Land Registration_Student Assignment_Lecturer Ricco Survival Yubaidi (11).pdf

Universitas Islam Indonesia
AGRARIAN CONFLICT
OF LAND DISPUTES IN THE URUTSEWU REGION
IN LAND REGISTRATION PERSPECTIVE
Fitri Maharani - 20410698
Agrarian Law / A
International Program - Faculty of Law
2022
1

OVERVIEW OF THE URUTSEWU AREA
URUTSEWU is a term for the southern coastal area that stretches from
Cilacap, Kebumen, and Kulonprogo Regencies. In Kebumen, the sub-districts
included in the Urutsewu area include six sub-districts, namely Klirong,
Petanahan, Puring, Buluspesantren, Ambal, and Mirit sub-districts. The
political ecology conflicts that emerged in Urutsewu only occurred in
Buluspesantren, Ambal, and Mirit sub-districts. Buluspesantren sub-district
consists of 21 villages, Ambal sub-district 32 villages, and Mirit sub-district 22
villages. Not all villages in these sub-districts were aﬀected. The villages
involved in the political ecology conflict include the White Chicken,
Setrojenar, and Bercong Villages in Buluspesantren District; the villages of
Entak, Ambalresmi, Kaibon, Kaibon Petangkuran, Sumberjati, and
Kenoyojayan in Ambal District; and the villages of Mirit Petikusan, Mirit,
Tlogopragoto, Tlogodepok, Lembupurwo, and Wiromartan in Mirit District.
2

The name Urutsewu is better known to the local community, as the
area in the southern coastal area, stretches along Logending Ayah to
the Wawar river which borders Purworejo. At least, there are
approximately 38 villages in the Urutsewu area.
In the case of this land dispute, one of which involves 3 sub-districts
and 15 villages. The 3 sub-districts are Mirit District, covering
villages: Wiromartan, Lembu Purwo Village, Tlogo Pragata Village,
Tlogo Depok Village, Mirit Village, Mirit Petikusan Village. The Ambal
sub-district includes the following villages: Ambal Village, Kaibon
Village, Kaibon Petangkuran Village, Ambalresmi Village,
Kenoyojayan Village, Entak Village. Buluspesantren sub-district
includes: Brecong Village, Setrojenar Village, White Chicken Village.
3

CHRONOLOGY OF THE URUTSEWU
AGRARIAN CONFLICT:
The Period of Seizure of People's Land by the TNI (since 1970)
● Whereas in 1972, there was an unwritten agreement at the village hall pavilion, in the villages of Ambal
Sub-district, the result of which was borrowing a place during the exercise. The party holding the discussion
from the Indonesian Army was Lieutenant Sardi from the Ambal Koramil.
● That in 1975, Madukismo entered the sugar cane plantation. The plantation is located in the southern part of
the Urutsewu grave (class D V). Previously, the land was considered unoccupied, so there was no land lease,
but after a community showed a deed of sale and purchase on the land, the company then paid the rent for
the land.
● Whereas in 1982, the TNI AD borrowed places during training in the Amdal sub-district and the villages in the
sub-district. In addition to training, the TNI also conducted heavy weapons tests. Initially, in using the land, the
TNI held consultations to borrow a place during training to the local community. Then borrow a place when the
exercise is no longer done. This year there is also a plan to develop the Dislitbang TNI AD in villages
throughout the Ambal sub-district but there was a rejection. Then the development plan shifted to Setrojenar,
Buluspesantren District and the name of the Latbak was in the name of Ambal. After the construction was
successfully carried out, the TNI AD only borrowed places during the exercise in two sub-districts, namely
Buluspesantren sub-district and Mirit sub-district.
4

● Whereas in 1988, there was a seal (deed) of buying and selling coastal land between farmers explaining the
sea boundary (Banyuasin), between Suwardi and Basiran, in Ambalresmi Village, Ambal District, Kebumen.
The sale and purchase took place on 1620 parcels of land, dated February 3, 1988.
● That in June 1997, to be exact, 5 (five) children from the village of Setrojenar died horribly because they
picked up mortar bombs left over from training, their bodies were buried in the Dukuh Godi grave.
● Whereas in 1998, the TNI AD borrowed a place in the Urutsewu area to the Kebumen Regency Government.
The TNI AD has also made a "contract" with the local government on the use of Urutsewu coastal land for
training.
● Whereas in 1998, to be precise from March to April, land mapping was carried out for the TNI-AD weapons
training and testing area which covered the area: Kali Lukulo estuary to the estuary of Kali Wawar with a width
of approximately (k.l) 500 meters from the coastline to the north and length k.l. 22.5 km across the coast of 15
villages in 3 sub-districts.
● The mapping was carried out unilaterally by members of the Indonesian Army, namely Serma Hartono, NRP:
549021; then asked for a signature from the village head. The term used to name the shooting range area on
the map is "Land Belonging to the TNI-AD", it is considered that the TNI AD has tried to make a unilateral
claim to the residents' land. The results of the mapping were requested for a signature from the Village Head
in the Urutsewu area, with the excuse of asking for permission to use owned land for training so that the
Village Head was willing to sign. In fact, the reason from the witnesses for the signing was that it was used for
a safe zone, a road to the beach and had nothing to do with the reason for the Army's training, let alone
admitting that the land belonged to the Army.
5

● That in 2005, there were injuries and permanent disabilities in the hands and feet on behalf of Triyono bin
Basuki (late), a resident of Entak village. The incident was caused by picking up mortar shells left over from
the training ground and taking them home, causing them to explode in his house.
● Whereas on December 12, 2006 a letter from the Head of Setrojenar Village No. 340/XII/2006 was issued
regarding the official statement of the Head of Setrojenar regarding 'Bersengaja land'. The definition of
intentional land (Jw: intentionally fallow/not planted) is land that is deliberately spread out and used as a field
for grazing goats, cows and buffaloes; in other idioms it functions as a coastal "green-belt". The letter issued
by the Setrojenar Village Head stated that although there had been an "unwritten agreement" between the
residents of Setrojenar Village and the TNI-AD who agreed to the "deliberate" use of the land for training and
testing of heavy weapons, the Village Government still had the right to manage the area based on existing
regulations. .
● The background of the issuance of this letter is the existence of levies on business actors in coastal areas,
including farmers, tourism managers and sea sand mining, while the Village Government also feels entitled to
take economic benefits from activities on land intentionally. Testimonials from the Head of the 4th Age
Headquarters, Samidja, said that in this zone there were remnants of the Dhadhap Jaran tree which in the
past had been used as a target for mortar shells from the north so that many trees were damaged and
destroyed.
6

• In December 2007, the letter from the Head of the Bulus Pesantren Sub-district was issued No.
621.11/236 dated November 10, 2007 regarding TNI land as a result of the discussion on TNI
land issues on November 8, 2007 at the Bulus Pesantren sub-district hall which was attended
by Muspika, Kodim 0709/Kebumen, Sidam IV Purworejo, Dislitbang- AD Buluspesantren, Head
of Ayamputih, Setrojenar and Brecong, Head of Village Representative Body (BPD) 3 villages,
former Kades (2 villages), and community members from 3 villages. In point 5 of this letter it
states that the TNI will not claim people's land unless it is 500 m from the coast. This poses a
problem, because in the 500 meter interval from the shoreline there is a resident's land which
is "taxed land" as stated in the Village C Book and has a Tax Payable Tax Return (SPPT).
• Based on the testimony of Agus Suprapto, a former member of the Regional House of
Representatives (DPRD) of Kebumen Regency who had seen the land map document at the
Central Java National Land Agency (BPN) oﬀice, there was no HANKAM land in Urutsewu. This
is in accordance with the statement of the Kebumen BPN at an Audience with the Kebumen
Regency DPRD, 13 December 2007; that it was stated "until now there is no TNI AD land in
Urutsewu and the TNI AD has never submitted an application to the BPN".
7
CHRONOLOGY OF THE URUTSEWU
AGRARIAN CONFLICT:
The period of the TNI in Mining Business and Certificate of Use Rights on People's Land

