A prominent member of the House of Representatives (DPR) Commission III, Hinca Panjaitan, has ignited a fierce debate by raising serious questions about the integrity of the Karo District Attorney’s Office (Kejari Karo). Panjaitan pointedly highlighted the controversial gift of vehicles from the Regent of Karo to the Kejari Karo while scrutinizing the high-profile case of Amsal Christy Sitepu, a videographer from Karo who faced charges of allegedly inflating the budget for creating video profiles for 20 villages.
Hinca’s remarks were delivered during a heated hearing (RDP) held at the DPR Building on Thursday, April 2nd. The session brought together key figures including Amsal, officials from Kejari Karo, the North Sumatra High Prosecutor’s Office (Kejati Sumut), and the Prosecutor’s Commission. Panjaitan directly challenged whether the acquisition of these three vehicles had influenced Kejari Karo to exclusively pursue creative professionals like Amsal, while seemingly overlooking other potential transgressions.
“I have received substantial information, Mr. Chairman. I am concerned that this situation may be true,” Hinca stated emphatically. “I expect an answer if this information is incorrect, and I apologize if it is. However, because this intelligence has come to light, you, Mr. Head of the High Prosecutor’s Office, must address it. Is it true that the Regent of Karo provided vehicular assistance to the Karo District Attorney’s Office? Specifically, a Toyota Kijang Innova, plate number BK 1094 S, used by the Head of the District Attorney’s Office; a Nissan Grand Livina, plate number BK 1089 S, utilized by the Karo District Attorney’s Office; and a Toyota Fortuner, plate number BK 1180 S, along with other Toyota Innova vehicles.”
Hinca further pressed the issue, questioning the perceived selective enforcement: “Is it because of these gifts that you solely pursue creative individuals, meticulously searching for their mistakes, while overlooking state officials who might be involved in wrongdoing?”
The legislative inquiry escalated as Hinca Panjaitan expressed his profound anger at Kejari Karo over Amsal’s case. He issued a resolute demand to the Head of Kejati Sumut, Harli Siregar, calling for the immediate dismissal of all Kejari Karo personnel implicated in the affair.
“Therefore, Mr. Head of the High Prosecutor’s Office, through the Chairman, I will not back down one single word to ensure this process unfolds correctly,” Hinca declared. “Recall the Head of the District Attorney, recall all the section heads involved, recall everyone connected to this case! And after this, you must issue an apology and retract these proceedings, as the error committed is grave.” He also urged the Head of Kejati to convey a message to the Attorney General, requesting an apology from the Head of the Information Center for disseminating what Hinca described as false information.
Following the intense hearing, Danke Rajagukguk, the Head of Kejari Karo, maintained a stoic silence when directly confronted with questions regarding the controversial vehicle donations. He merely offered a slight smile and repeatedly uttered, “Sorry, sorry,” without providing any further explanation.
Amsal’s Case
The origins of Amsal Christy Sitepu’s legal troubles trace back to 2020. At that time, Amsal circulated proposals to 50 villages, offering his services for creating video profiles at a cost of Rp 30 million per video. Ultimately, only 20 villages accepted his offer.
In a surprising turn of events in 2025, Amsal was abruptly named a suspect and subsequently brought to trial. Prosecutors alleged that Amsal had artificially inflated the budget by assigning costs to various specific service items within his proposals. These included elements such as idea/concept development, editing, cutting, dubbing, and the provision of clip-on microphones. The prosecution contended that these five particular items should have been priced at Rp 0.
Based on these accusations, prosecutors estimated that Amsal’s actions had resulted in state financial losses amounting to Rp 202 million.
In their formal demands, the prosecution sought a two-year prison sentence for Amsal, a fine of Rp 50 million, and restitution to the state of Rp 202 million for the alleged damages. However, the presiding judge ultimately found Amsal not guilty of the charges, leading to his acquittal.
Summary
Hinca Panjaitan from Commission III of the Indonesian House of