scholarly journals Legal Effects of Sporadik Issuance of Certified Land

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 875
Author(s):  
Lalu Didit Patria ◽  
M. Arba ◽  
Sahnan Sahnan
Keyword(s):  
Land Tenure ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Sociological Approach ◽  
Proof Of Ownership ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Ownership Of Land ◽  
Valid Proof

A certificate is a valid proof of ownership of land, but in this case the certificate does not apply if another person also controls the land. The purpose of this study was to analyze the strength of Sporadik law as the evidence of land tenure based on Law Number 5 of 1960 and analyze legal effects of Sporadik issuance of certified land. This study refers to the type of empirical normative research. It utilizes several approaches, including: 1) statute approach, 2) conceptual approach, and 3) sociological approach. The results of this study indicate that the strength of Sporadik issued must be in accordance with the procedures specified in the Government Regulation No. 24 of 1997 so that it has legal strength as the basis for the right to control over land. If the Sporadik issued is not in accordance with the requirements and provisions in the Government Regulation No. 24 of 1997, it cannot be used as the basis for the right to control over the land which can result in the absence of legal certainty and the appearance of disputes.

scholarly journals ANALISIS PENERAPAN WILAYAH KERJA PPAT BERDASARKAN PERATURAN PEMERINTAH NOMOR 24 TAHUN 2016 TENTANG PERUBAHAN ATAS PERATURAN PEMERINTAH NOMOR 37 TAHUN 1998 DI PROVINSI DKI JAKARTA

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 267
Author(s):  
Ivandi Setiawan ◽  
Rasji .
Keyword(s):  
Government Regulation ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Public Official ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
The Public ◽  
Work Area ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

PPAT is a public official authorized to make authentic deeds concerning certain legal acts concerning the right to land or the Property Right of the Flats Unit. Government Regulation No. 24 of 2016 is the latest regulation made by the government to regulate provisions on PPAT. in Government Regulation No. 24 of 2016 in Article 12 paragraph one explained that the scope of work area of PPAT is expanded into one province where in the previous regulation that is government regulation number 37 year 1998 explained that the scope of work of PPAT is only limited to district only. but the fact is now the government regulation number 24 of 2016 has not been applied efficiently, especially in terms of the scope of work of PPAT, it happens because of several factors that hamper causing the loss of effectiveness in Article 12 Paragraph one of Government Regulation No. 24 of 2016 . it is of course also contrary to the legal certainty that the public should have legal certainty with the enactment of the government regulation number 24 of 2016 by the government then the regulation should be applicable in the scope of the working area of PPAT should be applicable in practice in the community. contrary to lex posterior derogate legi priori principle which explains that in the same rules the new rules can replace the old rules. the approach used in this study using the approach of law.

scholarly journals PERAN NOTARIS DALAM PEMANFAATAN RUANG BAWAH TANAH UNTUK SARANA JARINGAN UTILITAS TERPADU DI DKI JAKARTA

2022 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Isfan Batubara ◽  
Emmanuel Ariananto Waluyo Adi ◽  
Wirdyaningsih Wirdyaningsih
Keyword(s):  
Government Regulation ◽  
Capital City ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Underground Space ◽  
City Region ◽  
Utility Network ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Ownership Of Land

