financial losses that can be recovered, and executing verdicts, including money compensation, fines, or confiscated assets.[4]
- Performance of the Attorney General’s Office
The Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes (JAM-Pidsus) of the Attorney General’s Office has handled 2,316 corruption cases at the investigation stage throughout 2024. Meanwhile, the estimated amount of state financial recovery this year reached Rp44.100.000.000.000. The handling of corruption cases by the JAM-Pidsus that reached the investigation stage totaled 1,589 cases, while 2,036 cases went to prosecution, and 1,836 cases were executed. Legal appeals included 511 appeals, 420 cassations, and 59 motion for reconsideration (peninjauan kembali).[5]
- Performance of the Police
The Indonesian National Police (POLRI) has also reaffirmed its commitment by establishing the Corruption Eradication Task Force (Kortas Tipidkor), tasked with handling and preventing corruption while securing state assets. Throughout 2024, POLRI successfully discovered 1,280 corruption cases, with 431 cases resolved, and arrested 830 suspects. One of the major cases handled was corruption in the Marga Tirta Dam project, which caused a state loss of Rp43.300.000.000. Additionally, POLRI has handled state financial losses totaling Rp4.800.000.000.000 from various corruption cases.
- Enforcement of Corporate Corruption Crimes
Private Company
A private company can be implicated in a corruption case if it acts as a co-conspirator. This includes scenarios where the company receives illegal state funds or participates in a criminal act leading to a financial loss for the state. On late December 2024, the Indonesian Attorney General’s Office formally designated two corporate entities and one individual as suspects in the ongoing investigation into the Duta Palma Group corruption case.[6] The newly indicted entities include PT Alfa Ledo, PT Monterado Mas, and Cheryl Darmadi, who serves as the Director of PT Asset Pasific and Chairperson of Yayasan Darmex. These indictments reinforce Indonesia’s approach to corporate criminal liability, holding companies accountable for financial crimes. Investigators found that the illicit profits from illegally controlled plantation lands were funneled through PT Kencana Amal Tani, PT Bayas Biofuels, and PT Taluk Kuantan Perkasa before being transferred to PT Asset Pasific, PT Alfa Ledo, PT Monterado Mas, and Yayasan Darmex. The funds were allegedly disguised as deposits, capital investments, shareholder debt payments, and offshore asset acquisitions.
The investigation revealed that the corruption scheme was directly linked to Surya Darmadi, the owner of PT Duta Palma Group, and Raja Tamsir Rachman, the former Regent of Indragiri Hulu. Raja Tamsir Rachman allegedly unlawfully issued plantation permits to subsidiaries of PT Duta Palma Group, including PT Palma Satu, PT Panca Agro Lestari, PT Seberida Subur, and PT Banyu Bening Utama.[7] These companies allegedly used falsified documentation to secure land concessions in protected forest areas, leading to illegal land acquisition and severe environmental damage. To further conceal the profits from this scheme, the illicit proceeds were processed through palm oil processing plants controlled by PT Duta Palma Group. The processed palm oil products were then funneled through PT Monterado Mas and PT Alfa Ledo, allowing the funds to be allegedly laundered through PT Asset Pasific and Yayasan Darmex.
Surya Darmadi had previously been convicted of corruption and money laundering in 2023 under Decision No. 62/Pid.Sus-TPK/2022/PN.Jkt.Pst. The court found him guilty of illegally obtaining plantation permits through bribery and document falsification, which resulted in extensive financial and environmental damage. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and ordered to pay financial penalties amounting to Rp4.79 trillion and USD7.88 million, along with additional restitution for state economic losses totaling Rp73.92 trillion.[8] Despite the severity of the sentence, Surya Darmadi continued to challenge his conviction. In 2024, he filed a motion for reconsideration (peninjauan kembali) seeking to overturn the verdict, but the Supreme Court rejected his petition, reaffirming the original ruling.[9]
The 2024 corporate indictments reaffirm Indonesia’s commitment to combating corruption at both individual and corporate levels. As legal proceedings continue, these cases highlight the growing enforcement of corporate criminal liability and the strengthening of governance in high-risk industries.
