Jakarta, ThedailyID — Indonesia’s anti-corruption court sentenced former Education Minister Nadiem Anwar Makarim to 10 years in prison after finding him guilty in a corruption case involving the procurement of Chromebook laptops and Chrome Device Management (CDM) systems.
The ruling, delivered by the Jakarta Corruption Court on Tuesday, was not unanimous. One member of the judicial panel issued a dissenting opinion and argued that Nadiem should have been acquitted.
Here are the key facts behind the verdict:
1. Court Imposes 10-Year Prison Sentence
The court sentenced Nadiem to 10 years in prison and fined him Rp1 billion. If he fails to pay the fine, he must serve an additional 190 days in prison.
Judges also ordered him to pay Rp809.5 billion in restitution. If he does not repay the amount, he will face an extra five years behind bars.
2. Judges Cite Abuse of Power
The panel ruled that Nadiem abused his authority during the procurement process between 2020 and 2022.
According to the court, his actions contradicted the government’s anti-corruption efforts. Judges also said the scheme was planned, structured, and systematic. They concluded that it caused major financial losses and disrupted education, especially in Indonesia’s remote regions.
However, the court acknowledged several mitigating factors. Nadiem had no previous criminal record, remained cooperative throughout the trial, and had previously contributed to education and technology development.
3. Nadiem Files an Appeal
The verdict has not become legally binding because Nadiem immediately announced he would appeal.
After the hearing, he said he would continue fighting the case for his family and for what he described as the truth.
4. One Judge Disagreed With the Verdict
Judge Andi Saputra issued a dissenting opinion. He argued that prosecutors failed to prove criminal intent beyond reasonable doubt.
According to Andi, evidence presented during the trial did not establish that Nadiem intentionally committed an unlawful act. He also said the education ministerial regulation signed by Nadiem specified an operating system rather than a particular brand.
In addition, Andi said prosecutors failed to prove that Nadiem conspired with the other defendants in the case.
5. Court Finds Rp1.5 Trillion State Loss
The court concluded that the procurement caused Rp1.5 trillion in state losses. Judges relied on an audit by Indonesia’s Financial and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP).
The panel also rejected prosecutors’ request to impose around Rp4.8 trillion in additional compensation. Judges said the legal mechanism used to pursue those assets was inappropriate in this case.
Nevertheless, the court recommended that investigators continue tracing Nadiem’s assets through a separate money laundering (TPPU) investigation if sufficient evidence exists.
