Dibalik Kasus Nadiem Makarim, Budi Arie & Pencopotan Sri Mulyani - Ft. Mahfud MD

Nadiem as a suspect, a suspect. He was very disappointed, I heard. Why? My house was so far away, the state didn't give enough protection. Second, I was compared to Saharoni.

If you're far away from someone, but compared to Saharoni, that's not good. The case of the title in KemenKomen.fo started from the delivery of the title in KemenKomen.fo was started by the admission of an official. In my opinion, he should have been suspected a long time ago. Because it's like this.

Okay, thank you very much, Mr. Mahfud.

See you again. Yes, I'm allowed. Thank you very much for the opportunity to talk to you. There are a few things I want to talk about. Number one is about Mr. Nadim's case. Number two is about the case, not the case, what happened yesterday, about the reshuffle. And the third is the details about the reshuffle, especially some people I want to discuss.

Now, let me talk first about Mr. Nadim's case. Because I did a survey yesterday. So there are three that I want to discuss. Now, let me talk first about Mr. Nadiem's case. Because I did a survey yesterday. So there are three things I surveyed. Number one, what do you believe? For my audience on Instagram. First, is Nadiem innocent?

So he's not wrong. Number two, are you disappointed because he turned out to be corrupt? Number three, are you confused? Which one do to choose? And it turns out that the majority of people are confused. They don't know.

Nadiem should be clean, but how come he is caught and used as a tool. So, I want to ask your opinion first. What is your opinion about this case? So far, I see that the legal reasons to make Nadem a suspect are fulfilled. Being fulfilled doesn't mean that he takes advantage of it. It's just that he doesn't understand the bureaucracy procedure.

Because he is a practitioner who wants to be quick, whereas in bureaucracy, you have to be patient. There are procedures. So if you ask, isadeem is doing it legally, so far there are enough evidences to be brought to court for the crime of corruption. What are the evidences?

One, the possession of goods that is suspected of damaging the country's finances in a real way. I have already calculated it in the beginning. The second is that he violated the procedure, the rules regarding the possession of the goods. In my understanding, there is a mechanism deliberately do something that should not be done. Why? Because the cooperation with Google on the Chromebook has actually been rejected by the previous minister

because it was considered unworthy. Pak Mohajir has received the proposal from the previous minister, but Pak Mohajir has been positioned as unworthy, so it was closed. Well, before the minister minister, had held meetings to make the project in the ministry. He was not a minister yet. These meetings were held in a W.A. group, which has now become a tool of proof in the judiciary.

The core team of the minister. Yes. And it seems that there is a deliberate mistake because they want to do it quickly. They want to do it quickly because everyone knows that this project in Malaysia has been announced to be a failure. It can't be used. It's ineffective and inefficient. Malaysia has been contracting this Chromebooks since 2013.

But in 2019, it was cut off by Malaysia. It's useless. Suddenly, Indonesia joined the relationship. This raised a lot of questions. If so, there must be a reason. The former minister refused to join the relationship.

Malaysia already thought that this was inappropriate. Especially in Indonesia, where there are more foreign countries than Malaysia. Why do we want to use this? That is the initial reason for the shortage. There is also a disadvantage,

of course, if the size is used for the fish, it will definitely fit. But using the comparison of the price of the price with a similar item, the government finds a very far solution. So that more than one trillion countries have to issue something that should not be issued. This is my explanation to the public. So, you may need to believe that the legal grounds for that are sufficient according to the law.

But you can also be sure that Nadiem is not willing to accept money from there. Because Nadiem is not looking for profit. He is a worker, a tasker, who just wants to do his job. He is good at his job, but there are bureaucracy procedures that he has to go through. And those procedures are not being followed, but instead, he is being talked to by someone who is not a formal officer.

That can cause problem with bureaucracy. That's what I want to ask. We both know his background. We know him from CV, he's an amazing person. He's a Gojek fan. He's definitely an inspiration to many people.

I also understand, maybe if we talk about corporate, people before joining, they want to work first. That's a good thing. Before joining, not officially joined, but let's make a group,

what do we want to do so we can get there faster? Because that's a principle of how to work, especially when we talk about startup world. We want to do that, let's do it quickly. Because we want to chase time, we want to be like, come on, come on, come on, come on. Because we want to catch up with the time, we want to make a breakthrough. Why is it so negative?

If we make a ministerial team, why is it negative? Not as a positive thing.

People want to work.

Because what is discussed is not a new thing, but something that has been rejected before. In Malaysia, it has been rejected, in Indonesia, it has been rejected by the previous minister. But actually, it's not wrong either. We are looking for an alternative, because people want to work in a corporate, right? But bureaucracy is different.

In many cases, in bureaucracy, people want to move forward, want to be fast, and so on. But instead, there is a lot of corruption. So, there is a rule that says, you can't do that. You can't do it like a corporate. There are ways to assess things, the process, who connects it, the administration, etc. Indeed, if people are impatient,

people who work in government with strict bureaucracy, the first possibility is that they will be trapped, like Mr. Nadiem. The second possibility is that they will step back before continuing their tasks. Just like Yudi Latif, he was good, smart, and had high competence, and he was put into the BPIB. But every idea had to wait for a short bureaucratic process.

So, he was frustrated as a person who wanted to do something quickly. Not even a year later, he resigned. Because if he didn't, he would have decided something, and it could be considered corruption. Before there was a legal basis, then you have to pay for things. Nadiem is involved in this kind of issue. I'm sure Nadiem is not in a hurry to take state money.

