<![CDATA[Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis pelaksanaan fungsi pengawasan Ombudsman Republik Indonesia terhadap pelayanan publik di bidang pertanahan di Kota Makassar berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2008 dengan pendekatan normatif-empiris, yaitu membandingkan ketentuan undang-undang dengan praktik pelaksanaannya di Ombudsman RI Perwakilan Sulawesi Selatan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pada tahap perencanaan Ombudsman melaksanakan penerimaan laporan, melakukan pemeriksaan (verifikasi), dan menindaklanjuti laporan; pada tahap pelaksanaan dilakukan investigasi atas prakarsa sendiri, koordinasi dengan instansi terlapor, serta pembangunan jaringan kerja; dan pada tahap pertanggungjawaban dilakukan upaya pencegahan maladministrasi serta pelaksanaan tugas lain yang diamanatkan undang-undang melalui mekanisme pengaduan langsung dan tidak langsung seperti SP4N-LAPOR; namun pelaksanaan fungsi pengawasan tersebut belum optimal karena masih terdapat laporan dugaan maladadministrasi di bidang pertanahan yang tidak dapat dicegah, sementara hambatan dalam pelaksanaannya meliputi keterbatasan sumber daya manusia, rendahnya kesadaran hukum masyarakat, serta kurang kooperatifnya sebagian instansi terlapor. Oleh karena itu, diperlukan penguatan pengawasan proaktif dan peningkatan kerja sama antar pihak guna mewujudkan pelayanan pertanahan yang transparan, akuntabel, dan berorientasi pada kepastian hukum. This study aims to analyze the implementation of the supervisory function of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Indonesia towards public services in the land sector in Makassar City based on Law Number 37 of 2008 with a normative-empirical approach, namely comparing the provisions of the law with the practice of its implementation at the Ombudsman of the Republic of Indonesia Representative Office of South Sulawesi. The results of the study indicate that at the planning stage the Ombudsman carries out report receipt, conducts examination (verification), and follows up on reports; at the implementation stage, investigations are carried out on its own initiative, coordination with the reported agency, and network development; and at the accountability stage, efforts are made to prevent maladministration and carry out other duties mandated by law through direct and indirect complaint mechanisms such as SP4N-LAPOR; however, the implementation of the supervisory function is not optimal because there are still reports of alleged maladministration in the land sector that cannot be prevented, while obstacles in its implementation include limited human resources, low public legal awareness, and lack of cooperation from some reported agencies. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen proactive supervision and increase cooperation between parties to realize transparent, accountable and legal certainty-oriented land services.]]>
