Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami Novrieza Rahmy, Andin Aditya Rahman
The Attorney General has announced that PT. Indosat, Tbk. (“Indosat”) and its subsidiary, PT. Indosat Mega Media (“IM2”), are suspects of corruption, suggesting that an arrangement was made between the two companies to profit from Indosat’s single 3G frequency license.
Investigations allege that an agreement was struck for IM2 to provide internet services using Indosat’s 3G frequency. Access to 3G mobile broadband frequencies is highly regulated, and is licensed by the government through competitive (and expensive) auctions. Although it may be Indosat’s subsidiary, IM2 is not authorized to utilize its 3G frequency, as it never participated in any such licensing process.
Whereas corruption cases have until now been focused on individuals, Indosat and IM2 themselves—corporations, both—were announced as corruption suspects on 3 January 2013, for alleged violations of Article 2 and / or Article 3 of Law No. 31 of 1999 on Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption (“Corruption Law”).
The Director of Investigations at the Deputy Attorney General’s Office for Special Crimes has appointed an investigation team to look into the case, led by Fadil Zaumhana together with a team of 14 attorneys.
Corporations as Suspects of Corruption
Setia Untung Arimuladi, the Head of the Attorney General’s Legal Information Centre, told a press conference (4/1) that whereas initially, the corruption inquiry had focused on IM2 President Director, Indar Atmanto, and the former Indosat President Director, Johnny Swandi Sjam, the focus had shifted now to the corporations of Indosat and IM2 themselves.
“In the Corruption Law it is stated that corporations can be held for criminal responsibilities. This case also aligns with the Attorney General’s priority in 2013 to return lost state funds. Hopefully, it [i.e., focusing on the gains made by both corporations] will more effectively return any lost state funds,” he said.
Setia explained that, in accordance to Article 1 number 3 of the Corruption Law, “every person” can include individuals or corporations; and Article 20 (1) of the Corruption Law additionally states that charges for acts of corruption can be applied to both corporations and / or their directors.
He also stated that company directors represent—and take responsibility for—their organization: “It is clearly stated in the Limited Liability Companies Law. Also in Article 1, number 1 of the Corruption Law, corporations are defined as a group of individuals and / or assets organized in a corporation or other non-legal entity.”
The attorney for Indosat and IM2, Luhut Pangaribuan, was not available for interview, however he has in the past been vocal in defense of his clients.
“What is correct is that IM2 used network services, not frequencies. If there are compulsory payments, the appropriate regulatory bodies should’ve issued bills. The proof is that there were no bills,” he stated at the South Jakarta District Attorney’s Office (19/12).
Luhut explained that Article 9 of Law No. 36 of 1999 on Telecommunications (“Telecommunications Law”) stipulates that frequency owners must provide opportunities for other parties to use the service networks. IM2 is allowed to use Indosat’s service networks, as it does not have a Base Transceiver Station.
Attorney General Endorsed by Corruption Watchdog
Febri Diansyah of the International Corruption Watch endorsed the prosecution and the renewed effort to apply criminal charges to corporations.
Indonesia’s law enforcers are fixated on corruption by individuals, he said, and therefore corporative corruption has been left by the wayside.
“Charging corporations [with corruption] is frequent in many other countries. It should be a priority,” Febry said during an interview with Hukumonline, Friday (4/1).
The successful prosecution of PT. Giri Jaladhi Wana in the Sentra Antasari Market construction project remains the only corruption case yet to have applied criminal charges to a corporation. PT. Giri Jaladhi was sentenced to pay IDR 1.3 billion in fines, and was temporarily prohibited from business for 6 months.
The ICW Member continued to state that this must be taken seriously: “…the public prosecutors must be serious; don’t stop halfway or issue an investigation termination letter (SP3),” he said.
Clarifications by Indosat
Indosat’s President Director and CEO, Alexander Busli emphasized in a press release (6/1) that the accusations are false, and that the cooperation between Indosat and IM2 is in full accordance with prevailing laws and regulations.
Indosat acquired permits to use the 3G frequency, he said; based on those permits, Indosat established and operated a telecommunication network using the 3G frequency, and fulfilled all necessary payments to the government.
He continued to state that IM2 is not required to make payments for its cooperation with Indosat. This cooperation enables IM2 to utilize Indosat’s telecommunication networks to provide internet services as an Internet Service Provider, in accordance to the Telecommunications Law.
“Cooperation between Indosat and IM2 is lawful, as stated in the Kemkominfo Letter No. 65/ M.Kominfo/ 02/ 2012 dated 24 February 2012. In this letter, it is specifically stated that Indosat and IM2 have fulfilled all compulsory payments to the government and IM2 is not obligated to pay frequency costs,” stated Alexander.
As a telecommunications operator, Indosat is allowed to provide its telecommunication networks to IM2, and “…therefore it is not a joint utilization of a frequency spectrum. Internet Service Providers using telecommunication networks is in accordance with the Telecommunications Law.”
He stated further that Indosat will send a letter to the Attorney General to request further information.
Something New
Adrian Prasanto, the Head of Indosat’s Public Relations Division, also emphasized that Indosat and IM2 both performed business operations in accordance to prevailing laws and regulations.
“Indosat and IM2 have fulfilled their responsibilities, such as fee concessions and tax payments, in accordance to prevailing provisions,” said the spokesman to Hukumonline, Saturday (5/1).
Adrian added that Indosat and IM2 will indeed request further details from the Attorney General, as he concluded that “…this is something new to us.”
