The public prosecutor charged that the alleged corruption by Surya Darmadi, inflicted severe losses on the state as well as the environment, environmental economics and ecological rehabilitation.
By
PRAYOGI DWI SULISTYO
·4 menit baca
KOMPAS/HENDRA A SETYAWAN
Defendant Surya Darmadi consults with his legal counsel after the initial trial of the alleged corruption case in the PT Duta Palma Group oil palm plantation permit at the Corruption Court, Jakarta, Thursday (8/9/2022).
JAKARTA, KOMPAS — The public prosecutor on Thursday (8/9/2022) accused the owner of PT Duta Palma Group, Surya Darmadi, of being involved in alleged oil-palm-estate business corruption that caused the state to incur financial and economic losses worth Rp 86.5 trillion (US$5.81 million). The public prosecutor said Surya’s activities had inflicted damage on the forest-zone environment in Indragiri Hulu, Riau.
The allegation against Surya was read out by public prosecutor Bima Suprayoga at a hearing in the Jakarta Anticorruption Court. The trial was chaired by presiding judge Fahzal Hendri. Surya was accompanied on the occasion by his attorney, Juniver Girsang. Meanwhile, former Indragiri Hulu regent Raja Thamsir Rachman, who was also prosecuted in the same case, followed an online hearing from the Penitentiary of Pekanbaru. The charges against both were delivered separately.
“Defendant Surya Darmadi on the dates that can no longer be determined from 2004 through 2022 has committed acts or jointly committed acts with
H Raja Thamsir Rachman in his capacity as regent of Indragiri Hulu for the period of 1999 up to 2008 in violation of the law,” said Bima.
Surya was alleged to have several times met with Raja Thamsir to request that the land already reclaimed in the forest zone in Indragiri Hulu be approved. Surya was engaged in the oil-palm-estate business in the forest zone.
Although without any principle license, Surya was granted an oil-palm-estate location permit by Raja Thamsir. Several of Surya’s companies had no environmental-impact analyses, nor did they make any environment management or environment-monitoring efforts. However, the companies were given oil-palm-estate business licenses by Raja Thamsir.
Surya also possessed no forest-zone release license. Unsurprisingly, the state derived no revenue from its rights in the form of payments of reforestation funds, forest-resources commissions and forest-zone utilization fees.
KOMPAS/HENDRA A SETYAWAN
The panel of judges presides over the trial of defendant Surya Darmadi in the alleged corruption case in the licensing of PT Duta Palma Group's oil palm land at the Corruption Court, Jakarta, Thursday (8/9/2022).
Economic losses
The prosecutor revealed that Surya had caused state financial losses of up to Rp 4.7 trillion (US$7.8 million) -- equivalent to Rp 117 billion at present. The losses were based on the state financial-loss audit report of the Finance and Development Comptroller dated 25 August 2022.
Besides, Surya was also accused of having inflicted on the state economic losses of Rp 73.9 trillion. The figures were based on the report of the Economics and Business Research and Training Institute of the Faculty of Economics and Business, Gadjah Mada University, dated 24 August 2022.
The prosecutor also charged Surya with enriching himself, others or corporations to the value of Rp 7.5 trillion.
“The defendant’s action of undertaking oil-palm-estate business in the forest zone has caused destruction with the consequence of environmental losses in the forest zone in Indragiri Hulu regency worth Rp 73.9 trillion,” said Bima.
The losses are made up of environmental losses, environmental-economic losses and rehabilitation costs to activate the lost ecological functions. Surya is subject to Article 2 Paragraph (1) with the option of Article 3 in conjunction with Article 18 of Law No.31/1999 on the Eradication of Corruption Crime as amended by Law No.20/2001 in conjunction with Article 55 Paragraph (1) point 1 of the Criminal Code.
The prosecutor said Surya had allegedly used the money from his crime to gain ownership of several companies. Apart from that, it was spent on the purchase of a number of assets, land plots and buildings in the country and abroad, the placement of funds at banks, the payment of capital, stock transactions, vessel purchases and fund transfers to the defendant’s overseas companies.
Replying to presiding judge Fahzal Hendri’s question after listening to the allegations of the public prosecutor, Surya claimed he did not understand part of the charges delivered by the prosecutor. His attorney, Juniver, said he would present an objection.