Peningkatan bonus demografi di Indonesia menyebabkan jumlah permukaan lahan untuk dimanfaatkan ruangnya dalam menggerakan roda ekonomi semakin sempit. Provinsi Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta yang menjadi pusat bisnis dalam menghadapi masalah keterbatasan lahan perlu memanfaatkan ruang bawah tanah yang ada. Keberadaan ruang bawah tanah pada praktiknya dimanfaatkan untuk sarana jaringan utilitas terpadu agar pemanfaatan lahan menjadi lebih optimal. Sebelum adanya Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 pemanfaatan ruang bawah tanah tidak diatur secara komprehensif. Kemudian barulah Peraturan Pemerintah No. 18 tahun 2021 menegaskan secara yuridis bahwa terdapat pemisahan secara horizontal antara kepemilikan hak atas tanah di atas permukaan dengan di bawah tanah. Namun dalam penerapan peraturan-peraturan dimaksud masih perlu adanya sosialisasi terus menerus agar tercipta keteraturan pemahaman hukum. Lebih lanjut, dengan adanya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 yang menyatakan UUCK inkonstitusional bersyarat diduga dapat memperlambat proses penerapan peraturan baru ini. Bahwa dalam hal ini diperlukan peranan notaris sebagai pejabat pembuat akta tanah yang akan bersinggungan dengan hal-hal dimaksud. Notaris perlu turut andil dalam peran edukasi terkait khususnya pelaksanaanya selama masa pandemi covid-19 saat ini. Penulis menemukan dalam pemanfaatan ruang bawah tanah menggunakan hak guna bangunan dimana untuk pembuatan aktanya dapat diproses oleh notaris.Keyword: Notaris, ruang bawah tanah, jaringan utilitasAbstractThe increase in the demographic bonus in Indonesia causes the amount of land to be used for economic development purposes has its own limitation. The Province of the Special Capital City Region of Jakarta, which is a business center that dealing with the problem of limited land, needs to take advantage of the existing underground space. The existence of underground space is usually utilized for integrated utility network facilities so that land use becomes more optimal. Prior to Law Number 11 of 2020 the use of underground spaces was not comprehensively regulated. Then the Government Regulation No. 18 of 2021 juridically confirms that there is a horizontal separation between ownership of land rights above the surface and below the ground. However, in the application of these regulations, there is still a need for continuous socialization in order to create a regular understanding of the law. Furthermore, with the Constitutional Court Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 which states that the UUCK is conditionally unconstitutional, it is suspected that it can slow down the process of implementing this new regulation. That in this case the role of a notary as an official making land deeds is needed which will intersect with the underground utilization. Notaries need to take part in the role of related education, especially its implementation during the current covid-19 pandemic. The author finds that in the use of the basement using the right to use the building where the deed can be processed by a notary.

scholarly journals HUKUM MAHAR BERUPA TANAH DALAM KEBIASAAN MASYARAKAT BUGIS BONE MENURUT PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-36
Author(s):  
Hasma Mhi
Keyword(s):  
Government Regulation ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Local Order ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Land Registration ◽  
Legal Development ◽  
Proof Of Ownership ◽  
Ownership Of Land ◽  
The Village

AbstractGiving Mahar in the tradition of the Bugis Bone community, commonly given by husbands to wives in the form of land. Provision of Mahar in the form of land is regulated in the provisions of the marriage law, UU number 1 of 1974 concerning Marriage, Juncto UUPA number 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Principles of Agrarian Law, Juncto Government Regulation (PP) number 24 of 1997 concerning Land Registration and KHI.Giving Mahar in the form of land accompanied by a statement that knows and is signed by a local order, namely head of the village related to the location of the Mahar land, is an evidence that is not strong. because proof of ownership is the strongest according to civil law is proof of the authentic deed. Authentic proof of ownership of land must be registered at the Land Agency Office and the certificate of dowry land issued. To provide collateral in the form of legal certainty of dowry ownership in the form of land that should be certified on behalf of the wife.Keywords: Land Certification; Mahar; Legal Development.

scholarly journals The Contradiction of Between Judge’s Decision and Legal Provisions Regarding The Position of Heirs in Proof of Land Rights

2019 ◽  
pp. 133-148
Author(s):  
Sulistiani Adont ◽  
La Syarifuddin ◽  
Rahmawati Al Hidayah
Keyword(s):  
Government Regulation ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Land Registration ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Valid Evidence ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

