Firli Bahuri Case Reopened, Police Visit Him Due to Two Failed Questionings

JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com - The Special Criminal Investigation Directorate of the Metro Jaya Police denied that former KPK Chairman, Comr. Gen. (Ret.) Firli Bahuri has been arrested over allegations of extortion against former Agriculture Minister Syahrul Yasin Limpo (SYL).

Head of Operations for the Corruption Eradication Task Force, Kombes Pol Ahmad Yusuf Afandi, stated that investigators from the Special Criminal Investigation Directorate only visited the three-star retired police officer.

“No (he was not arrested). Yes (the police only visited),” Yusuf said when contacted by Kompas.com on Wednesday (11/11/2026).

Yusuf confirmed that the presence of investigators was to follow up on Firli’s failure to appear for questioning twice regarding the case.

“The presence of personnel from the Special Criminal Investigation Directorate of the Metro Jaya Police at the badminton hall was to follow up on Firli Bahuri’s absence from two calls for questioning,” he said.

After the visit, the police stated that Firli would attend the next scheduled questioning.

According to the Criminal Procedure Code

According to Law Number 20 of 2025 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), suspects and/or witnesses are obliged to fulfill investigators' summons for questioning.

If they fail to appear, investigators may issue another summons by requesting the assistance of authorized officials to bring the suspect or witness before the investigators, as set out in Article 28 paragraphs (1) and (2).

Moreover, Article 99 paragraph (5) states that investigators are authorized to detain or extend detention for prosecution purposes.

Meanwhile, Article 100 paragraph (5) stipulates that detention may be carried out against suspects or defendants who are alleged to have committed a crime based on at least two valid pieces of evidence, if they meet one of the following conditions:

a. Ignoring the investigator's summons twice in a row without valid reasons;

b. Providing information that does not align with the facts during questioning;

c. Hindering the investigative process;

d. Attempting to flee;

e. Attempting to destroy or eliminate evidence;