Simeulue Kominsa Corruption Trial: BPKP Expert Witness Admits Lack of Media Business Understanding

The trial of the alleged corruption case regarding the media publication budget at the Communication, Informatics and Encryption Office (Kominsa) of Simeulue Regency at the Banda Aceh Corruption Court revealed a crucial fact. In his testimony, an expert witness from the Finance and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP) openly admitted that he lacked competence or deep understanding regarding advertising business mechanisms in the media industry.

The expert witness explained that the calculation of state losses he compiled was based on references from an expert at the Government Goods/Services Procurement Policy Institute (LKPP). Additionally, he confirmed examining documents such as invoices and memorandums of understanding (MoU) belonging to PT Gumpalan Media Perkasa in the case file under review.

Responding to this admission, Muhammad Zubir, legal counsel for defendant Kadri Amin from EMZED and Partner Law Firm, emphasized that this point was a crucial note for the panel of judges. According to him, doubts over the expert's competence in understanding the subject matter of the case mean that the calculation of state losses forming the basis of the indictment needs to be re-examined more carefully and objectively.

Furthermore, Zubir raised allegations of indicated criminalization behind this case. He explained that the case allegedly stemmed from an internal conflict regarding the distribution of the publication budget at the Simeulue Kominsa Office that occurred long before the legal process began. According to him, there is a correlation between that dispute and the pressure for legal reporting that subsequently criminalized his client.

For context, PT Gumpalan Media Perkasa, as the press company housing Gumpalannews.com, holds official legality from the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and is led by a journalist certified at the Principal level. The legal team emphasized that they will continue to monitor the trial process to prove that this case is not purely an enforcement of the law against acts of corruption.