As the economic development of Indonesian society increases, so will the need for legal certainty in the field of land for the right holder of a plot of land. the fundamental issue in verifying the right to the land is any person claiming to have a right, or appointing an event to affirm his right or to deny any right of another person, shall prove the existence of that right or prove the event, the heirs' a case study of the Samarinda District Court Judgment Number 138 / Pdt.G / 2014 / PN.Smr.This research uses normative research method. The primary legal material of this research is the legislation that is compiled into a conceptual form based on existing legislation. Which then conducted legal analysis of the problems in this study.The result of the research is the position of the heirs in verification of the right to land must have at least two evidences, that can prove that the heirs are valid first through the certificate of inheritance. To strengthen the verification of the heirs to the land rights, the heirs must prove by means of evidence as set forth in Article 24 paragraph (1) of Government Regulation Number 24 of 1997 concerning Registration. The second result of the research is the letter of appointment by the Government/Local Government is a valid evidence based on existing legislation, and it becomes the base of the right which is the basis of the land ownership, the analysis of the judge's decision namely the judge decision of Samarinda District Court No. 138 / Pdt.G / 2014 / PN.Smr is incorrect and does not provide legal certainty, it is caused by no reference what is contained in Article 24 paragraph (1) and Article 32 paragraph (2) Government Regulation Number 24 of 1997 on Land Registration.

scholarly journals TINJAUAN YURIDIS TENTANG PEMBENTUKAN ORGANISASI PEMERINTAHAN DESA BERDASARKAN PP NOMOR 72 TAHUN 2005 TENTANG DESA (Studi di DesaTawali Kecamatan Wera Kabupaten Bima)

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 35
Author(s):  
Zaini Bidaya ◽  
Ramzin Ardiansyah
Keyword(s):  
Government Regulation ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Construction Company ◽  
Government Organizations ◽  
The People ◽  
The Government ◽  
Village Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Consultative Body ◽  
The Village

Abstrak: Pemerintah Desa yang ada sekarang ini adalah Pemerintahan Desa yang sesuai dengan jiwa UUD Negara RJ 1945 yang selanjutnya disingkat (UUDNRI Tahun 1945) yaitu memperhatikan dan menghormati hak asal usul yang bersifat istimewa. Oleh karenanya mempunyai keharusan bahwa dalam melaksanakan pembangunan disegala bidang guna memcapai hasil yang optimal, mau tidak mau harus mengikutsertakan masyarakatyang ada di desa, pemerintah desa sebagai penyelenggara pemerintahan terendah yang langsung berhadapan dengan masyarakat sebagai pelaksana pembangunan agar semakin mampu menggerakkan masyarakat untuk berpartisipasi dalam pembangunan.Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah penelitian empiris dengan metode pendekatan perundang-undangan (StatuteApproach), pendekatan konseptual (ConceptualApproach) dan pendekatan lapangan. Metode pengelohan dan análisis data yang dipergunakan adalah análisis data dan bahan hukum.Dari hasilpenelitianiniadalahadabeberapajenis pembentukan organisasi pemerintahan desa yaitu pembentukan organisasi Kepala Desa, Badan Permusyawaratan Desa (BPD), Sekertaris Desa dan Kepala-kepala Urusan Desa. Dalam melakukan proses pembentukan organisasi pemerintahan desa dilakukan pembentukan kepengurusan pemerintahan desa. Dalam membuat dan menetapkan, aparatur pemerintahan desa tidak lepas dari peraturan-peraturan yang ada dan berlaku sekarang, Hal ini dapat dilihat di Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 72 Tahun 2005 dan Daerah KabupatenBima Nomor 02 Tahun 2007 Tentang PedomanPenyusunandan Tata KerjaPemerintahanDesa, Bima 2007 danperaturandaerahNomor 07 Tahun 2006 tentangBadanPermusyawaratanDesa (BPD), Bima 2006. Abstract:  The village government there right now is the Village Administration in the spirit of the State Constitution 1945, hereinafter abbreviated RJ (UUDNRI 1945) is to pay attention and respect the right of the origin of which is special. Therefore has the necessity that in carrying out development in all fields in order to striking an optimal result, inevitably have to involve the society in the village, the village government as the organizer of the lowest government that directly deal with the public as the construction company to be more able to mobilize the people to participate in development.Metodeyang used in this research is empirical approach legislation (StatuteApproach), the conceptual approach (ConceptualApproach) and the field approach. Pengelohan methods and analysis of data used is the analysis of data and legal material.Hasilpenelitianiniadalahadabeberapajenis establishment of the village government organizations namely the establishment of the organization Village Chief, Village Consultative Body (BPD), Village Secretary and Heads of Village Affairs. In the process of the establishment of the village government organization conducted the formation of village government stewardship. In making and sets, apparatus village administration can not be separated from the regulations that exist and apply now, It can be seen in the Government Regulation No. 72 of 2005 and Regional Bima Regency Number 02 Year 2007 on PedomanPenyusunandan Tata KerjaPemerintahanDesa, Bima 2007 danperaturandaerahNomor 07, 2006 tentangBadanPermusyawaratanDesa (BPD), Bima, 2006.

