Tom Lembong's Attorney Chooses to "Walk Out", Rejects Rini Soemarno's BAP from Being Read

JAKARTA, KOMPAS — The legal counsel for the corruption defendant, former Minister of Trade Thomas Trikasih Lembong, also known as Tom Lembong, led by Ari Yusuf Amir, chose to "walk out" of the courtroom. This action was taken because the panel of judges allowed the public prosecutor to read the minutes of the examination of former Minister of State-Owned Enterprises for the period 2014-2019, Rini Soemarno, during the trial.

The Tom Lembong party believes that the reading of the minutes of the examination (BAP) of Rini Soemarno poses a danger to the defendant in seeking justice. Moreover, Rini's reason for not being able to attend the hearing was merely due to a family event. In fact, the prosecutor has the coercive power to present witnesses in court.

The walkout occurred during the continuation of the sugar import case at the Ministry of Trade for the years 2015-2016, with the defendant Tom Lembong at the Jakarta Corruption Court, Tuesday (17/6/2025). A debate between the public prosecutor and Tom Lembong's legal counsel took place during the hearing, which was focused on witness examination. This debate briefly caused a commotion in the courtroom.

Initially, the prosecutor requested the panel to read the statement contained in the witness report of Rini Soemarno, who served as the Minister of State-Owned Enterprises from 2014 to 2019, during the hearing. The prosecutor argued that Rini had been asked to attend the trial four times. However, to date, Rini has never complied with the prosecutor's requests for various reasons. In the hearing on Tuesday, for instance, Rini was unable to attend due to a family event in Central Java.

Upon hearing the prosecutor's request, Chief Judge Dennie Arsan Fatrika asked for the opinion of the legal counsel. "The public prosecutor requests the panel to read the witness statement on behalf of Rini M Soemarno. Now, what is the response from the legal counsel?" the judge inquired.

The legal counsel for Tom Lembong, Ari Yusuf Amir, expressed objections to the prosecutor's request to read Rini's BAP during today's trial. Ari referred to Article 185 Paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which clearly states that a witness's statement as valid evidence is what the witness declares in court. Therefore, a witness's statement in the BAP can only serve as evidence if the witness is present and provides testimony in the courtroom.

"We firmly state our rejection of the request from the public prosecutor to read that out. Why? Because the prosecutor has the right to execute," said Ari.

According to him, when a witness refuses to be summoned, the public prosecutor can enforce a summons. He also questioned why other witnesses could be present while witness Rini could not attend. Among the witnesses who were able to attend is former Minister of Trade Rahmat Gobel.

"Why were other witnesses able to be presented, but why couldn't this witness be brought forward? Why were other witnesses sworn in, but this one was not sworn in during the examination? These are issues that we need to resolve in order to truly achieve justice," said Ari.

In response to the explanation from Tom Lembong's legal counsel, Judge Dennie stated that the advisory has been provided and rejected the reading of witness Rini's statement. However, the panel of judges concluded that the public prosecutor should still read the witness statement.

"However, we also need to hear the testimony of witnesses as stated in the minutes of the investigation, for assessment later, please present it during your response in your plea," said the judge.

Ari repeatedly expressed objections and rejected the reading of Rini's statement by the prosecutor. According to Ari, if the witness statement of Rini is still read, it would be considered detrimental to the defendant who is seeking justice.

The debate caused a commotion among the court visitors. The judge asked the visitors to remain calm in the courtroom.

The prosecutor argued that Rini had been summoned up to four times, but Rini did not attend. Today, it was stated that Rini was absent from the trial because she was attending a family event.

"From the letter, the witness has an event in Central Java. In previous letters, the witness was also abroad," said the prosecutor.

Ari stated that as a form of protest, his party chose to leave the courtroom because the judge still allowed the reading of witness statements.

"Therefore, we firmly reject the witness statement that was read without being presented in the trial, and since the judge decided to have it read, we walked out; we request permission to leave," said Ari.

The legal advisors of Tom Lembong exited the courtroom one by one. Several court attendees were also seen leaving the courtroom. During the reading of witness testimony by Rini, only the defendant Tom Lembong remained seated in the defendant's chair without any legal counsel accompanying him.

In the points of Rini's statement read by the public prosecutor, it essentially stated that the Minister of Trade, Tom Lembong, never coordinated with her as the Minister of State-Owned Enterprises at that time. Rini admitted that she did not know who was referred to as the domestic sugar producer, who could supply sugar or the industry that could process imported raw sugar into consumer sugar for the purpose of price stabilization and sugar stock fulfillment.

According to Rini, in order to fulfill the function of national sugar stock and stabilize sugar prices, the Ministry of State-Owned Enterprises has decided that PT Perusahaan Perdagangan Indonesia (PPI) and state-owned sugar producers are the responsible parties, not others.

"I didn't know that Thomas Trikasih Lembong gave import approval to a private company," said the prosecutor when reading Rini's statement.

Meanwhile, Tom Lembong refuted the witness statement read by the prosecutor. According to Tom Lembong, the importation of sugar was not carried out suddenly. The importation of sugar must go through mechanisms that have been established and inter-ministerial coordination meetings.

"Once again, I would like to emphasize that the coordination meetings have taken place, held on May 12, 2015, and on October 8, 2015. This then became the basis for the sugar import policy at that time," said Tom Lembong.

In this case, Tom Lembong is accused of enriching others, resulting in state losses amounting to Rp 515.4 billion. In his explanation, the public prosecutor stated that Tom issued import approval letters for raw crystal sugar for the period of 2015-2016 to parties from 10 private companies.

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