State-Owned Enterprises (BUMN)
According to Article 1 paragraph (1) of Law No. 19/2003 on State-Owned Enterprises (BUMN Law), State-Owned Enterprises (“SOE”) or BUMN are defined as business entities in which the state owns all or most of the capital through direct participation from separated state assets. This definition has long raised questions about whether BUMN finances should still be considered part of state finances. Under Law Number 17 of 2003 on State Finance, particularly Article 2 letter g, state or regional assets managed independently or by other entities, including assets separated into state or regional companies, are classified as state finances. This interpretation was reinforced by Constitutional Court Decision Number 62 of 2013[10], which ruled that BUMN assets remain state assets. As a result, financial losses in BUMN have traditionally been regarded as state losses, making them subject to potential prosecution under Law Number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with Law Number 20 of 2001 on the Eradication of Corruption.
However, a fundamental legal shift occurred with the enactment of the Third Amendment to the BUMN Law, which was officially passed on February 4, 2025.[11] This latest revision introduces a crucial change in the legal status of BUMN capital. The newly added Article 4B explicitly states that the capital and assets of BUMN belong to BUMN [12] and any profit or loss incurred by BUMN does not constitute state profit or loss. Furthermore, the law clarifies that profits or losses of BUMN include, but are not limited to, those arising from the management of part or all BUMN assets in investment and/or operational activities of the respective BUMN. This revision represents a significant departure from prior interpretations that linked BUMN losses to state losses, potentially limiting the automatic application of corruption laws in cases of financial mismanagement.
This Third Amendment to the BUMN Law is expected to reshape how financial accountability in BUMN is assessed. By explicitly separating BUMN financial outcomes from state finances, the law reinforces BUMN’s standing as independent business entities. Although the state remains the primary shareholder, BUMN operations are now governed by corporate financial principles rather than state financial administration. Since this provision has only recently been enacted, its implications for corruption cases involving BUMN will likely become a major subject of discussion among regulators, legal practitioners, and policymakers. The long-term impact of this legal shift on financial governance and corruption prevention in Indonesia remains to be seen.
Business decisions in SOEs must consider not only the profit aspect but also the public interest and state objectives, following Article 2 of Law No. 19 Year 2003. It should be noted that not all losses in BUMN are necessarily considered corruption, especially with the recent amendments further clarifying the distinction between state finances and BUMN assets.
For the sake of organizing BUMN businesses with integrity and free from corruption, in recent years, the government has continued to develop preventive regulations to prevent corruption. The first, regarding the governance of SOEs, has been stipulated in Government Regulation 45 of 2005 concerning the Establishment, Management, Supervision, and Dissolution of State-Owned Enterprises as amended by Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 23 of 2022. Chapter IV of the regulation has been regulated as the supervision mechanism for a state-owned company. Furthermore, employees and directors of SOEs are required to establish guidelines on behavior and ethics (code of conduct) and establish anti-corruption and anti-fraud policies as stipulated in Article 41 of the Regulation of the Minister of SOEs Number PER-02/MBU/03/2023 on the Implementation of Good Corporate Governance in State-Owned Enterprises.
