PRIME NEWS POST
JAKARTA — Serious allegations have emerged of repeated demands for up to Rp10 billion in the handling of a land case valued at a minimum of Rp600 billion in Manado, North Sulawesi. John Hamenda, represented by his legal advisors, has alleged that a Rp5‑billion to Rp10‑billion “operational‑fund” payment was being requested, purportedly in exchange for issuing a Termination‑of‑Investigation Order, known as an SP3, to close his police report.
What makes the complaint more significant, per Hamenda’s statement, is that the alleged demand was not a single‑time request but was raised on multiple occasions during meetings and communications regarding the case. These allegations have now been formally filed with the Professional and Security Division (Propam) at Indonesian National Police Headquarters.
The underlying matter is a dispute over possession and transfer of approximately 52,651 square meters of land owned by John Hamenda in Malalayang I, Malalayang District, Manado City, North Sulawesi. Hamenda’s side places the value of the contested land asset at no less than Rp600 billion.
The alleged payment demand is one of the core points in Hamenda’s formal complaint against Police Commissioner Suryadi, Director of General Criminal Investigation for the North Sulawesi Regional Police.
The official report was submitted at Police Headquarters in Jakarta on Thursday (November 12, 2026) and has been formally received by Propam, under Propam Receipt Number SPSP2/2026111201036.
After submitting the complaint, Hamenda’s legal counsel, Dr. Santrawan Paparang, SH, MH, M.Kn, called firmly on the National Police Chief to take decisive action against the named official, including an official performance review and temporary reassignment or removal from post while the disciplinary review runs.
“We ask the National Police Chief not to let this case remain unresolved. We also urge the Propam Division Head, the Paminal Bureau Chief, and the Wabprof Bureau Chief at Propam to fully investigate the alleged code‑of‑ethics violations our client has reported. Should these allegations be proven through a lawful, proper examination, we are requesting strict sanctions, up to and including dishonorable discharge,” Santrawan Paparang stated after filing the report at Propam, Police Headquarters.
## Alleged Rp5‑to‑Rp10‑Billion Request Said to Have Been Repeated
Santrawan explained that, based on Hamenda’s account, the alleged demand first surfaced around August 2025, when Hamenda met with Commissioner Suryadi to ask for updates on his ongoing police report.
During that meeting, according to Hamenda’s version of events included within the complaint submission, the Rp5‑billion to Rp10‑billion operational‑fund request was made, reportedly to ensure the investigation would be halted via an SP3. Hamenda’s legal team stressed the complainant’s statement that the demand was not a one‑off communication. Similar requests were allegedly repeated in follow‑up discussions about the case.
Hamenda stated he was unable to meet the requested amount, and told investigators he had only offered to provide a customary token of appreciation once the whole legal matter was completed. After sharing the sequence of events with his lawyers, Hamenda was advised by Santrawan Paparang and Hanafi Saleh, SH, that the alleged payment demand warranted formal review and should be reported immediately to Propam.
“Our client confirms the request was not made once, but several times. That is a critical fact Propam must examine. They need to verify the justification for a multibillion‑rupiah demand, what the funds were intended for, and whether there is a connection to the investigative process that eventually produced the SP3,” Santrawan said.
The complainant’s team says their concern deepened after the Termination‑of‑Investigation Order was issued under reference Number B/882/X/RES.1.9/2026/Dit Reskrimum, dated October 20, 2026. Hamenda suspects the SP3 decision was linked to his refusal to meet the alleged payment demand. Propam at Police Headquarters has been asked to independently verify any possible connection between the repeated alleged demands and the decision to stop the investigation.
“Law enforcement must never be treated as a commodity for transaction. Particularly for a case involving assets worth hundreds of billions of rupiah. If a payment was indeed demanded to influence the investigation, this is an extremely serious matter that must be fully uncovered,” Santrawan emphasized.
## 52,651‑Square‑Meter Land, Valued at Minimum Rp600 Billion
This involves a very high‑value asset dispute. John Hamenda claims ownership of two adjoining land parcels in Malalayang I, Manado, with a combined area of roughly 52,651 square meters, backed by two land‑ownership certificates: SHM No. 3788 for 36,560 square meters and SHM No. 3789 for 16,091 square meters.
