Traditional Rights of Indigenous People in Indonesia: Legal Recognition and Court Interpretation

Indigenous people living in Indonesia have enjoyed their traditional rights far before the establishment of Indonesia nation state, but their rights are often violated by issuance of government policies. In order to protect their rights, the Constitution, law and regulation recognize and respect traditional rights of indigenous people. Court also has pivotal role to interpret traditional rights of indigenous people. This paper analyzes recognition of traditional rights of indigenous people in law and regulation; and court interpretation on traditional rights of indigenous people. Ulayat right has been recognized since 1960, but indigenous people has not been recognized as legal subject. Meanwhile, recognition towards indigenous people by regional regulation is precondition to claim their traditional rights. Constitutional Court affirms that the nature of indigenous people recognition is declaratory. The Court emphasizes that living ulayat right in the jurisdiction of indigenous people shall be enjoyed hereditary;therefore it shall not be limited by permit issued by the government. Unfortunately, in civil law disputes, traditional rights of indigenous people are often neglected because the Courts only focus on formal legal proof without considering legal history of Land Certificate issuance and living or factual control of indigenous people’s towards the disputed object.


A. Background
National Agrarian Reform Committee said that 1% of the richest people in Indonesia controlled 50,3% of national wealth and another 10% richest people in Indonesia control 7% of national wealth. 1 By the great number of land monopoly, agrarian conflict increases from time to time. Agrarian Reformation Consortium noted that since 2015-2017 there were 1.361 manifest conflicts; and in 2017 there were 657 agrarian conflicts in 520.491,87 hectares (Ha) land involving 652.738 families. 2 According to identification conducted by Coalition for Law Reform based on Society and Ecology, HuMa, during agrarian conflicts, victims are communal groups, not individual, such as indigenous peoples, local communities, and groups of farmers. 3 Indigenous people and small farmers are facing land appropriation and forced eviction during agrarian conflict. 4 Oxfam noted that local rights-holders are losing out to local elites and domestic or 1 National Agrarian Reform Committee said that 71 percent of land in Indonesia are controlled by forestry corporation, 16 percent of them are under large scale plantation corporation; 7 percent are managed by conglomerate; and the rest are authorized by people. See Komite Nasional Pembaruan Agraria, "Indonesia Darurat Agraria: Luruskan Reforma Agraria dan Selesaikan Konflik-Konflik Agraria", http://elsam.or.id/2017/09/indonesiadarurat-agraria-luruskan-reforma-agraria-dan-selesaikan-konflik-konflikagraria/, accessed on 25/09/2017, accessed 6 February 2019. 2 Agrarian Reformation Consortium reported that agrarian conflicts are conflicts based on sector where plantation sector dominates the conflicts (32 percent, 208 conflicts), followed by property (30 percent, 199 conflicts); infrastructure (14 percent, 92 conflicts); agriculture (12 percent, 78 conflicts); forestry (5 percent, 30 conflicts); marine and fishery (4 percent, 28 conflicts); and mining (3 percent, 22 conflicts). See Konsorsium Pembaruan Agraria, "Catatan Akhir Tahun 2017: Reforma Agraria di Bawah Bayangan Investasi Gaung Besar di Pinggiran Jalan", http://kpa.or.id/assets/uploads/files/ publikasi/d5a29-catahu-2017-kpa.pdf, acessed on 27/12/2017, accessed 6 February 2019, p. 6. 3 HuMa, "Outlook Konflik Sumberdaya Alam dan Agraria 2012: Membara, Menyebar, dan Meluas", https://huma.or.id/home/pusat-database-daninformasi/outlook-konflik-sumberdaya-alam-dan-agraria-2012-3.html, accessed on 21/03/2013, accessed 6 February 2019. 4 Petr Drbohlav and Jiri Hejkrlik, "Social and Economic Impacts on Lad Concessions on Rural Communities of Cambodia: Case Stydy of Botum Sakor National Park, IJAPS, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2018, p. 166. foreign investors because they lack the power to claim their rights effectively and to defend and advance their interest. 5 HuMa distinguished between indigenous peoples and local communities based on claim where indigenous people bring claim based on the history of the conflicting land, while group of farmers bring claim based on contractual relation with the company. 6 Mutolib, et.al. said that agrarian conflict between Melayu indigenous people and government arises from conflicting claim of forest control. 7 State granted concession permit on forest of Melayu indigenous people because according to State Law, Adat Forest (indigenous forest) is defined as state forest located in indigenous people's territory. 8 In the perspective of the people, the state has no right towards their forest because they have lived around the forest long before the establishment of Indonesia nation state. These colliding claims create conflict between Melayu indigenous people, government and investor.
