<![CDATA[Constitutional recognition of indigenous peoples has not necessarily translated into effective protection against dispossession, land conflict, and resource exploitation. This article examines the gap between formal recognition and substantive justice in agrarian conflicts involving indigenous communities in Indonesia. The research asks why constitutional and statutory recognition frequently fails to provide effective remedies when indigenous territories overlap with state concessions, infrastructure projects, or corporate activities. Using a normative and socio-legal approach, the study analyzes constitutional provisions, legislation concerning indigenous peoples and natural resources, selected judicial decisions, and documented agrarian conflicts. The article argues that recognition-based approaches are insufficient when legal protection remains conditional upon complex administrative procedures and fragmented institutional authority. In practice, indigenous communities may be required to prove their existence, territorial boundaries, and customary status before accessing rights that should function as substantive guarantees. The analysis further demonstrates that the fragmentation of land, forestry, and local-government regimes creates structural barriers to effective remedies. The article therefore proposes a shift from recognition as a precondition toward recognition as an enforceable constitutional obligation accompanied by accessible remedies. It concludes that meaningful indigenous justice requires institutional coordination, stronger protection against dispossession, and judicial approaches that prioritize substantive equality over formalistic administrative classifications. The study contributes to debates on constitutionalism, indigenous rights, and transformative justice in Indonesia.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
