DPR Calls Prosecutor’s Evidence Strong in Chromebook Case

Nadiem Makarim, defendant in the alleged Chromebook corruption case (Photo: Okezone Doc)

JAKARTA – Member of Commission III DPR RI Hinca Pandjaitan highlighted the alleged corruption in the procurement of Chromebooks at the Ministry of Education and Culture which is currently ongoing at the Jakarta Corruption Court. According to him, the construction of the indictment and demands prepared by the public prosecutor (JPU) at the Attorney General’s Office (Kejagung) shows a strong, coherent pattern of evidence and is supported by solid evidence and can be tested legally.

He admitted that he had followed the proceedings from the start. He saw that the legal arguments presented by the prosecutor were neatly structured and had a solid evidentiary basis. Hinca also appreciated the prosecutor’s performance.

“I followed the proceedings of this trial closely from the start. I have to say that the facts and evidence presented by the prosecutor were very strong. The juridical analysis presented by the public prosecutor was well structured and had a solid evidentiary basis,” he said, quoted on Sunday (17/5/2026).

According to Hinca, in the public sphere there is a tendency to simplify a number of findings in this case as ‘coincidences’. He also believes that this view is not relevant in criminal corruption law if there is a recurring pattern.

He emphasized that the repeated and structured series of events cannot be considered a coincidence, but rather points to an element of intent in the criminal act.