Marind indigenous people resist against government policy on "Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate" (MIFEE) introduced by Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono in 2010. Ginting said that resistance movement against MIFEE aims not only to stall, to stop, and to rehabilitate the damages; but also to address poverty among Marind

B. Recognition towards Traditional Rights of Indigenous People in Law and Regulation
Traditional right of indigenous people towards land and territory has been acknowledged by Indonesian law since 1960. Basic Agrarian Law 16 recognizes ulayat right, indigenous people's right to control land and territory. According to this law, indigenous people can exercise their existing conditional ulayat right and any right similar to it. In adat law (customary law) literature, ulayat right was known as beschikkingrecht or ancient (purba) right. According to Bosco, scope of ulayat right embraces land, water, and natural resources contained therein. 17 Beschikkingrecht was term introduced by Van Vollenhoven. It is further explained by Ter Haar as right of a group of people to internally regulate how the members collect resources from their land and restrict outsider to take unlawful benefit from their land. 18 Ter Haar said that right to bechikken is absolute, including right to transfer land title, but according to Van Vollenhoven one of beschikkingrecht distinct character is prohibition to transfer the land. 19 At this current situation, ulayat right is right to control land, but it restricts land transfer.
The term ancient right is introduced by M. M. Djojodigoeno. The smallest indigenous community structure, village, has ancient right towards their territory. According to Iman Sudiyat, ancient right is right to control land in indigenous people territory. 20  right is flexible (mulur mungkret). 21 Their relation is fluid because they adapt to each other. When ancient right towards land is strong, individual right is weak; and vice versa.
Legally speaking, the application of ulayat right shall limit the implementation of state right to control in the territory of indigenous people. If indigenous community practices their ulayat right in their territory; state shall restrict itself to control it. The application of ulayat right according to Basic Agrarian Law is limited. Ulayat right shall be applied only if it is in accordance with national and state interest; nation unity; Indonesia socialism; law and regulation, including religious law. The practice of ulayat right is restricted by law and regulation issued by the state. Later, indigenous people find that it is troublesome to exercise ulayat right because they are not recognized as legal subject.
Ulayat right has tight relation with customary law and indigenous people. Ulayat right can not be separated from the existence of indigenous people because ulayat right is practiced through the customary law within the jurisdiction of indigenous people's territory. 22 If indigenous community is not recognized, then their ulayat right is not respected. The absent of recognition toward indigenous people as legal subject and indifference toward ulayat right can be seen in Forestry Law.
Forestry Law recognized indigenous forest, but it was defined as state forest located in the territory of indigenous people. This definition neglect indigenous people as legal subject who has right to control forest in their territory. 23 Recognition of indigenous people as legal subject to access their right is prominent. It is proven by requirement as mentioned in Forestry Law where right of indigenous people is considered only if they exist, recognized by regional regulation, 21 M. M. Djojodigoeno, 1961, Asas-Asas Hukum Adat Kuliah Tahun 1960-1961 Djilid 1 and in line with national interest. Moreover, Forestry Law regulates that existing and recognized indigenous people have right to collect forest product for daily life; to manage forest according to customary land and not in contrary to state law; and to be empowered. Theoretically speaking legal, the nature of recognition towards indigenous people is declaratory. Recognition through state legal instrument, such as regional regulation, is a declaration to confirm the existence of indigenous people. 24 State legal instrument does not justify the existence of indigenous community. The community themselves shall justify their existence. The state only administer the existence of indigenous community through state legal instrument. Though legal recognition through state law is only a declaration of existence, state often neglect existing indigenous people's right if they are not legally recognized. Failure to identify indigenous peoples as such incurs the imminent risk of violating the collective aspects of their human rights. 25 Considering the urgency of indigenous people recognition in order to access their right, Minister of Home Affair Republic of Indonesia issues regulation to administer indigenous people recognition.