● According to the testimony of Sugeng, Paryono, and Nur Hidayat (from Setrojenar), the December 8 2007
Deliberation of the Indonesian Army's Research and Development Agency only disseminated that
"according to the existing law (UU), along the coasts throughout Indonesia are State lands or defense
land, without state which law governs it.
● Whereas in 2007, there was also a widening of the claim for “TNI AD Land” from 500 meters to 1,000
meters from the coastline. At the time of determining the road route and land acquisition process for the
South Southern Cross Road (JLSS) infrastructure, the claim for "TNI AD Land" grew, from a radius of 500
meters to 1,000 meters from the coastline, so that the TNI AD (Kodam IV Diponegoro) had reasons (to
make pretext) to ask for compensation (Central Java Governor's letter to Pangdam IV Diponegoro, dated
October 5, 2007, regarding the re-application of assets to replace TNI AD land in the construction of the
Southern Cross Road of Java Island.
● The widening/expansion of these claims triggered strong and open resistance from the community in
the form of lifting the “radius 1,000 m” pathok and after the revocation there was a threat from the
Commander of the Regional Military Command IV Diponegoro which essentially stated: “A re-pegging
will be carried out and anyone who damages the TNI AD stake will be taken firm action. ". The claim of
1,000 meters from the shoreline was actually accommodated in the Draft Regional Regulation on Spatial
Planning (RTRW) which was presented at the Kebumen Regency DPRD on December 13, 2007 by
mentioning the draft for the determination of the Defense/TNI area of 1,000 meters by 22.5 kilometers. It
also reads the related article "in the defense and security area there can be no other activities other than
defense and security activities".
8

● Whereas in 2008, to be exact on April 18, in Building F of the Kebumen Regent's Meeting Room, a
hearing was held between FPPKS led by Br. There are 50 artists with elements from the Kebumen
Regency Government, the Kebumen Land Oﬀice and the 0709/Kebumen Kodim which is a
follow-up to the meeting at the Kebumen DPRD on December 13, 2007.
● Whereas in 2008, there were 2 (two) injured victims. The 2 people are youths from Entak Village
who were hit by mortar fragments from TNI AD training. The mortar exploded on the ground while
the two were working on the crops. In November, there were also injuries from the explosion of
mortar shells left over from training. The victim, named Paryanto, aged 15, was a young man from
the village of Entak. He was taken to the Ambal Health Center and on November 28, 2008 he was
referred to the Kebumen Hospital and treated for 3 days (Monday - Thursday).
● Whereas in 2008, Kodam IV Diponegoro approved the mining of iron sand. Letter from the Regional
Military Command IV Diponegoro, to PT Mitra Niagatama Cemerlang (MNC), Number:
B/1461/IX/2008, dated September 25, 2008, regarding the Approval for the Use of Indonesian Army
Land in Mirit District for Iron Sand Mining. Based on this letter, it is clear that the TNI has actually
made a unilateral claim to the coastal land of Urutsewu, as well as has carried out business
activities that are clearly prohibited and/or prohibited from being carried out by the TNI. The
TNI-AD's unilateral claim refers to an area of 317.48 hectares of land on the Mirit coast as "TNI-AD
land" which residents also protested through FMMS.
9

• Whereas in 2008, the iron sand exploration permit was also issued by the government to PT
MNC. The villages included in the exploration permit area are Mirit Petikusan, Mirit,
Tlogodepok, Tlogopragoto, Lembupurwo, and Wiromartan. In the Environmental Impact
Analysis (AMDAL) session, the village officials who were present rejected the presence of the
mining company. Only Wiromartan Village, through its Village Head, supports the mining plan
as long as it benefits the local community. One of the commissioners of PT MNC is a retired
TNI-AD (Mayjen. Purn. Rianzi Zulidar, SH, MSc); while the director is a former member of the
State Intelligence Agency (BIN). This permit was issued even though the spatial planning
regulation in force at that time had not yet designated the Urutsewu area as a mining area,
meaning that this permit had to be canceled by law.
• In 2009, to be precise in February, the Resistance Gate was established. The youth of
Setrojenar Village (Buluspesantren) have been building a coastal tourism gate since the
beginning of the month but in the middle of the month (already 75% of construction) was
prohibited by the Army from continuing. On Friday, February 20, a coordination meeting was
held at the Buluspesantren sub-district office, attended by 6 farmer representatives with the
Dislitbang commander and many TNI, Police and Pol PP officers. From the meeting did not
produce a meeting point. On Tuesday 24 February, these obstacles were discussed at the
Dukuh Godi prayer room with various village elements (Pemdes, BPD, Pemuda, Muslimat,
etc.) and resulted in a decision to continue with the construction of the gate to promote
tourism for the residents of Urutsewu. A discourse was born to reject the military area for the
promotion of agriculture and tourism. On Wednesday, April 22, the gate of resistance was
inaugurated.
10

• On May 14, 2009, there was a demonstration of the people who are members of the FPPKS at the
Kebumen DPRD oﬀice. The demonstration was related to the rejection of the TNI AD training area, the
RTRW Regional Regulation and iron sand mining. The protesters were able to meet with Kebumen
Regent Nashiruddin Al Mansyur, chairman of the Kebumen DPRD, TNI AD, BPN. The Regent gave a
statement that there should be no TNI AD training in the southern Kebumen area before there was a
settlement.
• That on October 20, 2009, at the Kebumen Regent's Oﬀice House Hall, it was agreed: the land issue
between the Urutsewu community and the Kebumen Army was temporarily changed to Status Quo,
meaning that land use for activities was carried out as before there was a problem (this applies
specifically to Ambal District and does not applies to Buluspesantren and Mirit sub-districts).
• That on June 21, 2010, 6 (six) residents of Ambalresmi Village, Ambal Sub-district, consisting of Amad
Kusnan et al., gave a statement and was signed allowing the TNI AD to build an emergency barracks
building measuring 6 x 12 meters on land owned by these residents, provided that : (1) If the TNI is no
longer using the land, the land will be returned to the owner/village residents; (2) It may be used by
residents to take shelter from the hot sun or rain when not being used by the TNI.
• Whereas on December 16, 2010, there was an action against the RTRW Regional Regulation. And this
year there were also many actions against iron sand mining.
• Whereas in January 2011, the government granted an exploitation permit (Production Operation
Mining Business Permit) to PT Mitra Niagatama Cemerlang (MNC). The government granted a
Production Operation Mining Business Permit to PT MNC for 10 years without any socialization. In the
production permit, it is stated that the area to be mined is 591.07 ha, of which 317.48 ha is land
owned by the Indonesian Army. This permit was issued even though the spatial planning regulation
in force at that time had not determined the Urutsewu area as a mining area, meaning that this
permit had to be canceled by law.
11

• That on March 23, 2011, there was an action by the Pisowanan Agung from the FPPKS
(South Kebumen Peasants Forum) and FMMS (Southern Mirit Community Forum)
action at the Kebumen Regent's Rumdin hall, demanding that the Army refuse
training and revoke the iron sand mining permit.
• Whereas on March 24, 2011, a field survey was carried out by the Regent of Kebumen
accompanied by the Head of the Kebumen Police, the Chairman of the DPRD of
Kebumen, the Assistant to the Government, the Head of the Administration, and the
Kebumen Land Oﬀice. The Regent emphasized that the Kebumen Regency
Government cannot decide on its own the land issue in the Urutsewu area because
the Central Government and the Provincial Government have decided that the area is
designated for the interests of national defense and security.
• That on April 16, 2011, the Setrojenar tragedy occurred. The residents' refusal on
Saturday morning was demonstrated by a pilgrimage to the village grave by visiting
the graves of 5 child victims who died in 1997 due to a mortar bomb explosion left
over from TNI training. The refusal was also made by making blockades from the
trees laid on the road. The action of the TNI-AD oﬀicers to dismantle the blockade
made by the residents. Seeing that the TNI-AD had dismantled the blockade, the
residents again blocked the road with wood, knocked down the TNI AD gate, and
pelted the used ammunition storage warehouse that had not been used for a long
time and was built on land owned by residents.
12

