Rahmat Wibowo posted accusations declaring a licensed advocate guilty of professional misconduct and criminal intimidation, naming Machrio Achmad and Mr. Nurhatta, alleging false claims, ethics breaches, and coercion, citing potential criminal penalties, weaponising legal terminology to publicly condemn an advocate without any court finding.

Licensed Advocate Found Guilty of Misconduct & Intimidation 5d Justice Served: A Licensed Advocate Found Guilty of Professional Misconduct & Criminal Intimidation Here are The Analysis Of Probabilities of Machrio Achmad - Pasal 281 KUHP 2023** (Obstruction and Intimidation of Judicial/Law Enforcement Process) - Pasal 483 KUHP 2023** (Extortion and Coercion Through Threats) He can be sentenced to 4 years imprisonment, a 5-year suspension from legal practice, restitution of Rp 100 million, and a restraining order. Mr. Nurhatta: ~ Breached his fundamental duties under Articles 3-5 of the Indonesian Bar Association Code of Ethics - Made false claims that a case had already been filed at Mabes Polri (claims proven nonexistent) - Used his professional position as a licensed advocate to intimidate and coerce me, the opposing party ~ Deliberately undermined his own client's interests This was not vigorous advocacy — it was a clear abuse of professional status and a criminal violation. To PERADI Perhimpunan Advokat Indonesia (PERADI) DPN PERADI Ahmad Fikri Assegaf No advocate is above the law. When members of our profession weaponize their credentials to intimidate citizens exercising their legal rights, the entire legal community must respond firmly. Let this case serve as a strong reminder: professional ethics are not optional. #LegalEthics #AdvocateAccountability #RuleOfLaw #PERADI #IndonesianBarAssociation #Keadilan #EtikaProfesi To view or add a comment, sign in More Relevant Posts Dr. Padriadi we (¢) Wiharjokusumo Cross-Border Investment Law. amo In the context of Indonesia's criminal justice system, one of the most important questions today is not merely whether laws exist, but whether legal processes move with sufficient transparency, accountability, and procedural certainty. Recent public data and academic research have highlighted ongoing concerns regarding investigative delays and prolonged case handling within criminal investigations. In legal discourse, this phenomenon has increasingly been discussed through the concept of "silent case closure," a situation where a case appears to stop progressing factually, despite the absence of a formal legal termination under criminal procedure law. From a legal and institutional perspective, this issue should not be viewed as an attack on any institution or law enforcement body. Rather, it should be understood as part of a broader discussion regarding: + procedural transparency + accountability mechanisms + due process of law + and the modernization of Indonesia's criminal procedure system Indonesia's ongoing KUHAP reform and institutional reforms within the Indonesian National Police (Polri), including the "Presisi" framework (Predictive, Responsibility, ‘Transparency with Justice), reflect important efforts to strengthen public trust and improve the quality of criminal investigations. Using the “Padriadi Dialectical Method,’ | approach this issue not only from the perspective of legal norms, but also from the relationship between: + structure + control + and execution within law enforcement practice Because in many cases, the challenge is not the absence of legal rules, but the difficulty of ensuring that legal procedures operate consistently and transparently in practice. Ultimately, strengthening transparency and accountability in investigations is not contrary to institutional reform, On the contrary, it is an essential part of strengthening professionalism, procedural justice, and the rule of law in Indonesia. Full article: #Indonesia #IndonesianLaw #CriminalJustice #KUHAP #PoliceReform #RuleOfLaw #DueProcess #LegalReform #Transparency #Accountability #Litigation #LegalScholar #MedanLawyer #IndonesiaLawyer #PWLawFirm #Sumatra #ProceduralJustice SILENT To view or add a comment, sign in __ PwC Indonesia PWE 728,035 followers How does corporate justice evolve when accountability is balanced with restoration and judicial oversight? Indonesia's new Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP Baru), enacted under Law No. 20 of 2025, introduces Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) as a new way of addressing corporate crime. Available only to corporations, DPAs mark a shift towards combining enforcement with restorative justice and court supervision—bringing new obligations and considerations for both companies and prosecutors. Our latest legal alert highlights the key features of DPAs and what they mean in practice. Read the full insight here: #PwCindonesia #LegalUpdate #KUHPBaru #DeferredProsecutionAgreement #CorporateCrime Indra Allen Danar Sunartoputra Agnes Maria E. Wardhana To view or add a comment, sign in James & Partners 16 followers w Legal Brief | Legal Developments (23-30 May 2026) High Court Awards RM675,000 for Unlawful Detention sf The High Court awarded a Nigerian national RM675,000 in damages after finding that his detention was unlawful. The Attorney General's Chambers is reportedly considering an appeal. Impact, Reinforces judicial scrutiny over detention procedures.Highlights potential liability exposure for unlawful deprivation of liberty. Serves as a reminder for enforcement agencies to ensure strict compliance with constitutional and