Nadiem is a professional. I'm also sure that if he didn't become a minister, he would have more income. How much does a minister earn? But he took the risk of becoming a minister for the sake of his devotion. But it was still wrong legally.

So, in law, there is a term called minsyria. Minsyria is a motive or intention to do something. It is a self-element. What is the intention? It is evaluated from the plans. So it is clear that this is rejected,

why do you still want to continue? There is means-reah, right? Then there is also a term, although it is not directly related to this, there is a term, malaprohibita, mala in se. There is an act that does not harm others, but is prohibited by law. For example, you ride a motorcycle without a sim card, without a helmet,

no one will be harmed. But if you do that, you will be arrested by the police. Nadiem might even do a prohibition. I don't intend to take it, I want to make a quick profit, but I still can't. If it becomes a criminal act, the element of completeness is forced to enter.

In the case of incest, there are those who are prohibited by the rules and indeed harm the party. For example, deliberately hitting other people is prohibited. Harming those who are hit and deliberately doing it. But there are those who deliberately but it but don't need other people. Like the person who drove without a sim card earlier. Or, he drove to one direction but he also had to drive past.

He had to turn left. I didn't hit him. I used my eyes closed. I could do it because I'm a magician. But he still didn't allow it. It's actually a prohibition.

That's how it is in the law. So we have to understand it in this context. I also want to follow up on one of the questions. For example, the previous minister has refused. Then, for example, Malaysia has refused. But if we, as a leader, I say this because I don't have experience in the ministry.

For example, I'm the leader in a company. I never think about what my previous leader thinks. I never think about what the competitor or the industry does. I only focus on what's best for me. Even though it could be wrong. But I never thought that the leader didn't agree.

If I agree, I think it's good, I'll do it. Is there a legal error there? If the previous ministry has refused, he continues, it's wrong. It depends on the evidence in court. The court will process this later. Later, it could be that the defense, the judge, the law enforcement,

is really sure that Nadiem is not wrong. Just sue him. I think the choice of the law enforcement is right for Judge Paris because he is brilliant in constructing laws and accentuating, articulating, articulating arguments in front of the court. Later, it can be exposed.

Yes, it's normal, if it's incorporated, people don't care if it was rejected or not. If the opportunity is different, the situation is different, we can appeal. It can be appealed again later in court. But in bureaucracy, it's not allowed. If it's in bureaucracy, it's not allowed. It's a corporate, private matter, like that.

Fast competition, limited opportunities. Sometimes, if it's not decided now, it will be lost tomorrow. That's in private. The limited opportunities are sometimes lost if we don't do it now. That's the case in private sector. In the country, it's not like that. We have to be careful. There are procedures that must be followed.

What about the second S-Salon? Where should we go? I've been to S-Salon 1, how can I go to the ministry?

Well, it's like that.

What should it be like? What should be done if Mr. Nadiem wants to buy Chromebook? What is the right way? You made a WhatsApp group and discussed with the staff. The right thing should be done once the budget is there and he becomes the minister.

Then we can discuss.

Yes, there can discuss. Let's go to Krombok now. For example, we are being forced to wear a hijab. Then there will be a lot of negotiations. And there are many difficult procedures. Because it belongs to the initial evidence,

which is now made as two sufficient tools of evidence by the Ministry of Justice. Later, it's up to Hotman Parys who needs to convince the government that this is not a loss to the country's finances. Because in the law, even if for example, Mr. Nadiem doesn't get a special amount of money, he will lose it if he is in trouble because he is the one who is in charge. But if it benefits the other party, which benefits someone else, it's also corruption. For example, it benefits Google as a company.

And so on. You can see it in the court. Does that mean, for example, actually, when I make a podcast, there are a lot of young people who are passionate and professional, who have an interest in contributing to the country, and joining in.

Does that mean that the background of entrepreneurs is not suitable? Usually we want to move fast, right? Where do we need it the most? Yes, it's not about entrepreneurs. There are It's not about the business. There are three conditions to join the bureaucracy. First, there must be a lot of competition.

Nadem is a competitor. No one doubts that he has succeeded in the field. Second, he doesn't have a track record in the government, in the bureaucracy. The bureaucracy is tight and complicated's all over the place. He doesn't have experience. He doesn't have a track record in that field. Third, we don't know his integrity.

But we are personally sure that Nadiem is a good person. His family is honest, his family is anti-corruption. He can say that he has integrity. But because he doesn't have a track record in the field of bureaucracy, he can be involved in that. And it can happen to anyone. Many people are forced to join because of ignorance.

That's why there is a discussion in the government. Can a person who makes a policy that is wrong be punished or not? That is an unresolved debate. As far as it is still in the field of administration, it cannot be punished. But if it has become a crime, for example, the country has been damaged and clearly violated the law,

yes, it can be punished. Entering the criminal case, can it be released or not? It depends on the evidence in the court. Should the government do that? Because I can understand why they have to safeguard the railways. To protect people from using monang.

The purpose is to make sure. But is that the best way, in your opinion, so that best way to encourage positive breakthroughs? I think it's okay or not, it has been discussed for a long time. It's better to just let it go, as long as the government benefits.

But, some people say, no, it can lead to corruption, it can lead to a debate, and in the end,, it can be corruption. So, the final debate is agreed upon by the bureaucracy. The bureaucracy is actually an agreement. If it's a regulation, it's an agreement.

It's formed by the press, by the press, by the law, etc. The resultant is there. If it's debated, which is better, which is not, it can be. It can't be settled. It's good to let go of this. It's good if this is done, just let it go. But don't open the door for others to enter.