• This incident was responded to by a counterattack in the form of armed attacks by the
Indonesian Army from the Yonif-403/WP Unit towards the residents. Soldiers chase,
capture, shoot and beat many citizens. This incident was followed by the arrest of 6
farmers who were criminalized (4 people with vandalism articles and 2 people with
torture articles), 13 people were injured, hospitalized in hospitals, 6 of them were injured
by rubber bullets, and inside the body of another farmer nesting rubber and lead bullets.
A total of 12 motorcycles belonging to residents were damaged and confiscated by the
TNI. Including some items, such as cellphones, cameras, and digital data were forcibly
confiscated by the TNI. The criminalization also happened to AP (initials) who was
reported by the Kodim to the Kebumen Police with the suspicion of "insulting the TNI
institution" because he gave a speech about a dog tale at the previous DPRD action. This
suspicion later developed into "undermining public power" in the second summons.
• That on April 17, 2011, the victims were questioned by the Denpom in Central Java. The
Military Police Detachment asked for information from the victims who were hospitalized
at the Kebumen Hospital, but one victim who was not a resident of Urutsewu was
promised an interview on Monday but this never happened after that.
• Whereas on April 28, 2011, FPPKS held a hearing with the Head of the Regional Oﬀice of
the National Land Agency of Central Java Province in Semarang with the conclusions:
BPN did not have proof of ownership of the rights of the community in the conflict
location of Setrojenar Village, Buluspesantren District; if the community feels they have
proof of land ownership, they must be shown to the Kebumen Land Oﬀice by bringing
original evidence that can be accounted for.
13

• Whereas in May 2011, TNI AD revoked the approval for iron sand mining based on a letter from
Kodam IV Diponegoro, to the Director of PT. Niagatama Cemerlang, No: B/6644/2011, Date: April
19, 2011, regarding: notification, it was conveyed that PT Mitra Niagatama Cemerlang was not
permitted (by the Indonesian Army) to continue field surveys, apply for iron sand mining permits
in Mirit District. The issuance of this letter also confirms that the TNI has indeed given permission
to PT MNC to mine iron sand or proven to be conducting business activities.
• Whereas in 2011, the residents of Urutsewu together with a number of parties submitted a judicial
review of the Regional Regulation of the Province of Central Java Number 6 of 2010 concerning the
Regional Spatial Plan of the Province of Central Java for the years 2009-2029. One of the issues in
question is the article regarding the determination of the southern coastal area as a potential
mining area. However, the judicial review decision stated that it was rejected by the Supreme
Court, through the decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 05
P/HUM/2011.
• Whereas in 2012, there was another action by residents against the ratification of the Regional
Regulation on RTRW Kab. Kebumen which made Urutsewu an iron sand mining area and training
and testing of heavy weapons. The rejection from the community was massive, but was
completely ignored, both by the Government (Pemkab) and DPRD. The RTRW Regional Regulation
stipulates the Urutsewu area as an iron sand mining area, heavy weapons training and testing, as
well as an agricultural and tourism area. The community's demand is to "make Urutsewu only an
agricultural and tourism area for the people". In May residents evicted PT MNC from Mirit
sub-district. With the strength of the masses, the residents managed to stop operations and expel
PT MNC in Mirit District, but so far the Mining Permit (IUP) has not been revoked.
14

• That in February 2013, there was a letter from the Ministry of State Secretariat to the Army Chief of Staﬀ
in response to complaints from the Urutsewu community to the President of the Republic of Indonesia
regarding the training of the Indonesian Army.
• Whereas in November 2013, the Regional Regulation on RTRW became the legitimacy of fencing by the
TNI-AD. The fencing began to be carried out in Tlogodepok Mirit Village, and received protests from
residents through actions. Regional Regulation No. 23 of 2012 concerning the RTRW of Kebumen
Regency was used as an excuse for the coast as a state asset by the Dan Kodim 0709/Kebumen, Lt. Col.
Inf. Dany Rakca Andalasawan.
• Whereas on December 9, 2013, at the Ambalresmi Village Hall, Ambal District, a socialization of the State
Land Fencing Plan was held, which was attended by the Muspika, the Village Head and the Village
Apparatus, BPD, LKMD, Community Leaders and Farmers who own and cultivate the southern land. In
connection with the deliberations, the community agreed (no objections) to implement fencing, with
the request: (1) Farmers working on state land (south of the fence) are still allowed to work/cultivate
forever; (2) No iron sand mining is allowed; (3) Road access remains unchanged, it can even be added
according to the request of the farmer; (4) As a result of damage from the work of the state land fencing
program, to be compensated and repaired. The letter is signed by the village head, approved by the
BPD, and an attached list of residents is present.
• Whereas on December 16, 2013, the Kodim 0709/Kebumen, gave a written response to the Ambalresmi
Village Head, in essence: (a) The community is allowed to plant but in accordance with the applicable
provisions or laws; (b) The defense and security area is a weapons training/testing area and not an iron
sand mining area and up to now there is no iron sand mining activity; (c) The construction of the fence
aims to secure the assets of the Republic of Indonesia for the benefit of the national defense so that all
citizens, including Ambalresmi, must comply; (d) Regarding the place where the fence will be built, it will
not hinder the access of the community's road for their daily activities and can be coordinated if it closes
the public road access; (e) If there is damage as a result of the fence construction work, it must be
coordinated with the construction implementer in the field and the Kodim will help facilitate it.
• 15

• Whereas in December 2013, there was a fencing of residents' land at a distance of 500 meters from the
coastline on the Urutsewu coast. Fencing by the TNI-AD has penetrated 2 (two) villages in Mirit District,
namely Tlogodepok and Mirit Petikusan Villages. This fencing has sparked strong resistance from the
community, but the TNI AD has continued.
• Whereas on February 11, 2014, there was a meeting with the ranks of the Kebumen Regency Government.
The residents were represented by four village heads at the time, namely: Widodo Sunu Nugroho
(Wiromartan), Bagus Wirawan (Lembupurwo), Supardi (Mirit), and Mukhlisin (Kaibon Petangkuran). The
government of Kebumen Regency at that time was represented by Buyar Winarso (Regent), Adi Pandoyo
(Sekda), Frans Haedar (Assistant I), the Attorney General's Office, and Heads of Service. The results of this
meeting are:
a. The Regent explained that he had tried to communicate with various senior TNI officials, the chairman
of the DPR RI, and others, both formally and informally, but to no avail;
b. The regent actually wanted the land status to be finalized before doing the fencing, and the regent
stated that he was confused about how to stop the fencing;
c. The Regent admitted that he had not received an official letter/request for a permit related to fencing
in Urutsewu;
d. The Bupati promised to hold an audience with the Governor of Central Java to resolve the issue, and
promised to provide news. However, until April 10, 2014 there has been no information whatsoever.
The conclusions of the meeting are:
a. There is not an inch of state land on the coast of Urutsewu;
b. Since ancient times until now, people have continued to use the coastal land of Urutsewu. The TNI AD
has been proven to have carried out business activities, namely the existence of an iron sand mining
permit to PT MNC, and the existence of levies on farmers and economic actors in the coastal area
of Urutsewu;
c. Fencing is carried out on community-owned land without a permit and without a solid foundation.
16

