Nadiem Makarim Faces 18 Years in Prison in Corruption Case

TheIndonesia.co - Indonesian prosecutors have demanded an 18-year prison sentence for former Education, Culture, Research and Technology Minister Nadiem Makarim over an alleged corruption scheme linked to the procurement of Chromebook laptops and Chrome Device Management (CDM) systems for schools.

The charges were presented during a hearing at the Central Jakarta Anti-Corruption Court on Wednesday, where prosecutors accused the former minister of orchestrating a “white-collar crime” by exploiting bureaucratic loopholes and abusing his office for personal and corporate gain.

Lead prosecutor Roy Riady told the court that Nadiem had deliberately bypassed formal ministerial structures by creating what prosecutors described as a “shadow organisation” operating outside official government channels.

According to the prosecution, the alleged structure was used to steer education technology policies in favour of business interests connected to companies affiliated with the former minister.

“The defendant used his authority to create a non-transparent system. Instead of strengthening the existing bureaucracy, he built decision-making mechanisms outside formal procedures that ultimately benefited certain commercial parties,” prosecutors said in court documents.

Prosecutors also highlighted what they described as an unexplained increase in Nadiem’s personal wealth during his time in office.

Court proceedings further revealed allegations linking the Chromebook procurement project to an alleged fraud scheme involving PT AKAB and large-scale external investments.

One of the prosecution’s most striking claims concerned an alleged Google investment worth US$786 million — equivalent to roughly Rp11 trillion — which prosecutors said had only been recorded as Rp60 billion in administrative reports.

“We see indications of a scheme designed to disguise the real value in order to avoid taxes and conceal conflicts of interest,” Roy Riady told the court.

In addition to the prison sentence, prosecutors demanded a fine of Rp1 billion, with an additional 190 days in custody if unpaid.

They also sought Rp5.6 trillion in compensation payments, consisting of alleged state losses of Rp809.59 billion from the procurement project and a further Rp4.87 trillion in assets prosecutors claimed could not be legally justified.

If the compensation is not paid, prosecutors said Nadiem could face an additional nine years in prison.

The prosecution argued that the alleged corruption was particularly serious because it took place within Indonesia’s education sector, which they described as a strategic pillar of national development.

They said the case had undermined efforts to improve equal access to quality education across the country.

Prosecutors also criticised Nadiem’s conduct during the investigation, alleging that he gave evasive answers when questioned about his income and funding sources.

The hearing additionally focused on testimony from three expert witnesses called by Nadiem’s legal team, whom prosecutors accused of lacking independence and objectivity.

One of the experts, criminal law specialist Romli Atmasasmita, was criticised over family ties to members of Nadiem’s defence team.

Prosecutors told the court that Romli is the father of three lawyers representing Nadiem through ADP Law Firm, creating what they described as a clear conflict of interest.

“Ethically, there is obvious partiality and a conflict of interest between the expert witness and the defence lawyers representing the defendant,” Roy Riady said.

Another expert, administrative law specialist I Gede Pantja Astawa, was criticised for arguing that alleged abuses of authority involving state officials should first be resolved administratively rather than through criminal proceedings.

Meanwhile, education consultant Ina Liem faced sharp criticism from prosecutors, who argued that her testimony resembled social media advocacy rather than expert analysis.

Prosecutors claimed she lacked detailed knowledge of the case and provided shallow answers when discussing Indonesia’s education system.

“She spoke about procurement and digitalisation outside her area of expertise. It resembled commentary without scientific grounding — more characteristic of a content creator,” prosecutors argued.

The prosecution urged the panel of judges to dismiss the experts’ testimony, claiming it merely attempted to justify the defendant’s actions while ignoring the legal facts presented during the trial.

The court is scheduled to resume proceedings next week, when Nadiem and his legal team are expected to deliver their defence statement.