Challenging the KPK, Silmy Karim files pretrial petition over asset seizure

Former Deputy Minister of Immigration and Corrections Silmy Karim has challenged the legality of an asset seizure carried out by Indonesia’s Corruption Eradication Commission, or KPK. He filed a pretrial petition at the South Jakarta District Court on Friday, Sept. 4, 2026.

The case, registered under number 163/Pid.Pra/2026/PN Jkt.Sel, concerns whether the KPK lawfully carried out the compulsory seizure. The court’s case-tracking system did not display the petition’s full demands. It lists Yuliana as the judge assigned to the case and Sri Gusliawatni as the substitute registrar. The first hearing is scheduled for Monday, Sept. 14, at 9 a.m. and will continue until the session ends.

The KPK had not responded to the petition at the time of publication. The agency has named Karim and seven other people as suspects in an alleged case involving extortion over foreign nationals’ residence permits and alleged receipt of gratification between 2022 and 2026. The other suspects include former acting immigration director general Saffar Muhammad Godam, Residence Permit Director Jaya Saputra, sub-directors Bagus Bramantyo and Tessar Bayu Setyaji, immigration office chiefs Ronald Arman Abdullah, residence-status transfer team head Juniadi Sri Priambudi, and residence-permit staff member Gusti Bernardiansyah.

The suspects are being detained at the KPK detention facility. They face allegations under Articles 12(e) and/or 12B of Indonesia’s Anti-Corruption Law, together with Article 20(c) of Law No. 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code.

The KPK has seized assets valued at about 150 billion rupiah and searched several locations in the investigation. In early August, investigators searched the office of the head of the South Jakarta Immigration Office and found S$8,500. The agency said it would confirm the money with Winarko. Investigators also searched immigration offices in South and Central Jakarta, seizing documents and electronic evidence allegedly linked to the case, as well as offices in Bali connected to visa services.

“

Classification of the case: whether the implementation of compulsory seizure was lawful or unlawful.