scholarly journals PENGARUH SERTIFIKAT HAK ATAS TANAH SEBAGAI ALAT BUKTI DALAM MENCAPAI KEPASTIAN HUKUM

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-43
Author(s):  
Abdul Muthallib
Keyword(s):  
Government Regulation ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Land Registration ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Role Of The Government

This article discusses legal certainty as one of the objectives of Law No. 5 of 1960 concerning Agrarian (Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1960 tentang Pokok-Pokok Agraria) Principles and the influence of land rights certificates as a strong means of proof of land registration. The provision of guarantees of legal certainty to holders of land rights is accommodated in Law Number 5 of 1960 concerning Agrarian Principles and further regulated in Government Regulation Number 24 of 1997 concerning Land Registration (Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 24 Tahun 1997 tentang Pendaftaran Tanah). Using a normative legal view, this article refers to regulations on agrarian. The discussion of the article looks at the role of the government in providing opportunities for all citizens to register land with the aim of obtaining legal certainty and minimizing disputes. This article looks at the purpose of issuing certificates in land registration activities so that right-holders can easily prove that they are the right-holders. This is done so that rights holders can obtain legal certainty and legal protection. However, the land rights certificate issued is considered to be still lacking in minimizing disputes and it is assumed that it has not affected the land rights owners to protect their rights.

DEVELOPMENT OF DESIGN PRINCIPLES DROIT DE PREFERENCE AGAINST OWNERS BUSINESS PREMISES IN TANAH ABANG JAKARTA

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilman Khairi ◽  
Abraham Yazdi Martin
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Public Works ◽  
Common Element ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Grand Theory ◽  
Proof Of Ownership ◽  
Hans Kelsen ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

Use Rights Certificate Business Place (SHPTU) is proof of ownership of the right to use business premises (shop) in a market that is owned by market traders. SHPTU have a fairly high economic value. Therefore, expected SHPTU can be used as loan collateral. SHPTU have a common element of the lease, as in article 1548 of the Civil Code. Because SHPTU not the right material, then SHPTU can not be guaranteed by using a material guarantee institutions. The research method with the added element of normative juridical empirical, with the analysis of qualitative data. From the analysis it can be concluded that SHPTU not the right material, but given SHPTU has economic value and can be transferred, it is expected that the government can immediately respond to the needs of society (the Merchants Market) to the existence of a guarantee institution which can accommodate SHPTU shop as loan collateral. Resulting from the rigidity of the legal material to deliver the right material on business premises or SHPTU recommended for use kaedah contained in Article 48-49 of the legislation Flats by issuing Certificates of Building Owners and Building (SKBG), where the issuance of the certificate is the same between Local government in this case the Department of Public Works and the Department of Housing, while still managing PD Pasar Jaya as it has been running for this. Issuing authority on the issuance of a certificate is not PD Pasar Jaya but agency in charge of publishing the SKBG. When referring to the Building Act SKBG publishing at the Department of Public Works, and when referring to the Law on Housing, the publishing SKBG by the Department of Housing. That way it is assured of legal certainty as mandated by state law, as well as the grand theory of Hans Kelsen. SKBG is way out proof of ownership of the store, which is very expensive because of the value it needs the necessary legal certainty regarding the right material.Keyword: Droit De’ Preference, UMKM, Shops

scholarly journals HUKUM MAHAR BERUPA TANAH DALAM KEBIASAAN MASYARAKAT BUGIS BONE MENURUT PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-36
Author(s):  
Hasma Mhi
Keyword(s):  
Government Regulation ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Local Order ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Land Registration ◽  
Legal Development ◽  
Proof Of Ownership ◽  
Ownership Of Land ◽  
The Village

