Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Penelitian ini menitikberatkan pada pembahasan sengketa tumpang tindih penguasaan bidang tanah berdasarkan surat pernyataan penguasaan fisik bidang tanah (SPPFBT) dengan sertifikat hak pengelolaan di Desa Kuta, Kabupaten Lombok Tengah. Banyak ditemukan masyarakat Desa Kuta yang menguasai tanah dengan berlandaskan SPPFBT karena belum melaksanakan pendaftaran tanah pertamakali. Dengan demikian, BPN Kab. Lombok Tengah wajib berhati-hati dalam mengumpulkan data fisik dan yuridis tanah dalam hal pelaksanaan kegiatan pendaftaran tanah pertamakali agar kelak terhindar dari adanya konflik pertanahan. Adapun masalah yang timbul dimana BPN Kab. Lombok Tengah lengah dalam menerbitkan Sertifikat HPL No. 73/Kuta, terdapat beberapa prosedur yang terlewati sehingga sebagian bidang tanah dalam Sertifikat HPL No. 73/Kuta dengan tanah SPPFBT No. 05/SKT/I/2000 seluas 20.845 M2 tumpang tindih secara keseluruhan. Permasalahan yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini adalah analisis amar putusan dan pertimbangan hukum Hakim dalam memutus Putusan PTUN Mataram No: 55/G/2016/PTUN.MTR, juncto Putusan PTTUN Surabaya No: 112/B/2017/PT.TUN.SBY, juncto Putusan MA No: 37/K/TUN/2018, serta kedudukan dan perlindungan hukum bagi pemegang SPPFBT Nomor: 05/SKT/I/2000. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif serta analisis data secara eksplanatoris, sehingga terjawab bahwa, dalam mempertimbangkan suatu perkara, Majelis Hakim seyogianya menimbang dalam aspek kewenangan, prosedur serta kebenaran substansi dari suatu Sertifikat. Dibatalkannya Putusan PTUN Mataram No: 55/G/2016/PTUN.MTR oleh PTTUN Surabaya No: 112/B/2017/PT.TUN.SBY, maka pemegang SPPFBT No. 05/SKT/I/2000 kehilangan tanah yang telah dikuasainya selama lebih dari 16 tahun tanpa diberikan ganti kerugian. Di lain sisi, PP No. 24/1997 memandang SPPFBT sebagai alat pembuktian kepemilikan hak-hak lama dalam rangka pendaftaran tanah, sehingga pemegang SPPFBT wajiblah diberi perlindungan hukum terkait haknya.

---

This research focuses on discussions related to the overlapping land tenure rights based on the letter of land physical ownership (SPPFBT) with right to use certificate in Kuta Village, Central Lombok District. Kuta Village Citizens are commonly found having SPPFBT as their land tenure evidence. This happens because they have never registered their land to BPN. BPN Central Lombok District needs to be more careful in collecting physical and juridical data on land in terms of carrying out land registration activities for the first time so that in the future there will be less land conflicts. The problems that arise are where BPN Central Lombok District was negligent in issuing HPL Certificate No. 73/Kuta in which several procedures were missed so that some of the land parcels in the HPL Certificate No. 73/Kuta with SPPFBT No. 05/SKT/I/2000 land, which covers an area of ​​20,845 M2, are completely overlapping. The problems raised in this research are related to the analysis of the decisions and legal considerations of the judges in deciding the Mataram Administrative Court Decision Number: 55/G/2016/PTUN.MTR, in conjunction with the Surabaya Administrative High Court Decision Number: 112/B/2017/PT.TUN.SBY and legal status and protection for the holder of SPPFBT Number: 05/SKT/I/2000, in conjunction with the Supreme Court Verdict Number: 37/K/TUN/2018. In answering these problems, normative legal research methods are used. In addition, data analysis carried out in an explanatory approach. This research resulted in an answer which the Judges should consider all the aspects of competency, procedural and substance of a certificate. The cancellation of the Mataram Administrative Court Decision No: 55/G/2016/PTUN.MTR by PTTUN Surabaya No: 112/B/2017/PT.TUN.SBY, the holder of SPPFBT No. 05/SKT/I/2000 lost his land which he had utilized for more than 16 years without being given any compensation. On the other hand, PP No. 24/1997 views SPPFBT as an evidence of old rights land ownership in the context of land registration, so that SPPFBT holders must be given legal protection regarding their rights."

"ABSTRAKSistem pendaftaran tanah yang dianut Indonesia adalah sistem pendaftaranhak dengan sistem publikasi negatif yang mengandung unsur positif,apabila ada pihak yang merasa dirugikan atas diterbitkannya sertipikat atastanah, dapat mengajukan pembatalan. Permasalahannya adalahbagaimanakah tata cara atau mekanisme pembatalan penguasaan tanahyang telah terdaftar dalam sertipikat HGB dan HPL? Kemudian apakahKepala Kantor Pertanahan Kotamadya Jakarta Selatan sudahmembereskan hak atas tanah milik Susuna Dewi sebelum diterbitkannyasertipikat HPL No. 1/Kuningan Barat kepada PD. Pembangunan SaranaJaya DKI Jakarta, sertipikat HGB No. B119/Kuningan Barat kepada PT.Bimantara Sarana Perkasa, dan sertipikat HGB No. 198/Kuningan Baratkepada PT. Fajar Surya Shakti (Studi Kasus Putusan Peninjauan KembaliMahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia No. 89/PK/TUN/2008 jo. PutusanKasasi Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia No. 75K/TUN/2008 jo.Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Tata Usaha Negara DKI Jakarta No.178/B/2007/PT.TUN.JKT jo. Putusan Pengadilan Tata Usaha NegaraJakarta No. 14/G/2007/PTUN.JKT)? Metode penelitian yang digunakanadalah tipe penelitian yuridis normatif dari data sekunder yang dianalisissecara kualitatif dalam bentuk preskriptif.

---

ABSTRACTLand registration system applied by Indonesia is land registration systemwith a negative publicity which is contain positive elements, if any partiesfeel harmed by the issuance of land certificate, can file cancellation. Theproblem is how the procedures or mechanism cancellation of land tenurethat has been registered in HGB dan HPL? Then, if Head of the MunicipalLand Office of South Jakarta has settled the right of land belongs toSusuna Dewi before the issuance of the Certificate of HPL Number1/Kuningan Barat to PD. Pembangunan Sarana Jaya DKI Jakarta,Certificate of HGB Number B119/Kuningan Barat to PT. BimantaraSarana Perkasa, and Certificate of HGB Number 198/Kuningan Barat toPT. Fajar Surya Shakti (Study Case of the Decision of Judicial Review bythe Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number89/PK/TUN/2008 as amended to the Decision of Cassation by theSupreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 75K/TUN/2008 asamended to the Decision of State Administrative High Court of the SpecialCapital City Region of Jakarta Number 178/B/2007/PT.TUN.JKT asamended to the Decision of Jakarta State Administrative Court Number14/G/2007/PTUN.JKT)? The Research method that is used is a judicialnormative research type from secondary data that is analyzed qualitativelyin the form of prescriptive. The case of such cancellation is submitted toPTUN and is proceed through regular procedure examination."