Mediation between Ruben Onsu and Sarwendah Fails, Miscommunication Regarding Agreement Conditions

Kapanlagi.com - The mediation process between Ruben Onsu and Sarwendah did not reach an agreement. Amidst the deadlock, Minola Sebayang highlighted the miscommunication between the legal representatives of both parties, particularly regarding health issues and several sensitive conditions that were reportedly raised only recently.

"I also conveyed to them, when this deed was sent to us, sent to me, we were supposed to communicate between the legal representatives. You never mentioned anything, I told Chris (Sarwendah's legal representative), 'You never mentioned anything, you should have talked to me,'" said Minola Sebayang when met at the South Jakarta District Court on Wednesday (19/08/2026).

1. Mediation of Ruben Onsu and Sarwendah Ends in Stalemate

Kapanlagi.com/Fikri Alfi Rosyadi

The failure of this mediation was followed by Minola's criticism of his colleague. He regretted that health issues and sensitive conditions were only raised now. According to him, if those concerns had been communicated from the beginning, the issues could have been formulated earlier and the potential for disputes in court might have been avoided.

"You should have talked to me, Bang, we should have done it like this, actually there are things that need to be arranged. You didn’t talk to me. Your client didn’t talk to me either. My client didn’t talk to me," Minola emphasized.

He considers it unfair if now his side is asked to understand the existence of conditions that were never agreed upon during the initial drafting of the document. "So why are we talking about conditions now and I am forced to understand that there are those conditions? Well, that’s not fair, right?" he said.

2. Sensitive Requirements Never Discussed from the Start

Kapanlagi.com/Fikri Alfi Rosyadi

According to Minola, sensitive issues such as health can still be expressed in nuanced legal language as long as there is communication from the beginning. He emphasized that his side never received notification regarding those concerns when the agreement began to be drafted.

Minola stated that the absence of communication from the start led his side to adhere to the formulation that was valid and previously agreed upon. Changes or additions to the requirements at a later stage are seen as triggering a deadlock because they were not discussed together.

"Even if we don't mention something related to the health issue because it is considered sensitive, at least with the requirements that will be determined later on, for example," he concluded.

3. Invitation for Communication from the Start and Options for Formulation

Minola stated that various concerns during the marriage should be discussed directly, either through private conversations between lawyers, phone calls, or text messages. This way, the terms can be formulated from the beginning in a mutually agreed draft.

"Well, he talks to me in whispers. Or he messages me. How can we formulate it so that there are those terms," he said.

Since there was no prior notification, he stated that he remained steadfast in adhering to the established rules and formulations. On the other hand, he emphasized again the importance of open communication so that any terms deemed necessary can be agreed upon from the start and accurately documented.

(kpl/far/fbi)