• Whereas in 2014, in October there was a meeting of representatives of the Urutsewu community to meet
President Jokowi. Meanwhile, in the same year, there was a fencing in Amaresmi Village by the
Indonesian Army.
• That on May 21 2015, there was a protest against the socialization of the fencing plan in Entak Village.
Meanwhile, in June 2015, there was a protest by the residents of Sumberjati, Mirit Pertikusan Village
over the socialization of the fencing plan by the TNI AD. On 30 July 2015, the community again protested
the fencing plan. There have been protests against the forced construction of fences over land belonging
to the people since 2013, namely in the villages of Tlogopragoto and Tlogodepok.
• That in July 2015, there was a two-day rejection of the fencing accompanied by intimidation by the TNI
AD in Kaibon and Petangkuran villages. Likewise, in August 2015, residents protested the installation of
land fencing in Lembupurwo for several days.
• That on August 22, 2015, there was a protest from residents over the forced fencing of the coastal area of
Wiromartan
Village. The TNI AD also carried out physical violence, resulting in 30 people being victims of brutality,
including Sri Rochaini, who was pregnant at the time. Apart from Sri, there were other residents who
were victims, such as Widodo Sunu Nugroho, who at that time acted as the Head of Wiromartan Village,
was not spared from the TNI AD violence which resulted in him being injured and fainting. The same
thing happened to the Head of Kaibon Petangkuran Village, namely Muhlisin, he was hunted and
persecuted by the TNI AD at a distance of 200 meters north of the fence location. Not only residents but
all members of the media, around 5-6 journalists were taken hostage and taken to a shop located on the
side of Daendels Street and prohibited from covering the location of the residents' protest.
• On August 24, 2015, the Head of the General Information Sub-Department of the Army Information
Service, Lt. Col. Inf. Fajar Tjahyono, confirmed that the Indonesian Army had complete land ownership
documents. The asset is land of the former Dutch East Indies government, namely the KNIL colonial
army, which was handed over to the TNI after the recognition of sovereignty on 27 December 1949.
•
17

• That on Monday 21 September 2015, Widodo Sunu (Wiromartan village), Ratiman
(Wiromartan village), Yusuf Suramto (LBH YAPI), Seniman (FPPKS), Surahman (FPPKS), Mulki
Makmun (KONTRAS), Ananto (KONTRAS) visited Komnas HAM .
• That on September 16, 2015, the Regent of Kebumen formed a mediation team to resolve the
Urutsewu land issue, chaired by Prof. Indra Bastian, Ph.D, MBA, CA, CMA (Indonesian
Mediation Center UGM), which consists of Dr. Ir. Cahyo Arianto, SH, M. Hum and Sarjita, SH, M.
Hum (STPN), Ir. Joko Budiyanto, SH, MM and Muh. Nurdin, ST, MT (Kanwil BPN Central Java
Province) and Yoyok Hadi Mulyo Anwar, SH and Heri Susanto, A.Ptnh, MM. (Kebumen Regency
Land Oﬀice).
• That on 19 September 2015, there was a fencing protest in the White Chicken Village. Because
they did not get a response from the relevant parties, the people of Urutsewu continued the
action at the Kebumen Regent's oﬀice. The action lasted until late at night. This was then
followed by the action of 1000 blood signatures in the village of Setrojenar, on October 25,
2015.
• That on September 14, 2016, there was a victim of a mortar explosion named Bedor. He is a
resident of Entak Village (Ambal District) who was hit by fragments of a mortar explosion on
his farm. Initially he was taken to the Ambal Health Center then referred to the Kebumen
Hospital and finally to the Magelang Hospital.
• That on September 14, 2017, residents again found mortar shells on the Bengkok Kaur
General area of Kaibon Petangkuran Village. In addition, the residents of Bercong Village
again encountered mortar fragments around the southern causeway.
•
18

• That in 2018, there was a discussion of the findings of the mediation team, attended by
representatives, the Indonesian Army, the mediation team, the Regent of Kebumen and members
of the Indonesian House of Representatives.
Mediation results notes:
a. Residents protested because the process was not balanced, because the data from the
findings of the mediation team regarding proof of ownership owned by the Indonesian Army
were not presented to residents;
b. The mediation carried out seems to have produced results in the form of a settlement option
in the form of compensation. Yet there has never been any agreement.
• That on July 2 2019, members of the Buluspesantren Koramil reported verbally (without an
oﬀicial letter) to the Setrojenar Village Head that a fencing would be carried out in Setrojenar on 8
July 2019. Then, the people of Setrojenar and Brecong took a prayer together in the field in front
of the Dislitbang TNI AD Village Dormitory Setrojenar.
• On 11 July 2019, DANDIM invited the Village Head to the TNI AD Dislitbang Dormitory to socialize
the plan for reforestation. Present: Brecong Village Head, Setrojenar Village Head, Setrojenar
Village Secretary, Brecong Village Secretary, Entak Village Secretary, Buluspesantren Sub-district,
Police, Kantah Kebumen, Dandim, Head of Dislitbang, and one resident on behalf of Paryono from
USB. As a result, the community rejected the fencing, but the TNI continued to insist on doing the
fencing. The Dandim asked for an audience with the Kebumen Regent.
• On July 11 2019, FPPKS and USB wrote to the Indonesian Ombudsman regarding complaints of
land grabbing and fencing by the Indonesian Army in the Urutsewu area. The next day, July 12,
2019, there was an audience with the Regent of Kebumen. However, there were no results
because the Dandim and the Regent felt they had no authority.
• 19

• On July 15, 2019, three trucks of materials came to Setrojenar, but were chased away by
residents. And, on July 17, 2019, fencing began again in Entak Village (Ambal District).
• On September 11, 2019, the TNI AD again carried out fencing in the Bercong area. Residents
protest against forced fencing. The TNI AD responded to the action with violent acts such as
beatings and shootings which later left 16 injured and received outpatient treatment from doctors
at the Buluspesantren Health Center. One of the 16 victims was hit by a rubber bullet in the left
groin.
• On January 20, 2020, the Regent gathered village heads throughout Urutsewu and conducted a
socialization of the 'Minute Map'. On January 21, 2020, the Regent of Kebumen held a press
conference on the 'Minute Map'. On January 25, 2020, at the Setrojenar Village Hall, the Kebumen
Regency government carried out socialization of the 'Minute Map' and PTSL. Claiming the
existence of a 'Minute Map', Dislitbang-AD (Army-Army Research and Development Service)
conducted a mapping of the boundaries of 'state land' in the zones referred to by new idioms as
GG-1 and GG-2.
• That on January 27, 2020, the people of Urutsewu held an audience with the Kebumen Regency
Government. This hearing relates to the land certification of the Urutsewu community with the
PTSL system from the BPN of Kebumen Regency. And the TNI AD will also certify the GG 1 and GG
2 lands. The land claimed by the TNI AD stands on the land of the Urutsewu community. The
audience was attended by the Regent of Kebumen Yazid Mahfudz, Regional Secretary Ahmaf
Ujang, Head of the Land Oﬀice of Kebumen Duties Dwi Padma.
• That on February 13, 2020, land measurements were carried out in Setrojenar Village by the BPN
of Kebumen Regency with the TNI AD and village oﬀicials. This also happened in other villages in
the Urutsewu Region.
20

• That on March 13, 2020, the people of Urutsewu held consultations with the Indonesian
Ombusdman Representative for Central Java regarding the issue of unilateral measurement and
benchmarking by the TNI AD and BPN in the context of the certificate of land use rights claimed by
the TNI AD.
• That on April 4, 2020, residents found a BPN peg in Setrojenar Village. Then, on April 16, 2020,
Urutsewu Bersatu (USB) visited the BPN of Kebumen Regency to reject the Urutsewu land
certification by the Indonesian Army. It happened again, that on June 22, 2020, residents found BPN
stakes in Ambalresmi Village and Kenoyojayan Village.
• That in June 2020, the Kebumen Regency BPN conducted a socialization of the results of field
measurements. The socialization was carried out in Kaibon Village, 29 June 2020, Petangkuran
Village, 2 July 2020 and Entak Village, 1 July 2020, and Bercong Village, 3 July 2020. The entire
village community rejected the measurement results by BPN.
• That in July 2020, at the Mirit Perikusan village hall, socialization of the results of field
measurements was carried out, and residents rejected the results of these measurements.
• On August 12, 2020, the Ministry of ATR/BPN handed over five Certificates of Use Rights to the
Indonesian Army for the Urutsewu land area of 213.2 hectares. The five certificates are Kenoyojayan
Village with an area of 247,700 square meters, Ambalresmi Village with an area of 477,200 square
meters, Sumber Jati Village with an area of 554,600 square meters, Tlogodepok Village with an area
of 595,800 square meters, and Tlogopragoto with an area of 256,800 square meters.
• On Wednesday, August 26, 2020, a shooting exercise with heavy equipment vehicles of the
Indonesian Army which was held on the coast of Urut Sewu, Setrojenar Village, Buluspesantren
District, Kebumen Regency, Central Java, ran over and damaged a number of melon plants in the
gardens being cultivated by farmers.
21

