Dilemma of customary land policy in Indonesia
Indonesia’s policy of customary land regulation does not eradicate the problems faced by indigenous people. Disputes over customary land proprietary rights continue to occur even in this current era of decentralization and democracy. Departing from empirical phenomena, this study aims to uncover customary land policy dilemmas and explore strategies to reconstruct customary land policies in Indonesia. This study uses a qualitative approach to literature study methods. This study was conducted in Indonesia and uses various cases of customary land policy from the provinces of Riau, East Kalimantan, and Papua. The data collected in this study is derived from books, documents, journals, research results, and news in electronic media. The results of the study show that Indonesia has a policy dilemma in the regulation of customary land for a number of reasons. First, customary land policies governed by customary law and national law often result in disputes. Second, in relation to natural resources management, there is no synchronization and harmony between sectoral laws and the Basic Principles of Agrarian Law (UUPA). Third, the government is yet to create policies at the local level regarding the protection and recognition of customary land. Therefore, the ideal strategy of policy reconstruction is to create a synergy between government institutions and all stakeholders in the policymaking process of customary land regulation. The conclusion of this study is that the policy dilemma of customary land in Indonesia will continue to occur if the government does not involve the participation of indigenous people and groups of interest in the policymaking process of customary land regulation.
Erni C & Marut D (2015) Laporan Evaluasi tentang Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara. [Accessed 4 February 2019]. http://www.aman.or.id/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/buku-evaluation.pdf.
George MW (2008) The Elements of Library Research: What Every Student Needs to Know. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Hristov J (2005) Indigenous struggles for land and culture in Cauca, Colombia. The Journal of Peasant Studies 32 (1):88-117.
Julius D (2014) Tambang dan Kebun Punahkan Mata Pencaharian Warga Adat Kalimantan. [Accessed 22 September 2017]. http://ekonomi.kompas.com/read/2014/07/02/0005008/Tambang.dan.Kebun.Punahkan.Mata.Pencaharian.Warga.Adat.Kalimantan.
Kolers A (2009) Land, Conflict, and Justice A Political Theory of Territory.USA: Cambridge University Press.
Kristianto ED (2014) UU No. 41 Tahun 1999 tentang Kehutanan Paska Putusan-Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Jakarta: Perkumpulan untuk Pembaruan Hukum Berbasis Masyarakat dan
McWilliam A (2006) Historical reflections on customary land rights in Indonesia. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 7 (1):45-64.
Mongabay (2019) Permasalahan Tenurial dan Konflik Hutan dan Lahan. [Accessed 4 February 2019]. https://www.mongabay.co.id/permasalahan-tenurial-dan-konflik-hutan-dan-lahan/.
Ng’ombe A, Ramin K, Michael M, & Michael S (2014) Impacts of privatization of customary land rights in Zambia: A comparative study of rural and peri-urban locations. International Journal
of Urban and Regional Research Volume 38 (6):1985-2007.
Scholtz C (2010) Land claim negotiations and indigenous claimant legibility in Canada and New Zealand. Political Science 62 (1):37-61.
Scholtz C (2013) Federalism and policy change: An analytic narrative of indigenous land rights policy in Australia (1966–1978). Canadian Journal of Political Science 46 (2):397-418.
Sembiring R (2017) Hukum Pertanahan Adat. Depok: Rajawali Pers.
Copyright of this journal is possession of Editorial Board and Journal Manager, by the knowledge of the author, while the moral right of the publication belongs to the author.
The formal legal aspect of journal publication accessibility refers to Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA), implies that publication can be used for non-commercial purposes in its original form (cannot be modified).
Every publication (printed/electronic) are open access for educational purposes, research, and library. Other than the aims mentioned above, the editorial board is not responsible for copyright violation.