Witness Says Issuance of Sugar Import Permits Without Recommendations Not During Tom Lembong Era

JAKARTA, KOMPAS – The continued trial of the sugar import corruption case at the Ministry of Trade during 2015-2016, with the defendant being former Minister of Trade Thomas Trikasih Lembong or Tom Lembong, took place on Monday (24/3/2025) at the Corruption Court in Central Jakarta, presenting several witnesses. During the trial, it was revealed that the issuance of sugar import permits without recommendations from limited coordination meetings did not occur during Tom Lembong's leadership era.

As previously reported, Tom Lembong was charged with enriching others, resulting in state losses amounting to Rp 515.4 billion. The indictment stated that Tom issued import approval letters for raw crystal sugar for the 2015-2016 period to 10 private companies.

The approval was granted without being based on a coordination meeting between ministries and without being accompanied by a recommendation from the Ministry of Industry. There are 21 sugar import approval letters that do not comply with the provisions of the legislation.

However, during the trial, the witness presented by the public prosecutor stated that the approval for sugar imports without a limited coordination meeting was issued by the Minister of Trade in 2017, held by Enggartiasto Lukita, not Tom Lembong.

In this hearing, the public prosecutor presented two witnesses from the Ministry of Trade, namely the Secretary of the Inspectorate General at the Ministry of Trade, Robert J. Indartyo; and the Expert Staff for Management, Governance, and Inter-Institutional Relations at the Ministry of Trade, Susy Herawaty.

The legal team of the defendant, Tom Lembong, then delved further into who granted approval for sugar imports to private companies, such as PT Medan Sugar Industry, PT Permata Dunia Sukses Utama, and PT Makassar Tenne.

Firmly, witness Susy stated that the approval was given by Enggartiasto Lukita, not by Tom Lembong. "In 2017, the Minister of Trade was Enggartiasto Lukita. The one who signed the approval was the Minister," said Susy.

When asked whether the witness was aware of the defendant's involvement in the import permit issuance process in 2017, he stated that he was not aware of such involvement. The witness also confirmed that there was no communication between the defendant and him in the import permit issuance process in 2017.

Furthermore, the legal team asked about the legal basis used in issuing the sugar import permit in 2017. However, the witness admitted to forgetting.

The defendant's legal team then reminded the witness' statement summarized in the Examination Report (BAP). In the BAP, the witness stated that the sugar import permit was made without a limited coordination meeting (rakortas) between ministries.

"Why was the import approval that did not meet the requirements because there was no discussion in the coordination meeting, but was still issued by Mr. Engartiasto Lukita?" asked the defendant's attorney.

"I told my leader that this did not meet (the requirements) because there was no coordination meeting. Then the import director told me that the import approval must still be processed because it was the Minister's instruction," said Susy, who served as Head of the Sub-Directorate of Agricultural, Marine, and Fishery Goods at the Ministry of Trade for the period September 2016-January 2018.

Meanwhile, witness Robert J Indartyo explained that the sugar import policy in 2015-2016 or during Tom Lembong's leadership era was carried out based on domestic needs. The determination was discussed in a limited coordination meeting with various related ministries, such as the Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs, the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of SOEs, and several other institutions, including BMKG.

"I attended a coordination meeting on December 28, 2015 at the Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs office. In that meeting, three main commodities were discussed, namely beef, soybeans, and sugar," he said.

In the discussion of the coordination meeting, Robert said, the Deputy for Food explained the position of sugar stocks at the trader, industry, and farmer levels, as well as national needs. From the results of the study, it was concluded that additional imports were needed to meet domestic needs.

Robert also emphasized that the implementation of sugar imports was carried out under the direction of the Minister of Trade, who assigned PT Perusahaan Perdagangan Indonesia (PPI) to manage sugar imports to stabilize prices and stock availability. He also mentioned that PT Perusahaan Perdagangan Indonesia (PPI) must import raw sugar to protect sugar cane farmers.

"If we import white crystal sugar directly, farmers will definitely object," he said.

In order to protect sugarcane farmers, according to Robert, the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Economy proposed to import raw sugar. That is the basis for the creation of a recommendation letter for importing raw sugar.

In the trial, the prosecutor also questioned the evaluation of market operations which were considered less than optimal. Robert confirmed that in the official memo he made, it was stated that market operations had not been running effectively, especially in border areas. Furthermore, based on the evaluation results, the Letter from the Minister of Trade limited its operational areas to border and remote areas.

If we import white crystal sugar directly, farmers will definitely object.

After listening to the witnesses' testimonies, Tom Lembong expressed relief because the witnesses revealed the truth. For example, regarding the absence of a sugar surplus in 2015-2016 so that the sugar import policy did not harm farmers. In addition, it was revealed in the trial that sugar imports were carried out in order to stabilize prices and secure national stocks.

Meanwhile, in the trial, the panel of judges again ordered the public prosecutor to bring a copy of the Financial and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP) report. Until now, neither the panel of judges nor the defendant's legal team have received a copy of the BPKP report.

Before the trial began, the Head of Tom Lembong's legal team, Ari Yusuf Amir, again asked for a copy of the BPKP report. "Please excuse me, panel of judges, we would like to remind you again about the BPKP," he said in a trial held at the Corruption Court, Jakarta, Monday (3/24/2025).

The public prosecutor said he would report on the developments regarding the order soon. "We ask for time to report," the public prosecutor said.

Chief Justice Dennie Arsan Fatrika said it was the public prosecutor's obligation to bring a copy of the report. "This remains the obligation (of the public prosecutor). We have mentioned before the expert examination, both the legal counsel and the panel of judges must have received it," said the judge.

Dennie reminded the prosecutor to bring the copy before the examination of the expert witness. "So, when will the expert be brought in. We ask that a few days before the examination the expert is already there," said Dennie.

Dennie said the witness examination hearing would continue on Monday (14/4/2025).