LEGAL PROBLEMS
Based on the chronology of the conflict and document attachments regarding the legal events
experienced by Urutsewu residents. The study team will provide a description of the legal
problems that have been described by the Urutsewu residents. The questions are as follows:
1. What is the legal status of land tenure and ownership of residents along the Urutsewu coast?
2. What is the legal status of the use of the shooting/combat training ground by the Indonesian
Army? Does the TNI AD's fencing have legal validity?
3. Is the process of certifying the Indonesian Army Land Use Rights on community land legally
valid?
4. What is the responsibility of the state, especially the government in eﬀorts to promote
respect, protection and fulfillment of human rights for farmers, or victims who are also
citizens of Urutsewu?
5. In searching the study team, the team found things that could potentially harm the rights of
Urutsewu residents, in order to protect the rights of Urutsewu residents and prevent further
rights violations, and the team also elaborated on the legal analysis of the problem, as
material or legal documentation that can be taken into consideration by the residents of
Urutsewu and parties who want to seek the resolution of the agrarian conflict.
22

LEGAL ANALYSIS
CLAIMS OF LAND OWNERSHIP STATUS BY URUTSEWU RESIDENTS
1. Urutsewu Residents' Land Status is Yasan Land
2. Yasan land is privately owned land, which means that the land
came from the yasan (self-made) which originated when clearing
the forest (no man's land) in the past for himself and for his later
descendants. (Article II Conversion Provisions, BAL 1960).
3. The Yasan land was recorded in the Village C book. (called Letter C)
23

a. Legal Legality of Letter C in Indonesian Land Regulations
Based on the position of the case above, the Urutsewu area stretches between the estuary of Kali
Luk Ulo, Ayam Putih Village in the west, to Wawar River, Wiromartan Village in the east. In total, the
villages with land conflicts are 22.5 km long and 500 meters wide from the shoreline. This case
involved the villages of Ayamputih, Setrojenar, Brecong, Entak, Kenoyojayan Ambalresmi, Kaibon
Petangkuran, Kaibon, Sumberjati, Mirit Petikusan, Mirit, Tlogodepok, Tlogopragoto, Lembupurwo,
and Wiromartan. Furthermore, this area is referred to as the Urutsewu area. Residents of the Urutsewu
area began to occupy and work on land which is now a dispute for decades, even before the
Indonesian Army began training in the area. The clearing and cultivation of this land is recognized by
the LoGA.
One of the rights recognized in the LoGA is the right to clear land as referred to in Article 16 letter f
of the LoGA. In agrarian law, there are two concepts of land acquisition, namely original land
acquisition or original acquisition, for example by opening land, and derivative land acquisition,
namely the transfer of juridical rights such as buying and selling and exchanging. Land acquisition by
residents in Urutsewu is categorized as clearing land for the first time. Land bordering the coast can
become property rights, meaning that it does not automatically become state land.
24

The ownership of the residents' land is proven by evidence of letter C or often called
Village C. Letter C is proof of land ownership at the village or kelurahan oﬀice. A copy is
given to the landowner. Prior to the issuance of the LoGA, Letter C had the same power
as a Hak Milik certificate. After the issuance of the LoGA, lands bearing Letter C can be
applied for as Ownership Rights. Based on Article 3 of the Regulation of the Minister of
Agriculture and Agrarian No. 2 of 1962 concerning Confirmation of Conversion and
Registration of Former Indonesian Rights on Land, an application for confirmation of
conversion of land rights is submitted to the Head of the Land Registration Oﬀice
accompanied by:
Proof of entitlement, i.e. proof of Indonesian agricultural/verponding tax letter or proof
of letter of granting rights by the competent authority (if any, include a measurement
letter)
A letter from the Village Head confirmed by the Assistant Wedana that:
a. confirming the letter or letters of proof of such rights;
b. explain whether the land is residential land or agricultural land; and
c. explain who has the right, if any, accompanied by a derivative letter (a letter of
sale and purchase of the land);
d. proof of valid citizenship of those who have the right.
25

The regulations that explain that Village Letter C or C are also evidence that can be used for land conversion
are contained in the Decree of the Minister of Home Aﬀairs Number SK26/DDA.1970 as an explanation of the
Regulation of the Minister of Agriculture and Agrarian Aﬀairs (PMPA) No. 2 of 1962 in its first dictum which is said to
be and is considered a "proof of rights" in Article 3 letter a PMPA No. 2 of 1962 are:
a. In areas where before September 24, 1960, land (landrente) or Indonesian verponding taxes had been
collected.
b. Land Tax (yield) or Indonesian Verponding issued before September 24, 1960, if between September 24, 1960
and the time when land registration was started according to government regulation no. 10 of 1961 there was
a transfer of rights (sales and purchases, grants, or exchanges) so in addition to the tax letter issued before
September 24, 1960, must also include letters of sale and purchase, grants, or legal exchanges (made before
and witnessed by the head of the village/custom concerned).
c. Decision letter granting rights by the competent authority, accompanied by signs of evidence that the
obligations stated in the decree have been fulfilled by the recipient of the rights.
d. Proof of valid citizenship of those who have rights.
e. In areas where until September 24, 1960 there was no tax (product) of land (landrente) or Indonesian
verponding.
f. Original Letters of Sale and Purchase, Grants or exchanges made before and witnessed by the relevant
Village/customary Head before land registration is held according to government regulation no. 1 of 1961 in
the area.
g. Decision letter granting rights by the competent authority, accompanied by signs of evidence that the
obligations stated in the decree have been fulfilled by the recipient of the rights. Thus, it can be concluded
that all land rights that existed prior to the enactment of the LoGA through conversion agencies entered into
the LoGA system through their equivalents and after that all the provisions of the LoGA were required without
the need to mention that the land was a former right that existed before the LoGA.
h. Proof of valid citizenship of those who have rights.
26

