Determination of Indigenous Community's Forests as A Form of State Recognition of Customary Sovereignty

Hendra Sukarman, Tri Lisiani Prihatinah, Sulistyandari, Urip Santoso

Abstract

Forestry in Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation has two major problems that change the basic character of the Forestry Law: abandoning the spirit of conflict resolution and forest resource conservation efforts. The emergence of provisions for "strategic areas" will be prioritized in accelerating the determination of forest areas with the aim of opening up investment space as much as possible. This study aims to examine the extent to which the precautionary principle is applied to address overlapping spatial planning, forest areas, and investment permits, and to assess the recognition of indigenous peoples’ forests as a form of state acknowledgment of customary sovereignty. This study also explores the dynamics of structural agrarian conflicts and the legal uncertainty surrounding customary forest determination.This study uses qualitative research methods through a normative juridical approach, analyzing various legal sources and academic literature relevant to the topic.The scientific novelty of this research lies in highlighting how the Job Creation Law structurally diminishes indigenous sovereignty over forests by prioritizing economic investment over legal certainty and customary rights. Furthermore, it offers a comprehensive legal argument advocating the application of the precautionary principle to restore a balance between economic interests, forest sustainability, and indigenous land rights.The results of the study conclude that investment interests, such as being given a smooth path and becoming a priority compared to the interests of forest conservation and state recognition of customary sovereignty over forests belonging to indigenous peoples, should apply the precautionary principle approach to addressing the overlapping issues between spatial planning, forest areas, and investment permits. Furthermore, structural agrarian conflicts are rooted in overlapping claims of forest tenure and ownership as well as the absence of state recognition of indigenous peoples and their living spaces which has an impact on the narrowing of the living space and management rights of indigenous peoples in customary areas. The latest existing regulations have not achieved legal certainty regarding the determination of forests belonging to customary law communities.

 

Keywords: Customary forest, State recognition, Customary sovereignty.

 

https://doi.org/10.55463/issn.1674-2974.52.5.5


Full Text:

PDF


References


Y. Arizona, “Antara teks dan konteks: Dinamika pengakuan hukum terhadap hak masyarakat adat atas sumber daya alam di Indonesia.” Perkumpulan untuk Pembaharuan Hukum Berbasis Masyarakat dan Ekologis (HuMa), 2010.

S. Suparto, “Interpreting The State’s Right to Control In the provisions of Article 33 Paragraph (3), The Constitution of 1945 Republic of Indonesia,” UIR Law Rev., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 1–8, 2020, doi: 10.25299/uirlrev.2020.vol4(2).6889.

I. B. Hasba, “PESANTREN KOPI; UPAYA KONSERVASI LAHAN HUTAN OLEH PESANTREN ATTANWIR BERBASIS TANAMAN KOPI,” Bina Huk. Lingkung., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 167–181, 2018.

B. Pamulardi, Hukum kehutanan dan pembangunan bidang kehutanan, First edit. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada, 1999.

M. Sulastriyono and S. D. F. Aristya, “Penerapan norma dan asas-asas hukum adat dalam praktik peradilan perdata,” Mimb. Hukum-Fakultas Huk. Univ. Gadjah Mada, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 25–40, 2012.

Y. Pujiwati and B. Rubiati, “Peran Notaris Dalam Pelepasan Hak Atas Tanah Pada Proses Konsolidasi Tanah Guna Optimalisasi Fungsi Tanah Dikaitkan Dengan Peraturan Pertanahan,” ACTA DIURNAL J. Ilmu Huk. Kenotariatan, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 226–240, 2019.

G. F. Shofiana, “Philosophy, Pancasila and modern technology,” Yuridika, vol. 29, no. 2, 2014.

R. O. S. Soemadiningrat and A. F. Susanto, Teori hukum: mengingat, mengumpulkan dan membuka kembali. Refika Aditama, 2005.

Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara, “Petition for MK No.35 Ruling and Indigenous Peoples Bill,” Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara.

L. A. Savitri, “Rentang Batas dari Rekognisi Hutan Adat dalam Kepengaturan Neoliberal,” J. Wacana Nomor, vol. 33, pp. 61–98, 2014.

L. Tibaka and R. Rosdian, “The Protection of human rights in Indonesian constitutional law after the amendment of the 1945 constitution of the republic of Indonesia,” FIAT JUSTISIA J. Ilmu Huk., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 266–288, 2017.

A. L. Anshori, “Rezim HKI Sebagai Konsep Perlindungan Hak Kekayaan Intelektual Atas Pengetahuan Tradisional (traditional knowledge) di Indonesia,” Yogyakarta FH UII, 2008.

P. O. T. R. O. INDONESIA, FORESTRY AFFAIRS, no. 41. 1999.

A. Kar Gupta, “Natural Law & Rights,” Nov. 2019.

R. S. TARIGAN, MENUJU NEGARA HUKUM YANG BERKEADILAN. Ruang Karya Bersama, 2024.

B. White, “Di antara Apologia Diskursus Kritis: Transisi Agraria dan Pelibatan Dunia Ilmiah di Indonesia,” Dalam Ilmu Sos. dan Kekuasaan di Indones. diedit oleh Vedi R. Hadizdan Daniel Dhakidae, pp. 119–154, 2006.

G. Wiradi, Reforma Agraria : Perjalanan Yang Belum Berakhir. 2000.

Y. Herawati, “Konsep Keadilan Sosial Dalam Bingkai Sila Kelima Pancasila (The Concept Of Social Justice Within The Fifth Principle Framework Of Pancasila),” Paradig. J. Masal. Sos. Polit. dan Kebijak., vol. 18, no. 1, 2014.

R. Ridha, “Social Protest of Women Farmers Regarding Agrarian Conflict,” J. Leg. Ethical Regul. Isses, vol. 24, p. 1, 2021.

J. Davies, “MINISTRY OF ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES MINERAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT,” 1990.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.