Finally, it's set up as a rule or a procedure that must be followed. If there is an element of intent or unintentionality, will it be punished differently? For example, Mr. Nadiem did it unintentionally because he didn't know. He just did business as usual,

just like he did before. If he didn't know, it means there was no motive. There was no intention. But the motive is not only knowing the four dimensions. One, he knows. For example, that is considered a motive.

If he doesn't know, then he doesn't know, but he should suspect that it will happen. Or he doesn't know and shouldn't be suspected of corruption, he will be dismissed. He can be dismissed as a part of the Ministry. Then he can be dismissed as a member of the Sembrono. He can be dismissed as a corrupt official. So there are four dimensions.

Something is said to have an intention. There are people who are curious about your response as a suspect. Is this like Tom Lembong? Maybe the legal process, the formal procedure is the same. But the motive of Tom Lembong is not proven. The motive of the Ministry is not proven. The Ministrysury's motif was not proven. Nadem, is there a mansury?

The court will prove it. The court can investigate it in a wide range of ways. Usually, when people become suspects, the probability of them being convicted is very high. Is there an example that has been used by Robby and it turns out that he is free?

There are many cases like that, but not even 10% of the cases. Some people say that it is a pure freedom. It is free from all demands. If it is a pure freedom, it means there is no evidence at all. If it is free from all demands, there are event, but it is not a criminal law. There are many cases like that.

But it's only a little bit, because the law of law has a principle. If it has made someone a suspect, the law must be able to prove that the person involved is guilty. If not, it is considered that the person involved is guilty. If not, you are considered a non-judge. Why? You can't prove that you can be brought to court.

But there are still people like that. They can be free. Is there a specific actor who attacks Mr. Nadym? For example, Tom Lembong, in the public discussion, he was first crossed out. That's why there are people who attack.

But for example, Tom Lembong is a public figure, he is minimal, neutral. He is not left, not right, not number one, two, three. He is only a professional. Is there anyone in particular who wants to... I don't see any politician.

Tom Lembong has a political case, so he should be blamed. As for Tom Lembong, although he can be debated, he was there yesterday, talking about political rulers, it's okay.

But Nadeem is just fine. As far as I know, he has never done anything that was political and harmed anyone. But still, the elements of law should be proven in court. Because if everyone is good and not harmed,

everyone will do it even though they are not good. There's an incident, but if the't just let them go. Right. I want to move on to the issue of what happened recently, about the demo and all that. Because there are so many cases, and the movement is so fast. There's the issue of salary increase, DPR,

and then the death of the person who was hit. And then the DPR, and then the death of the victim, and then the DPR's request. And people said, including Nadiem, people said this is a misappropriation of issues. Is this really a misappropriation of issues, or is there no motive to misappropriate issues from anywhere, actually, from Prof. Liat?

Maybe misappropriation of issues, what is the question? People say, just remove the issue so that people do not continue the debate about deportation. So, deportation has started to move, it has started to enter the DPR, then just remove the issue so that it doesn't continue. Some people analyze it like that. That's possible.

There are also people who analyze it. There are people who are willing to provide the funds because it seems to be organized and organized in various places. There must be someone who organizes it, not just the issue. The demo, you mean? Yes.

There are two demos, right?

There are students and there are those who support it. That's why. Some say it's a misappropriation of issues, some are in favor. Now there is the third theory. I follow the third theory. I agree with the third theory. The events at the end of August,

which started with a student demonstration and followed by a demonstration of the victims, I think the action is organic. It emerged from the society in a pure way, but then there were those who supported it politically. Why did it come from the public in a pure way? I call it organic because there were previous events.

All the issues in the demo have been conveyed to the President and the Government for the last 10 months. But they were accumulated and never responded. Then they made a demo. When the demo was running, passengers appeared. These passengers were the ones who caused the mess. That's why, Mr. Leon, we know that once the demonstration is brutal, then Mr. Prabowo will do the first quick win,

which is to stop all the riots, catch all the rioters, TNI, Pololi, work. The people must be calm. That will succeed. Because of him, I will consider all requests, all aspirations. What is the second quick end?

Reshuffle. The people are shocked. This is what is asked for. Reshuffle has been around for 10 months. People say it's not suitable, it's not suitable, it's never heard of. It was always said at that time by the President. This is what was asked for. People have been saying that reshuffle is not suitable for the government for the past 10 months.

It has never been heard of. The president always said, My minister is great. There will be no reshuffle. When people want to reshuffle, there will be no reshuffle.

My minister is good. He works day and night. Poor him. His car is not good. There are all kinds of things, like the vehicles were not good, and so on. It was accumulating, and then Mr. Prabowo said, Quick, quit.

He said, stop all the demos. Those who are corrupt, catch them. Fair, both the authorities and the demonstrators. Then I want to arrange a reshuffle. The reshuffle was done, then the agreement to change the laws of the political system. Wow, the DPR was stopped.

That was a quick win. It was a quick solution. The DPR minister can't go abroad unless he represents the country on the law. That was the right promise. That's why I said, I said, yes, two thumbs up for Mr. Prabowo in how to finish the last Huru Hara,

how to finish it because the quick win is already correct. That's it. Now, the only thing left is to continue, right? What's next? Later there will be the Law of the Asset Bargaining, right? The next step is the asset abuse law. The changes in the political field will be made.

The middle term will be improved once the quick win is over. Maybe the quick win will continue until October with the next reshuffle. This is only the fifth, even though it is considered to be problematic. But it's up to the president too.

