The South Jakarta District Court became the focal point of a high-profile civil litigation on Wednesday, April 15, 2026, as prominent beauty doctor Oky Pratama took the stand to provide critical testimony in the ongoing legal battle between media personality Nikita Mirzani and skincare entrepreneur Reza Gladys. The case, which centers on allegations of "Perbuatan Melawan Hukum" (PMH) or Unlawful Acts, has gripped the public’s attention due to its implications for the multi-billion rupiah Indonesian skincare industry and the professional reputations of the parties involved.
During the hearing, Dr. Oky Pratama, who is well-known as the founder of Bening’s Clinic and a close associate of many Indonesian celebrities, was summoned as a witness by the plaintiff, Nikita Mirzani. His testimony focused primarily on his role as a self-described "communication bridge" between the two feuding parties during the early stages of their conflict in late 2024. Alongside Dr. Oky, Nikita Mirzani’s legal team also presented Dhea Hanifa Putri, Nikita’s personal manager, to provide further evidence regarding the timeline of events and the professional impact the dispute has had on the plaintiff.
The Testimony of Dr. Oky Pratama: Bridging the Divide
In his detailed account before the panel of judges, Dr. Oky Pratama revealed that the friction between Nikita Mirzani and Reza Gladys was not a sudden occurrence but rather the culmination of months of behind-the-scenes tension. Dr. Oky testified that between September and October 2024, he was frequently contacted by Reza Gladys. According to his statement, Reza Gladys reached out to him repeatedly, seeking his assistance in facilitating a direct meeting with Nikita Mirzani.
"I was contacted several times by the defendant [Reza Gladys] during that period," Dr. Oky stated in the courtroom. "The primary request was for me to act as a mediator. She expressed a strong desire to meet with Nikita directly to resolve certain misunderstandings that had begun to surface in the public eye and across social media platforms."
Dr. Oky’s testimony suggests that while there were attempts at private reconciliation, the communication eventually broke down, leading to the current legal proceedings. As a neutral party with professional ties to both women, Dr. Oky found himself in a precarious position, attempting to de-escalate a situation involving two of the most influential figures in the Indonesian beauty and entertainment sectors. His testimony is considered vital by the plaintiff’s counsel to prove that there were specific interactions and perhaps admissions of concern from the defendant’s side prior to the filing of the lawsuit.
Examining the Manager’s Testimony and Legal Strategy
Following Dr. Oky, Dhea Hanifa Putri, the manager of Nikita Mirzani, provided her perspective on how the dispute affected Nikita’s professional engagements. Dhea’s testimony aimed to establish the "material and immaterial damages" often required in a PMH lawsuit. She detailed the sequence of events from the plaintiff’s office’s perspective, noting how the public allegations regarding skincare products and business ethics caused significant disruption to Nikita’s work schedule and brand collaborations.
The legal strategy employed by Nikita Mirzani’s team appears to be two-pronged. First, they are using Dr. Oky’s testimony to establish a timeline of intent and the defendant’s awareness of the growing conflict. Second, they are utilizing Dhea’s testimony to quantify the damage caused by the defendant’s alleged actions. In Indonesian civil law, a PMH claim under Article 1365 of the Civil Code requires the plaintiff to prove that there was an unlawful act, that the act was the result of the defendant’s fault (intent or negligence), that there was damage, and that there was a causal link between the act and the damage.
The Root of the Conflict: Skincare Safety and BPOM Allegations
While the current hearing focused on the mediation attempts, the broader context of the lawsuit is deeply rooted in the safety and legality of skincare products distributed in the Indonesian market. Earlier reports indicate that the dispute escalated when Nikita Mirzani raised concerns regarding the distribution permits and ingredients of skincare products associated with Reza Gladys.
The controversy involves allegations that certain products may not have fully complied with the regulations set by the Indonesian Food and Drug Authority (Badan Pengawas Obat dan Makanan, or BPOM). In Indonesia, any cosmetic or skincare product sold to the public must possess a Distribution Permit Number (Nomor Izin Edar or NIE). Allegations of "overclaiming" (making medical claims for cosmetic products) or using ingredients not approved for over-the-counter sale have become a recurring theme in the competitive Indonesian beauty market.
Nikita Mirzani has been vocal about "cleaning up" the skincare industry, often using her massive social media following to highlight brands that she claims are "over-claiming" their benefits or operating without proper BPOM oversight. Reza Gladys, as a prominent doctor and owner of a large skincare brand, has consistently defended the integrity of her products, leading to the legal stalemate currently being adjudicated in the South Jakarta District Court.
