The Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR) Commission III has definitively stated that the acquittal of Amsal Christy Sitepu cannot be subjected to further legal appeals, neither through appellate review nor cassation. This significant conclusion emerged from a recent hearing held at the DPR Building on Thursday, April 2nd, involving Commission III, Mr. Sitepu himself, the Karo District Prosecutor’s Office (Kejari Karo), and the North Sumatra High Prosecutor’s Office (Kejati Sumatera Utara).
Habiburokhman, the Chairman of DPR Commission III, underscored this point, asserting, “Commission III of the DPR RI emphasizes that in handling the case of Mr. Amsal Christy Sitepu, in accordance with the spirit of the new Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), an acquittal cannot be met with legal appeals, whether through appellate review or cassation.” This declaration highlights the finality of the court’s decision under contemporary legal frameworks.
Beyond affirming the non-appealable verdict, Commission III also called for a comprehensive evaluation of the personnel within the Karo District Prosecutor’s Office responsible for handling the contentious case. “DPR Commission III requests the Junior Attorney General for Supervision to conduct a thorough evaluation of the Karo District Prosecutor’s Office staff who handled case Number 171/Pid.Sus-TPK/2025/PN Mdn concerning Mr. Amsal Christy Sitepu, and to submit a written report of the evaluation’s findings to DPR Commission III within one month,” Habiburokhman elaborated, emphasizing the urgency and accountability sought.
Furthermore, serious allegations of intimidation against Amsal Christy Sitepu prompted Commission III to demand a full and exhaustive investigation into these claims. “DPR Commission III urges law enforcement to conduct a thorough investigation into the intimidation experienced by Mr. Amsal Christy Sitepu, allegedly perpetrated by Public Prosecutor (JPU) Wira Arizona, Head of Special Criminal Investigations (Kasi Pidsus) Reinhard Harve Sembiring, and Head of Intelligence (Kasi Intel) Dona Martinus Sebayang,” Habiburokhman stated, naming specific individuals implicated in the alleged misconduct.
The Commission’s directives extended further, requesting an inquiry into alleged violations concerning the non-implementation of a judicial panel’s order. Habiburokhman conveyed, “DPR Commission III requests the Junior Attorney General for Supervision to investigate alleged violations by individuals within the Karo District Prosecutor’s Office for failing to implement the Medan District Court Judicial Panel Order Number 171/Pid.Sus-TPK/2025/PN Mdn, and for allegedly creating propaganda implying that DPR Commission III was interfering in Mr. Amsal Christy Sitepu’s legal proceedings.” This reveals a concern about not only non-compliance but also a perceived attempt to discredit the Commission.
In an additional layer of oversight, Commission III formally requested the Indonesian Prosecutor’s Commission to undertake an examination of the case. “DPR Commission III requests the Prosecutor’s Commission of the Republic of Indonesia to conduct an examination of Mr. Amsal Christy Sitepu’s case, which will serve as comprehensive evaluation material for the overall performance of the Prosecutor’s Office,” Habiburokhman concluded, underscoring the broader implications for judicial integrity.
The Case of Amsal Christy Sitepu
The intricate legal saga of Amsal Christy Sitepu commenced in 2020. At that time, Sitepu distributed proposals to 50 villages, offering services for the creation of video profiles, each priced at Rp 30 million. Out of these, only 20 villages ultimately accepted his offer.
However, the situation dramatically shifted in 2025 when Amsal was unexpectedly named a suspect and subsequently brought to trial. Prosecutors alleged that he had inflated the budget by pricing several components of his services, including idea/concept development, editing, cutting, dubbing, and the provision of clip-on microphones. The prosecution contended that these five specific items should have been valued at Rp 0.
Based on these alleged actions, prosecutors calculated that Amsal Christy Sitepu had caused the state to incur losses totaling Rp 202 million. In their demands, the prosecution sought a two-year prison sentence for Amsal, a fine of Rp 50 million, and restitution of Rp 202 million for the state losses. Yet, in a decisive turn, the presiding judge ultimately found Amsal not guilty, leading to his complete acquittal in the high-profile corruption case.
Summary
The House of Representatives’ Commission III affirmed that Ams