Despite the regulations and preventive mechanisms, corruption continues to plague SOEs, as seen in the recent PTPN VI case. In 2024, the Jambi Corruption Court sentenced Drs. H. Iskandar Sulaiman, ME Bin H. Sulaiman, the former President Director of PTPN VI, to 7 years in prison for corruption in the 2012 acquisition of PT Mendahara Agro Jaya Industry (PT MAJI). The court ruled that he orchestrated a fraudulent acquisition, inflating valuation reports, manipulating procurement processes, and mismanaging finances, which resulted in significant state losses. It also ordered him to pay a fine of IDR 750 million (approximately USD 47,000) or serve an additional 4 months in prison.[13]
A similar pattern of corruption emerged in PT INKA Multi Solusi (IMS), a subsidiary of PT INKA (Persero). In 2024, the Surabaya Corruption Court sentenced Heny Wulandari, the former Head of Procurement Department at PT IMS (2015–2017), to 10 years in prison for her role in a procurement fraud scheme. The court found that she had manipulated supplier selections, inflated contract values, and engaged in financial mismanagement, which resulted in her illegally benefiting herself by IDR 4.25 billion (approximately USD 273,000).[14]
While legal frameworks and preventive measures exist, their consistent implementation and enforcement remain crucial in mitigating financial misconduct. These cases reaffirm that SOE finances are part of state finances, making corporate transparency and ethical compliance essential. Moving forward, a balanced approach between prevention, oversight, and enforcement will help ensure that SOEs can operate efficiently, maintain public trust, and contribute to sustainable economic growth.
- Major Cases Throughout 2024
Alleged Sugar Import Corruption Case Involving former Minister of Trade
In October 2024, the Attorney General’s Office named former Minister of Trade (2015-2016), Tom Lembong, as a suspect in an alleged corruption case involving sugar imports.[15] The case originated from Lembong’s unilateral decision to approve the import of 105,000 tons of raw crystal sugar (GKM) for PT AP, despite an inter-ministerial coordination meeting in May 2015 concluding that Indonesia did not need sugar imports. This decision was made without recommendations from relevant agencies and violated ministerial regulations stating that only state-owned enterprises (BUMN) were authorized to import white crystal sugar.
In December 2015, PT PPI allegedly collaborated with eight private companies to process GKM into white crystal sugar, despite these companies only being licensed to manage refined sugar. The processed sugar was then sold above the highest retail price without a market operation, while PT PPI received a fee of Rp105 per kilogram. After undergoing four rounds of questioning, Tom Lembong was charged under Article 2 Paragraph 1 or Article 3 in conjunction with Article 18 of the Anti-Corruption Law, as well as Article 55 Paragraph 1 (1) of the Criminal Code. His pre-trial motion filed in November 2024 was rejected, and he was reaffirmed as a suspect. In January 2025, the Attorney General’s Office named nine additional suspects allegedly involved in the scheme.
The Tin Trading Corruption Case
One of the cases that shocked the public in 2024 was the tin trading corruption case, which involved several high-ranking officials from various companies related to tin mining. This case caused a major uproar as it was reported from the outset that the defendants’ actions had caused losses amounting to hundreds of trillions of rupiah. The issue began in 2015 when PT Timah Tbk ceased its land-based mining operations due to the rampant activities of illegal miners within its mining business permit (Izin Usaha Pertambangan or IUP) areas. These miners operated under mining service business permits (Izin Usaha Jasa Pertambangan or IUJP) issued by local governments. Based on court proceedings, it was revealed that despite knowing such activities were prohibited, PT Timah continued purchasing tin from illegal miners and legitimized the practice through the Mining Services Partnership program. From 2015 to 2022, the number of partner companies in this scheme varied each year. Initially, payments to partners were based on accumulated service costs, but from 2016 onwards, payments were adjusted to market tin prices and recorded as operational service compensation.
It was later revealed that this partnership program was a scheme created by PT Timah Tbk to legalize both mining activities and the purchase of illegal tin ore within its IUP areas. Several partner companies also sold high-grade tin ore to collectors, who then supplied private smelters such as PT Refined Bangka Tin, CV Venus Inti Perkasa, PT Sariwiguna Binasentosa, and PT Tinindo Inter Nusa, causing PT Timah Tbk to fail in meeting its production targets. Due to these practices, the company incurred unnecessary expenditures amounting to IDR 10.38 trillion.
