By: Infobank Editorial Team
Semarang – Something is seriously wrong in this country. It’s not about the price of rice or the rupiah exchange rate, but about how law enforcement officials treat bankers as if they were criminals. The Sritex trial at the Semarang District Court has become the greatest stage of irony: prosecutors, ignorant of banking, boldly drag bankers into the defendant’s seat, while the main perpetrators of the crime are allowed to walk free.
On Wednesday evening (April 8, 2026), Yuddy Renaldi—one of the BPD bankers charged in the Sritex non-performing loan case—completed his examination as a defendant. With relief, he gave thanks: “Alhamdulillah, all charges have been refuted based on the testimony provided.”
However, the struggle is not over yet. Next Thursday (April 15, 2026), in the Semarang District Court, the Public Prosecutor will read the indictment. After that, it will be the defendants’ turn to present their defense. And around May 5 or 6, 2026, the panel of judges will deliver the verdict.
The fate of these bankers rests in the hands of the judges. During the trial, no mens rea was revealed; there was no flow of funds, and credit decisions were based on proper analysis. Meanwhile, out there, the Public Accounting Firm (KAP) Tanubrata, Susanto, Fahmi Bambang & Partners (BDO International)—which, according to an expert witness, blatantly fabricated Sritex’s audited financial statements for 2017, 2018, and 2019—remains untouched.
Three Expert Witnesses: This Is Not Corruption, It Is Abuse of Power
From Wednesday afternoon until midnight the day after yesterday, the defense team presented three expert witnesses. They were no joke: Prof. Muzakkir, SH, MH – Lecturer at the UIN Faculty of Law, Dr. R.B. Budi Prastowo, SH, M.Hum – Dean of the Unpar Faculty of Law, and Dr. Surach Winarni, SH, M.Hum – Lecturer and Banking Practitioner at UIN
All three were in agreement. One voice. What the Attorney General’s Office did to the BPD bankers in the Sritex case constitutes an abuse of power and an egregious misuse of authority.
Why? Because the BPD bankers—such as Yuddy Renaldi, former CEO of Bank BJB; Supriyatno, former CEO of Bank Jateng; and Babay Parid Wazdi, former Director of Bank DKI—carried out their duties in accordance with procedures. There was no criminal intent (mens rea). There was no bribery. Not a single drop of money flowed into their personal pockets from PT Sritex.
They were simply doing their jobs: analyzing and approving loans based on the principles of prudence and the business judgment rule.
So, who is truly at fault? Experts unequivocally point to: KAP BDO, along with a state-owned bank official who manipulated account transfers and balances, and a Sritex official who fabricated the audited financial statements. They are the ones who caused losses to 28 national and foreign banks, investors, and Sritex bondholders.
But ironically, investigators from the Attorney General’s Office had already questioned them in their interrogation reports, and then… let them go free. Meanwhile, the regional development bank (BPD) bankers, who were merely victims of a setup, were put on trial.
State Losses: Absurd and Hasty
The expert witnesses also highlighted the calculation of state losses by the State Audit Agency (BPK). According to them, the BPK’s Audit Report (LHP) was rushed, lacked independence, and appeared to be tailored to the investigating prosecutors’ demands.
“The calculation of state losses should not yet be used as the basis for an indictment because the bankruptcy proceedings are still ongoing,” the experts stated. The bankruptcy process must be finalized by the trustee through the distribution of the bankruptcy estate. If that has not been completed, calculating state losses is an absurd act.
The experts agreed: The Sritex case is not a criminal act of corruption, but rather a matter of banking data—and if there are elements of fraud, they were committed by the debtor and third parties (including the accounting firm), not the bankers.
Prof. Muzakkir: Criminalizing Loans Will Destroy the National Banking Sector
The strongest statement came from Prof. Muzakkir. During the trial of defendants Yuddy Renaldi and Benny Riswandi, the UIN professor expressed his concern:
“The prosecutor’s highly repressive actions against bankers in every non-performing loan case—by accusing and charging them with corruption—will actually destroy the structure of the national banking industry.”
The impact? Bankers will be psychologically intimidated. They will be reluctant to analyze and approve loans, fearing that if the loans go bad in the future, prosecutors will look for faults and hold them accountable.
This is no mere speculation. Currently, national credit growth has fallen below double digits, to only about 7–8 percent. Yet just a few years ago, it reached 11–12 percent. Undisbursed loans (loans approved but not drawn down by borrowers) have reached Rp2.5 trillion. Borrowers are afraid to draw down the funds because they fear criminal prosecution if defaults occur.
This means the economy is rife with uncertainty. Investment is stalled. Growth is slowing. And President Prabowo, who aims to build the people’s welfare, is being betrayed by his own officials.
During the trial proceedings, it became clear just how superficial the prosecutors’ understanding of the banking business is. From credit analysis to loan termination, according to expert witnesses, the investigating prosecutors and the Public Prosecutor’s Office (JPU) did not understand. Yet, wielding their vast authority, they forced the issue—a banker witness could be made a suspect.
What’s the most absurd and tragic part? There’s an indictment stating: “The banker was negligent in analyzing and making financial projections/cash flow because they did not use the OJK’s SLIK as a reference.”
“Prof. Muzakkir and Dr. Surach Winarni could only shake their heads. That is very basic knowledge. The functions of audited/in-house financial statements and the OJK’s SLIK are different. The OJK’s SLIK is a record of a debtor’s credit history at other banks; it is not a tool for preparing a company’s cash flow projections.
Equating the two is like telling a doctor to use a thermometer for heart surgery.
“With such dismal charges and indictments, prosecutors can arbitrarily name bankers as suspects,” the expert witnesses asserted.
Just One Word: Free Those Bankers!
Yuddy Renaldi, Supriyatno, and Babay Parid Wadzi in the Sritex non-performing loan case have been proven: they never received bribes, there was no flow of funds for personal gain, and the procedures for analysis through to loan approval followed standard operating procedures (SOP) and the application of the 5C principles (Character, Capacity, Capital, Collateral, Condition).
What remains is only the judges’ conscience, freedom, and independence. Will they acquit the bankers of the prosecutor’s unfair charges? Or will they join in beating the drum of injustice? May the judges, in the name of justice, be able to counter the prevailing narrative of corruption allegations surrounding this non-performing loan case for the sake of justice and to save Indonesia’s economy.
Anyone who has been closely following the Sritex non-performing loan trial feels that the application of the law in Indonesia is deeply unfair. Any banker can become a suspect simply because a loan they issued went bad. Law enforcement agencies are all too happy to make bankers the scapegoats.
President Prabowo and Commission III of the Indonesian House of Representatives must take immediate action. The verdict to be handed down on May 5–6, 2026, will not only determine the fate of a few bankers but also shape the future of national economic growth.
For if bankers are afraid to extend credit, the economy grinds to a halt. It is the people who suffer. And this legal hypocrisy will continue to be a thorn in the side of a nation that claims to want to progress.
“Prosecutors, learn about banking before you use your vast authority to indict a banker.”
That is the message that must be echoed by the expert witnesses who have been called. Because if not, don’t be surprised if one day, no banker dares to approve a loan. And when that happens, it won’t just be the bankers who suffer—it will be the entire backbone of Indonesia’s economy.
In conclusion, the Sritex non-performing loan case is not a criminal act of corruption; therefore, the BPD bankers must be acquitted of all charges. (*)