I have a lot of follow-up questions. But before I go to the Minister of Reshuffle, I want to ask, there are also some people who ask, who is the enemy behind Mr. Prabowo's cover? Who is in the latest demo? Is there any connection with Riza Khalid's oil corruption?

I don't know. I read someone's analysis about it. It's definitely Riza Khalid behind it. But we want to prove it legally, it's a bit difficult. If Riza Khalid was a passenger, not an enemy behind the curtain, he could have just passed by and made a lot of noise.

That's what I'm saying, this is not a cockroach. There is no cockroach, this is not a fake news. There is no fake news. This is organic. We have recorded everything that has been asked for.

We have recorded it since 10 months ago and always delivered to the President. But the response is always different. Indonesia is doing very well now. The job market is increasing, economic growth is increasing. That's all. Below, they said, no, sir.

Now there are many jobs, but no, you keep doing this and that. Because there are all of them. So, it's organic. But even though there are people who ride it, I think it's normal. I don't understand that, sir. Maybe I want to understand.

What do you mean when people ride it, what is the benefit for them? What do they expect? There are many. First, if the passenger is Reza Khalid, there might be a delay in the case. If it's a continuous dispute, the case will be delayed.

If there is a change of government in certain areas, the handling of the case might be changed. There are also passengers who have politicalads because they have political enemies. Some people are nomads because they want to get political benefits. If this happens, I can get this. That's what nomads are.

But for others, like students and teachers, they are actually organic. Because before the demo, it was already announced that they were organic. This is our demand. The people who burned the house were not known. It was like an organized group.

Yes, that's right. Are you optimistic about the implementation of the law in Indonesia after the demo and also after seeing the response of the government, especially from the quick win? I don't know if I should be optimistic or pessimistic, but we all hope that a country whose law is not properly enforced

will destroy the country itself. At least there is always proof that the government must be replaced, always like that, so we hope that the government is stable in accordance with the constitutional calendar, let's enforce the law well. I often say this, the World Bank in 2006 and never removed the size of the success of a country if you look at the assets largest asset as a country that is 44 percent is law enforcement law natural resources

that so rich we only give a contribution of 23 percent The remaining 43% is for education, for the skills of building, and so on. If 40% of the people have failed, it means that everything is in a mess. Right? Therefore, if you ask me,

Mr. Mahfud, I am an optimist. I don't talk optimistically and pessimism, but it's a must. If we want to save this country, the law must be enforced. Don't be a coward like the people who are protesting now. I want to ask, sir. There are some people in the community who see some people who are ministers,

but their positions are not quite right. We can divide them into three categories. We can divide them into those who still have hope. We can see that they are good people. Then we can see those who are in the middle. We can see if they are good or not.

We are not sure. But there are categories that we are sure are quite high. Based on their history, that this person is not suitable for that position. My question is, if the society and the majority of people have seen the third category like this,

why are people like this still given positions? That's what we have to answer, of course, the one who gives the position. Why are people like that? The ex is very destructive if he is still given a position. Those who can answer must be the ones who raise the issue. But there is a political analysis.

The theoretical structure explains. Maybe it's because of political trade-off. People usually do this. In the political process that leads someone someone is a governor, and in the process of making someone a leader, he can be a governor because of this. That's why I give him this.

It's a political trade-off. It can be promised from the future. If asked, why? But if it's true, it shouldn't be done. Because no matter what the aspirations of the community, if they say that the CA is bad, then the government will be disturbed before it is replaced.

It will continue to be disturbed by uncomfortable issues. For example, even though legally it not been proven by the court, the government of Mr. Budiari, from the beginning until now, has been in a bad position. The government is not comfortable,

and in the end, they just give up. It will also happen to other ministers, other offices. Because democracy requires what is it called? People's participation to determine who has the right to manage the taxes

that they issue for mutual needs, for the country. Right? There is a question, but he said he asked for censors, so I'll just ask the question. What is Prof. Mahfud's view on the Budi Ari that was removed? Should it be investigated as a case of a title and become a suspect? Personally, I have said many times,

if you look at the construction of the case, which is stated in the newspaper and the investigation report that we got. In my opinion, the case should have been suspected a long time ago. Because the case of Yudol in Kemenkomen.fo was started by the admission of the officials to arrange blockers against the titles so that there is no title.

When the officials were sent, Budi Ari took someone who did not meet the requirements but was forced, not through an open selection because, Budi Ari said, his license was not checked because he admitted that he was good at operating IT. Then he was fired and forced to leave. He had no license whatsoever.

And then he made up stories about the online crime. That's why it's possible to be suspected. If so, then it's Budiary's fault. He's the intellectual actor. He knows that he has no competence. He was forced to work there until his staff got paid from the operational fund of the staff office.

Because Budiary told him to pay a high salary, even though the standard is not allowed in that bureaucracy. There are other proofs. There was a confession on March, on the day of the execution, that there was a witness who delivered a copy.

But the one who delivered it said it was filled with money, in the investigation. And there was a CCTV. Well, that must have been a mistake. In fact, the one who asked for a mistake was this one. Therefore, because this was not responded to well by the police, the police only mentioned the rumors,

because it was not respond to the request. The people kept protesting. Every time Budiari appeared in public, they were shouted at. Every time he spoke, they lied. The officers were disturbed. So, in my opinion,

the police or the police force should immediately work more professionally to find an intellectual actor, that title, who cannot be denied. It is mentioned in the Jaksa Dakwa, the things I said earlier are mentioned in the Jaksa Dakwa, and we do not need to hesitate to mention it.