According to Verdict No. 80/Pid.Sus-TPK/2024/PN Jkt.Pst in the case of the defendant Mochtar Riza Pahlevi, President Director of PT Timah from 2016 to 2021, the environmental damage caused in forest and non-forest areas covering 170,000 hectares amounted to IDR 271 trillion. These losses were divided into environmental damage losses, environmental economic losses, and environmental restoration costs. Additionally, the defendants were also found guilty of causing state losses through the lease agreement for tin processing equipment that did not comply with regulations, amounting to IDR 2.28 trillion, as well as state losses from payments for illegal tin ore mining, totaling IDR 26.6 trillion. As a result, the total losses caused by the defendants’ actions reached IDR 300 trillion.[16]
The judges’ considerations in Verdict No. 80/Pid.Sus-TPK/2024/PN Jkt.Pst in recognizing the IDR 271 trillion in environmental damage as a state loss were based on the fact that the environmental destruction created an obligation for restoration, which would become the responsibility of the state.[17] The government would then have to use state budget funds to restore the damage caused by illegal mining activities.
Dozens of suspects were involved in this massive corruption case. The sentences handed down by the judges varied, ranging from 4 years in prison—such as the sentence given to Rosalina, General Manager of Operations at PT Tinindo Internusa[18]—to 8 years in prison for Mochtar Riza Pahlevi, the President Director of PT Timah. The defendants were found guilty of violating Article 2(1) in conjunction with Article 18 of the Anti-Corruption Law in conjunction with Article 55 (1) of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP), while several defendants were also charged with money laundering under Article 3 of the Anti-Money Laundering Law.
The Bribery Case in the Ronald Tannur Trial Involving Three Surabaya District Court Judges and a Former Supreme Court Official
This case originated from the acquittal verdict handed down by the Surabaya District Court judges in the murder case involving Ronald Tannur. The judge’s decision to free Ronald raised suspicions and was deemed unusual by the Attorney General’s Office (AGO). Following the verdict, the AGO, through the Special Crimes Investigation Team (Jampidsus), launched an investigation.[19] The inquiry led to the discovery of sufficient evidence to escalate the case to the prosecution stage, ultimately resulting in the arrest of three Surabaya District Court judges and Ronald’s lawyer, Lisa Rahmat, as suspects in bribery and gratuity offenses.
In the bribery case, investigators found several pieces of evidence during searches at the suspects’ residences. Seized items included IDR1.1 billion, USD450, SGD717,043, and transaction records at Lisa’s home in Surabaya. From her apartment in Jakarta, authorities confiscated USD and SGD equivalent to IDR 2 billion, currency exchange documents, records of money transfers to related parties, and a mobile phone. The search at Judge Erintuah Damanik’s apartment in Surabaya uncovered IDR 97 million, SGD 32,000, MYR 35,992.25, and other evidence, while his house in Semarang yielded USD 6,000, SGD 300, and electronic devices. Additionally, from Judge Hanindyo’s apartment in Surabaya, investigators secured IDR 104 million, USD 2,200, SGD 9,100, JPY 100,000, and electronic items. Meanwhile, Judge Mangapul’s apartment in Surabaya contained IDR 21.4 million, USD 2,000, SGD 32,000, and other electronic evidence.
More recently, investigators arrested and named Zarof Ricar, a former Supreme Court official, as a suspect for allegedly conspiring to facilitate a bribe amounting to IDR 5 billion to ensure Ronald Tannur’s acquittal at the cassation level.[20] According to preliminary findings, the AGO discovered that Zarof frequently received gratuities related to case management at the Supreme Court, totaling approximately IDR 920 billion and 51 kg of gold bars. Furthermore, Meirizka Widjadja, Ronald Tannur’s mother, was also declared a suspect for allegedly preparing IDR 3.5 billion to bribe the Surabaya District Court judges to secure her son’s acquittal.
