Suara.com – President Joko Widodo questioned the meaning of the statement by former chairman of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Agus Rahardjo, who admitted that he had been asked to stop the legal case of former chairman of the DPR RI Setya Novanto (Setnov) regarding electronic KTP (el-KTP) corruption.
“What is it for? What is it for? What is it for? What is it for?” asked Jokowi at the Presidential Palace, Newsdelivers.com, Monday (4/12/2023).
Jokowi said this in response to Agus Rahardjo’s statement in a program on a private television station some time ago, who said that in 2017 he had asked the KPK to stop the Setya Novanto corruption case.
Jokowi also asked the public to check the news in 2017, when the Setya Novanto case was ongoing. Jokowi emphasized that at that time he told Setya Novanto to follow the existing legal process.
Chairman of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Agus Rahardjo gives a thumbs up before the sting operation (OTT) press conference at the KPK Building, Newsdelivers.com, Wednesday (16/10).
“Firstly, look at the 2017 news. In November, I told you that at that time Mr. Novanto, Mr. Setya Novanto were following the existing legal process. It’s clear that the news is all there,” stressed Jokowi.
Furthermore, Jokowi said that the legal process against Setya Novanto was currently ongoing. Then, Jokowi said that Setya Novanto had been sentenced to 15 years in prison.
When asked about whether there was a political motive for Agus Rahardjo’s statement, Jokowi again emphasized that the media and the public should check for themselves.
“I told you to check. I have dozens of meetings a day. I asked to check at the State Secretariat, there wasn’t any. The agenda at the State Secretariat doesn’t exist. Please check, just check again,” he stressed.
Meanwhile, when asked for a response regarding the issue of the right of interpellation which could be used by the DPR RI to ask for information from him regarding Agus Rahardjo’s statement, Jokowi was reluctant to respond to this.
“I don’t want to respond to that (my right of interpellation),” he said. (Between)