procedural safeguards. Could influence future civil claims involving wrongful detention. Court of Appeal Increases Defamation Damages to RM300,000 sf The Court of Appeal increased damages awarded to former Tune Talk CEO Jason Jonathan Lo from RM200,000 to RM300,000 in his defamation suit against The Star and three journalists, while affirming the finding of liability. Impact, Signals continued judicial willingness ‘to award substantial reputational damages.Highlights risks arising from identification of individuals even where. names are not expressly stated. Important precedent for media organisations and publishers. Zahid Hamidi's DNAA Challenge Heads to Federal Court sf News/DecisionDeputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has reportedly brought the Malaysian Bar's challenge relating to his discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) to the Federal Court. Impact, Potentially significant for prosecutorial discretion jurisprudence. May provide further guidance on judicial review involving criminal proceedings. Federal Court determination could have long-term implications for future DNAA cases. #Beranang #Semenyih #Kajang #Bangi #Cheras #Serdang #Balakong #Kajanglegalfirm #James&Partners To view or add a comment, sign in e Marvine Gabriel ee aw Glad to have been involved! While this decision arises from the Magistrates Court and may not be binding to higher courts, the reasoning of Hon. CN. Ondieki cannot be gainsaid. (It was so good ‘that he won't be writing any other decision in the same court\ Glad he has moved to the higher court) Apart from dissecting what amounts to a “pre-qualification" vis a vis "tender" under the PPADA, the decision outlined the ingredients of an Economic Crime under the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act. Further, what does it mean for parties to conspire? Evidence of a meeting ina boardroom, a walk in the park or a shared coffee is certainly not enough proof of conspiracy to commit a crime. Anyway, at the end of it yours truly is learned in Procurement Law! Oh, and wearing a keen eye around Economic Crimes. O'Bang Law 1,234 followers tmo - Edited Legal Alert - Victory: Misclassification, Mens Rea, and Mandate Limits: Court Recalibrates Criminal Liability in Public Procurement (Our Managing Partner Jack Brian Ong'anya and Trainee Advocate Marvine Gabriel structured a strategy that resulting in enabled families to feel more at home (despite being out on cash bail), unite firmly with the concept of freedom and live peacefully as from April 17, 2026, through an anchoring submission on whether the impugned process constituted a “tender” or a “pre-qualification” under the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act, 2015 (PPADA). Our website: www.obang.law General comms: [email protected] #OBangLaw #TheHomeForCuratedLegalExpertise #EconomicCrimes #LitigationADR #ComplexLitigation en To view or add a comment, sign in ~ Batam News Asia we 2ua — 392 followers w Indonesia's Constitutional Court ruled parties can be disqualified in districts that fail the 30% female candidate quota, reinforcing Law No. 7/2017 and raising stakes for party compliance. Read full details in the article. #GenderQuota #ElectionLaw #WomensRepresentation #IndonesiaPolitics #ConstitutionalCourt #LawReform To view or add a comment, sign in Xavier Nugraha Associate di Kantor Hukum & 3w + Edited Sharing is Caring Landmark Case Edition Friday, 15 May 2026 [THE IMPORTANCE OF VICTIM-WITNESS ‘TESTIMONY DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE ‘THE VICTIM'S PRESENCE AN ABSOLUTE REQUIREMENT IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS] In criminal proceedings, the presence of the victim as a witness is often regarded as an absolute requirement, particularly in cases arising from losses suffered by the victim. However, through Constitutional Court Decision Number 50/PUU-XxIII/2025, the Constitutional Court affirmed in its legal considerations that Article 160 paragraph (1) letter b of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code, which provides that “the first person whose testimony shall be heard is the victim who becomes a witness,” essentially regulates the order of witness examination during trial. Accordingly, this provision cannot automatically be interpreted to mean that the victim must always be personally present in every criminal proceeding. The Court acknowledged that victim-witness testimony holds an important position. Nevertheless, the importance of such testimony does not mean that the victim's presence becomes an absolute requirement in all circumstances. According to the Court, there are certain circumstances that may constitute exceptions, for instance where the victim has passed away, is ill, has suffered trauma, has experienced intimidation, resides far from the place of trial, or where other lawful reasons exist. In such circumstances, criminal procedure law continues to provide room for the examination of a case to proceed, notwithstanding the victim's inability to appear personally before the court. Even in complaint-based offences, the absence of the victim or complainant does not automatically render the indictment inadmissible. The legal considerations of the decision further explain that this matter cannot be separated from the principle of a speedy, simple, and low-cost trial. If every criminal case were to absolutely require the victim’s presence without any room for exception, the judicial process could instead be obstructed, particularly where the