Indonesia's top court reject's former Justice Minister Nadiem Makarim's appeal to dismiss the corruption investigation against him.
Makarim, who served as Indonesia's Justice Minister from 2014 to 2017, had lodged an appeal against the Corruption Eradication Commission (KEPOLSI) decision to investigate him for alleged corruption in the procurement of a state-owned hospital.
However, the Supreme Court of Indonesia has rejected his appeal, paving the way for the KEPOLSI to proceed with the investigation.
The court's ruling was seen as a significant blow to Makarim, who has been at the center of several corruption scandals during his tenure as Justice Minister. The investigation into the hospital procurement scandal is one of the most high-profile cases against him.
Makarim's lawyers had argued that the KEPOLSI decision was based on flawed evidence and that their client was innocent of any wrongdoing. However, the Supreme Court rejected these claims, stating that the evidence presented by the KEPOLSI was sufficient to warrant further investigation.
The court's decision has been met with a mixed reaction from observers, with some hailing it as a victory for transparency and accountability in Indonesia, while others expressed concern about the potential impact on the country's judiciary.
Makarim, who served as Indonesia's Justice Minister from 2014 to 2017, had lodged an appeal against the Corruption Eradication Commission (KEPOLSI) decision to investigate him for alleged corruption in the procurement of a state-owned hospital.
However, the Supreme Court of Indonesia has rejected his appeal, paving the way for the KEPOLSI to proceed with the investigation.
The court's ruling was seen as a significant blow to Makarim, who has been at the center of several corruption scandals during his tenure as Justice Minister. The investigation into the hospital procurement scandal is one of the most high-profile cases against him.
Makarim's lawyers had argued that the KEPOLSI decision was based on flawed evidence and that their client was innocent of any wrongdoing. However, the Supreme Court rejected these claims, stating that the evidence presented by the KEPOLSI was sufficient to warrant further investigation.
The court's decision has been met with a mixed reaction from observers, with some hailing it as a victory for transparency and accountability in Indonesia, while others expressed concern about the potential impact on the country's judiciary.