Based on this description, the existence of Letter C or C Village is included in written evidence in the
form of written evidence as stated in the explanation of Article 24 paragraph (1) letter K PP No. 24 of 1997.
Ownership of evidence of the Village Letter C/C became one of the evidences for the issuance of a land
certificate which resulted in a letter of proof of title. However, if the written evidence is incomplete or no
longer available, the proof of ownership can be carried out with the testimony of the witness or the
statement concerned which can be trusted to be true in the opinion of the Adjudication Committee in
systematic land registration or the Head of the Land Oﬀice in sporadic land registration. Whereas what is
meant by a witness is a person who is capable of giving testimony and knowing the ownership.
The ownership of the Village Letter C/C can already be a form of written evidence of land ownership
and is even stronger if accompanied by a reliable witness who knows the history of the land ownership.
Basically Letter C/C village after the decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. No.
34/KSip/1960, dated February 19, 1960 which stated that the letter of land tax/document Letter C was not
an absolute proof that the disputed rice field belonged to the person whose name was listed in the Letter C
document, but the document was only a sign of who who must pay taxes from the fields concerned. Letter
C cannot be used as the sole benchmark for claiming land rights. If we look back at the data listed in the
Village Registration (Letter C), the data held is almost the same as the certificate. In the Village Registration
(Letter C) there is the name of the owner, serial number of the owner, part number of parcels, village class,
list of land taxes, regarding the government concerned. Thus, for Letter C owned by Urutsewu residents,
physical data and juridical data should be checked as contained in PP No. 24 of 1997 to find out who the
real land owners are and avoid conflicts in the future.
Based on the description above, it is true that the Village Letter C/C is not proof of legal land
ownership, but the existence of a Village Letter C can be one of the written evidences and can be followed
by witnesses as reinforcement of the legality of land ownership that has been controlled. So, Urutsewu
residents who have Letter C are the owners of the land.
27

b. The Validity of Letter C to the Heirs
Information on Letter C/C Villages owned by Urutsewu residents still use the names of the old owners,
and the owners or those who control the land are descendants of the old land owners. Based on this, the
ownership of Letter C must be proven by a certificate of inheritance. This certificate of inheritance is used as
the basis for the right to control the land so that the community knows exactly and definitely who is entitled
to the property left by the heir.
Based on the Circular Letter of the Directorate of Land Registration dated December 20, 1969 Number
DPT/12/63/69, the right to issue a certificate of inheritance is based on the classification of the population in
Indonesia, namely for the indigenous population (bumiputera) the certificate of inheritance is witnessed by
the Lurah and known by the Camat ( now made by the heirs and ratified by the Village Head or Lurah and
known by the Camat).
This certificate of inheritance must be preceded by a death certificate that explains the time and place of
the testator's death. Statement of heirs known to the village head or sub-district head to be used in case of
inheritance distribution. In practice, the role of the lurah and sub-district is very important in strengthening
the evidence in the form of a Certificate of Inheritance and a Declaration of Inheritance because the
registration number must be given in the number book in the kelurahan and sub-district books. Therefore,
interested parties, especially those who manage the certificate, are expected to provide correct information
or the honesty of all the heirs so that nothing is overlooked. This inheritance certificate, apart from being
made and confirmed by the village head or sub-district head, can also be from the testament of the heir,
court decisions, and decisions from the head of the court/judge as contained in the Regulation of the Minister
of Agrarian Aﬀairs/Head of BPN Number 3 of 1997 Article 111 paragraph ( 1) letter c. Heirs as stated in Article
833 Paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code, the heirs automatically by law, get ownership rights over all goods, all
rights and all receivables of the deceased. So, according to civil law, all heirs who inherit the inheritance of
the heir according to the law have obtained all the rights or are entitled to what was left by the testator.
.
• 28

Regarding who becomes the heir, it is necessary to make a certificate of inheritance which is the main
and first source to determine who has the right to inherit the inheritance from the heir. Regarding the
granting of power of attorney to one heir, if there are many heirs and requires power of attorney to one heir,
the other heirs are required to make a power of attorney explaining that one of the heirs has the power to
sell the land. The regulation regarding the granting of power of attorney is regulated in article 1792 of the
Criminal Code which states, "The granting of power of attorney is an agreement that contains the granting
of power to another person who accepts it to carry out something on behalf of the person giving the power
of attorney."
This heir certificate is important to be used in proving land ownership if there is no proof about who
the heirs are entitled to inherit from the heir, then it will be very diﬀicult to prove the ownership of the land
because the heirs have no rights at all. Regarding the case that occurred in Urutsewu, the bargaining
position of the residents only has evidence of only a Village C/C Letter and evidence of tax collection on the
land that has been cultivated, but the evidence regarding the validity of the land heirs is not clear. This
ambiguity creates a weakness in the recognition of the land because in order to prove the ownership of
Letter C which is currently held by the heirs, it must first be proven who is the heir.
Determination of heirs is also important for carrying out land registration, as stated in the explanation
of Article 42 paragraph (2) PP No. 24 of 1997, documents proving the existence of land rights to the
beneficiary are needed because the registration of the transfer of rights can only be carried out after the
first registration of the right in question in the name of the beneficiary. So, it is important that the residents
of Urutsewu have a statement / statement of heirs in order to prove the validity of Letter C.
Thus, the validity of Letter C to the heirs remains the legal validity that is recognized under civil law, and is
regulated in the Indonesian legal system. So that there is no reason to transfer rights to other institutions
and parties, especially the TNI AD, without carrying out a legal civil process to the heirs.
29

CLAIMS OF LAND TENURE AND
OWNERSHIP BY TNI AD
1. Land Designation by the Indonesian Armed Forces
Based on the chronology of the cases described above, the Indonesian Army used the land
along the coast in the Urutsewu area to conduct shooting exercises and military exercises. The TNI
AD stated that in the 'HANKAM area' there should not be any activities except for defense and
security.
This provision is in stark contrast to what happened in Urutsewu itself. In 2008, Kodam IV
Diponegoro approved the mining of iron sand. Letter of the Regional Military Command IV
Diponegoro, to PT Mitra Niagatama Cemerlang (MNC), Number: B/1461/IX/2008, dated September
25, 2008, regarding the Approval for the Utilization of Indonesian Army Land in Mirit District for Iron
Sand Mining.
The approval of the iron sand mining indicates that the Indonesian Army has misused the land
use. The land that was supposed to be a shooting training center is part of the land but in practice
it is used as an iron sand mine. The Indonesian Armed Forces issued a policy by allowing iron sand
mining activities to operate in the Urutsewu area, which is a form of arbitrariness for the
Indonesian Army, even though it should be noted that the land occupied by the Indonesian Army is
currently in dispute with local residents. iron is not for its original purpose.
30

2. How to Obtain TNI AD Land Rights Status
Land acquisition is any activity to obtain land through the transfer of land rights or by surrendering or
relinquishing land rights with the provision of compensation to the entitled party. The method of acquiring land
that should be taken by the Ministry of Land and National Security cq. The TNI AD on land owned by civilians
cannot be carried out through the transfer of land rights, let alone only attaching evidence of a unilateral claim,
without handing over or acquiring land to the aﬀected people.
That it is known that the abolition of property rights has been regulated in Article 27 of the Basic Agrarian
Law No. 5 of 1960 which stipulates that Ownership Rights are nullified if:
a. The land falls on the country
b. Due to the revocation of rights under article 18
c. Due to voluntary submission by the owner
d. Because abandoned
e. Due to the provisions of article 21 paragraph 3 and article 26 paragraph 2
f. The land is destroyed
One of the causes of the abolition of Hak Milik is due to voluntary surrender by the owner. In other words,
the relinquishment or surrender of land rights is one of the causes of the abolition of land ownership rights and
results in the land being controlled by the state or becoming land controlled directly by the state. While what is
meant by the surrender or relinquishment of land rights is the activity of releasing the legal relationship between
the holder of land rights and the land controlled by providing compensation on the basis of deliberation, so that
in the process of relinquishing land rights there are elements of activities releasing legal relations, compensation,
and discussion. The legal consequences of relinquishing or surrendering land rights are rights that do not transfer
to those who provide compensation, but the rights to land return to the state or return to land that is directly
controlled by the state. So that the release of land rights is not a transfer of land rights but one of the reasons for
the abolition of land rights.
31

