Long-awaited land acquisition law passed

Jakarta Post, 12/17/2011

The House of Representatives endorsed the long-awaited land acquisition law for public development in Jakarta on Friday.

The new law is expected to solve conflicts that have, in the past, often resulted in delays of public infrastructure projects.

Daryatmo Mardianto, an Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) legislator who led the House’s special committee deliberating the bill, said that the law was badly needed to help cope with infrastructure problems in the country.

“Infrastructure projects are the key drivers to boost the Indonesian economy. This law sets the time frame of every acquisition process without ignoring the rights of the public,” Daryatmo said.

By having the law, all legal proceedings pertinent to land acquisition for a government-commissioned infrastructure project should be completed within 436 working days at the most.

The law also allowed a more democratic process for providing a 60 day public consultation period before acquiring land.

If the public disagreed with providing the land, they could appeal to the state administrative court (PTUN), which would then issue a ruling in no more than 30 days. Should the public remain dissatisfied with the ruling, they will be given a 14 day period to appeal to the Supreme Court, which should issue a ruling within 30 days.

However, if the public agree with all the terms and conditions after the public consultation period, all business and legal procedures for the land acquisition should be complete within 260 days.

After that, the National Land Agency (BPN) would step in and assign an independent appraisal team, consisting of independent financial experts with expertise in agrarian issues certified by the BPN, to determine the value of compensation due to be paid to the public.

The valuation process must be completed in 30 days and it could be paid in the form of money, re-settlement, land ownership, or stock ownership in the government project.

Landowners who disagree with the compensation settlement or the proposed land price can file a legal complaint and seek court rulings up to the Supreme Court.

The head of the BPN, Joyo Winoto, said that the implementation regulation of the law was expected to finish within a year.

“However, we are expecting that the presidential decree for this law will be finished within six months,” Joyo told The Jakarta Post.

Regarding compensation, he said that the public could have more than one form of settlement. “If the public wants money and re-settlement for compensation, we will give that,” he added.

In a separate interview, Fatchur Rochman, the chairman of Indonesian Toll Road Association (ATI) said that he was very content with the passing of bill, saying that delay of infrastructure projects had caused severe headaches for businesspeople.

However, he warned that the implementation regulations should be issued by the end of 2012 at the latest, unless the execution of land acquisitions would still take a long time. “Some presidential decrees are issued three to four years after the passing. We do not want such things to happen because the land acquisition law will then be useless,” he told the Post.

The Consortium for Agrarian Reform (KPA) said the land acquisition law only accommodated the interests of the government and not necessarily the people. “We will ask the Constitutional Court to review the law,” KPA campaign deputy Iwan Nurdin told the Post. (nfo)

Legal confusion sparks nationwide land dispute

Tifa Asrianti, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta | Tue, 12/27/2011 10:35 PM Legal confusion surrounding the management of land resources has resulted in conflict between businesspeople and locals, which at times has ended bloodily, agrarian experts have said.

Arie Hutagalung, the University of Indonesia’s expert on agrarian affairs said that when deliberating the 2004 Law on Plantation, the 2009 Law on Mineral and Coal and the 1999 Forestry Law, the government and the House of Representatives had failed to make reference to the Agrarian Law of 1960.

“For instance, the Plantation Law opens the door for the local administration to give a permit for private companies to manage up to 100,000 hectares. The Agrarian Law meanwhile stipulates that it should be no more than 20,000 hectares,” she said.

Arie said that there was also a clash between the Agrarian Law and the three laws on the issue of rights for indigenous communities. “The Forestry Law does not recognize the rights of indigenous communities, something that has been clearly regulated by the Agrarian Law,” she said.

Iwan Nurdin, campaign deputy for the Consortium for Agrarian Reform (KPA) said that the three new laws were endorsed to secure the interests of the business community.

“Agrarian politics in those three laws is based on the interests of investors. Those laws close access to land for the local people,” he said.

He said that the Forestry Law was clear in its stipulation on what the central government and local administration could give as compensation to companies.

The same also went for both the Plantation Law and Mineral and Coal Law, he said.

“When the two laws allow for the forest to be given as a concession, they fail to take into account the presence of the local community that relies on the forest for their livelihood,” he said.

As a solution, Iwan said that instead of appointing big companies to manage the concessionary land, the government should start trusting local communities to manage them.

Data from the KPA said that there were 163 agrarian conflicts during 2011.

Two weeks before the Bima riot on Saturday, the public was shocked by the alleged mass killing in Mesuji, Lampung, allegedly over the encroachment of traditional land by private companies.

Of the 25 million hectares of productive forest concessions (HPH), more than 8 million hectares were under the industrial forest concession (HTI) scheme and 12 million hectares were given to palm oil companies.

Arie said that to prevent future conflicts, local administrations should show more accountability to the local community.

Private companies should also fulfill their obligations in finding new lands for local people whose land would be occupied before the companies started their operations.

In the mining sector, companies should also reclaim land, upon which they would run their operation.

She also said that it was not always a sad story for local communities.

She said that in Bengkulu, a private company only needed to make a verbal request to locals who would later give up their land for commercial projects.

“It depends on the political will of politicians and government officials. They should work together to carry out agrarian reform,” she said.

Iwan said that the government should refrain from issuing new agrarian-related regulations before conducting a thorough review on the four laws.

Janji Pembaruan Agraria Tidak Pernah Ditunaikan

Kompas, Kamis, 05 januari 2012
Mata Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono berkaca-kaca, mulutnya tertahan sejenak tak mampu melanjutkan pidatonya. Presiden tak kuasa menahan haru, lalu menitikkan air mata. Itu terjadi di Istana Bogor pada 21 Oktober 2010 dalam peringatan ke-50 Hari Agraria.

