J.H. Partner Law Office's somasi to Rahmat Wibowo on behalf of PT Nomnie Technologies Indonesia, accusing him of spreading untrue information and company secrets after he was let go during probation, and stating that every candidate he referred was rejected

What this document is

A somasi (formal legal warning) from J.H. Partner Law Office, numbered 045/Som.JHP-LO/VII/2026 and dated Jakarta, 1 July 2026, addressed to Rahmat Wibowo. In his PERADI ethics complaint against the firm, Rahmat describes it as a somasi titled “Somasi Teguran Keras Terhadap Penyebaran Informasi” (a strong warning about spreading information), sent on behalf of PT Nomnie Technologies Indonesia under a special power of attorney of 17 June 2026 and signed by four advocates (ev-20260728-046).

He posted pages 1, 3 and 4 on Threads on 31 October 2026, together with the Polsek Cisauk invitation of 5 July (doc-20260705-001). Most of the upper half of page 1, from below his name to the first point, is covered by a large skin-coloured shape in his photo.

What it says

1. His employment. He signed a fixed-term employment agreement (PKWTT) with the company, with service starting on 1 April 2026 (page 1, point 1, partly covered).
2. Probation. The agreement set a three-month probation period (Article 3(1) and (2)), during which the company assesses the worker’s performance, and either side may end the employment with written notice and without any compensation (Article 3(3)).
3. The decision. During the probation, “ternyata pihak perusahaan menemukan hal-hal yang membuat perusahaan memutuskan hubungan kerja” (the company found matters that led it to end the employment). The rest of this point is on the missing page 2.
4. His referrals. “…dan semua calon yang di rekomendasikan pekerja tidak ada ada yang sesuai dengan kriteria perusahaan dan kesemuanya ditolak oleh perusahaan” (and none of the candidates the worker recommended met the company’s criteria, and all of them were rejected by the company).
5. The company met its obligations under Indonesian labour regulations and the employment agreement (point 9), but he allegedly kept posting content about the company that could damage its image and cause it losses.
6. Untrue information. Based on the chronology, he spread inaccurate and harmful information about the company and its employees through electronic media, which could damage their reputation (point 10), citing Article 1365 of the Civil Code (tort), Article 27A of the second amendment to the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (Law No. 1 of 2024), and Article 433 of the new Criminal Code (defamation).
7. Company secrets. As a probationary employee in the position of Senior DevOps Engineer, he disclosed company information of a confidential nature in public through electronic media (point 11), citing Articles 444 and 322 on disclosing company and professional secrets.
8. The demands. That he (1) stop spreading inaccurate and untrue information about PT Nomnie Technologies Indonesia and its employees, personally or in public; (2) stop spreading the secrets of the company or any of its employees; and (3) delete posts and content that still link him to the company.
9. A deadline. The firm “still believes” he has the good faith to stop and to delete the posts, and gives him until 6 July 2026 (point 12). If he does not, it will take legal action, criminal and/or civil, on behalf of its client (point 13).

Observations

1. “50+ referrals”, all rejected. Rahmat has repeatedly boasted that he referred more than 50 people to the companies he worked for, and cited it as proof of how much he gave them (ev-20260604-003, ev-20260604-004, ev-20260627-005). According to the company’s lawyers, none of the candidates he recommended met the company’s criteria, and all were rejected.
2. There was a reason. The letter says the company found matters during his probation that led it to end his employment, as Dinda Rhapsodya’s messages to him also said. He still claims he was fired “tanpa alasan” (without a reason) (ev-20261031-002).
3. Accused of sharing internal information, again. In 2023 he admitted that AWS fired him for breaching its code of conduct by sharing internal matters on social media (ev-20230923-001). Three years later, after less than a month at his next employer, its lawyers accuse him of disclosing confidential company information in public.
4. He did not stop. The deadline was 6 July 2026. Instead of deleting his posts, he wrote back to the firm on 14 July and filed an ethics complaint with PERADI against the four advocates (ev-20260728-046), and on 31 October he was still calling the company a “red flag” and its HR “unprofessional” (ev-20261031-002).

Pages still needed

Page 2, which continues the chronology from point 3 to point 8, and the signature page, assumed here to be page 5, which by his account carries the four advocates’ names and signatures. The part of page 1 covered in his photo is also missing.