In connection with the release of land rights, there are legal requirements for the release or surrender of land, namely:
1. There is an agreement in the deliberation regarding the form and amount of compensation between the holder of
land rights and the party who needs the land. This deliberation activity is used to listen to each other, give and
receive each other's opinions, as well as the desire to reach an agreement regarding the form and amount of
compensation. In the deliberation there must be equality and equality between the holders of land rights and those
who need the land. The deliberation process itself is prohibited from coercion, intimidation, violence or suppression
by parties who need land against parties who have land rights. If evidence is found of coercion, intimidation,
violence or suppression of the owner or holder of land rights, then there is a juridical defect in the deliberation or
agreement reached, so that the owner or holder of land rights can apply for cancellation of the release or surrender
of the land rights.
2. A statement or report on the release or surrender of land rights, a statement or minutes of releasing or surrendering
land rights, is formal evidence that land rights have been released by the holder of land rights for the benefit of the
party providing compensation or the party who needs the land, and becomes a sign that the relationship between
the holder of land rights and the land owned or controlled has been cut oﬀ. In the event that the statement letter or
minutes of handover can be made by the owner or holder of land rights, or made by the local city/district land oﬀice.
3. Submission of compensation by the party who needs the land to the holder of land rights. Submission of
compensation for land, buildings, plants, and or other objects related to land must be submitted directly by the
party requiring the land to the owner or holder of land rights. Submission of compensation in the form of money is
evidenced by receipts or other evidence whose monetary value is the same as that stated in the receipt or other
evidence and that received by the owner or holder of land rights. Therefore, for the use of shooting ranges, the
Ministry of Land and National Security, cq TNI AD, in obtaining land rights cannot proceed by means of unilateral
claims without strong evidence, as has been found in the integrated licensing service and district investment.
Kebumen Number: 590/04/KEP/2013 which states that there must be land acquisition, compensation payments
directly to land owners without going through intermediaries related to the existence of latbak in the Urutsewu area.
32

4. Procedures for land acquisition by the Ministry of Defense and National Security cq TNI AD on land
owned by residents in the Urutsewu area has been determined by the Kebumen Regency Government, so
the steps that should be carried out are:
a. Communicating with the Urutsewu community;
b. Carry out land acquisition in accordance with applicable laws and regulations;
c. Pay compensation directly to the land owner and not through intermediaries;
d. After paying compensation directly to the land owner, immediately submit an application for land
rights;
e. Make a land use plan/land footprint in the area that has been acquired/acquired along with the
maintenance of the land and the environment;
f. In carrying out activities to use labor around the location and actively participate in protecting the
location environment;
g. Implement documents/stipulations related to environmental conservation.
This decision issued by the oﬀice regarding permits and integrated services in Kebumen Regency is
only valid for 12 months from the date of issuance. However, within a period of 12 months after the decision
was issued, the Department of Security and Land cq TNI AD has never implemented the applicable
provisions, even talking to aﬀected communities has not been carried out until the time the decision
expires and until now there has been no discussion on land acquisition. by the TNI AD on residents of the
Urutsewu area. However, in reality, until now the central government, regional governments, districts, the
Ministry of Security and Defense cq TNI AD have never attempted land acquisition in accordance with the
provisions of the prevailing laws and regulations. This results in the absence of legal certainty for the
residents of the Urutsewu area and causes large material and immaterial losses in the long term.

3. Construction of Fences by TNI in Conflict Areas of Residents' Agricultural Land
The Ministry of Defense and Security cq TNI AD in 2013 has started land fencing for the first time in
Tlogodepok Mirit Village. Fencing occurs on land that is claimed to belong to residents within 500
meters of the coastline. This fencing finally penetrated into Mirit Petikusan Village. In 2014, in
Ambalresmi Village there was a fencing by the TNI AD and it continued until 2019 in the Brecong area.
In connection with the fencing, the fence built by the TNI AD stands on land that belongs to the
residents of Sanmuntangad in Entak Village with evidence of Land Ownership Certificate No. 136. The
fencing carried out by the Indonesian Army has clearly violated the existing regulations. These
violations included:
a. The TNI AD socialized the fencing but did not inform the residents about the Building Permit
(IMB). Whereas this IMB must be owned by the Indonesian Army as stipulated in the Regulation of
the Minister of Home Aﬀairs of the Republic of Indonesia Number 32 of 2010 concerning
Guidelines for Granting Building Permits;
b. This application for IMB is submitted to the Regent/Mayor, this application is included in the
building or non-building as contained in Article 6 paragraphs (1) and (2) and which is included in
the non-building described in Article 8 letter c Permendagri No. 32 of 2010 Non-building
buildings, one of which consists of wall/iron fences and embankments/stucco and others of the
like;
c. That in relation to the application for an IMB, the TNI AD is required to have proof of the status of
ownership of land rights or a land use agreement. In addition, there is a statement letter that the
land is not in dispute status as stated in Article 9 Paragraph 2 letters a and d of the Minister of
Home Aﬀairs Regulation No. 32 of 2010;
34

d. In this case the TNI AD does not do the above, there is no permit regarding the use of land from
the land owner or the heirs of the land owner. Then, residents whose land was built by the TNI AD
fence were never asked for approval of land use or permission to use land, but only socialization
of the existence of fencing. In addition, it should be noted that the land where the fence is
erected is land that is currently in dispute between residents and the Ministry of Defense and
Security Cq TNI AD;
e. The Indonesian Army has built a fence on other people's land without the consent of the land
owner, so that in this case the Army has committed an unlawful act;
f. The Indonesian Army has violated the law by taking land in accordance with Article 2 of the
Government Regulation in Lieu of Law Number 51 of 1960 concerning the Prohibition of Land Use
without the Rightful Permit or Proxy ("Perppu 51/1960"). Perppu 51/1960 regulates the
prohibition of using land without the rightful permit or legal proxy. It is also stated that Article 1
point 3 of Perppu 51/1960: Using land is occupying, working on and/or on a plot of land or having
plants or buildings on it, without question whether the building is used alone or not. And the
consequence of this ' usurpation ' , as stated in Article 6 paragraph ( 1 ) letter b of Perppu 51/1960
: Using land without the rightful permission or legal proxy is an act that is prohibited and is
punishable by criminal punishment with imprisonment for ever .
35

4. Minute Map and Release of Land Rights
(i) In the process of transferring rights, in agrarian law, it must be accompanied by the RELEASE of
land rights. The release of rights is carried out by agreement in deliberation regarding the form
and amount of compensation between the holder of land rights and the party who needs the
land. Deliberation is an activity that contains a process of listening to each other, giving and
receiving each other's opinions, as well as a desire to reach an agreement regarding the form and
amount of compensation. In this deliberation there is equality and equality between the holders
of land rights and those who need the land. In the deliberation there should also be no coercion
of will, intimidation, violence or pressure by parties who need land against land rights holders. If
evidence can be found of coercion, intimidation, violence or suppression by parties who need
land against the owner or holder of land rights, then there is a juridical defect in the deliberation
or agreement reached, so that the owner or holder of land rights can apply for cancellation of the
release or transfer of rights to the land.
(ii) Statement letter or minutes of relinquishment or surrender of land rights. A statement or
minutes of the release or transfer of land rights are formal evidence that the land rights have
been released by the land rights holders for the benefit of the party providing compensation or
the party who needs the land, and is a sign that the legal relationship between the rights holders
has been cut off. land with land owned or controlled. The statement letter or minutes of the
release or transfer of land rights can be made by the owner or holder of land rights, or made by
the Regency/Municipal Agrarian Office (now the Regency/City Land Office).
36

(iii) Legally, the delivery of compensation by the party who needs the land to the holder of the
land title. Submission of compensation for land, buildings, plants, and or other objects related to
land must be submitted directly by the party requiring the land to the owner or holder of land
rights. Submission of compensation in the form of money is evidenced by receipts or other
evidence whose monetary value is the same as that stated in the receipt or other evidence and
that received by the owner or holder of land rights. Because the land required is in the form of
land with the status of Customary Property Rights (Yasan), the Ministry of Defense and National
Security cq TNI AD in obtaining land cannot be carried out by transferring land rights because the
Ministry of Defense and National Security does not meet the juridical requirements to own land.
or not subject to Property Rights.
(iv) In relinquishing land rights, THERE MUST BE DELIVERY OF LAND CERTIFICATES in the form of
certificates or other than certificates (Petok Land Tax, Girik, Letter C, Pipil, Ketitir) by the owner or
holder of land rights to the party providing compensation after the amount of compensation
received by the land owners. If there has been no delivery of land titles by the owner or holder of
land rights to the party providing compensation and the compensation money has not been
received by the owner or holder of land rights, then legally, formally, there has not been a RELIEF
OF LAND RIGHTS. In other words, land rights are still the property of the original land owners and
land rights have not been erased back into land controlled directly by the state (state land).
37

