JAKARTA, LITERASIHUKUM.COM — The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) has revealed alleged interference by the Regent of Pekalongan Fadia Arafiq in the procurement project for goods and services outsourcing within the Pekalongan Regency Government. According to the KPK, the intervention was allegedly carried out through Fadia's child, who serves as a member of the Regional People's Representative Council (DPRD), as well as her confidants, with the aim of having a number of heads of departments and regional apparatuses use the services of their family company, PT Raja Nusantara Berjaya (PT RNB).

Deputy for Enforcement and Execution of the KPK Asep Guntur Rahayu mentioned that the alleged intervention occurred in the procurement of outsourcing services in various agencies, ranging from departments, sub-districts, to regional general hospitals. The KPK suspects that regional officials were directed to favor PT RNB, even though other companies submitted lower bids. In the case construction presented by investigators, this practice is considered to potentially cause state financial losses and also demonstrates a conflict of interest in public procurement.

KPK Says HPS Was Submitted to Family Company First

The KPK also revealed the alleged modus operandi used to rig the project. According to Asep, every regional apparatus intending to carry out procurement was allegedly asked to submit the Self-Estimated Price (HPS) to PT RNB from the beginning. With access to the HPS value, the company is said to be able to adjust the bid value to approach the figure set by the regional government, so that the chances of winning in the procurement process become greater. This kind of practice, if proven, is a serious violation of the principles of fair competition, transparency, and accountability in the procurement of government goods and services.

Throughout 2025, PT RNB is said to have dominated outsourcing service projects within the Pekalongan Regency Government. The KPK stated that the company worked on procurement at 17 regional apparatuses, 3 RSUDs, and 1 sub-districtThis dominance reinforces the suspicion that these projects did not proceed through fair competition, but were pre-arranged to benefit certain parties close to the regional head.