JAKARTA — WartaGlobal.Id

The controversy surrounding the account of Supriyono, also known as Botok, coordinator of the Pati United Community Alliance (AMPB), is no longer merely about whether the account was blocked or subjected to a transaction suspension.

The issue has developed into a broader matter involving banking transparency, customer protection, banking confidentiality, and public trust in a state-owned bank.

Previously, Bank Mandiri stated that the action against the account had been taken at the request of law enforcement authorities. However, the Jakarta Metropolitan Police later explained that the action was not a blocking measure, but rather a request to suspend transactions as part of an investigation.

Meanwhile, the Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Center (PPATK) stated that it had never requested a temporary suspension or blocking of the account.

HAS THE POLICE BECOME THE BANK’S PUBLIC RELATIONS OFFICE?

This situation has raised critical questions from Netti, a journalist, intelligence management strategy expert, and 2024 master’s graduate of PORTMAN College Malaysia.

According to Netti, from a crisis communication perspective, Bank Mandiri should have been the first institution to provide an open, proportionate, and easily understandable explanation to its customer.

“If the police have to explain the status of a customer’s account, then what is the function of Bank Mandiri’s communications department? The public must not be left with the impression that a government-owned bank has lost control of communications regarding an issue involving its own customer,” Netti said.

According to Netti, the issue is not merely whether the police have the authority to request a transaction suspension.

The main question is how the bank explains that authority to the public without undermining customers’ sense of security.

NOT MERELY A DIFFERENCE IN TERMINOLOGY

The distinction between “blocking” and “transaction suspension” is not a trivial matter.

For institutions, the difference may be a matter of legal terminology.

For customers, however, the question is simple:

“Can my funds still be used or not?”

If the funds cannot be used, the public is entitled to a clear explanation of the legal basis, duration, procedures, and resolution mechanisms involved.

OJK Regulation No. 22 of 2023 establishes the confidentiality and security of consumer data or information as an obligation of financial services providers. The regulation also emphasizes the principles of transparency, fair treatment, reliability, and consumer complaint handling.

Meanwhile, banking secrecy is regulated under OJK Regulation No. 44 of 2024, which implements amendments to banking provisions following the enactment of Law No. 4 of 2023 on the Development and Strengthening of the Financial Sector. The regulation provides for exceptions to banking secrecy for certain purposes as stipulated by law.

This means that banking secrecy does not mean information can never be disclosed to authorities under any circumstances.

However, the disclosure of information must be based on clear legal authority and procedures.

NETTI: CUSTOMERS MUST NOT BECOME VICTIMS OF POOR COMMUNICATION

Netti believes Bank Mandiri must exercise caution in handling matters of this nature.

“A bank is not merely a place to store money. A bank sells trust. When customers begin questioning the security of their funds, the issue has entered the realm of reputation,” she said.

She also highlighted concerns regarding the alleged disclosure of customer account information.

However, Netti stressed that an alleged data leak must not be immediately declared a fact before adequate examination and evidence are available.

Among the matters that need to be established are:

• who obtained the account information;
• under what authority the information was provided;
• to whom the information was disclosed;
• whether there was an official written request; and
• whether confidentiality and data protection procedures were followed.

OJK Regulation 22/2023 expressly requires financial services providers to maintain the confidentiality and security of consumer data or information. The regulation also contains provisions on sanctions for violations of these obligations.

DO NOT LET A COMMUNICATION CRISIS DEVELOP INTO A CRISIS OF TRUST

According to Netti, this is what Bank Mandiri’s management must pay attention to.

A communication crisis can be addressed through an appropriate explanation.

However, a crisis of trust takes far longer to repair.

This is especially significant because Bank Mandiri is one of the country’s largest banks and holds a strategic position in the national financial system.

Therefore, the public cannot be expected to accept only the statement:

“We acted on the authorities’ request.”

The following questions still need to be answered:

Which authorities?

What is the legal basis?

What form did the request take?

What was the scope of the bank’s action?

How long will the action remain in effect?

What are the customer’s rights?

How will the customer’s personal data be protected?

WARTAGLOBAL INVESTIGATES

The Botok account case has become a communications test for Bank Mandiri.

The issue is not merely the amount of money, reportedly around Rp80 million, but rather the fact that a single account can raise broader questions about customers’ sense of security.

If the procedure was lawful, explain it openly.

If there was a request from law enforcement, explain the limits of its authority.

If there is an obligation to keep information confidential, explain why certain information could be disclosed.

If there is an alleged violation of data protection, conduct a transparent examination through the applicable mechanisms.

The police must not become the bank’s spokesperson.

In a reputational crisis, silence is not always a strategy.

At times, silence merely encourages the public to fill the information vacuum with speculation.

NETTI’S ANALYSIS

“Bank Mandiri must understand that what is at stake is not merely one account, but trust. When customers begin asking, ‘Is my account safe?’, management must respond with data, regulations, and transparency—not leave another institution to explain the bank’s position.”

According to Netti, this matter deserves the attention of the Financial Services Authority (OJK), particularly from the perspectives of market conduct, consumer protection, information transparency, and customer data security. OJK Regulation 22/2023 serves as a foundation for strengthening consumer protection and governing the relationship between financial services providers and consumers.

Ultimately, the public’s question is not merely:

“Was Botok’s account blocked?”

Rather:

“If a bank asks customers to trust the banking system, can the bank also provide a sense of security when customers come into contact with state power?”

Afkan

WartaGlobal Investigates.

Banks must comply with the law.
Authorities are entitled to carry out their duties.
However, customer rights, transparency, and data protection must still be safeguarded.

Views Post