JAKARTA, The Kabar News—Government Communications Agency (Bakom) head Syahganda Nainggolan has disputed Vice President Gibran Rakabuming Raka’s claim that President Prabowo Subianto advised him to defend his education documents through the State Administrative Court (PTUN).

Syahganda said Coordinating Law, Human Rights, Immigration and Correctional Services Minister Yusril Ihza Mahendra’s explanation more accurately reflected Prabowo’s position. Yusril had argued that further litigation would serve no purpose. This is because the Supreme Court had already issued a final ruling concerning the same administrative document.

“What is clear is that Mr. Yusril’s account is the correct one. No, the PTUN advice is not true,” Syahganda told reporters in Jakarta on Tuesday, Nov. 10.

“Yusril’s account is correct because he was the last person to meet the president. I was there,” he added.

Prabowo appointed Syahganda to lead the Government Communications Agency on Oct. 2 under Presidential Decree No. 106/P/2026, according to the State Secretariat.

Syahganda’s statement contradicted Gibran’s account of a two-and-a-half-hour meeting with Prabowo earlier on Tuesday. Gibran said the president had encouraged him to continue defending the validity of his education documents.

“One of his suggestions was that I should keep fighting at the PTUN by presenting all documents from elementary school through university,” Gibran said.

He also said Prabowo advised him to coordinate with the Basic and Secondary Education Ministry on seeking a judicial review at the Supreme Court.

State Secretary Prasetyo Hadi had previously said Prabowo offered Gibran advice during the meeting. However, Prasetyo did not specify that the president had told Gibran to pursue litigation. He said Gibran had asked for an opportunity to prove the validity of his documents through the administrative court process.

Yusril said Gibran could not seek a judicial review of Supreme Court Decision No. 742 K/TUN/2026. This was because he had not joined the original case as an intervening defendant.

“It would be pointless because the Supreme Court ruling is final. The subject matter is the same,” Yusril said at the Presidential Palace.

“The Constitutional Court’s ruling is final and binding, with no further legal remedy. The Supreme Court ruling is also final because no party can seek a judicial review of that decision,” he added.

The Supreme Court granted Subhan Palal’s appeal and invalidated Equivalency Letter No. 9149/D.D1/KS/2019. The Directorate General of Primary and Secondary Education issued the letter on Aug. 6, 2019. Furthermore, the court also ordered the directorate general to withdraw the letter. In addition, the court published the full ruling on Nov. 10, according to Antara.

Yusril argued that Gibran lacked standing to request a review. This is because the lawsuit named the directorate general—not Gibran—as the defendant. He also said another PTUN case involving the same letter could lose its object. This would happen once the ministry formally withdraws the document.

You May Also Like: Sponsored Offers

The differing statements leave Prabowo’s precise advice unclear. Syahganda said Yusril’s position represented the president’s legal view, while Gibran described the advice differently after their private meeting. Prabowo has issued no direct statement, and the government has released no transcript of their conversation.

Until the president or the State Secretariat provides a definitive account, the competing descriptions should remain attributed to the officials who made them. Yusril’s legal assessment also does not itself constitute a court ruling on any future case Gibran may attempt to file.