E-KTP Graft Case, FBI Documents, and Incriminating Setya Novanto
9 October 2017 13:56 WIB
TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - Stronger indications have emerged regarding the suspected involvement of Indonesian House Speaker Setya Novanto in the high-profile e-KTP graft case. According to FBI reports, Biomorf Lone LLC Chairman Johannes Marliem once revealed that there was a discussion about “discounts” on the price of the e-KTP procurement between himself and Setya Novanto.
That statement was part of a 33-page prosecution document presented at the Minnesota court and constructed by Special Agent Jonathan E. Holden which was dated at September 28, 2017. The document – which Tempo obtained a copy of – requested the court to seize the assets owned by Johannes Marliem that were suspected to be products of crime.
Page 18 of the document described the meeting that took place between Marliem and four Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) investigators who questioned him at the Indonesian Consulate General in Los Angeles on 5-7 July.
Read: KPK Targets Setya Novanto Using FBI Data from Johannes Marliem
The document suggests that Marliem traveled to Jakarta to conduct a meeting at the residence of Setya Novanto, it is where he also met with businessman Andi Agustinus, and another individual called “Oka”. Setya asked for a “discount” for every card that will be printed for 172 million Indonesian citizens, which they agreed to set the “discount” at Rp2,000 for each card.
“Marliem understands that the word “discount” meant bribe, which he agreed on,” as Holden wrote. The document stated that Marliem recorded all of the conversations that took place in Setya Novanto’s house and was played in front of KPK investigators who he met with in Los Angeles. Marliem also showed several banking transaction pieces of evidence that were related to the scandal.
KPK Deputy Chairman Saut Situmorong said that the Minnesota court evidence is eligible to be used for the investigation of the e-KTP case and the involvement of Setya Novanto. “The Book of Criminal Procedure Code does not prohibit the origin of the evidence, as long as it’s essentially relevant to the case,” said Saut.
MAYA AYU PUSPITASARI | INDRI MAULIDAR