In 2014, Minister of Home Affair Republic of Indonesia issues procedure to recognize indigenous people. 26 Indigenous people are defined as Indonesian citizen which has distinct character; lives in group harmoniously according to their customary law; has ancestral bonding and/or similar residence; has strong relationship with land and environment and has value system which hereditary determines their economic, politic, social, culture, law and utilization of territory. 27  conducted by governor or regent/mayor (chief of region). Chief of region's authority to recognize the existence of indigenous people is not only regulated in Minister of Home Affair Regulation, but also in Regional Government Law 28 . According to this law, regional government of province and regency/municipality, has authority to recognize and to protect indigenous community's right.
Minister of Home Affair regulates steps to recognize indigenous people. It is started from identification, verification to stipulation. By involving indigenous people, regent/mayor shall identify the history; territory; law; wealth and/or property; and organization system/institution of the community. This identification will be verified and validated by regency/municipality indigenous people committee 29 . Then it will be published to the community within a month.
If there is objection from the community, the committee shall re-verify and re-validate the identification. Verification and validation result is the basic of the committee to deliver recommendation to the regent/mayor. Based on the recommendation, regent/mayor recognizes indigenous people through chief of region decision. If the community lives in two or more regencies/municipalities, recognition shall be stipulated by head of region joint decision.
Recognition of indigenous people through regent/mayor decision is prominent since it is the precondition to claim their rights. Theoretically speaking there is different between regional regulation and decision issued by chief of region. Regional regulation is a product of legal consensus between regional house of representative and chief of region. While chief of region decision is decision issued solely by the chief without any consensus with regional house of representative. From above explanation, there is inconsistency between recognition of indigenous people regulatory in Forestry Law ic, political, social, and law structure. 28 Law Number 23 of 2014 regarding Regional Government. 29 Adat Law Community Committee is committee established by regent/ mayor and consists of Head of Region Secretary as the head; head of unit of government on people empowerment; head of legal department of regency/municipality; head of distict; and head of government unit related to the characteristic of Adat Law Community. and Minister of Home Affair Regulation. Forestry Law orders to recognize indigenous people through regional regulation, but Minister of Home Affair instructs to acknowledge indigenous people by chief of region decision. In order to mitigate the disharmony, Minister of Forestry and Environment issues regulation regarding Forest with Title 30 . This regulation broaden instrument to recognize indigenous community. Recognition towards indigenous community can be conducted through regional law product. Regional law product is legal instrument which expected to accommodate either regional regulation, chief of region decision, or chief of region joint decision.
At this current situation, there are three Drafts of Law regarding indigenous people proposed by House of Representative, Regional Representative Council, and Indonesia Indigenous Community Alliance (AMAN). According to Sumardjono recognition of indigenous people's existence shall identify legal subject; existence of territory as legal object; and existence of authority to conduct legal action. 31 In general, these drafts are similar. They try to recognize indigenous people's right towards territory, natural resources, development, spiritual and culture, and environment. The different is how the procedure to recognize indigenous community whether indigenous community as subject or the object under the control of the community which shall be recognized first.
Right of indigenous people towards natural resources are scattered in natural resources law. Not only Basic Agrarian Law, but also Plantation Law 32 recognizes ulayat right of indigenous people. It is defined as authority of indigenous people to collectively regulate the utilization of land, territory and natural resources because resources in their territory are their source of life and livelihood. Plantation permit on indigenous people's territory can only be issued if there is consensus between the community and Plantation Company.
As mention before, recognized indigenous people have right to manage forest. According to Prevention and Eradication of Forest Destruction Law 33 , indigenous people who has permit to manage forest shall also prevent forest destruction. To prevent and to eradicate forest destruction, the community has right to search and to receive information and to obtain service in searching, receiving, and giving information on allegation of forest destruction and misuse of permit. They also have rights to search and to obtain information on forest management permit issued by regional government; to deliver recommendation and opinion to legal enforcer; and to obtain legal protection in exercising rights and in investigation, inquiry, and court proceeding as informant, witness, or expert.