We quote from the Jaksa Dakwa, which is quoted in the Quran, that this is what happened, and so on, it has been made in the newspaper. That's what happened. And there are many stories in the media. If you want this country to be comfortable, you have to make laws, and enforce them well. Make laws well, and enforce them well.

Is there anyone else who is considered to be a reshuffled? That is Mrs. Sri Mulyani. She is highly respected by foreign investors. It seems that her response to the capital market is also very high, including today. What is Mr. Mahfud's response to her reshuffle?

Is she reshuffled or resigned?

There were many rumors that he was going to resign. I heard that he... I heard it from the past, but I haven't really understood it. But the last one, about the cancellation, I heard that he asked for a second chance to resign, but it was not accepted until the end of the reshuffle.

Well, the term was changed, but actually the process that preceded for Bu Sirumulyana was he asked for a request to withdraw himself. And it was conveyed to some friends. That he had asked for a withdrawal, but it was not answered. But finally, it was stopped with the reshuffle. It's the same. The product will be the same.

So, the reshuffle, because it's a withdrawal or not, it's the same. It must be replaced. But if we talk about the requirements for the government, Mrs. Sirimulyani meets the three requirements that are required to be in office. First, her professionalism is very competent.

Second, her track record is extraordinary, both is very competent. Second, he is very well-recruited both nationally and internationally. He is also very well-integrated. I know him well. So, I was very disappointed when I heard that the country did not provide enough protection for my house was so far away from the country, the country did not provide enough protection. Of course, if the country could have been prevented,

it would have happened suddenly. But it should have been anticipated. If it had happened at Saharone's house, it should have been in the office. It should have been guarded. But at his house,

when the first prison was established, he called the Ministry of Justice and sent a TNI. But only a little. But two hours later, another prison came. Then they sent a lot of people. But it was already continued in Jarah.

Yes, what I heard, he was in jail because he needed to, but I was still disappointed because of the security of the apparatus. Secondly, I was treated like a Saharoni. If I was in jail because of someone, but treated like a Saharoni, it's not good. If I was treated like Mas Leon, maybe it's not good to be treated like that. If you're treated like Leon, it's okay. He's a prisoner, but if you're treated like that, it's not good. He cried there.

If you say that, it means that he's from a source that has met with the Mulianda culture and can be trusted. What I don't understand is, I agree with what the professor said, for example, there is a prison in Sharoni's house. The mother of this simulation is not only a minister,

but also a symbol. Because it has been proven, right? After he resigned, the capital market fell. The net outflow was huge. And even, if we are capital market players,

we can see that the news that he resigned has been heard even before. Because the foreign net outflow has been from Friday, from Thursday, they have been out first. So, he can be that he is an important person and also a correlation to Indonesia's investors.

What I don't understand is, what is the reason why his maintenance is not as tight or the resources are not as much as it should be?

What is the reason?

I think the reason is simple. Maybe people don't expect it. So, they just keep their house as usual. For example, when I became the Minister of Land, there was a standard for keeping the house. There were four people.

If it's normal, maybe because Sri Mulyana is not clean, there won't be any problems. That's the basic reason. But if they suddenly come, then we ask for help. Even a little help, because Sri Mulyana has no fault.

But then more people come, then security comes, and then the prison is created. I imagine a in jail. Well, I think if I imagine the reason is as simple as that. For example, at Mrs. Sri Mulyani's house in Jogja, when she brought the boar, people were also surprised, what was going on?

Then I was already in jail, the response came. Although of course, if there is an incident, Sahroni was already in jail, Eko was already in jail, this was already in jail, Sahroni has been fired, Eko has been fired, this has been fired, even though at the home of the ministers who are sensitive to it, it must be strengthened. Well, that's just about the commando technique on the field.

About the commando technique on the field, I don't know either. But that's the incident. Yes, because actually, the name of Mrs. Sri Mul name often appears on Instagram, on social media. Who is Satorusa? Who is Satorusa? It's mentioned. It's mentioned, Satorusa, let's go to this house.

Even the address is also published in the comments column. The address is here, Satorusa. What I haven't imagined is, can we not know that the mass will be that big? Yes, maybe. Maybe we don't know. Maybe it's a miscalculation.

In the military and the police, it's called a miscalculation. Maybe it's a miscalculation. It's okay, it's just a miscalculation. But it's not. But there are other theories, other conspiracy theories also appear. Well, someone is really controlling it, so it goes there first, and the rescue team is already prepared.

The proof is like that. If there is a fire, it's like a whoosh, if it's yellow, what's the sign? It's said that someone caught it, so when when the fire broke out, he rushed there. It seemed like someone was controlling him. That's what is now being investigated. I have a follow-up question about Mrs. Srimuleni's case. What we heard on the ground is that he has already proposed a resignation.

First, did he propose his resignation when he was in your government or before? And if he proposed his resignation when he was in your government, why was he approved now? I don't know. But I know that before the establishment of Mr. Prabowo's cabinet, Mrs. Sri Mulyani had already made a statement at the DPR.

It means that she was ready to stop. At the DPR, it was my last session. Thank you for your cooperation. As soon as there is a new minister in Sudan." But it was re-elected. That's a political consideration.

