Debates on social media over alleged corruption in Chromebook laptop procurement involving former Education Minister Nadiem Makarim have heated up, leading to a 'social media trial' phenomenon. Legal observer Fajar Trio warns of the dangers of public opinion interference that could undermine judicial independence. He stresses the need to respect the sub judice principle.
Jakarta – The controversy over alleged corruption in the procurement of Chromebook laptops implicating former Education, Culture, Research, and Technology Minister Nadiem Makarim has intensified, spilling from courtrooms to social media. A 'social media trial' phenomenon has emerged, with narratives suggesting the case has a final conclusion despite ongoing court proceedings.
Legal observer Fajar Trio criticized this trend. "It is highly unethical for parties, especially non-experts in criminal law, to dictate public opinion as if this case is substantively final. We must respect the sub judice principle. Do not let trial by press damage judges' independence in seeking material truth," he told reporters on Thursday, April 9, 2026.
Fajar noted that social media narratives often oversimplify legal issues, such as claims that debt-to-equity swaps or stock splits cannot be criminal. In corruption law, he said, malicious intent or mens rea is key and currently under scrutiny in court. "Criminal law does not only look at the shell of the transaction. Whether stock split or other financial engineering, if malicious intent is found to benefit oneself or others through abuse of authority, the criminal element is fulfilled," he stated.
He rejected narratives linking the legal process to disruptions in the investment climate, calling it no shield against law enforcement. Law enforcement must rely on facts revealed in court.
