Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search
Journal : JIHAD : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum dan Administrasi

Validity of Absentee Land Ownership Based on Sale and Purchase Deed Number 01/DEPOK/1967 (Case Study of Supreme Court Decision Number 599/K/PDT/2019) Saputri, Widya Anugrah; Handayani, Sri Wahyu
JIHAD : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum dan Administrasi Vol 7, No 2 (2025): JIHAD : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Dan Administrasi
Publisher : Lembaga Penelitian dan Pendidikan (LPP) Mandala

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58258/jihad.v7i2.8726

Abstract

In the implementation of the land reform program, deviations occurred by tenant farmers as recipients of land redistribution by transferring ownership rights of absentee land to others through a deed of sale and purchase, without the approval of the Minister of Agrarian Affairs. This happened because the tenant farmers did not fulfill their obligation to pay the required fees after being granted the agricultural land, leading to land disputes, as seen in the District Court Decision No. 165/Pdt.G/2014/PN in conjunction with the Bandung High Court Decision No. 346/PDT/2016/PT.BDG in conjunction with the Supreme Court Decision No. 599 K/Pdt/2019. The issue at hand is the validity of the transfer of ownership rights of absentee land based on the deed of sale and purchase No. 01/Depok/1967 in this case and the impact of the Supreme Court Decision No. 599/K/PDT/2019 on the validity of absentee land. This thesis employs normative juridical research methods. The validity of the deed contradicts Article 14 paragraph (4) of Government Regulation No. 224 of 1961 concerning the Implementation of Land Distribution and Compensation, and its impact is that the land returns to the original owner before the land was declared absentee, with the land being returned to the respective heirs. However, the heirs do not reside where the land is located, thus they must immediately transfer the agricultural land to another party who resides in the same area as the land, in accordance with Article 3c of Government Regulation No. 41 of 1964 concerning the Implementation of Land Distribution and Compensation.
Notary's Responsibility for Signing A Blank Deed of Agreement Farahiani, Sita; Handayani, Sri Wahyu
JIHAD : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum dan Administrasi Vol 7, No 3 (2025): JIHAD : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Dan Administrasi
Publisher : Lembaga Penelitian dan Pendidikan (LPP) Mandala

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58258/jihad.v7i3.8987

Abstract

The background is the practice of agreements for building shophouses which are stated in the Deed of Agreement through blank forms made before a Notary. The issue that arises then is whether the agreement can be accepted in positive law. The problem in this journal discusses how the Notary's Responsibility for the Deed of Agreement through blank forms and How the Legal Protection for the injured party is for the Deed that is canceled, which aims to gain an understanding regarding the validity of the Deed of Agreement. The method used is Normative Jurisprudence, Conceptual Approach Type, Using Data Collection Methods with Literature studies related to Laws and Regulations, and the Research Specifications used are Descriptive Techniques that focus on solving legal problems and events. The results of this study explain that the Notary's responsibility in making a deed of agreement through blank forms is very large, including civil, criminal, and administrative responsibilities. Legal protection for parties to a deed of agreement that is canceled by law is based on the principle of justice and legal certainty guaranteed by statutory regulations.
Legal Protection for Land Rights Holders in Land Disputes Over Customary Land Based on Girik Case Study of PK Decision Number 1169 Pk/Pdt/2023 Firmansyah, Melania Indiana Putri; Handayani, Sri Wahyu
JIHAD : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum dan Administrasi Vol 7, No 3 (2025): JIHAD : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Dan Administrasi
Publisher : Lembaga Penelitian dan Pendidikan (LPP) Mandala

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58258/jihad.v7i3.9251

Abstract

This thesis analyzes the complex land issues in Indonesia, particularly concerning adat land disputes based on girik ownership in the face of a dominant, centralized national land law system. As an agrarian nation with diverse traditional land ownership systems, Indonesia frequently encounters conflicts between adat rights and state or private interests. Girik, a traditional proof of land control, is often not fully recognized by the modern legal system, even though Law No. 5 of 1960 on Basic Agrarian Principles has accommodated ulayat rights. This research focuses on the dispute between Lumin Tuningtyas (girik holder) and Desyanto (Certificate of Ownership/SHM holder) in East Jakarta. The case highlights the discrepancy between customary law recognition and positive law. Lumin Tuningtyas filed a lawsuit based on inherited girik ownership, while Desyanto defended his ownership based on an SHM registered with the National Land Agency (BPN). Although the District Court initially granted part of Lumin Tuningtyas's claim, the decision was overturned at the appellate level, and the Supreme Court rejected Lumin Tuningtyas's cassation and judicial review (PK) requests. In its PK decision No. 1169 PK/PDT/2023, the Supreme Court affirmed that a certificate registered with the BPN is the legitimate proof of ownership, while girik is only considered proof of control. This ruling underscores the necessity of a multidimensional approach to adat land disputes, one that not only relies on positive legal instruments but also considers the historical, anthropological, and sociological aspects of indigenous communities. This thesis argues that court decisions, which tend to be centralized and state-oriented, need to be transformed into a legal paradigm that is more responsive to the rights of indigenous communities and the principle of substantive justice. This research aims to dismantle less responsive legal practices and encourage systemic change in handling land disputes in Indonesia, in order to uphold justice and build a more humane legal system.