According to Law regarding Coastal Area and Small Islands Management 34 , utilization of coastal area and small islands, including business on sea surface and water column to bottom of the sea surface, is granted in the form of Right of Coastal Water. Later, Right of Coastal Water is revoked by Constitutional Court. Then, Right of Coastal Water is replaced by Location Permit. Location Permit is permit granted to utilize space of partial coastal water including sea surface and column water to bottom of sea surface in certain area and/or to utilize part of small islands. Persons who utilize space and part of coastal water; and utilize permanent small islands shall have Location Permit as the basic of Management Permit, except indigenous people. Recognized indigenous people is excluded from obligation to have Location Permit in order to utilize their space and resource in coastal area and small islands in their territory. Indigenous people in Papua is distinctly recognized by Law regarding Papua Province Distinct Autonomy 36 . They are defined as native Papua people who born and live in particular area, bound and obey customary law, and have high solidarity between the members. The community has ulayat right and each member has individual right. Ulayat right is communal right of indigenous community towards particular territory as members' livelihood including right to utilize land, forest, water and therein according to law and regulation.
Ulayat right shall be conducted by head of the community according to their customary law by respecting authorization of ex ulayat land which has legally transferred to other party. Procurement of ulayat land or individual land of the community shall be conducted through deliberation to achieve consensus on land transfer and compensation. Government shall actively, fairly, and wisely mediate dispute resolution of ulayat land and ex individual land to achieve satisfying consensus between parties.
Minister of Agrarian and Spatial Planning aware that land right of indigenous people who live in forest or plantation is often disputed; therefore it shall be protected. In 2016, Minister of Agrarian and Spatial Planning issues procedure to stipulate Communal Land Right of indigenous people and community in particular area 37 . Communal right is collective land ownership of indigenous people or collective land ownership granted to community living in forest or plantation. In order to obtain Communal Land Right, indigenous community shall be paguyuban community 38 ; have indigenous government insti- tution; have clear territory boundaries; and have customary law and structure. Community living in forest or plantation shall authorize the land physically at least 10 (ten) years or more consecutively; collect natural product or utilize land directly in forestry or plantation and its surrounding to fulfil daily need; consider forest or plantation as their main source of life and livelihood; and have social and economic activity integrated with forest or plantation. Procedure to obtain Communal Land Right is started from indigenous community request to regent/mayor or governor. Based on the request, regent/mayor or governor shall establish Inventory Team of Control, Ownership, Use, and Utilization over Land (IP4T Team) to identify the existence of indigenous people and their land. IP4T Team will check, identify and verify the document on applicant's land history and authorization. When it is complete, IP4T Team conduct field observation. Based on collected data, IP4T Team shall verify whether there is authorization of land by indigenous people.
If there is land authorization by indigenous people, the team shall analyze under what title the authorized land is. Title of land authorization will determine where to address the report. If the land is under forest area, the report shall be submitted not only to chief of region, but also to Minister of Forestry, cq. Director General on Planology Forestry. Then, Minister of Forestry shall release the forest area and revise utilization and function of forest.
If the land in under Right to Cultivate, the report shall be sent to the head of region and the right holder or any related party regarding the authorization of the land. partial land title which has been authorized by the indigenous people and return it to the state. If the right holder is unwilling to release or to return the land, Head of Regional Land Agency requests cancellation of partial land title to Minister of Agrarian and Spatial Planning. If it is granted, Minister of Agrarian and Spatial Planning issues Decision regarding Cancellation of Right to Cultivate. The land becomes state land and later granted to the community. If it is rejected, Minister of Agrarian and Spatial Planning will return back the document to Head of Regional Land Agency and recommend the right holder to well utilize, use, and maintain the land; and not to create conflict.
Use and utilization of registered Communal Right of indigenous people can be cooperated with third party based on consensus and law. Transfer of indigenous people's Communal Right shall be conducted according to customary law. Susilaningsih differentiates between communal right and ulayat right because ulayat right has wider scope than communal right. 39 Sumardjono explains that ulayat right has broader scope than communal right because ulayat right has public and private character, while communal land right only has private character. 40 Public character of ulayat right authorizes indigenous community to regulate land utilization and to manage relation between the community and the land; while private character of ulayat right is ulayat right as manifestation of collective ownership. 41 By considering this difference, recognizing Communal Right of indigenous people restrict the nature of ulayat right which has public and private character because it only recognized private character of ulayat right, collective ownership.
