Pati activist's frozen bank account sparks rights concerns

A Bank Mandiri account belonging to Supriyono, a community organizer from Pati Regency, Central Java, has been frozen. The account was frozen as Supriyono accompanied residents from his area to a protest in Jakarta. The move has drawn criticism from civil society groups, who question the legal basis for freezing the funds.

Supriyono leads the Pati United Community Alliance (AMPB), a group representing residents. His account contained about Rp80.9 million ($4,800) in personal funds and public donations. These funds were earmarked for covering food, transportation, and accommodation for residents participating in the protest. The account was frozen on Friday, August 21, while Supriyono was with the demonstrators outside the House of Representatives complex in Jakarta.

Civil society groups argue that the freeze could violate Indonesian law, restrict freedom of expression, and undermine public confidence in the security of bank funds. Bank Mandiri issued an apology on Instagram, stating the action followed a request from law enforcement authorities and adhered to procedures. However, the bank did not specify which agency made the request.

This lack of transparency has prompted a coalition of civil society groups to demand more information. They seek to know who ordered the freeze, the specific case being investigated, and how the money in Supriyono's account is allegedly linked to a criminal offense. Usman Hamid of Amnesty International Indonesia, a member of the coalition, stated that a "request from law enforcement is not enough to justify arbitrarily freezing a citizen’s bank account."

Usman cited Article 140 of Indonesia's 2025 Criminal Procedure Code, which requires court authorization for account freezes, specifying that such measures need approval from the head of a district court. He noted that while urgent circumstances allow for freezing an account before court approval, subsequent approval must be sought within 48 hours. The coalition contends that Mandiri's explanation is insufficient to prove compliance with legal requirements, especially if no clear criminal case, established connection to an offense, or required court authorization exists.

“

An instruction from law enforcement is not enough to justify arbitrarily freezing a citizen’s bank account.