Rahmat Wibowo's legal notice to Ghozy Ul Haq, copied to the HR and compliance division of OJK, demanding Rp533 million over an eight-word reply on X

What this document is

A 12-page somasi (legal notice), numbered 004/SOMASI/RW/VIII/2026 and dated Friday, 28 August 2026, from Rahmat Wibowo in Bekasi to Ghozy Ul Haq, holder of the X account @ghozyulhaq, in Jakarta. It is marked “Segera / Penting” (urgent / important) and copied to the Financial Services Authority (OJK), “for the attention of Human Resources / Internal Compliance”, and to the Universitas Indonesia alumni association (ILUNI UI). Rahmat posted it on X. All twelve pages have been found; pages 8–12 are his evidence attachments B-1 to B-7.

What it says

• The reply. On 21 July 2026 at 21:51, under a post by another user sharing a screenshot of Rahmat’s LinkedIn post about Luca Cada Lora, he replied: “sebelum percaya tulisannya, baca2 dulu @KawalRahmatwi” (“before believing his writing, read @KawalRahmatwi first”). When Rahmat documented it on 28 August it had 1,748 views. The notice also says that, “based on account activity records”, he reposted a post “in the same smear campaign”.
• His position. By pointing readers to @KawalRahmatwi — which, the notice says, accused him of cursing a pregnant woman’s child to be autistic, of being “the son of the owner of SPPG MBG” and of neglecting his work — the recipient discredited him and adopted those accusations. The notice says the harm is aggravated because the reply came from someone who lists an analyst position at a state authority.
• Legal basis. Defamation under Article 433(2) of the new Criminal Code as the main charge and slander under Article 434 as the subsidiary one, each increased by a third under Article 441(1), as participation or assistance under Articles 20 and 21; and civil tort under Articles 1365, 1366, 1372 and 1373 of the Civil Code. He lists Articles 143 and 145 of Law 8/2016 on disability “as a normative marker” only.
• Demands, within three calendar days, by Monday 31 August 2026 at 17:00 WIB:
  • permanently delete the reply and any reposts, comments or replies that attack him;
  • publish a public apology on the same account for 14 days, admitting that directing the public to the account and discrediting him was wrong, and send him a copy by email;
  • stop any further statements, links, reposts or publications;
  • pay at least Rp533,333,334 in immaterial damages, “two times the maximum fine” for slander under Articles 434 and 441(1) (Rp266,666,666.67 × 2 = Rp533,333,333.33, “rounded up”).
• Settlement. He must contact Rahmat by email within the same three days; Rahmat offers to meet in Bekasi or online.
• If not met, “without further notice”:
  • a first police report to Bareskrim for defamation as a participant, Article 433(2) jo. 441(1) jo. 20;
  • a second police report for slander as a participant, Article 434(1) jo. 441(1) jo. 20, as “two separate criminal cases”, each “demanded at the maximum penalty, both prison and fine”;
  • a civil suit with a request to attach assets (conservatoir beslag);
  • publishing the notice and all the evidence “as a lawful form of self-defense”.

Observations

1. Eight words, no claim of fact. The whole reply is “sebelum percaya tulisannya, baca2 dulu @KawalRahmatwi”. It says nothing about him except that readers should look at another account before believing what he wrote. The notice treats that as adopting every accusation the other account has made and charges it as participation in defamation and slander.
2. What “his writing” was. The post the recipient replied under shared a screenshot of Rahmat’s own LinkedIn post announcing a “legal risk analysis” of his dispute with Luca Cada Lora, which said Luca “can expect an active prison sentence of 12 to 16 months”, a fine of Rp800 million to Rp1.2 billion and civil damages of Rp1.5 to 2.5 billion, and ended “Congratulations on accelerating straight into court, Luca.” (evidence B-1, page 8). The reply suggested reading other sources before believing that analysis. See also his published analyses of Luca Cada Lora (ev-20260728-010, ev-20260612-002).
3. A copy to the regulator’s HR and compliance division, with no claim against it. The notice is copied to OJK, the recipient’s employer, “u.p. Bidang Sumber Daya Manusia / Kepatuhan Internal”, because he lists his job on his public profile. Unlike his notices 003, 006 and 007 the same day, this one does not cite Article 1367 or name the employer as a co-defendant: the civil suit is against the recipient alone. The copy to HR and compliance serves no legal claim the notice makes. In a later notice he wrote that he would not use the recipient’s employer as leverage (doc-20261001-001).
4. The repost is not identified. The notice says the recipient reposted “a post in the same smear campaign”, and its evidence B-5 (page 10) is a “Post activity — Reposts” list showing @hrdbacot and @ghozyulhaq. It does not show which post was reposted or when.
5. Rp533 million for 1,748 views. The demand is the same Rp533,333,334, from the same calculation, as in his notices to Julyana Sonia Darmawati, Yassirullah Muhammad and Adith Widya Pradipta the same day (doc-20260828-003, doc-20260828-001, doc-20260828-002). It comes to about Rp305,000 per view of the reply.
6. Two criminal cases for one reply. As in notice 003, slander (Article 434) is called only a “subsidiary qualification” on pages 3–4, then filed on page 7 as one of “two separate criminal cases”, each “demanded at the maximum penalty, both prison and fine”. The articles, as he quotes them, provide prison or a fine. In Indonesian criminal procedure, the sentence is demanded by the public prosecutor, not by the person who files the report.
7. He concedes the disability law does not apply. He writes that the facts do not meet the elements of Article 145 jo. 143 of Law 8/2016 and that it is “not fit to be the basis of a criminal charge” (page 5), as in his other notices of that day.
8. What his own screenshot shows. Evidence B-2 (page 9) is a screenshot of his browser, logged in to X as @Rahmatwi_, dated Friday 28 August at 12:13. Its open tabs include the recipient’s post, a Google search for his name, his LinkedIn profile and “Users who reposted” — and two tabs for “PT. Global Sukses Di…”, the employer of Julyana Sonia Darmawati, to whom he posted notice 003 on X eight minutes earlier (doc-20260828-003).
9. Published before his own deadline. The notice gives the recipient until 31 August at 17:00 WIB and lists publishing it as a step to take only if he does not comply. Rahmat’s X post containing the notice dates, from its post ID, to 28 August at about 12:36 WIB — 23 minutes after his screenshot and three days before his own deadline.
10. The attachments are a profile of him. Evidence B-3 and B-4 (pages 9–10) are screenshots of his LinkedIn profile and his education, including a master’s degree from Universitas Indonesia and a bachelor’s degree from a university in Finland.
11. Not shown to have been sent or answered. The signature space on page 7 is blank, and the collected pages show no proof of delivery and no reply.

Legal references were not checked against the official gazette, which could not be accessed when this analysis was written.