AbstractGiving Mahar in the tradition of the Bugis Bone community, commonly given by husbands to wives in the form of land. Provision of Mahar in the form of land is regulated in the provisions of the marriage law, UU number 1 of 1974 concerning Marriage, Juncto UUPA number 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Principles of Agrarian Law, Juncto Government Regulation (PP) number 24 of 1997 concerning Land Registration and KHI.Giving Mahar in the form of land accompanied by a statement that knows and is signed by a local order, namely head of the village related to the location of the Mahar land, is an evidence that is not strong. because proof of ownership is the strongest according to civil law is proof of the authentic deed. Authentic proof of ownership of land must be registered at the Land Agency Office and the certificate of dowry land issued. To provide collateral in the form of legal certainty of dowry ownership in the form of land that should be certified on behalf of the wife.Keywords: Land Certification; Mahar; Legal Development.

scholarly journals DEVELOPMENT OF DESIGN PRINCIPLES DROIT DE PREFERENCE AGAINST OWNERS BUSINESS PREMISES IN TANAH ABANG JAKARTA

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 119
Author(s):  
Ilman Khairi ◽  
Martin Roestamy
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Public Works ◽  
Common Element ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Grand Theory ◽  
Proof Of Ownership ◽  
Hans Kelsen ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

Use Rights Certificate Business Place (SHPTU) is proof of ownership of the right to use business premises (shop) in a market that is owned by market traders. SHPTU have a fairly high economic value. Therefore expected SHPTU can be used as loan collateral. SHPTU have a common element of the lease, as in article 1548 of the Civil Code. Because SHPTU not the right material, then SHPTU can not be guaranteed by using a material guarantee institutions. This thesis research methods with the added element of normative juridical empirical, with the analysis of qualitative data. From the analysis it can be concluded that SHPTU not the right material, but given SHPTU has economic value and can be transferred, it is expected that the government can immediately respond to the needs of society (the Merchants Market) to the existence of a guarantee institution which can accommodate SHPTU shop as loan collateral. Resulting from the rigidity of the legal material to deliver the right material on business premises or SHPTU recommended for use kaedah contained in Article 48-49 of the legislation Flats by issuing Certificates of Building Owners and Building (SKBG), where the issuance of the certificate is the same between Local government in this case the Department of Public Works and the Department of Housing, while still managing PD Pasar Jaya as it has been running for this. Issuing authority on the issuance of a certificate is not PD Pasar Jaya but agency in charge of publishing the SKBG. When referring to the Building Act SKBG publishing at the Department of Public Works, and when referring to the Law on Housing, the publishing SKBG by the Department of Housing. That way it is assured of legal certainty as mandated by state law, as well as the grand theory of Hans Kelsen. SKBG is way out proof of ownership of the store, which is very expensive because of the value it needs the necessary legal certainty regarding the right material.

scholarly journals The Philosophical Foundation of the Coherence of Regulations Concerning Apartment in Indonesia

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 18
Author(s):  
Salma Suroyya Yuniyanti
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Philosophical Foundation ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Separation Principle ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Shared Objects ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

A state holds constitutional responsibility of embodying physical, psychological welfare, and social justice for all of its citizens. Developing apartments is one of the Indonesian government's policy to ensure the embodiment of these responsibilities. Regulation on apartment that adheres to horizontal separation principle (<em>Horizontale scheiding beginnsel</em>) still often leads to a range of legal issues. Accordingly, it is necessary to find out and comprehend the philosophical foundation of the coherence of regulations concerning apartment. The present study applied normative legal method with statutory and conceptual approaches. In practice, horizontal separation principle is not well-implemented and is not in line with the Basic Agrarian Law (BAL). Right of Ownership of an apartment unit (HMSRS) is a personal right and is separated from common right upon shared objects, parts, and land. This phenomenon can lead to legal issues, particularly when the secondary rights (i.e., right to use building or right to use upon the state land and right to use building or right to use upon the right to manage) are no longer extended. The implementation of horizontal separation has not provided a legal certainty for the community regarding apartment unit ownership. Accordingly, in order to provide legal certainties, the government should enact Government Regulation as further stipulation of Law no. 20 of 2011.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document