PDI-P Secretary General Hasto Kristiyanto Named as a Suspect
At the end of 2024, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) named PDI-P Secretary General Hasto Kristiyanto as a suspect. This case is a development of the case involving former PDI-P legislative candidate for South Sumatra Electoral District I in the 2019 General Election, Harun Masiku, who remains a fugitive.[21]
KPK revealed evidence of Hasto and Donny’s involvement in the case linked to former Deputy Chairman of the General Elections Commission (KPU) for the 2017-2022 period, Wahyu Setiawan, and former member of the Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu), Agustiani Tio F. The KPK stated that the money used for the bribery originated from Hasto.
Hasto is suspected of bribing KPU Commissioner Wahyu Setiawan and obstructing the investigation into Harun Masiku’s case. He has been charged under Article 5 paragraph (1) letter a or letter b, or Article 13, and Article 21 of Law No. 31 of 1999 on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes, as amended by Law No. 20 of 2001 on the Amendment to Law No. 31 of 1999 on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes, in conjunction with Article 55 paragraph (1) point 1 of the Indonesian Penal Code (KUHP).
Investigation of Alleged Corruption in Bank Indonesia’s CSR Funds
The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) is currently investigating alleged corruption involving Bank Indonesia’s (BI) corporate social responsibility (CSR) funds, which are suspected to have been distributed to members of the House of Representatives’ (DPR) Commission XI.[22] The investigation gained traction after Satori, a member of Commission XI, claimed that all members of the commission had received BI CSR funds for programs in their respective electoral districts. KPK conducted searches at the offices of BI and the Financial Services Authority (OJK) and questioned several DPR members. KPK’s Director of Investigations, Asep Guntur Rahayu, stated that the main issue lies in the misuse of CSR funds, which were not entirely utilized as intended. Meanwhile, KPK’s Deputy for Enforcement and Execution, Rudi Setiawan, emphasized that the commission would uncover all facts related to the decision-making process and identify those who benefited from the funds.
On the other hand, the Chairman of Commission XI, Mukhamad Misbakhun, denied that the funds were directly transferred to DPR members, stating that BI’s CSR funds were deposited directly into the accounts of recipient foundations without passing through the personal accounts of legislators. Bank Indonesia Governor Perry Warjiyo also affirmed that CSR allocations are determined annually through the Board of Governors’ meetings and are only awarded to verified legitimate foundations. Nonetheless, KPK continues to investigate allegations that the distribution mechanism could serve as a kickback scheme, where CSR funds are used as compensation to facilitate the agendas of certain parties.
Written by: R. Bayu Perdana, Agil Mayumi, Allison Dara, and Afiyah Arinda Putri
Disclaimer: The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information.
[1]Official KPK, The most common corruption modes in 2024, https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFzKDqisrBigsh=MTFxNXRvem1samgwdQ, Accessed on February 10, 2025
[2] KPK Statistical Data, https://www.kpk.go.id/id/publikasi-data/statistik/penindakan-2, accessed on February 3, 2025
[3] KPK Performance 2020-2024: Handles 2,730 Corruption Cases, Five Sectors Become Main Focus, KPK News, 2024, https://www.kpk.go.id/id/ruang-informasi/berita/kinerja-kpk-2020-2024-tangani-2730-perkara-korupsi-lima-sektor-jadi-fokus-utama, accessed on February 3, 2025.
[4] 2020-2024 Performance: KPK Recovers State Losses Worth IDR 2.5 Trillion, KPK News, 2024, https://kpk.go.id/id/ruang-informasi/berita/kinerja-2020-2024-kpk-kembalikan-kerugian-negara-senilai-rp25-triliun, Accessed on February 4, 2025.
[5] 2024 Attorney General’s Office Performance Achievements: Special Crimes Unit handles investigations of 2,306 corruption cases, contributes Rp. 1.69 Trillion in Non-Tax State Revenue, Attorney General’s Office News, https://story.kejaksaan.go.id/pencapaian/capaian-kinerja-kejaksaan-2024-pidsus-tangani-penyelidikan-2306-perkara-korupsi-setor-pnbp-rp169-triliun-269823-mvk.html?screen=1, accsessed on February 4, 2025.
