<![CDATA[Land title certificates serve as strong evidence, but they often contain administrative and/or legal defects that lead to their revocation. The main issue is the ambiguity of Article 35 of ATR/BPN Regulation No. 21 of 2020, which lists 17 types of errors without specifying a scale of severity or criteria to distinguish between procedural and substantive errors, thereby creating legal uncertainty. This study aims to analyze the mechanism for the annulment of certificates due to administrative/legal defects, as well as the liability of the National Land Agency (BPN) in this regard, using a normative legal method with a descriptive-analytical approach based on primary and secondary legal sources analyzed qualitatively. The results of the study indicate that revocation can be pursued through two channels: direct revocation by the BPN based on the principle of contrarius actus in a tiered manner with a five-year time limit, and indirect revocation through a decision by the Administrative Court (PTUN) that reviews the legality of administrative actions based on the principle of rechtmatigheid van bestuur. The BPN bears legal responsibility through preventive safeguards (AUPB) and repressive measures (objections, PTUN lawsuits), with an emphasis that the errors of officials must not be imposed on members of the public acting in good faith.]]>
Copyrights © 2027