victim is ill, resides far away, or is not yet psychologically prepared to provide testimony. Source: Constitutional Court Decision Number 50/PUU-XXill/2025. Warm regards, Xavier Nugraha, S.H. Committee for Legal Studies & Competency Development PERADI Suara Advokat Indonesia, Surabaya Branch Council #SharinglsCaring #CaseLaw #Yurisprudensi #ConstitutionalCourt #Mahkamahkonstitusi #CriminalLaw #HukumPidana #CriminalProcedure #KUHAP #VictimWitness #DueProcessOfLaw #FairTrial #LegalUpdate #Legalinsight #IndonesianLaw #LawyersOfLinkedin #Advokatindonesia #PERADI #PERADISAI #XavierNugraha To view or add a comment, sign in Indonesia at Melbourne, ,, 4,212 followers 3w But the category that most dramatically changes the evidentiary landscape is Article 236(1)(h) - a catch-all provision admitting anything that can be used for proof, so long as it is lawfully obtained. For more than four decades, Indonesia operated a closed system of evidence: material that did not fit one of the five statutory categories was not evidence. With Article 235(1)(h), Indonesia has shifted to an open system. -- Simon Butt ‘The new KUHAP: more kinds of evidence, fewer limits (Part 1 of 2) https:/findonesiaatmelbourne.unimelb.e 6: To view or add a comment, sign in Wei Wei Ng uy 6d For years I've heard it said — almost as gospel — that challenging the Attorney General's prosecutorial decisions means clearing a *higher* bar to even get into court. After reading *Bar Malaysia v. Peguam Negara Malaysia & Anor* [2026] CLJ JT (8), I've had to retire that assumption. The court's position, as | read it, is refreshingly clean: > Under Order 53 of the Rules of Court 2012, there is one leave threshold — an arguable case that is not frivolous or vexatious. > There is no separate, elevated test for prosecutorial decisions under Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution. One door, one key: arguability. ~ But where you're challenging the AG's discretion, the court applies that same test with heightened discipline, caution and restraint — out of respect for the AG's constitutional status, the presumption of legality, and the separation of powers. My own POV : this is the right balance. The threshold isn't raised — so the courtroom door stays open and no public power sits above the law. What changes is the quality of scrutiny. So if you're drafting that Statement and affidavit, bare grievance won't cut it. You need a genuinely arguable ground, particularised, that survives a more demanding ear. Same bar. Sharper listening. Do you read this as protecting access to. justice — or as the courts signalling caution before second-guessing the AG? I'd like to hear where you land. #MalaysianLaw #LegalMalaysia #Litigation #JudicialReview #ConstitutionalLaw BAR MALAYSIA v. PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA & ANOR [2026] CL3 3T (8) To view or add a comment, sign in Zeto Lawyers ey 142 followers tw Indonesia's new Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP 2025) may change how judges assess corporate criminal cases in a very practical way. The change is not only about legal procedure. Judges are now given clearer authority to assess what happens directly inside the courtroom. This includes how witnesses answer questions, how defendants respond to evidence, whether testimonies remain consistent, and how digital or physical evidence holds up during examination. In corporate cases, this matters a lot. ‘A.company may believe its position is strong because the documents look complete. But problems often begin when explanations from directors, management, or employees start to contradict each other during trial. In practice, many corporate criminal cases are not decided by one document alone. They are shaped by the overall picture that appears when evidence is openly tested in court. For corporate counsel, this means legal protection cannot depend only on preparing legal memos or collecting documents after a problem arises. Companies should pay attention to how decisions are made internally, how sensitive communications are handled, and whether management can consistently explain the business rationale behind important actions. Once a matter enters criminal proceedings, the room to manage risk usually becomes much smaller. Preventive legal strategy is often far more valuable than reactive defense after exposure occurs. #CorporateCounsel #LegalRiskManagement #CriminalLitigation #CorporateGovernance #KUHAP2025 #ZetoLawyers To view or add a comment, sign in Emilia Metta Karunia ane 1mo - Edited As promised, | am pleased to share several presentation slides and moments from the discussion session. The forum became an important space to reflect on a fundamental question: can restorative justice truly become a bridge toward justice, or does it remain accessible only to certain groups? Through this discussion, we explored how restorative justice should not merely function as a legal mechanism, but also as an approach that prioritizes equality, dignity, and meaningful access to justice for everyone. Access gaps, unequal power relations, and the risk of selective justice remain significant issues that cannot be overlooked if restorative justice is truly becoming justice for all. Thank you to all participants, fellow speakers, and organizers for the insightful exchange of ideas and critical perspectives. Hopefully, discussions like this can continue to encourage more inclusive and humane legal development in indonesia. #Restorative #Justice #Restorativejustice #Law #Legal #Academic #Discussion