Continuing Trial of Alleged Corruption in Sleman Tourism Grant Funds Heats Up, JCW Urges Witnesses to Be Honest and Expose All Parties Involved

KabarJawa.com– The follow-up trial in the case of alleged corruption in Sleman Regency tourism grant funds with the defendant former Regent of Sleman, Sri Purnomo (SP), is back in session at the Corruption Crime Court at the Yogyakarta District Court.

The trial again attracted public attention because it revealed a number of important facts and brought up the names of other parties who were considered to have a strategic role in managing the grant funds.

Jogja Corruption Watch (JCW) firmly reminds all witnesses presented by the Public Prosecutor to provide information honestly, objectively and truthfully.

JCW believes that corruption trials should be a space to reveal the truth, not a means to cover up facts or protect the interests of certain parties.

Continuing Trial of Alleged Corruption in Sleman Tourism Grant Funds

Deputy for Public Complaints and JCW Judicial Monitoring, Baharuddin Kamba, emphasized that every witness has a legal responsibility as well as a moral responsibility to reveal the complete truth before the panel of judges.

“Every witness is obliged to convey the true facts. No party should be protected. The law regulates strict sanctions for anyone who provides false information,” stressed Baharuddin Kamba.

JCW emphasized that giving false statements under oath is not a misdemeanor. The state has regulated this act as a serious criminal offense.

These provisions are contained in Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the new Criminal Code (KUHP), especially Article 291.

This article states that every person who provides false information on oath, either orally or in writing, in the judicial process, is threatened with a maximum prison sentence of seven years.

In fact, in paragraph (2) of Article 291, the law increases criminal threats. If the false statement is detrimental to the suspect, defendant or other party, the judge can increase the sentence by up to one third of the principal threat.

During the trial, the Public Prosecutor presented Suci Iriani Sinuraya, former Acting Head of the Sleman Regency Tourism Office, as a witness.

Before the panel of judges, Suci admitted that he did not know in detail the various aspects of managing Sleman Regency tourism grant funds.

Suci said that he had just served as Acting Head of the Tourism Service when the grant program was running.

Previously, Suci served as Expert Staff for People’s Welfare for the Sleman Regency Government. Therefore, he admitted that he was not involved from the initial stages of planning and formulating tourism grant funding policies.

JCW Request

Paying attention to the facts revealed at the trial, JCW urged the Public Prosecutor not to stop at the names listed in the indictment.

JCW asked the prosecutor to present and examine other parties whose names appeared in the trial, even though they were not yet defendants.

They considered that the testimony of witnesses at the trial had opened up room for allegations of involvement of other parties in the management of Sleman Regency tourism grant funds. Then, they emphasized that law enforcement must be carried out thoroughly, transparently and without favoritism.

Apart from highlighting the substance of witness statements, JCW also provided critical notes regarding the mechanism for examining witnesses by the panel of judges.

In the trial which took place Monday (12/01/2026), the panel of judges examined four witnesses from related agencies separately and not simultaneously.

JCW assesses that this examination pattern has the potential to open up space for communication between witnesses outside the courtroom. These conditions can affect the independence, consistency and honesty of witness statements presented before the panel of judges.

JCW then compared this practice with the case of Yogyakarta State University (UNY) student, Arie Perdana, which was also tried at the Sleman District Court.

In this case, the panel of judges presented witnesses simultaneously to prevent communication and adjustment of statements between witnesses outside the trial.

Based on these considerations, JCW hopes that the Panel of Judges at the Corruption Crime Court at the Yogyakarta District Court which is examining the case with the defendant Sri Purnomo can present and examine witnesses simultaneously at the next trial.

JCW emphasized that this step is very important to maintain the objectivity of the trial, reveal the material truth as a whole, and strengthen public trust in the law enforcement process in the case of alleged corruption in Sleman Regency tourism grant funds.

This statement was conveyed by Baharuddin Kamba, who emphasized that Jogja Corruption Watch will continue to oversee the trial of the alleged corruption case in Sleman Regency tourism grant funds until it is completed and all the facts are revealed to the public. (ef linangkung)