As mentioned above, ulayat right is traditional right of indigenous people. Recognizing ulayat right of indigenous people is different from granting communal right to community in forest and plantation. The nature of ulayat right recognition is declaratory, while the 39 Tri Susilaningsih, 2018, "Juridical Studies on the Communal Rights of Land according to Agrarian Law in Indonesia", Journal of Law, Policy, and Globalization, Vol. 71, p. 168. 40 Maria S.W. Sumardjono, 2018, Op. Cit., p. 37. 41 Ibid., p. 37-38. nature of granting communal right to community in forest and plantation is constitutive. Recognition of ulayat right is to confirm what already exists, while granting communal right to the community is creating new right which does not exist before. By considering the nature of ulayat rights, Sumardjono says that the government shall only grant communal land right of community living in forest and plantation in order to create new title for their existing land authorization. 42 Traditional rights of indigenous people shall not be given, but it shall be recognized by considering the fact that their rights exist hereditary and traditionally.

C. Court Interpretation on Traditional Right of Indigenous People
Constitutional Court has jurisdiction to review law against the Constitution. Article 18B (2) of the Constitution is often brought by the claimant as legal basis to review natural resources law which allegedly violates traditional right of indigenous people. This article guarantees recognition and protection towards traditional right of indigenous people. Article 18B (2) of the Constitution is brought to challenge Forestry Law.
Forestry Law recognizes traditional indigenous people's property, indigenous forest. According to this law, indigenous forest is state forest located in indigenous people's territory. 43  According to Constitutional Court, either utilizing their territory based on Right to Cultivate Coastal Water for 20 years which extendable or receiving compensation is against the concept of ulayat right. 46 Ulayat right is limitless traditional right because it is enjoyed hereditary. Replacing ulayat right with 20 years permit will confine the application of ulayat right into particular period on time.
Compensation to replace indigenous people's traditional right will deprive hereditary enjoyment of ulayat right. Ulayat right is inherited from the ancestor to be taken care of by current generation and later will be enjoyed by future generation. Each generation has right to live on the planet in no worse condition than did the past generation, to inherit comparable diversity in the cultural and natural resources, and to have just access to the use and advantage of the legacy. 47 Compensation is received only by the community at the time it is given. When compensation is received, future generation loses their chance to enjoy ulayat right. This contradicts to the principle of ulayat right as traditional right which shall be enjoyed hereditary. Considering those reasons, Constitutional Court Decision Number 3/PUU-VIII/2010 dated 9 June 2011 revokes Right to Cultivate Coastal Water regulated in Law regarding Coastal Area and Small Islands Management.
Water Resources Law respects living ulayat right of indigenous people towards water resource which has been recognized by regional regulation. 48 Constitutional Court emphasizes that the nature of indigenous people recognition through regional regulation is not constitutive, but declarative. 49 It is not constitutive recognition because it does not constitute new rights. Declarative recognition is recognition towards fact of existence. 50 The fact that indigenous people exist is recognized by the state through regional regulation. Regional regulation declares recognition towards the existence of indigenous people and their traditional rights. Recognition is to recognize being which exist, not to grant existence. 51 Right of indigenous community towards land and territory is not only contested in Constitutional Court, but also in District Court, High Court, and Supreme Court. Langgam Indigenous Community and Luhak Indigenous Community are indigenous communities living in West Sumatra. Utilization of indigenous people's ulayat land in West Sumatra by private entity has been practiced before either right of indigenous people is recognized by the Constitution in 2000 Vol. 4,No. 2,p. 202 or ulayat land and its utilization are recognized by regional regulation in 2008.
Since 2008, ulayat land and its utilization in West Sumatra is recognized through regional regulation. 52 According to this regulation, ulayat land in West Sumatra consists of Nagari Ulayat Land controlled by Ninik Mamak Kerapatan Adat Nagari; Tribe Ulayat Land owned by head of tribe representing its members; Kaum Ulayat Land owned by Mamak Kepala Waris representing jurai/paruik of its kaum; and Rajo Ulayat Land which owned by eldest man heir of rajo representing members of kaum from matrilineal lineage. According to the regulation, ulayat land of indigenous people can be utilized for private interest. Utilization of ulayat land for private entity's/individual's interest shall be conducted based on Utilization and Cultivation Agreement between the owner/holder/controller of ulayat land and private entity/individual regarding duration of time and profit sharing.
Langgam  55 Right of Indigenous Community towards land and territory is not only recognized in West Sumatra, but also in Papua. Indigenous Community in Papua is recognized and protected by Law regarding Distinct Autonomy. 56 Indigenous people shall be involved in the deliberation of ulayat land procurement to achieve consensus regarding land transfer and compensation. If there is dispute on ulayat land procurement, provincial and regency/municipality government shall actively mediate to settle dispute fairly and wisely.
