<![CDATA[This study examines the critical tension within legal pluralism, where formal administrative legality frequently overrides constitutionally guaranteed customary rights. It analyzes the qualification of an unlawful act and determines the appropriate forms of civil liability regarding the prolonged agrarian dispute between the Soge and Goban indigenous communities and PT Krisrama in Sikka Regency. Utilizing a normative juridical research method, this study employs statutory, conceptual, and case study approaches to evaluate secondary legal data. The findings reveal that the corporation's forced renewal of a Cultivation Rights Title (Hak Guna Usaha/HGU) over land actively and physically possessed by indigenous communities during a legal vacuum (rechtsvacuum), compounded by forced evictions and the criminalization of residents, cumulatively fulfills the five elements of an Unlawful Act under Article 1365 of the Indonesian Civil Code. Disregarding the strict "clear and clean" requirement during the application process fundamentally invalidates the administrative legitimacy and evidentiary strength of the formal title. Consequently, PT Krisrama bears civil liability for both material and immaterial damages. Ultimately, achieving true agrarian justice demands legal restoration (rechtsherstel or restitutio in integrum) through the implementation of the Agrarian Reform Priority Location (Lokasi Prioritas Reforma Agraria/LPRA) scheme under Presidential Regulation Number 86 of 2018 to permanently redistribute the land back to the customary law community.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