Then, Mrs. Sirinwani mentioned that the event was not yet accepted. That's also a political consideration. Mr. Prabowo. The market sensitivity was also observed by Mr. Prabowo. But that was Mr. Prabowo's opinion. But we must remember that Mrs. Sri Rumulyani is a beautiful person, competent,

has good track record, good integrity, but has also been for a long time. So maybe there is also a thought that Mrs. Sri Rumulyani wants me to be for a long time so that there is also a thought that I have been wanting to have a new cabinet for a long time. The government and the public also want a new cabinet. There are so many smart people in this country. Maybe that's it.

So, various factors can affect all the events that happen.

Yes.

Someone also asked, how strong is Jokowi's influence in the current political situation?

I don't know about other people. I think he is just a normal person. As a member of society, as a supporter, he will definitely be influential. But I think he is just the same as other powerful people. He is being destructive.

I think it's okay, it's a gift to be political, to deliver ideas, to deliver opinions, to look at people, even if we can look at people. It's up to us to look at people. So, maybe we don't, if I were you, why are we paranoid? Why is there always a Jokowi gang? I don't think so.

Why is it so excessive? We can manage this country together. Because we don't have any proof. We don't have any proof that they are a Solo Gang. We can talk about it in the media. But the other people in the media are also like that.

So, what's the point? Let's just make sure that this country is well-organized and well-maintained. This is one of the frequently asked questions. And it's been asked repeatedly. Is it interesting to be offered a ministerial position again if you are invited to join the Prabowo Cabinet? And what kind of minister would you like to be if you could choose? Prof, why don't you join the Prabowo Cabinet?

These are only three questions. If I read them all, it would be too long.

Well, I... There are a lot of questions, and there are also a lot of people who answer them themselves. There are thousands of people who ask, Mr. Mahfud, do you want to join? Mr. Mahfud, you don't have to join. And with their own reasons.

Some people say, you're just talking about it from the outside. There are many people like that in the media. But there are also people who say, Mr. Mahfud, don't go in. Just be consistent, keep it from the outside. There are people who say that.

For that, whatever my answer is, it will be pro or contra. Therefore, on that question, I will only answer the questions that people ask me

if they are willing to take or stop the office. If it's a general question, there are too many questions. Whatever the answer is, I will definitely complain. That's it, right? It's called politics. But I don't have much experience in politics or in government. But if I'm allowed to speak or not,

if it's too much, I can cut it. But I have one measure. How to see if this person is clean or not. Minister. I've talked about it on YouTube before. It's to see the team. The team was very good and I think they were over the top. The team.

If the team was normal, for example, they didn't get any position, that's because the top team was looking at the top team. The top team was also pushing like that. That's why the team was normal. I once talked to the football team.

They were very good. The top also pushed like that. That's why the team is also normal. I had a chat with Mr. Mahfud.

Wow, it's so close.

The salary is high.

I want to talk, but I don't dare to talk.

The salary is not enough. Well, the country's money can't be wasted. If you want to be a citizen of a country, don't ask for any facilities that are already determined by the country. And that means it's not enough if you want to be productive. Actually, if we talk about when in the country, it's okay. But after, even after Mr. Mahfud left, they are still with Mr. Mahfud with a salary that...

Maybe if you apply to other places, which is not to talk about all of this, you can get a higher salary. Because what is fought is the idea, not the material. My friends have a small team, but they are fighting for the idea of militancy in the country. The country must be improved.

And the way to improve it is through working with you. That's what I think. That's why my team is not many, not many. The important thing is to move forward. Sir, I don't know if I can ask this, but are you in contact with the government to discuss the probability of joining the government? The answer is the same as before. I will only answer that question when people have the competence or the ability to do so.

Because it's useless to answer that question. It's still a controversy. For example, if I don't want to do it, someone will ask, who offered you the job? And I'll say, I want to do it. And they'll say, you're just a nobody.

You were out of the country yesterday, and now you're back. It's like that. There's always a controversy. That's why the'm going there. I'll be there when the time comes. So that I don't cause any controversy.

That's it.

Okay, I'll turn to the tips. Because someone asked,

what would Prof. Mahfud do now if he becomes the Minister of Justice again? I don't know. Because I'm not the Minister of Justice anymore. I mean, what would I do now if'm not the Minister of Justice now. I don't know what I'm doing now. I'm not the Minister of Justice now. I don't know what I'm doing. Mr. Mahfud often speaks up. I see that he sometimes criticizes the government

and sometimes he can be positive, like praising the government at certain moments. So, it's two-way. That's why I joined Mr. Mahfud's YouTube membership. For me, it's a unique thing. Because usually when I see YouTube membership,

it's for people who can... maybe the stereotype is content creator, right? Entertainment, education, finance, for example. Why do you have a desire to form a membership like this? First, thank you for being a member of the Masterclass. So this is a special material for YouTube outside the broadcast. The broadcast is also open to anyone.

Because he is open to anyone and praises and criticizes anyone, depending on the performance and situation, there is no one who pays for the Only me and my friends. But it was heard a lot. So I want to deepen this, to give a service to the public who want to be serious

by opening a master class, a part of the Mafud MD Official. For those who want to contribute to this event, please join us. But if you don't, it's okay to join the regular one. Every week, there is also a room for friends, there are several channels there.

But this one is more serious, deeper, maybe useful for people who want to do research, predict what will happen in the legal field if we talk about the past that I have experienced. So, what I want to show in the masterclass is a bit exclusive, things that are rarely exposed to the public,

so that the event and the reference can be summarized. Can I ask for a little bit of permission? Because I ask for permission, especially to talk about money, you can say bully easy positive it may have an Italian capo a paladin Tang do it so I can say channel channel one. Yeah, man. I'm a colony selling the re-use of adsense I pay to to be saw my cover the sea channel near Bapak and Bapak and serene bersuara the channel nyama food and official mahapun D D to strong to the

Rasanya not you guys see happy I don't think so. But my team handles it. I never ask if it covers the cost or not. But I say, here's the money. Please go ahead.

