The commotion arose because of the KPK's own communication.

One source of the commotion actually came from the KPK's communication, which appeared unsynchronized. On March 20, 2026, the KPK still stated that Yaqut was included in the list of detainees who were facilitated to perform Eid al-Fitr prayers at the Merah Putih Building. However, a day later, the KPK actually confirmed that Yaqut had actually been under house arrest since the night of March 19. It was this lack of synchronicity in information that led the public to judge that the decision was not managed openly and gave the impression that something was being covered up.

Criticism soon emerged. Boyamin Saiman from MAKI questioned the transfer of detention because it was considered to potentially create a discriminatory impression and damage the anti-corruption system. MAKI then reported the KPK leadership to the Supervisory Board, alleging that the decision was odd and deserved ethical scrutiny. From a public control perspective, this step shows that the problem that arises is not just a difference in legal interpretation, but also concerns trust in fairness in handling corruption cases.

Interestingly, the polemic did not last long before the direction of the KPK changed. On March 23, 2026, the KPK announced that it was processing the transfer of Yaqut's detention from house arrest back to detention in a detention center. A few days later, the Deputy for Enforcement and Execution of the KPK Asep Guntur Rahayu even apologized for the commotion that arose and said that the transfer to house arrest was previously part of the investigation strategy to expedite case handling.