InfoSAWIT, JAKARTA - In a recent statement, Dr. Sadino, a Forestry Law expert from Al Azhar University Indonesia, emphasized the need for the government to uphold land rights amidst ongoing disputes over areas claimed as forest zones. He argued that the resolution of land conflicts involving local communities, transmigrants, and plantation entrepreneurs should fall under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning/National Land Agency (ATR/BPN), in accordance with the Basic Agrarian Law (UUPA).

"The existing mechanisms in the UUPA should serve as the primary reference. We must remember that land rights are the final product of government determination and cannot be disregarded due to unilateral claims of forest areas," Sadino stated in a statement received by InfoSAWIT on Wednesday, July 9, 2025.

He explained that since the enactment of Law No. 5 of 1967 on Basic Forestry, which was later replaced by Law No. 41 of 1999 on Forestry, the position of land rights cannot be separated from the UUPA established in 1960. He stressed that agrarian law is the fundamental basis for determining land rights, not the other way around.

According to Sadino, forestry policies have undergone significant changes, particularly since the New Order era, which viewed forests as "green gold." During that time, the government granted numerous forest utilization concessions to third parties through the TGHK (Forest Utilization Agreement) policy, established via Ministerial Decrees. However, he criticized the implementation of these policies as imbalanced.

"The focus is often on the First Dictum—designating forest areas. Yet, it is the Second Dictum, which involves boundary delineation and area confirmation, that provides legal certainty," he explained.

Sadino further elaborated that the Forestry Law clearly outlines the procedures for confirming forest areas, including designation, boundary setting, mapping, and establishment. All these stages must be conducted systematically and transparently to avoid harming those who hold legitimate land rights.

"Designating a forest area is merely the initial step; it does not yield legal certainty. Certainty only arises after the establishment phase is completed, and this must consider the rights of third parties," he asserted.

He also referenced Government Regulation No. 23 of 2021 on Forestry Administration, which clarifies the definition and procedures for confirming forest areas, including the Minister's obligation to issue a registration number for designated areas. However, he noted that field practices often bypass these procedures.

Sadino pointed out that a fundamental error occurs when forest area regulation neglects the basic principle that land rights are not objects of the Forestry Law but are subject to the UUPA. Article 68, paragraph (4) of the Forestry Law states that anyone has the right to compensation if their land rights are lost due to the designation of forest areas.

"Forest area regulation should not become a tool to sideline community ownership rights. The state must respect the principle of legality and refrain from creating policies that contradict higher laws," he emphasized.

He also highlighted the importance of legal protection for land certificates, as stipulated in Government Regulation No. 24 of 1997 on Land Registration. Article 32 states that if a piece of land has been certified in the name of a party who obtained it lawfully and has possessed it in good faith for five years, it cannot be contested by others.

In conclusion, Sadino reiterated that the resolution of land disputes claimed as forest areas should be framed within agrarian law, not forestry law. This approach is essential to ensure legal justice for communities, particularly those who have legitimate land rights but are now at risk of losing them due to forest area claims.

"The politics of forestry law should adhere to principles of justice and legal certainty, rather than confuse matters with unilateral interpretations. We must not sacrifice the rights of the people for short-term interests," he concluded. (T2)