That's all. So I don't know, at least until now, I don't know if it's all enough of what is received from the broadcasts, is there any other business that needs to be done? Because of this, officially, I don't want to be a manager. I only want to share my knowledge and my name.

Use this if you can. By the way, you can use my name and my voice. Please use it. But don't take the profit or money from here. This is not a business. This is not a business place. This is a place of struggle.

That's all. Or how, you can ask my team later. Poor thing, you know it. Actually, that's one of the reasons why I subscribe. Because I see the struggle of each team. The other team that wants to speak. We need to see the other teams' efforts. We need to see the other teams' efforts.

We need someone in the middle to criticize. If it's wrong, and if it's right, we can say it's right. I want to criticize anyone who is wrong, but I want to praise them if they are right. That's it. Yes. If we continue what we discussed, for example, the DPR salary revision, which was finally dropped.

But if we talk about money, it's actually a minority. If we talk about money, the leak is most likely bigger than corruption. And also a backbone for politics, so they can get the seats.

How do you fix that? Because if the salary is 60 million or 100 million, it doesn't go back to the capital anyway. Yes, actually, the salary that is demanded from the DPR is much lower than the salary of the executives. In the ministries, the board of directors, the PMDA, the salary is much higher. Imagine, the DPR Central, in my time was a member of the DPR. I received a monthly rent of Rp12,500,000.

Now, it has increased to Rp50,000. It has been 20 years since the rent was increased by 50 people. near the DPR building, the name of the DPRD, DKI Jakarta, the rent of the house alone is 78 million. There is the SKA since the time of Anies Baswedan, there is the SKA governor on his salary, especially those who are not DPR.

So many DPR members, if from the DKI, the note can be billions of dollars, much larger than the DPR members, if they are from the DKI, can get billions of dollars in income. It's much bigger than the DPR. It's the same in ministries, and in the UN. So, the DPR is actually small.

So, it's useless to say that the DPR will be organized. No, it has to be organized. It has to close all the corruption holes. And Mr. Prabowo knows where the corruption holes are. Because Mr. Prabowo has written about the corruption holes in his book, which is a must-read by every office.

The title is Paradox Indonesia and its Solution. Mr. Prabowo knows that the DPR is just peanuts. But as a media person, it's okay. But when it comes to negotiations, there are more negotiations outside the DPR. This is one of the many questions.

Why didn't the President run the asset theft campaign? The President could, if he wanted to. Why is the DPR late in the process of reviewing the asset abuse bill? Even though this is the desire of the people. Is the asset abuse bill possible to be reviewed? Where is the blocker?

The blocker is in the DPR. So the president, not Pak Prabowo, there are Pak Prabowo, Pak Jokowi, there is Pak SBY and the others. The president has been proposing this legislation President is Mr. Prabowo, Mr. Jokowi, Mr. SBY, and others.

The President has been proposing this legislative plan to the DPR for a long time, but the DPR refused to discuss it. Until the last moment, the President proposed it again on 5 May 2023 with an official letter from the Supreme Court, but it was not discussed. If you ask why, the DPRK doesn't want to. It's a bit scary.

The theft of assets can be interpreted as a poverty-making corruptor. Because in the asset-theft law, people can be robbed of their assets through the process of data, even though it is a criminal act. If it is a criminal act, the assets can be confiscated and owned by the state if the crime is already final. So it may take a decade to be investigated, or it may take three years to be investigated.

Meanwhile, the criminal process is underway, many assets are sold. There are assets that are still under investigation, not yet in court, but there are already signs. These assets cannot be taken away, they have been transferred to other people, on behalf of the family, and sent to Singapore in the form of money,

and deposited there. It's all gone. So when you are fined, for example, a 10-, you have no assets. You can claim your assets with the theft of assets. If it turns out that it is not proven, you can count it again.

Some people doubt that the theft of assets taken, even though it was not wrong. No, it was taken first because for example, there is a property that is not a corruption crime. For example, this is what was done by a minister, he was involved in a corruption crime because the corruption was dismantled. The money was deposited, in this case I deposited 27 billion rupiahs. This has not been resolved yet. If there is no tax evasion law, the money will be inflated.

If you are involved in corruption or I am involved in corruption, I have this thing, I am corrupt, I am missing, it cannot be evaded. Therefore, the tax evasion law takes taken first, but not by law. It was passed by the court. So, before the corruption case was over, the Anaset's Corruption Act was taken by the State Prosecutor's Office.

If it was a crime, the State Prosecutor's Office would ask for the court's permission. This corruption is being investigated, please order to confiscate the state's assets. If the state does not find the state's assets, they will lose them. The state will take the assets. The state will benefit from this. The corruptors are afraid.

The corruptors want to be rich, but they are afraid of the poor. They are very afraid of the poor. The poor are not like that. The asset abuse law. Well, thank God, Mr. Prabowo, it has been agreed. The asset abuse law will be discussed in 2026. That means in four months, it will be included in the pro-legnaz priority list.

Why should it be delayed?

No, I mean, why not now? There is a procedure. A bill is discussed if it is included in the pro-legnaz priority list first. What is pro-legnaz? Pro-legnaz is a national legislation program, which is a list of bills that the government wants to make.

