Judge's Consideration in Sentencing Hasto to 3.5 Years in Prison in Bribery Case

JAKARTA, KOMPAS – The considerations of the panel of judges, based on the strength of electronic evidence and fundamental legal aspects, became the determining factor for the fate of the Secretary-General of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle or PDI-P, Hasto Kristiyanto. In the verdict read at the Jakarta Corruption Court on Friday (25/7/2025), Hasto was sentenced to 3.5 years in prison for being proven involved in a bribery case, but he was acquitted of the obstruction of investigation charges.

In the bribery case, the judge relied heavily on digital evidence, while in the obstruction of investigation case, the judge acquitted him due to the prosecution's charges being deemed weak from a legal and material evidentiary standpoint.

The key to the guilty verdict in the bribery case is the electronic evidence in the form of WhatsApp conversations. The Chief Judge Rios Rahmanto explained that the inconsistency in the testimony of key witnesses regarding the source of the bribe funds was successfully countered by this digital trail.

The judge referred to a conversation on December 16, 2019, between witness Donny Tri Istiqomah and Saeful Bahri. Within a span of just a few seconds, Donny sent a message that explicitly mentioned two different sources of funds: "Mas Hasto is giving Rp 400," which was immediately followed by the message, "the 600 is from Harun, they say."

According to the judge, this evidence legally and convincingly shows that Hasto provided funds of Rp 400 million to facilitate Harun Masiku's path to the DPR.

This consideration was reinforced by the member judge, Sunoto, who stated that Hasto had the motive and organizational authority to carry out such actions. "When formal efforts fail, the defendant resorts to illegal means," said Sunoto.

Yes, in my opinion the suspicion is clear, the article is also clear, anyone who intentionally prevents, obstructs or thwarts...

On the other hand, the panel of judges dismissed all charges of obstruction of investigation for several fundamental reasons. First, the alleged act occurred on January 8, 2020, one day before Harun Masiku was officially designated as a suspect. According to the judges, at that time the process was still in the investigation stage, not the inquiry stage, thus it did not fall within the scope of Article 21 of the Anti-Corruption Law that was charged against Hasto.

Secondly, the judge assessed that the allegation of destroying evidence was unproven. The phone that was said to have been submerged is still in existence and has been confiscated by the KPK. Since the article used pertains to a material offense, the prosecutor must demonstrate the existence of a concrete consequence in the form of a failed investigation, and this was not found in the trial facts.

Due to being proven in a bribery case, the panel of judges sentenced Hasto to 3.5 years in prison and a fine of Rp 250 million. Hasto was also deemed not to support the anti-corruption program and to have damaged the image of the election organizing institution. Meanwhile, mitigating factors included Hasto's polite demeanor, the fact that he had never been punished before, and his family responsibilities.

Meanwhile, the Chairman of the KPK, Setyo Budiyanto, respects the judges' decision regarding Hasto Kristiyanto. However, he expressed disappointment and questioned the acquittal verdict handed down to Hasto in the obstruction of investigation charges.

Setyo admitted that he had just heard the news of the 3.5-year verdict from the media and had not yet received an official copy of the decision. However, he specifically commented on Hasto's escape from the entanglement of Article 21 of the Anti-Corruption Law.

"Yes, in my opinion, the presumption is clear, the wording of the article is also clear, anyone who intentionally prevents, obstructs, or frustrates," said Setyo on Friday (25/7/2025) evening.

The evidence presented by the public prosecutor is already very strong in demonstrating the defendant's direct efforts to obstruct the investigation. He is confident that this evidence directly indicates attempts to prevent, obstruct, and thwart the legal process by the defendant.

Regarding the next legal steps, such as filing an appeal, Setyo stated that his side will not rush. The KPK will wait and study the complete copy of the verdict along with the judges' considerations within it before making a decision.

"That effort will come after we receive the complete verdict. I will not preempt because the first authority lies with the public prosecutor," he stated.