Former Minister of Youth and Sports Roy Suryo has renewed scrutiny over President Joko Widodo’s academic credentials, asserting that the president’s university diploma contains significant irregularities.
In a recent interview, Roy Suryo claimed that embossing on the diploma submitted as evidence reads “Universitas Gadhaj Adam” instead of the officially recognized “Universitas Gadjah Mada.” He stated this discrepancy was identified during a technical review of the document.
“Di embosnya itu bukan Universitas Gadjah Mada, tapi Universitas Gadhaj Adam,” Roy Suryo said in Jakarta on Saturday, April 25, 2026.
He further argued that the absence of the original diploma in court proceedings and perceived flaws in the thesis submitted by the president support his conclusion that the credential is “99.9% fake,” based on technical analysis.
Roy Suryo criticized Universitas Gadjah Mada for its handling of the matter, suggesting institutional complicity in the alleged forgery.
The claims arrive amid an ongoing legal case concerning the authenticity of Joko Widodo’s educational records. Earlier in May 2025, the president’s legal team submitted what they described as original high school and university diplomas to the Criminal Investigation Agency (Bareskrim) for forensic examination.
“Hari ini kami sudah serahkan semuanya (ijazah) kepada pihak Bareskrim untuk ditindaklanjuti, untuk dilakukan uji laboratorium forensik,” said Yakup Hasibuan, Joko Widodo’s legal representative, on May 9, 2025.
Despite the submission, developments in the case have stalled, with prosecutors reportedly not yet receiving the case files from the Attorney General’s Office as of late April 2026.
Roy Suryo’s allies have responded to procedural challenges in the case, maintaining that the allegations warrant continued investigation regardless of delays in the judicial process.
The controversy surrounding the president’s education has persisted for years, resurfacing periodically amid political debates. While officials have maintained the documents are legitimate, independent analysts like Roy Suryo continue to challenge their validity based on forensic and visual inspections.
The case remains open, with no definitive ruling issued by the courts to date.