It can't be done randomly. It's not allowed to make it randomly if you haven't entered here. There are thousands of laws. There is the law that wants to poison rats, what laws? Select it first. The one that is included in the National Proleg is this one. This one is already included in the Proleg.

Now it's included in the Proleg Nas, long-term. Then there is the Proleg Nas Tahunan. There is a video of Mr. Mahfud that was discussed. Then someone said, if we want to do it, but we are dependent on the superior. The superior says yes, we say yes. But if we all say yes, but the superior says no,

we can't do anything. That's the fact. That's the fact. So, the one who rejects actually, is the one who is not able to do anything. So, the one who rejects actually, If we say yes, we say yes. But if we say yes but the superior says no, we can't do anything.

That's the fact. That's the fact. So, the one who rejected was the superior. The superior at that time. The superior did not agree with the members of the DPR. Because the DPR said,

ask the superior first. Until that time, I still remember, after President Jokowi issued a letter on May 5, to immediately issue the Asset Raid Law, because it was not discussed, President Jokowi said to me,

how is it, Mr. Mahfud? I reported, sir, the DPR did not discuss it either, even though your letter had arrived. Because if the DPR's leader does not want to, he cannot refer the answer. Mr. Jokowi said,

I will invite the party leaders here. I want to ask the children of the fruit in the DPR would be able to pay for the stolen assets. If that is not done, I will issue a warrant before I stop being president." That's what Mr. Jokowi said to me. It was clear that Mr. Jokowi was still there and I was there. So, if I was found, I would say, I asked, is that true? He said, yes. But I left the Cabinet first.

I was the press officer. I asked for permission to leave the Cabinet. I was the press officer. Of course, it was the other people who were in charge, not me. I was not ethical to go there. But it didn't happen.

I didn't call the head of the Parpol. I didn't call the head, nor did Perpu. Because at that time, politics was already heating up. Yes, because there are a lot of people who are against corruption. What should the public do to make the RUU's asset theft legal? I'm against corruption.

I think this is a question that represents a majority.

Well, it's a demo like yesterday. Because it's a demo like yesterday, so it's assumed that tomorrow it will be invited. But it turns out that the demo has already had results. It's an ordinary aspiration, it's not officially invited, it's not even governed. It's a crowded demo like yesterday, and then tomorrow it's going to be a priority. It's going to be a priority in the next pro-Leknas.

Can you explain why the demo can be a push to make the agenda really serious? Why? What is the trigger from the point of view of the people in the government. Why do they have to do that? Because maybe the people in the government will be disturbed by a law. It's not a big deal to fight for one thing,

because the asset-seizing law also limits people who shop, people who are corrupted, because their assets can be stolen. That's what causes us to lose money. Then, we are triggered by the democracy. It's common in democracies.

In many countries, there are democracies. If there is such a law, it is a democracy.

Or there is laws like that.

Or there are laws that are part of democracy. There are laws about democracy, called the Laws on Action, Reaction, and Emotion. There are laws, but they have to be regulated because there must be democracy. But why? Why does democracy make people take it seriously? For example, are they afraid that in 5 years they will not be elected? Yes.

Or what?

Yes, they can. First, they can be arrogant. Second, they need money. But there are also those who are responsive. Instead of not being elected in five years, we have to hold big demonstrations like this. Let's respond to this with kindness, and we politicians should be like that.

And we, Mas Leon, should be used to it. Because in the past, we couldn't even hold a demonstration. Everything was controlled by the state. We are independent so that we can demonstrate like that, electing our own government, demonstrating our government. The government can also respond to gain confidence,

or it can throw itself into corruption. That's its choice. But this is a democracy state and there are laws. That's what I think needs to be understood and lived by. I have two last questions. Number one is about the reshuffle.

We discussed two people earlier. How about the other people who are reshuffled? Is it really worth reshuffling? And how about replacing them according to the assessment, Professor? Then, for example, in this second session, why do you think there will be a second reshuffle?

Yes, that's my prediction. Because, first, this Cabinet is not productive yet. The lack of productivity is due to the competition, which is often caused by the high number of competitors, or the unclear work, which is due to political trade-offs. And secondly, it is also because there are many who are indicated to be corrupt, for example.

So, the Cabinet is not needed. I believe that the reshuffle will continue at least once again in October. It's only been 10 months, right? It was a year-long agreement. It's been 10 months since it was approved. In the past, the agreement the contract was for a year.

But now, it's been 10 months and I'm still being rejected. Maybe in a year. And I believe there will be another one. But it's all up to Prabowo. How about the first reshuffle? Do people who are replaced by the prof sees as better than before?

I don't know the track record. That's why we're all waiting. But whatever the president's choice is, it must be considered true and supported before we know that it shouldn't be supported. We don't know this yet. We give the opportunity first.

Yes. My last question.

Someone asked, is there still hope for Indonesia? Yes, there is. Why? Because we are a democracy country. If we look at it from a religious perspective, this is a country that is blessed by God's mercy. So God will definitely protect it.

But, from a secular perspective, view is not related to this. This is a democracy country. A democracy country will always have momentum periodically to improve the situation. In improving the situation, the people play a role. That's where people have to steal the hearts of the people so that they can be chosen for good. That's why there will definitely be changes.

It's just a matter of what the configuration is like. There will be changes every five years. Maybe every year there will be changes due to the policy of prerogative rights and so on. And we have to stay motivated, there will be changes. If there are no changes, we will run away.

Thank you very much, Prof, for your time. Thank you very much, Prof, for your time.

Yes, thank you.