Nadiem Makarim, former Indonesian education minister and Gojek co-founder, was formally named a suspect and detained on September 4, 2025, in connection with a laptop procurement program investigation. The case centers on the procurement of approximately 1.2 million Chromebook laptops between 2020 and 2022, valued at around 10 trillion rupiah (US$580 million), and has become a test case for how policy decisions in Indonesia could cross into criminal liability.
Background: The Digitalization Program
During the Covid-19 pandemic, Indonesia’s education ministry launched a digitalization program to accelerate technology adoption in classrooms. However, doubts emerged in May 2025 when the Attorney-General’s Office of Indonesia (AGO) began investigating the procurement process.
According to prosecutors’ charges read in court, the education ministry procured Chromebook laptops despite internal recommendations favoring devices running Microsoft Windows. A 2018 internal ministry review had found that Chromebooks required stable internet connectivity to function effectively.
Core Allegations
Prosecutors alleged that Makarim carried out the procurement in a manner that deviated from the original plan, violating public procurement principles. They further alleged that some vendors sold the laptops to the government at inflated prices, contributing to estimated state losses of more than 2.1 trillion rupiah (US$122 million).
The AGO also named four other suspects, including Ibrahim Arief, a former vice president at ecommerce platform Bukalapak, who was a consultant to the Ministry of Education’s digitalization program.
The Google Connection
A central controversy in the case involves alleged links between the Chromebook procurement and investments by US tech giant Google in Gojek. At the first hearing in January, prosecutors alleged that Makarim had set requirements that effectively matched only Google’s operating system, aimed at making the company “the sole controller of the education ecosystem in Indonesia.”
Prosecutors alleged that Makarim sought to enrich himself by 809 billion rupiah (US$47 million) through the transfer of investment funds in Aplikasi Karya Anak Bangsa – one of Gojek’s entities – to Gojek Indonesia. They pointed to Google’s investments in Aplikasi Karya Anak Bangsa between 2017 and 2021, totaling approximately US$786 million over that period.
Prosecutors told the court that the program moved forward after Makarim allegedly held several meetings in 2020 with representatives from Google Asia Pacific and Google Indonesia. Makarim has denied this claim in court.
Google’s Defense
At a hearing on April 20, three former Google Asia Pacific executives testified as witnesses and rejected the allegations. Caesar Sengupta, former vice president of Google Asia Pacific, told the court that Google was a minority investor in companies linked to Indonesia’s tech ecosystem and did not control corporate or government policy decisions.
“There was absolutely no relationship between Google’s investment and government policy on the use of ChromeOS,” Sengupta said. He added that the claim of 809 billion rupiah in payments was “not true and does not reflect what we did.”
Scott Beaumont, former president of Google Asia Pacific, echoed this testimony via video conference from Singapore, stating that there had never been any request from the Indonesian government for investment or payment in connection with the Chromebook policy.
Makarim’s Position
Makarim has consistently denied any wrongdoing. In statements posted on his LinkedIn account (now managed by his legal team following his detention), he said he was “innocent of all charges” and rejected accusations that he had caused financial losses to the state.
He wrote that the Chromebooks were “not overpriced” and were “bought below market rate.” “That is not a minor discrepancy. It is the difference between a crime and no crime,” Makarim said. “If there is no state loss, there is no case.”
At a media briefing in Jakarta on April 22, his legal counsel Ari Yusuf Amir raised concerns about his client’s health, saying doctors have advised Makarim to undergo medical treatment.
In a doorstop interview with Tech in Asia on April 13, Makarim said if he is found guilty, it could be “quite devastating” because the case involves giant tech companies like Google and Gojek, which is backed by global investors. “It will be devastating for the perception of Indonesia on its way to becoming an economic powerhouse,” he added.
The trial is expected to reach a verdict in May, roughly eight months since his detention.
Broader Policy Risk Concerns
The case has drawn attention to Indonesia’s broader struggle with procurement-related corruption. The country’s Corruption Eradication Commission has identified goods and services procurement as one of the most common areas linked to corruption cases.
Makarim founded Gojek in 2010, one of Southeast Asia’s most valuable technology companies, before joining former president Joko Widodo’s cabinet as education minister in 2019. His appointment was viewed as a sign that Indonesia was opening its bureaucracy to leaders from the tech sector.
Analysts say the case is now being read through a different lens. For a country seeking to position itself as a regional tech hub, the trial could carry implications for how entrepreneurs and professionals view public service and policy risk.
According to Achmad Hidayat, an economist and public policy specialist at UPN Veteran Jakarta, the case has unsettled parts of Indonesia’s tech diaspora and some investors. “What investors and technology professionals see is not merely a legal case. They see a signal that controversial policy decisions in Indonesia can easily turn into criminal risk,” he explains.
Hidayat notes that in many innovation-driven sectors, policy experimentation is often necessary. “If every flawed decision is interpreted through a criminal lens, what emerges is not good governance but a bureaucracy paralyzed by fear.”
Regulatory Uncertainty and Investor Concerns
Leigh McKiernon, founder and president director of advisory firm StratEx, says that Indonesia’s laws are generally sound on paper, but their interpretation can shift with politics. “While the legal framework makes sense on paper, there is a history of people believing they were operating within the law but later finding themselves in hot water,” he adds.
McKiernon notes that for investors, regulatory uncertainty can affect capital flows. While he stresses that Indonesia remains one of Southeast Asia’s largest and most attractive markets, he advises foreign investors to adopt a more cautious approach when entering partnerships with government entities.
“Companies should also conduct thorough due diligence,” McKiernon adds. He also recommends working with experienced local legal advisers who understand Indonesia’s regulatory environment and political dynamics.
Analysts say Makarim’s case highlights the broader risks that investors and executives may face when dealing with government-linked projects in Indonesia, particularly when policies are later reviewed under new political leadership. A similar high-profile case involved Thomas Lembong, a former trade minister under Widodo, who was accused in 2024 of corruption linked to raw sugar imports during his 2015 to 2017 tenure, although court proceedings did not show he had personally benefited from the policy.