Understanding ‘Perbuatan Melawan Hukum’ in the Indonesian Legal Context
The term "Perbuatan Melawan Hukum" (PMH) is a cornerstone of Indonesian civil litigation. Unlike a criminal case where the state prosecutes an individual for breaking a law, a PMH case is a civil matter where one party sues another for compensation due to an act that violates the law, the rights of others, or the principles of decency and professional conduct.
In this specific case, Nikita Mirzani’s lawsuit suggests that Reza Gladys’s actions—whether through business practices, public statements, or failed professional obligations—violated the legal standards expected in their industry. The inclusion of Dr. Oky Pratama as a witness is intended to show the court that the defendant’s actions were not merely accidental but part of a documented series of events that led to a breach of legal and ethical boundaries.
The Impact of Celebrity Disputes on the Beauty Industry
The legal battle between Nikita Mirzani and Reza Gladys is more than just a personal feud; it reflects the volatile nature of the Indonesian beauty industry, which has seen exponential growth over the last decade. As of 2025 and 2026, the market for local skincare brands has surged, driven by "beauty influencers" and celebrity-owned labels. However, this rapid growth has often outpaced regulatory enforcement, leading to what some experts call the "Skincare Wars."
These high-profile lawsuits serve as a double-edged sword for the industry. On one hand, they bring much-needed attention to the importance of BPOM compliance and consumer safety. On the other hand, they can damage consumer trust in local brands. When two major figures in the industry go to court over product safety and business ethics, it forces every other brand to re-examine their own compliance and marketing strategies.
Market analysts suggest that the outcome of this case could set a precedent for how "unlawful acts" are defined within the context of digital marketing and celebrity endorsements in the skincare sector. If the court finds in favor of the plaintiff, it may encourage more rigorous scrutiny of brand owners’ public statements and their adherence to health regulations.
Regulatory Oversight and Consumer Protection in Indonesia
The Indonesian government, through BPOM, has recently intensified its crackdown on illegal cosmetics. In the years leading up to 2026, BPOM conducted numerous raids and public awareness campaigns to educate consumers about the dangers of "mercury-laden" or "hydroquinone-heavy" creams often sold by unscrupulous "white label" manufacturers.
The involvement of Dr. Oky Pratama, who himself is a key player in the regulated clinic industry, adds a layer of professional gravitas to the proceedings. His testimony underscores the necessity of professional ethics in a field that sits at the intersection of medicine and commerce. For consumers, the case serves as a reminder to be vigilant about the products they apply to their skin and the credibility of the figures who promote them.
Chronology of the Dispute: From Private Messages to Public Litigation
To understand the weight of Dr. Oky’s testimony, one must look at the timeline that led to the April 2026 hearing:
- Early 2024: Rumors began circulating on social media regarding the efficacy and safety of several high-profile local skincare brands.
- September 2024: Reza Gladys allegedly begins reaching out to Dr. Oky Pratama to act as a mediator with Nikita Mirzani, as indicated in the recent court testimony.
- Late 2024: Public exchanges between Nikita Mirzani and Reza Gladys become more frequent on platforms like Instagram and TikTok, with Nikita questioning the BPOM status of certain products.
- Early 2025: Legal notices (somasi) are exchanged between the two parties’ legal teams.
- Mid-2025: Nikita Mirzani officially files a PMH lawsuit at the South Jakarta District Court.
- April 15, 2026: Dr. Oky Pratama and Dhea Hanifa Putri testify in court, providing the evidentiary basis for the plaintiff’s claims.
Future Legal Proceedings and Potential Outcomes
As the trial continues, the court is expected to hear from expert witnesses, including dermatologists and regulatory specialists from BPOM, to determine the veracity of the claims regarding product safety. The defendant, Reza Gladys, will also have the opportunity to present her own witnesses and evidence to refute the allegations of an unlawful act.
The potential outcomes of this case vary. If Nikita Mirzani succeeds, the court could order Reza Gladys to pay significant financial compensation for damages and issue a public apology. More importantly, it could lead to administrative sanctions from BPOM if any regulatory violations are proven during the discovery phase of the civil trial. Conversely, if the court finds the claims unsubstantiated, it could bolster Reza Gladys’s reputation and potentially lead to a countersuit for defamation.
Regardless of the verdict, the testimony provided by Dr. Oky Pratama has already shed light on the intricate and often hidden dynamics of Indonesia’s celebrity-driven business world. The case stands as a landmark in the intersection of celebrity influence, consumer protection law, and the burgeoning beauty economy in Southeast Asia. The next hearing is scheduled to continue in the coming weeks, with more witnesses expected to take the stand in this ongoing legal saga.