Hamenda’s representatives estimate the land’s current value at no less than Rp600 billion. That high valuation underpins their demand for the case to be handled transparently, professionally, and free from third‑party interference.
In the timeline submitted to the National Police Chief, Hamenda noted that in 2003 he had planned to develop the Manado Square Mall on the site. As part of a commercial agreement with several investors, he says he received Rp41 billion in down payments for mall kiosk purchases. The dispute later expanded to cover sales‑and‑purchase documents, agreements, and alleged land‑title transfers Hamenda claims were processed without his knowledge or consent.
Hamenda’s legal team is also contesting several subsequent title‑transfer deeds and transaction records handed over to investigators. One of those documents, Settlement and Title‑Transfer Deed No. 07 dated October 25, 2013, records a land transfer valued at Rp50 billion, before tax and administrative fees. Hamenda has requested that the full chain of transactions and supporting paperwork be re‑examined during the police investigation.
## Pre‑Trial Court Rulings Used to Challenge the SP3
A further point raised by Hamenda’s lawyers is Pre‑Trial Ruling No. 01/Pid.Pra/2025/PN.Manado from the Manado District Court, dated March 5, 2025. In that ruling, the judge declared an earlier termination of Hamenda’s police report unlawful and ordered the investigation to resume. Hamenda’s team also cites Pre‑Trial Ruling No. 17/Pid.Pra/2025/PN.Mdo, dated September 1, 2025, relating to evidence‑seizure procedures within the same investigation.
Based on their interpretation, the second pre‑trial ruling did not contain an order to halt Hamenda’s specific police report. For that reason, they are formally challenging the legality, procedure, and reasoning behind the new SP3 issued on October 20, 2026.
“We want everything to be laid out clearly. A pre‑trial ruling that criticizes investigator conduct must not be misread as permission to close a separate, different case. The full process leading to the SP3 must be reviewed objectively,” Santrawan stated.
John Hamenda meanwhile expressed hope that the National Police Chief’s leadership would push for genuine internal reform within the force, especially against any member found abusing their authority. He asked that his complaint not only be registered administratively, but followed up with a thorough, impartial probe.
“I hope under the National Police Chief’s leadership there will be a genuine cleanup inside the police institution. I am asking for my reported allegations to be processed, for the official’s position to be reviewed, and for dishonorable discharge to be considered if serious misconduct is proven. Rogue officers must not be allowed to damage the reputation of the National Police and harm ordinary citizens,” Hamenda said.
He also requested that the handling of his police report be taken over by the Criminal Investigation Agency (Bareskrim) at Police Headquarters, to guarantee objectivity, transparency, and legal certainty.
## Propam Has Received the Complaint; Public Awaits Firm Action
With Propam at Police Headquarters formally receiving Hamenda’s report on November 12, 2026, the case has become a test of the police’s internal oversight mechanism for handling alleged abuse of authority.
Santrawan stressed that Propam’s leadership must go beyond a simple administrative check of the report. They must examine the substance of the repeated alleged payment demands, the process that produced the SP3, and any procedural irregularities in how the land dispute was investigated. Hamenda’s team is also asking for the case file to be pulled from the regional police and transferred to Bareskrim, Police Headquarters.
“This is not merely my client’s private problem. It affects public trust in the National Police. If multibillion‑rupiah payments were indeed solicited to influence law enforcement — and allegedly done repeatedly — this cannot be treated as a minor violation. There must be a serious investigation and accountability under the law,” Santrawan concluded.
The public is now waiting for concrete action from the National Police Chief and Propam. The sequence of alleged repeated Rp10‑billion demands, the Rp600‑billion land dispute, and the subsequent SP3 order requires a full, public explanation. While the presumption of innocence must be respected for every named party, every report of alleged abuse of power must be examined transparently, professionally, and without bias. Anyone proven to have violated police regulations or the law must face the corresponding sanctions.
Reported from various media sources //photo from Google documents // contribution by Prime News Post international online media //