In 2015 In Jayapura District Court, defendant does not object the proof that plaintiff has lawfully hereditary owned disputed object either based on customary law or national law. Moreover, according to law and regulation, issuance of Certificate of Land Title which initially owned by Indigenous Community shall be based on Letter of Land Title Release witnessed by authorized officers and contains land identity and compensation. 60 Not satisfied with Jayapura High Court Decision, claimant files second appeal to Supreme Court. Unfortunately, it is rejected by reasoning that there is no proof which strengthens claim of plaintiff that disputed land is owned by Afaar Indigenous Community. 61 Both High Court and Supreme Court neglect District Court's proof that Afaar Indigenous Community is proven as legal owner of the disputed land; the tribe has not released the land; and there is no compensation received by the tribe.
Conceptually speaking, judge in codification system of law and customary law has similarity and differences. Either in codification system of law or customary of law, judge decides based on past legal principle; society's condition; and case individuality. 62 The different is that judge in codification legal system shall implement legal principle and norms in codified law, while judge in customary law has more flexibility to include or exclude legal principle in customary law based on situation suitable for each case. 63 Koesno mentions that in customary law, judge made law according to harmony, propriety, and peaceful legal principles in order to settle the dispute and restore the wellness. 64 Above decisions are judge made law according to codified law. Theoretically, judge in codified law shall apply past legal principle in the specific case by considering the society's condition. Constitutional Court has appropriately reviewed law by referring to legal principle to recognize and respect traditional right of indigenous people. Ulayat right is traditional right of indigenous people towards their territory, including land, water, and natural resources therein. Constitutional Court has confirmed that ulayat right is traditional right which shall be enjoyed hereditary; therefore it can not be limited for example by Right to Cultivate Coastal Water for 20 years. Ulayat right is applicable in the jurisdiction of Indigenous People, therefore recognition towards indigenous people as legal subject is prominent. Constitutional Court has confirmed that the nature of recognition towards indigenous people through regional regulation is declaratory.
Unfortunately, District Court, High Court and Supreme Court often did not decide the case by referring to the legal principle to recognize and respect indigenous people in regional regulation and Law. The Courts neglect direct or living control of indigenous people 62 M.M. Djojodigoeno, 1960, Harapan Hukum Adat Indonesia, Badan Penerbit Gadjah Mada, Jogjakarta,p. 29. 63 Sulastriyono andSartika Intaning Pradhani, 2018, "Pemikiran Hukum Adat Djojodigoeno dan Relevansinya Kini", Mimbar Hukum, Vol. 30, No. 5, p. 456. 64 Moh. Koesno, 1979, Catatan-Catatan terhadap Hukum Adat Dewasa Ini, Airlangga University Press, Surabaya, p. 61. towards their land and only focus on formal legal certainty according to Land Certificate. Though right of indigenous people is legally recognized and protected by regional regulation and Law, there is still another challenge to prove their factual control before the Court.

D. Conclusion
Traditional land right of indigenous people, ulayat right, has been recognized since 1960 through Basic Agrarian Law. Unfortunately, recognition of ulayat right is not automatically recognition of indigenous people as legal subject. Failure to recognize indigenous people as legal subject neglects their right to access natural resources because laws, such as Forestry Law, Plantation Law, Prevention and Eradication of Forest Destruction Law, and Coastal Area and Small Islands Management Law, require recognition of indigenous people as basic precondition to access their right. Court has crucial role to interpret traditional rights of indigenous people in specific case by considering society's condition. According to Constitutional Court, living ulayat right in the jurisdiction of indigenous people shall be enjoyed hereditary. It shall not be limited by permit issued by the government. In order to respect traditional right of indigenous people, indigenous people shall be recognized as legal subject through regional law product. The nature of indigenous people recognition is declaratory because it is necessary to confirm their existing rights. Unfortunately, in civil law disputes, District Court, High Court and Supreme Court often neglect traditional rights of indigenous people because the Courts only focus on formal legal proof, Land Certificate, without considering legal history of Land Certificate issuance and living or factual control of indigenous people's towards the disputed object.

Law, Regulation, and Decision
The 1945 Constitution Republic of Indonesia. Law Number 5 of 1960 regarding Basic Agrarian.