DEPOK, LITERASIHUKUM.COM - In early 2026, the policy to improve the welfare of judges through a salary increase of up to 280 percent was officially ratified. However, amidst this policy, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) again conducted a sting operation against a rogue judge at the Depok District Court on February 5, 2026.

Judges' Salary Increase Policy

The government has stipulated a performance allowance increase for judges of up to 280 percent through Government Regulation Number 44 of 2024 concerning the Third Amendment to Government Regulation Number 94 of 2012 concerning the Financial Rights and Facilities of Judges Under the Supreme Court, with allowance amounts ranging from IDR 46.7 million to IDR 110.5 million per month. [1]

President Prabowo Subianto stated that this policy was implemented so that judges could not be bribed. The increase attracted the attention of the Chief Justices of Malaysia and Singapore, who noted that Indonesian judges' income had surpassed that of judges in their respective countries.

Bribery Practices at Depok District Court

On February 5, 2026, the KPK conducted a sting operation targeting several individuals in Depok City, West Java. The operation resulted in the arrest of seven people, including the Chief Judge of the Depok District Court, I Wayan Eka Mariarta; the Deputy Chief Judge of the Depok District Court, Bambang Setyawan; the bailiff of the Depok District Court, Yohansyah Maruanaya; the President Director of PT Karabha Digdaya, Trisnadi Yulrisman; Head of Corporate Legal PT Karabha Digdaya, Berliana Tri Kusuma; and two employees of the company.

This case began in 2023 when the Depok District Court granted PT Karabha Digdaya's lawsuit in a dispute over a plot of land measuring 6,500 square meters. The verdict was upheld through the appellate and cassation levels, and in January 2025, PT Karabha Digdaya filed an execution request. However, as of February 2025, the execution had not been carried out. The Bailiff, Yohansyah, acting as an intermediary, was asked to arrange a secret agreement regarding a fee request of IDR 1 billion from the Chief and Deputy Chief Judge of the Depok District Court to PT Karabha Digdaya.

Ultimately, an agreement of IDR 850 million was reached, originating from the disbursement of invoices fictitious. The KPK seized IDR 850 million in cash from the parties involved, which is suspected to be part of the committed fee. The funds were channeled through invoices fictitious [transactions] created as if for the purchase of goods or services. However, in reality, it is an modus operandi to disguise the flow of money.

Bambang Setyawan is even suspected of receiving gratification amounting to Rp2.5 billion through a foreign exchange company as a new disguise modus operandi. Therefore, the KPK has named the five suspects under Article 605 paragraph (a) and/or Article 606 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code (KUHP) in conjunction with Corruption Eradication Law, with Bambang Setyawan also charged under Article 12B concerning gratification.

Modus Operandi and Data on Judge Violations

The Depok District Court case reveals increasingly sophisticated modus operandi in judicial bribery practices. The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) suspects that Bambang Setyawan, Deputy Chief Justice of the Depok District Court, received up to Rp2.5 billion through a foreign exchange company (money changer). KPK Spokesperson Budi Prasetyo stated that this method has attracted special attention from investigators because it has the potential to become a new pattern for disguising the origin of money from corruption.

According to monitoringIndonesia Corruption Watch, from 2011 to 2024, 29 judges were named as suspects in bribery cases involving a total of Rp107,999,281,345. They came from various judicial levels, ranging from district courts, corruption courts, state administrative courts, the Supreme Court, to the Constitutional Court. Former Supreme Court Justice Gazalba Saleh became the largest recipient of bribes and gratuities, amounting to Rp62.89 billion in two different cases in 2022 and 2023.

Similar cases continue to emerge, including the case of Judge DS from the West Jakarta District Court, who was dishonorably dismissed for accepting bribes. The case of Judge Dede Suryaman, who received Rp300 million in a corruption case involving the former Mayor of Kediri, serves as an example that ethical violations can be addressed without waiting for a criminal verdict. In 2025, at least seven judges were arrested on charges of bribery, including three judges from the Surabaya District Court involved in manipulating the acquittal of Ronald Tannur and four judges from the South Jakarta District Court involved in the acquittal of a corporation in the crude palm oil (CPO) export case.

Institutional Responses and Prevention Efforts

The Supreme Court expressed deep disappointment over these cases. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Sunarto emphasized that there is zero tolerance for corrupt practices within the judiciary. As an initial step, the Supreme Court imposed temporary dismissals on the judges involved while awaiting the outcomes of legal proceedings. The Chief Justice also asserted that the leadership of the Supreme Court has consistently reminded all judges to avoid transactional practices.

Deputy Chairperson of the Judicial Commission (KY) Desmihardi stated that the commission will coordinate with the Supreme Court and the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) in the process of ethical examination and sanction imposition. The KY emphasized the importance of strengthening ethics, transparency, and layered supervision so that judicial integrity does not solely depend on their financial welfare.

The Deputy Chairperson of the KPK emphasized that without personal commitment and strict supervision, bribery practices still have the potential to occur. The Minister of State Secretariat acknowledged concern and stated that efforts to eradicate corruption do not necessarily eliminate these practices entirely. ICW also urged the Supreme Court to map potential corruption within judicial institutions and to encourage stronger legal regulations to ensnare corporations in corruption cases.