(eli)
Novrieza Rahmy, Andin Aditya Rahman
The Attorney General has announced that PT. Indosat, Tbk. (“Indosat”) and its subsidiary, PT. Indosat Mega Media (“IM2”), are suspects of corruption, suggesting that an arrangement was made between the two companies to profit from Indosat’s single 3G frequency license.
Investigations allege that an agreement was struck for IM2 to provide internet services using Indosat’s 3G frequency. Access to 3G mobile broadband frequencies is highly regulated, and is licensed by the government through competitive (and expensive) auctions. Although it may be Indosat’s subsidiary, IM2 is not authorized to utilize its 3G frequency, as it never participated in any such licensing process.
Whereas corruption cases have until now been focused on individuals, Indosat and IM2 themselves—corporations, both—were announced as corruption suspects on 3 January 2013, for alleged violations of Article 2 and / or Article 3 of Law No. 31 of 1999 on Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption (“Corruption Law”).
The Director of Investigations at the Deputy Attorney General’s Office for Special Crimes has appointed an investigation team to look into the case, led by Fadil Zaumhana together with a team of 14 attorneys.
Corporations as Suspects of Corruption
Setia Untung Arimuladi, the Head of the Attorney General’s Legal Information Centre, told a press conference (4/1) that whereas initially, the corruption inquiry had focused on IM2 President Director, Indar Atmanto, and the former Indosat President Director, Johnny Swandi Sjam, the focus had shifted now to the corporations of Indosat and IM2 themselves.
“In the Corruption Law it is stated that corporations can be held for criminal responsibilities. This case also aligns with the Attorney General’s priority in 2013 to return lost state funds. Hopefully, it [i.e., focusing on the gains made by both corporations] will more effectively return any lost state funds,” he said.
Setia explained that, in accordance to Article 1 number 3 of the Corruption Law, “every person” can include individuals or corporations; and Article 20 (1) of the Corruption Law additionally states that charges for acts of corruption can be applied to both corporations and / or their directors.
He also stated that company directors represent—and take responsibility for—their organization: “It is clearly stated in the Limited Liability Companies Law. Also in Article 1, number 1 of the Corruption Law, corporations are defined as a group of individuals and / or assets organized in a corporation or other non-legal entity.”
The attorney for Indosat and IM2, Luhut Pangaribuan, was not available for interview, however he has in the past been vocal in defense of his clients.
“What is correct is that IM2 used network services, not frequencies. If there are compulsory payments, the appropriate regulatory bodies should’ve issued bills. The proof is that there were no bills,” he stated at the South Jakarta District Attorney’s Office (19/12).
Luhut explained that Article 9 of Law No. 36 of 1999 on Telecommunications (“Telecommunications Law”) stipulates that frequency owners must provide opportunities for other parties to use the service networks. IM2 is allowed to use Indosat’s service networks, as it does not have a Base Transceiver Station.
Attorney General Endorsed by Corruption Watchdog
Febri Diansyah of the International Corruption Watch endorsed the prosecution and the renewed effort to apply criminal charges to corporations.
Indonesia’s law enforcers are fixated on corruption by individuals, he said, and therefore corporative corruption has been left by the wayside.
“Charging corporations [with corruption] is frequent in many other countries. It should be a priority,” Febry said during an interview with Hukumonline, Friday (4/1).
The successful prosecution of PT. Giri Jaladhi Wana in the Sentra Antasari Market construction project remains the only corruption case yet to have applied criminal charges to a corporation. PT. Giri Jaladhi was sentenced to pay IDR 1.3 billion in fines, and was temporarily prohibited from business for 6 months.
The ICW Member continued to state that this must be taken seriously: “…the public prosecutors must be serious; don’t stop halfway or issue an investigation termination letter (SP3),” he said.
Clarifications by Indosat
Indosat’s President Director and CEO, Alexander Busli emphasized in a press release (6/1) that the accusations are false, and that the cooperation between Indosat and IM2 is in full accordance with prevailing laws and regulations.
Indosat acquired permits to use the 3G frequency, he said; based on those permits, Indosat established and operated a telecommunication network using the 3G frequency, and fulfilled all necessary payments to the government.
He continued to state that IM2 is not required to make payments for its cooperation with Indosat. This cooperation enables IM2 to utilize Indosat’s telecommunication networks to provide internet services as an Internet Service Provider, in accordance to the Telecommunications Law.
“Cooperation between Indosat and IM2 is lawful, as stated in the Kemkominfo Letter No. 65/ M.Kominfo/ 02/ 2012 dated 24 February 2012. In this letter, it is specifically stated that Indosat and IM2 have fulfilled all compulsory payments to the government and IM2 is not obligated to pay frequency costs,” stated Alexander.
As a telecommunications operator, Indosat is allowed to provide its telecommunication networks to IM2, and “…therefore it is not a joint utilization of a frequency spectrum. Internet Service Providers using telecommunication networks is in accordance with the Telecommunications Law.”
He stated further that Indosat will send a letter to the Attorney General to request further information.
Something New
Adrian Prasanto, the Head of Indosat’s Public Relations Division, also emphasized that Indosat and IM2 both performed business operations in accordance to prevailing laws and regulations.
“Indosat and IM2 have fulfilled their responsibilities, such as fee concessions and tax payments, in accordance to prevailing provisions,” said the spokesman to Hukumonline, Saturday (5/1).
Adrian added that Indosat and IM2 will indeed request further details from the Attorney General, as he concluded that “…this is something new to us.”
(eli)