<![CDATA[Village autonomy guaranteed by Law Number 6 of 2014 on Villages positions customary service land (tanah bengkok) as part of the village's original wealth, traditionally used as in-kind compensation for the Village Head and Village Officials. Following the enactment of Government Regulation Number 11 of 2019 on the Second Amendment to Government Regulation Number 43 of 2014, the financing pattern for the fixed income of village officials underwent a paradigmatic shift: fixed income is now charged to the Village Fund Allocation, while proceeds from the management of customary service land are positioned as a supplementary allowance outside the Village Budget revenue structure. This shift generates distinct juridical complexity, since it concerns the legal status of communal village assets that must be managed transparently and accountably amid conventional practices still centred on individual control by incumbent village officials. This article aims to analyse the legal standing of customary service land as village-owned property, to construct the normative framework of fixed income under the two legal instruments, and to formulate an innovative, participatory, and legally certain model for optimising its management. This research employs a normative juridical method with statute and conceptual approaches. The study finds that optimisation requires reorienting management from an individual cultivation-right pattern toward an institution-based asset management pattern, through utilisation cooperation schemes, digitalisation of village asset databases, strengthened supervisory roles for the Village Consultative Body, and harmonisation of local regulations with higher norms to prevent regulatory overlap and abuse of authority.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
