Sumber : Infobank
THE former executives of Regional Development Banks (BPD) retirement haven’t meant peace, it’s meant prosecution. Years after signing off on corporate loans, they now face criminal charges. Careers that once shone with success are now shadowed by scandal. Reputations built over decades have unravelled in days.
Former directors of Bank DKI, Bank BJB, and Bank Jateng are now in the spotlight, accused of greenlighting loans that later turned sour. It’s a sobering wake-up call: in the world of banking, what looks like a smart decision today could become a legal nightmare tomorrow.
These weren’t reckless amateurs. Most are seasoned professionals, many with roots in Bank Mandiri. But according to Nurcahyo Jungkung Madyo, Director of Investigations at the Attorney General’s Special Crimes Unit, these bankers allegedly conspired to approve loans to PT Sritex, despite the company being labelled unfit for financing. The result is alleged state losses of Rp 1.08 trillion. “The estimated damage from the loans granted by these three banks is around Rp 1,088,650,808,028,” said Nurcahyo. “That figure is still under review by the national audit agency (BPK).”
In 2020, PT Sri Rejeki Isman, better known as Sritex was a poster child for Indonesian manufacturing success. A publicly listed giant in the textile industry, it held credit lines from 28 respected banks worth Rp 25.1 trillion. Bank DKI, BJB, and Jateng were just a few among many eager to fund its future. Its books showed Rp 27.37 trillion in assets, Rp 21.89 trillion in liabilities, and a healthy Rp 5.47 trillion in equity. Yes, the debt ratio was high, 80%, but equity was positive and lenders saw opportunity, not risk.
However, during 2022–2023, conditions worsened due to rising debt and declining assets, resulting in negative equity for PT Sritex in 2023. The company fell into a debt trap, exacerbated by the tough times during COVID-19, which further deteriorated its financial condition. Eventually, the company entered into a Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU) process and was declared bankrupt. The fallout was severe: mass layoffs began, and investigations were launched.
Being an executive at a Regional Development Bank (BPD) requires more than just banking skills. BPDs have long been subject to interference from their shareholders namely, local governments through regents and governors. Leadership instability is common: a change in governor often leads to a change in the bank’s board of directors, regardless of the bank’s sound financial performance. On top of that, there is regulatory pressure from the Ministry of Home Affairs via Government Regulation (PP) No. 54 of 2017, which restricts BPDs’ operational flexibility, despite them being under the supervision of the Financial Services Authority (OJK) and Bank Indonesia.
Currently, credit approvals such as those at Bank BJB, Bank DKI, and Bank Jateng have come under legal scrutiny when those loans turned sour. The directors involved are being accused of causing state losses, and even more alarmingly, of “collusion.” Yet, if we look closely at the Sritex case, it was clearly the company that defaulted due to declining revenue. This was largely caused by a weakened export market following the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war, which disrupted global markets and derailed the company’s business plans.
As a result, many banks including the three where seven of their directors and executives are now suspects saw their loans to Sritex become non-performing. This raises a fundamental question: how can BPDs be blamed when it was PT Sritex that used the funds and mismanaged the business? Once a loan becomes non performing, it seems anything can be blamed often reduced to a simple allegation of violating prudent banking principles.
The designation of BPD bankers as suspects for allegedly causing state losses has serious implications. It may discourage them from approving corporate loans in the future. Instead, they may play it safe by focusing on employee loans or simply purchasing government securities (SBN), which offer attractive yields. They may even prefer investing in Bank Indonesia Securities or Retail Bank Indonesia Certificates (SRBI), which provide decent returns with less risk.
Who would have thought that a company performing well at the time of financing could collapse five years later? And if it received funding from a BPD, suddenly the case goes viral, and even retired bankers can be named suspects. While bankers at state-owned banks (Himbara) are protected under the State-Owned Enterprises Law, which clarifies that bad loans do not constitute state losses, it’s time for the same principle to be extended to BPD bankers. Credit approval is a business judgment, as long as there’s no corruption, bribery, or any form of illicit enrichment involved.
Beware, approving a loan that later defaults may result in being accused of causing a loss to the state. This could happen to any of the bankers from Indonesia’s 27 BPDs. As one banker aptly said, “If all BPD bankers were to die, they would surely go to heaven, because they’ve already been through hell in this life.”
Former directors of Bank DKI, Bank BJB, and Bank Jateng are now in the spotlight, accused of greenlighting loans that later turned sour. It’s a sobering wake-up call: in the world of banking, what looks like a smart decision today could become a legal nightmare tomorrow.
These weren’t reckless amateurs. Most are seasoned professionals, many with roots in Bank Mandiri. But according to Nurcahyo Jungkung Madyo, Director of Investigations at the Attorney General’s Special Crimes Unit, these bankers allegedly conspired to approve loans to PT Sritex, despite the company being labelled unfit for financing. The result is alleged state losses of Rp 1.08 trillion. “The estimated damage from the loans granted by these three banks is around Rp 1,088,650,808,028,” said Nurcahyo. “That figure is still under review by the national audit agency (BPK).”