[6] Kejaksaan Tinggi Jawa Timur. (2025, January 2). Penetapan tersangka perorangan dan korporasi dalam perkara korupsi PT Duta Palma Group di Kabupaten Indragiri Hulu. Kejati Jatim. Retrieved from https://kejati-jatim.go.id/penetapan-tersangka-perorangan-dan-korporasi-dalam-perkara-korupsi-pt-duta-palma-group-di-kabupaten-indragiri-hulu/
[7] Ibid.
[8] Page 3–4, Verdict No. 62/Pid.Sus-TPK/2022/PN Jkt Pst.
[9] CNN Indonesia. (2024, September 27). MA tolak PK Surya Darmadi, tetap dihukum 16 tahun bui dan bayar Rp2 T. CNN Indonesia. Retrieved from https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20240927192729-12-1149266/ma-tolak-pk-surya-darmadi-tetap-dihukum-16-tahun-bui-dan-bayar-rp2-t
[10] Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. (2013). Ikhtisar putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 62/PUU-XI/2013. Retrieved from https://www.mkri.id/public/content/persidangan/sinopsis/ikhtisar_1350_1044_62-PUU-XI-2013_ok.pdf
[11] Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Republik Indonesia. (2025, February 4). DPR RI sahkan revisi UU BUMN jadi undang-undang. EMedia DPR RI. Retrieved from https://emedia.dpr.go.id/2025/02/04/dpr-ri-sahkan-revisi-uu-bumn-jadi-undang-undang/
[12] Triatmodjo, Y. (2025, February 5). Kerugian Negara. Kontan. Retrieved from https://insight.kontan.co.id/news/kerugian-negara
[13] Page 3, Verdict No. 36/Pid.Sus-TPK/2024/PN Jmb.
[14] Page 242, Verdict No. 34/Pid.Sus-TPK/2024/PN Sby
[15] Tempo.co, “Kronologi dan Kasus Dugaan Korupsi Impor Gula Tom Lembong, Kejagung Tetapkan 9 Tersangka Baru” retrieved from https://www.tempo.co/hukum/kronologi-dan-kasus-dugaan-korupsi-impor-gula-tom-lembong-kini-kejagung-tetapkan-9-tersangka-baru-1196839
[16] Page 1787-1789, Verdict No. 80/Pid.Sus-TPK/2024/PN Jkt.Pst
[17] Page 1845-1846, Verdict No. 80/Pid.Sus-TPK/2024/PN Jkt.Pst
[18] Page 3, Verdict No. 81/Pid.Sus-TPK/2024/PN.Jkt.Pst
[19] Kompas, “Kronologi Kasus Ronald Tannuar Suap HakimDemi Bebas dari Pembunuhan”, retrieved from https://www.kompas.com/tren/read/2024/10/24/154500465/kronologi-kasus-ronald-tannur-suap-hakim-demi-bebas-dari-pembunuhan-?page=all
[20] CNN Indonesia, “Daftar Tersangka Kasus Suap Pengurusan Perkara Ronald Tannur”, retrieved from https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20241105060336-12-1163018/daftar-tersangka-kasus-suap-pengurusan-perkara-ronald-tannur
[21] Hukum Online, “Ditetapkan Tersangka oleh KPK, Begini Peran Hasto Kristiyanto di Kasus Harun Masiku”, retrieved from https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/ditetapkan-tersangka-oleh-kpk–begini-peran-hasto-kristiyanto-di-kasus-harun-masiku-lt676ab827f04b8/
[22] BBC Indonesia, “Kasus dugaan korupsi CSR BI, benarkah dana mengalir ke semua anggota Komisi XI DPR?” retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/articles/cdjgpp7e01mo
Partner