”Saya terharu melihat tadi,” ujar Presiden kala itu. Untuk sesaat, ia seperti tak mampu melanjutkan kata-katanya.

Sebelumnya, Presiden menyaksikan tayangan video tentang permasalahan tanah dan petani di Cilacap, Jawa Tengah. Tak berapa lama, Presiden pun melanjutkan pidato. Kata dia, tema besar yang diusung pemerintah adalah tanah untuk keadilan dan kesejahteraan rakyat.

”Mari camkan betul tema besar ini, misi besar ini agar di negeri kita rakyat menjadi tuan tanah, menjadi tuan yang memiliki bumi dan air dan kekayaan alam yang terkandung di dalamnya,” ujar Presiden.


Saat itu, Presiden membagikan sertifikat tanah kepada 10 petani. Mereka bagian dari 5.100 keluarga dari empat desa di Cilacap yang memenuhi syarat mendapat redistribusi lahan seluas 266 hektar.

Pencitraan
Banyak yang mengganggap air mata Presiden ketika itu merupakan bagian dari politik pencitraan semata. Baca misalnya bagaiman Direktur Reform Institute Yudi Latif dalam kolomnya di Kompas saat itu mengatakan, makna air mata tersebut hanya Presiden yang tahu. Itu karena, menurut Yudi, satu hal yang pasti, jeritan harapan keadilan korban lumpur Lapindo belum kunjung terkabulkan. Sementara itu, selama masa pemerintahan Yudhoyono, otoritas Badan Pertanahan Nasional mengizinkan jutaan hektar tanah dikuasai segelintir orang (terutama modal asing) yang kian meminggirkan akses rakyat kecil atas lahan. Yudi pun bertanya, apakah Presiden tak menyadarinya?

Bagi Yudi, dengan kesenjangan yang lebar antara ekspresi keharuan dan ekspresi keadilan, tetes air mata Presiden belum sanggup meneteskan air mata rakyatnya. Terlebih klaim redistribusi lahan kepada 5.100 keluarga petani di Cilacap belakangan ternyata diketahui hanya akal-akalan yang dibuat seolah memang telah ada tanah yang dibagi-bagikan kepada petani.

Deputi Riset dan Kampanye Konsorsium Pembaruan Agraria (KPA) Iwan Nurdin mengungkapkan, 266 hektar yang dibagikan kepada petani Cilacap tersebut sejak 1960-an memang merupakan areal yang hendak dibagikan kepada rakyat dalam bentuk Surat Keputusan Redistribusi. Belakangan, tanah tersebut dikuasai PT Rumpun Sari Antan. Setelah masa hak guna usaha perusahaan itu habis, rakyat akhirnya mendapatkan haknya yang tertunda puluhan tahun. ”Dan, tidak gratis karena rakyat harus bayar Rp 15.000 per meter,” kata Iwan.

Jadi, menurut Iwan, sertifikat tanah yang dibagikan Presiden tersebut bukanlah bagian dari redistribusi lahan yang menjadi inti pembaruan agraria. Hal ini karena sejak awal memang tanah tersebut hak petani Cilacap.

Tangisan Presiden makin terlihat sebagai bagian pencitraan jika kita melacak lebih ke belakang saat dia hendak maju dalam Pemilu Presiden 2004 bersama Jusuf Kalla. Saat itu, Yudhoyono-Kalla membuat buku visi, misi, dan program capres dan cawapres dengan judul Membangun Indonesia yang Aman, Adil, dan Sejahtera. Yudhoyono menulis, agenda pembangunan yang dia janjikan selama 2004-2009 salah satunya adalah mendorong pelaksanaan refroma agraria (halaman 56). Janji revitalisasi pertanian dan pedesaan Yudhoyono kala itu dengan jelas disebutkan, salah satunya melaksanakan reforma agraria.

Inti pembaruan agraria adalah land reform dalam pengertian redistribusi pemilikan dan penguasaan tanah (Usep Setiawan, 2010). Sekretaris Jenderal, KPA Idham Arsyad mengatakan, land reform dalam pengertian sempit adalah redistribusi tanah kepada orang yang tidak bertanah. Dalam pengertian yang lebih luas, land reform bermakna sebagai upaya untuk menata struktur kepemilikan, penguasaan, dan penggunaan tanah dan sumber daya alam yang timpang untuk mencapai keadilan dan kesejahteraan. Dengan demikian, UUPA tidak menghendaki adanya ketimpangan penguasaan, pemilikan, dan penggunaan tanah dan sumber daya alam.

Sudahkah tunaikah janji Presiden Yudhoyono melakukan pembaruan agraria? Konflik tanah di Mesuji, Lampung dan Sumatera Selatan, hingga bentrokan warga yang menolak pertambangan dengan aparat di Pelabuhan Sape, Bima, Nusa Tenggara Barat, membuat kita membuka mata konflik agraria seperti bom waktu yang bisa meledak kapan pun selama pemerintah tak pernah tuntas menyelesaikan pembaruan agraria.

Di masa Presiden Soekarno, pemerintah memiliki perangkat lengkap untuk melakukan pembaruan agraria melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1960 tentang Peraturan Dasar Pokok-Pokok Agraria (dikenal dengan sebutan UUPA). Menurut Idham, UUPA disusun agar tanah dan sumber daya alam benar-benar digunakan untuk kemakmuran dan kesejahteraan rakyat. UUPA menjadi hukum agraria nasional baru menggantikan kebijakan agraria kolonial. UUPA sebagai perwujudan Indonesia merdeka agar tanah dan sumber daya alam menjadi alat kesejahteraan dan kemakmuran bangsa. Sejak dikeluarkan UUPA pada 1960, semua peraturan perundang-undangan yang didasarkan pada Agrarische Wet 1870 dinyatakan tidak berlaku.