(v) Based on the chronology, the evidence and claims of each party show that there is no process
of relinquishing land rights, and the procedures for acquiring land and certificates for the use of
rights of the Indonesian Army in Urutsewu clearly contradict the formal procedures of the
prevailing laws and regulations. Moreover, there are juridical defects in it because in the process
of releasing land the TNI-AD used coercive and intimidating methods, such as fencing and
evidence of claims that were not known in the agrarian law system. Whereas in the land
acquisition process, there was no agreement that put the parties in an equal position. This
disagreement is evidenced by testimonies from residents and the absence of minutes of land
acquisition.
(vi) While the basis for the transfer of land rights based solely on the Minute Map, is not an
appropriate legal basis and is not known in the agrarian law system. This means that the Minute
Map can only serve as a guide, which must be seen and confirmed with field data, including when
the map was published, by whom, and whether the map has been authorized as supporting
evidence. However, it must be emphasized that the Minute Map is only evidence, not a legal form
that confirms the process of transferring land rights.
38

5. One-sided Land Measurement by BPN and TNI AD in the Context of Land Use Certificate
That so far there have been measurements made by the Kebumen land office with the
Indonesian Army on the disputed lands and there has been a socialization process for the
measurement of the land. However, in reality the land measurement carried out by the Kebumen
Land Office does not involve the parties who own the land or control the land.
Even though the regulations that have been set regarding land measurement. In measuring
land in Indonesia, it is known as the Contradictoir Delimitatie principle, where in carrying out
land registration the land owner as much as possible obtains the approval of the land boundary
by the land owner bordering the land being measured. This principle is contained in articles 17,
18 and 19 of Government Regulation No. 24 of 1997. The measurements carried out were
supposed to present the land owner, but in reality the land owner was not presented but the
local Land Office summoned village officials to witness the land measurement. Thus, the
principle of contradictoir delimitatie has been violated and ignored by the local land office.
If this principle is not carried out, the local land office does not carry out land measurements
based on safe and up-to-date principles. The principle of safety is intended to show that land
needs to be carried out carefully and carefully so that the results provide guarantees of legal
certainty according to the purpose of the land registration itself. The latest principle is meant for
adequate completeness in its implementation and continuity in maintaining its data, in fact the
data owned by the TNI AD has never been opened to the public or interested parties.
39

CONCLUSION
40

1. Legal Status of Land Ownership and Ownership of Residents Along the Urutsewu Coast
- TRANSFER OF RIGHTS in agrarian law, must be accompanied by waiver of RIGHTS. The release of rights is
carried out by agreement in deliberation regarding the form and amount of compensation between the
holder of land rights and the party who needs the land.
- In relinquishing land rights, THERE MUST BE DELIVERY OF LAND CERTIFICATES either in the form of a
certificate or other than a certificate (Petok Land Tax, Girik, Letter C, Pipil, Ketitir) by the owner or holder of
land rights to the party providing compensation after the amount of compensation received by the land
owners. If there has been no delivery of land titles by the owner or holder of land rights to the party
providing compensation and the compensation money has not been received by the owner or holder of land
rights, then legally, formally, there has not been a RELIEF OF LAND RIGHTS. In other words, land rights are
still the property of the original land owners and land rights have not been erased back into land controlled
directly by the state (state land).
- While the basis of the Minute Map is not an appropriate legal basis and is not known in the agrarian law
system. Minute maps are only evidence, not a legal form that confirms the process of transferring land rights.
- Based on the chronology, the evidence and claims of each party show that the procedure for acquiring land
and certificates for the Indonesian Army Use Rights in Urutsewu clearly contradicts the formal procedures of
the prevailing laws and regulations. Moreover, there are juridical defects in it because in the process of
releasing land the TNI-AD used coercive and intimidating methods, such as fencing and evidence of claims
that were not known in the agrarian law system. Whereas in the land acquisition process, there was no
agreement that put the parties in an equal position. This disagreement is evidenced by testimonies from
residents and the absence of minutes of land acquisition.
- Thus, the claim for the Right of Use Certificate issued by the National Land Agency (BPN) is actually more of a
FORM OF LAND GRABILITY THAT IS LEGALIZED BY ADMINISTRATION, NOT A LAND ACCOUNT PROCEDURE.
Such a process has a juridical defect, the product of the usufructuary rights certificate owned by the TNI-AD
is CANCELED BY LAW.
41

2. Legal Status of Land Use for Shooting/Combat Training and Fencing Policy by TNI AD
- Based on Conclusion 1 above, that so far the legal status of the use of the
shooting/combat training land and the policy of fencing by the TNI AD, THERE IS NO
LEGAL BASIS BASED ON TENURE AND OWNERSHIP OF LAND RIGHTS.
- In practice, it was even used for iron sand mining, not for its original designation. This is
often the case in various parts of Indonesia, as a military business mode that claims to be
for the benefit of combat training facilities or others, which is far from the interests of
state institutions.
- The fencing carried out by the Indonesian Army has violated the law by taking land in
accordance with Article 2 of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law Number 51 of
1960 concerning the Prohibition of Land Use without the Rightful Permit or Proxy
("Perppu 51/1960") . In fact, the contradictoir delimitatie principle has been violated and
ignored by the local land oﬀice, in legal processes prior to the issuance of the Right to
Use Certificate.
42

- Because the basis that is actually owned does not yet exist, until at least before the
issuance of the Indonesian Army Land Use Rights Certificate, it is clear that two
things should be suspected in the field:
a. There has been a maladministration of the administration of the government
over the practices or actions taken without considering the general principles of
good governance and in accordance with the laws and regulations. This is
indicated by not carrying out, for example, land measurement based on safe and
up-to-date principles. The principle of safety is intended to show that land needs
to be carried out carefully and carefully so that the results provide guarantees of
legal certainty according to the purpose of the land registration itself. The latest
principle is meant for adequate completeness in its implementation and
continuity in maintaining its data, in fact the data owned by the TNI AD has never
been opened to the public or interested parties.
b. Human rights violations occur, either in the form of insecurity, deprivation of
land rights, both for agricultural land and housing, and also the absence of legal
certainty for the residents who so far have evidence of ownership of land rights.
43

3. Responsibilities of the State, in particular the Government in Efforts to Promote Respect,
Protection and Fulfillment of Human Rights
- Whereas during the dispute, the community has sought a settlement through the district,
provincial, and central governments, as well as through the Land Offices in the regions and
the Central BPN. However, over the years, the community's efforts have not obtained a clear
settlement of the land rights seized by the TNI AD. This shows that public services are carried
out in a discriminatory manner, not in favor of fair legal provisions.
- That in accordance with article 28I paragraph (4) of the Constitution of the Republic of
Indonesia, "The protection, promotion, enforcement and fulfillment of human rights are the
responsibility of the state, especially the government", and rights to land, rights to
livelihoods and jobs decent housing, the right to a decent place to live, the right to social
welfare, the collective right to promote a shared living space, and the right to legal certainty
are human rights that have been regulated in basic law and become the mandate of the
organizers of power to affirm their accountability (attached to in the following table, at least
12 types of human rights have been violated).
- Seeing how efforts to expropriate people's lands occur with a violent process, which
continues continuously, accompanied by destruction, expulsion, and intimidation, and even
the loss of so many human rights, the human rights violations that occurred in the Urutsewu
case took place in a systematic, widespread and planned manner with the involvement of
state institutions.
44

[ end of presentation ]
45

Land Registration_Student Assignment_Lecturer Ricco Survival Yubaidi (11).pdf

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from 224100501

More from 224100501 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Land Registration_Student Assignment_Lecturer Ricco Survival Yubaidi (11).pdf