The long-running legal saga of the First Travel umrah scam has entered a critical new phase following the Supreme Court’s decision to grant a Judicial Review (Peninjauan Kembali or PK) filed by the agency’s founders, Andika Surachman and Anniesa Hasibuan. In response to this landmark ruling, victims of the multi-billion rupiah fraud are calling on the Indonesian government to immediately establish a specialized task force to inventory the remaining assets. The victims argue that a transparent and meticulous process is essential to ensure that the restitution process is fair and that the assets, which were previously seized by the state, are properly returned to the tens of thousands of individuals who lost their life savings.
Fadjar Panjaitan, one of the many victims who has been advocating for justice since the travel agency collapsed in 2017, emphasized that the government must act with extreme caution. Speaking on the matter, Fadjar noted that the Supreme Court’s decision to return evidence and assets to the victims—rather than maintaining their status as state-seized property—requires a high level of administrative precision. He warned that without a formal inventory team, the distribution process could descend into chaos, potentially leaving many victims empty-handed while others receive disproportionate amounts.
The primary concern among the victim community is the sheer scale of the fraud. First Travel is estimated to have defrauded approximately 63,000 prospective pilgrims, with total losses exceeding IDR 900 billion. Fadjar highlighted that the available assets might not be sufficient to cover the total losses of all victims, making the "first-come, first-served" or unorganized distribution a dangerous possibility. He stressed that every victim must be accounted for in a centralized database to ensure that the rights of the many are not sacrificed during the execution of the court’s mandate.
The Complex History of the First Travel Asset Dispute
The First Travel case has been one of the most high-profile white-collar crime stories in Indonesia’s modern history. Established as a low-cost umrah provider, the agency lured thousands of middle-class and lower-income Muslims with the promise of affordable pilgrimages to Mecca. However, the business model eventually collapsed, revealing a massive Ponzi scheme where new deposits were used to fund the trips of earlier registrants and the lavish lifestyles of its founders.
In 2018, the Depok District Court sentenced Andika Surachman to 20 years in prison and his wife, Anniesa Hasibuan, to 18 years. A controversial aspect of the original sentencing, which was later upheld by the High Court and the Supreme Court at the cassation level, was the decision to seize the agency’s assets for the state. At the time, the judiciary reasoned that the assets were the proceeds of crime and, because they were difficult to distribute fairly among 63,000 people, they should be confiscated by the national treasury.
This decision sparked years of protests and legal challenges from victims who argued that the state was essentially profiting from their misfortune. The recent granting of the Judicial Review changes this legal standing, effectively ruling that the assets should be returned to the rightful owners—the pilgrims. While this is a moral victory for the victims, it presents a logistical nightmare for the Indonesian Attorney General’s Office and the Ministry of Finance.
Concerns Over Asset Depreciation and Third-Party Holdings
While some victims celebrate the Supreme Court’s ruling, others, like Suwindra, remain skeptical about the practical outcomes. Suwindra expressed frustration that the value of the assets currently held by the state has significantly depreciated over the years. Luxury cars, real estate properties, and high-end fashion items—once worth billions of rupiah—have likely lost value due to neglect or market shifts during the five years they remained in state custody.
Furthermore, Suwindra pointed to another layer of complexity: assets allegedly held by third parties. He specifically mentioned Umar Bakadam, the owner of Kanomas and a former business associate of the First Travel founders. According to Suwindra, a significant portion of First Travel’s wealth and operational assets were tied up with Bakadam’s businesses. He urged the government and the Supreme Court to look beyond the currently seized items and pursue assets held by associates to ensure a more substantial recovery for the victims.
Suwindra claimed that the assets currently in the hands of business partners are potentially more liquid and valuable than those seized by the state. He revealed that he had attempted to bring this matter to the attention of the Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal, and Security Affairs, Prof. Mahfud MD, but has yet to receive a formal response. The victims’ demand for a comprehensive inventory includes a call for a forensic audit to trace where the pilgrims’ money flowed beyond the immediate possession of Andika and Anniesa.
The Legal Perspective and the Path Forward
Boris Tampubolon, the legal counsel representing Andika Surachman and Anniesa Hasibuan in their Judicial Review petition, confirmed that the Supreme Court had indeed granted the request. Although he noted that his team had not yet received the official written copy of the verdict, he expressed appreciation for the decision. From the defense’s perspective, the primary goal of the PK was to ensure that the assets were used for their intended purpose: fulfilling the rights of the pilgrims or providing compensation.
The legal basis for the Judicial Review centered on the argument that the state had no right to claim ownership over funds that were clearly private deposits intended for religious services. The successful petition marks a rare instance where the "confiscation for the state" principle in money laundering and fraud cases was overturned in favor of direct victim restitution.
However, the implementation of this ruling faces several hurdles:
- Verification of Victims: A definitive list of the 63,000 victims must be cross-referenced with the agency’s internal records and bank statements.
- Asset Valuation: An independent appraisal is needed to determine the current market value of the seized assets, which include several houses in Sentul and South Jakarta, a fleet of luxury vehicles, and various business equipment.
- Distribution Mechanism: The government must decide whether to sell the assets and distribute the cash proportionally or to attempt to facilitate the umrah trips—a prospect that seems unlikely given the agency’s bankruptcy.
Supporting Data and the Scale of the Impact
To understand the necessity of the requested task force, one must look at the data surrounding the First Travel collapse. According to court records from the initial trial:
- Total Registered Pilgrims: 93,295 individuals.
- Pilgrims Successfully Departed: 29,985 individuals.
- Pilgrims Left Stranded: 63,310 individuals.
- Total Financial Loss: Approximately IDR 905,333,000,000.
- Seized Assets: Included 11 luxury cars (Hummer, Toyota Vellfire, etc.), 3 houses, several land plots, and hundreds of items of branded clothing and accessories.
The disparity between the IDR 900 billion loss and the estimated value of seized assets—which some experts suggest may now only be worth a fraction of that amount—is the driving force behind the victims’ anxiety. Without a government-led inventory and a transparent distribution plan, there is a fear that the "restitution" will be merely symbolic.
Broader Implications for the Umrah Industry and Consumer Protection
The First Travel case served as a wake-up call for the Indonesian Ministry of Religious Affairs (Kemenag). In the years following the scandal, the government implemented stricter regulations for Umrah Travel Organizers (PPIU). These include the introduction of the Siskopatuh (Computerized System for Umrah Integrated Monitoring) to track pilgrim registrations and payments in real-time, as well as a mandatory minimum price for umrah packages to prevent predatory pricing models that resemble Ponzi schemes.
The Supreme Court’s decision to return assets to victims sets a significant legal precedent in Indonesia. It reinforces the principle that in cases of mass fraud, the priority of the legal system should be the restoration of the victims’ welfare rather than the enrichment of the state treasury. However, the success of this precedent depends entirely on the execution phase.
As the victims wait for the official copy of the Supreme Court’s ruling to be processed by the Depok District Court, the pressure on the government to form an inventory team continues to mount. For Fadjar, Suwindra, and tens of thousands of others, the ruling is only the beginning of a final attempt to reclaim what was taken from them through years of hard work and religious devotion. They argue that the government, which is responsible for overseeing travel agencies and ensuring the rule of law, has a moral and legal obligation to manage the final distribution of these assets with the highest degree of integrity.
