Listyo Sigit Prabowo and the presidential wiretapping probe
I see the designation of former National Police Chief Listyo Sigit Prabowo as a suspect in the illegal wiretapping of President Prabowo Subianto as a direct result of a police report filed on October 30, 2026. Criminal Investigation Agency (Bareskrim) head Irjen Pol. Asep Safrudin confirmed during a Tuesday night press conference that three individuals, identified by the initials LSP, ASN, and EH, are held at the Mabes Polri detention center. These suspects include Irjen Ahrie Sonta Nasution, the National Police Law Division Chief, and Irjen Pol Eko Hadi Santoso. Listyo Sigit Prabowo, a 1991 Akpol graduate born in Ambon on May 5, 1969, previously served as an aide to President Joko Widodo in the Presidential Military Secretariat from 2014 to 2016 and was the longest-serving Kapolri in the Reform era. Irjen Ahrie Sonta, an Akpol 2002 graduate with a doctoral degree in law, was part of a mutation involving 88 high-ranking officers in October 2026. Irjen Pol Eko Hadi Santoso, an Akpol 1999 graduate and Taruna Nusantara alumnus, was appointed as the Director of Narcotics Crimes at Bareskrim via Telegram Number ST/488/III/KEP./2025 on March 12, 2025. Menko Kumham Imipas Yusril Ihza Mahendra stated that President Prabowo learned of the wiretapping by the three generals from Kapolri Suyudi Ario Seto. The President ordered legal action following this report to ensure an objective investigation.
Modus operandi and seized evidence
The investigation began after a police officer reported illegal wiretapping, electronic data deletion, and illegal access on October 30, 2026, prompting Bareskrim to examine 10 witnesses and 3 experts while seizing 11 handphones, 1 iPad, and 4 flash drives. I find the specific modus operandi used by the suspects, who allegedly ordered wiretapping without investigative reports or case reports between 2025 and 2026, to be a blatant violation of Perkapolri Number 5 of 2010. The suspects reportedly added phone numbers to the lawful interception management system (LIMS) without verification and then ordered the deletion of interception files in October 2026 to hide their tracks. The surveillance targeted the President, ministers, political figures, media, social organization leaders, and various businessmen. These phone numbers were entered into the LIMS server without the required verification through proper law enforcement, investigation, or inquiry procedures under existing laws. The suspects allegedly performed the wiretapping without any connection to law enforcement or investigation procedures under existing laws. The probe also focused on the removal of electronic files to erase the digital footprint left by the unauthorized access.
Legal consequences and civil society response
The suspects face several criminal charges under the Indonesian Criminal Code and the ITE Law. They face a 10 year sentence under Article 258 of Law Number 1 of 2023, a 6 year sentence under Article 332, and an 8 year sentence under Article 32 of the ITE Law. The Yayasan Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Indonesia (YLBHI) stated the case shows a problem in how the state uses surveillance technology and law enforcement power. YLBHI noted that wiretapping journalists and civil society organizations can expose confidential sources, information about victims, legal strategies, and human rights defender networks. I agree that the investigation must reach the actors who ordered and controlled the operation to ensure full accountability for these human rights violations. The organization emphasized that the use of wiretapping without a legal basis constitutes a violation of the right to privacy and freedom of expression under the 1945 Constitution and Law Number 39 of 1999. This includes protections for personal privacy, honor, dignity, and the freedom to communicate. The group also called for the investigation to reach the individuals who provided orders and controlled the operations to ensure complete accountability.
