Juridical Analysis of Strengthening the Decision of the Administrative Court by PT TUN Jakarta in the Dispute Over the Cancellation of HGB Certificate No. 1444/Kebon Kelapa (Decision Study Number 243/B/2025/PT.TUN.JKT)

Rilawadi Sahputra

doi:10.59712/iaml.v4i4.142

Authors

Rilawadi Sahputra Universitas Dharmawangsa

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59712/iaml.v4i4.142

Keywords:

Administrative Order, Land Disputes, Lawsuit Grace Period

Abstract

This study examines the juridical basis of The Jakarta High Administrative Court (PT TUN) in strengthening the decision of the Jakarta Administrative Court related to the dispute over the cancellation of the building rights certificate (HGB) No. 1444 / Kebon Kelapa issued by the Land Office of the city administration of Central Jakarta. The dispute is filed by the plaintiff on the pretext that the certificate is legally flawed both procedurally and substantially, so it must be declared null and void. In addition to the head of the Central Jakarta Land Office as a defendant, PT Multi Aneka Sarana also serves as defendant II intervention because it is the right holder of the HGB.The Jakarta Administrative Court in the first instance decision stated that the niet Ontvankelijk lawsuit (unacceptable) was filed after passing the 90-day grace period as determined by Article 55 of Law Number 5 of 1986 on Administrative Justice. The panel of judges considered that the plaintiff should have known the existence and validity of the certificate long before filing the lawsuit, considering that the certificate had been issued since 1989 and the land object had been controlled and utilized by the HGB holder. This decision was then re-examined at the appeal level and upheld by PT TUN Jakarta through Decision number 243/B/2025/PT.TUN.JKT.Through normative legal research methods with a statutory approach, conceptual approach, and case approach, this study found that PT TUN consistently applied the principle of termijn vervallen, which is a doctrine that states that a lawsuit filed after the passage of a mandatory grace period is otherwise unacceptable without examining the subject matter of the case. The application of this principle confirms that the provisions of the grace period in the Tun procedural law are limited and binding, so ignoring them will damage legal certainty.In addition, the study found that the reasons for the delay in filing a lawsuit put forward by the plaintiff did not meet the qualification of “justifiable juridical reasons,” based on both doctrine and judicial practice. Therefore, the consideration of PT TUN Jakarta that strengthens the PTUN decision is not only in line with positive legal norms, but also strengthens the principles of administrative order, protection for land rights holders, and stability of the National Land system.PT TUN's assertion is important to prevent misuse of certificate cancellation claims filed after a very long period of time, as well as to ensure that land administration is not constantly in a state of uncertainty. Thus, this ruling contributes to the harmonization of TUN judicial practice and provides jurisprudential guidelines for the future handling of land disputes.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Ariman Sitompul, 2023, Alternative Dispute Resolution Criminal Acts Of Money Politics In Elections In View Of Normative Law, International Asia Of Law and Money Laundering . Vol. 2, No. 1

Ariman Sitompul, Sabela Gayo (2023) Mediasi Perkara Pidana di Indonesia, Mazda Media, Malang, 1-190 https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=id&user=o6ripa8AAAAJ&cstart=20&pagesize=80&citation_for_view=o6ripa8AAAAJ:M3NEmzRMIkIC

Boedi Harsono. “Hukum Agraria Indonesia.” Edisi Lengkap, Jakarta: Djambatan.

Budi Santoso. “Penyelesaian Sengketa Tanah melalui Peradilan Administrasi.” Jurnal Yudisial.

H.D. Van Wijk & Willem Konijnenbelt. “Hoofdstukken van Administratief Recht.” (edisi terjemahan).

Hadjon, Philipus M. “Perlindungan Hukum bagi Rakyat di Indonesia.” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan.

Indroharto. “Usaha Memahami Hukum Tata Usaha Negara Indonesia (Buku I–III).” Jakarta: Pustaka Sinar Harapan.

Ismail Suny. “Hukum Administrasi Modern.” Jakarta: UI Press.

J. Wahyudi. “Doktrin Termijn Vervallen dalam Hukum Acara PTUN.” Majalah Hukum Nasional.

Jimly Asshiddiqie. “Pengantar Ilmu Hukum Administrasi Negara.” Jakarta: RajaGrafindo.

L.M. Simanjuntak. “Keabsahan Sertipikat Tanah dalam Perspektif Administrasi Pertanahan.” Jurnal Agraria dan Pertanahan.

Maria S.W. Sumardjono. “Kebijakan Pertanahan.” Yogyakarta: Kompas & UGM Press.

Maria S.W. Sumardjono. “Prinsip Kepastian Hukum dalam Pendaftaran Tanah.” Jurnal Mimbar Hukum.

Maswandi, A. S. (2024). Metode Penelitian Hukum Normatif (Mekanisme Dalam Penulisan Ilmiah), Mazda Media, Malang.

Muchsan. “Sistem Pengawasan Administrasi Negara.” Yogyakarta: Liberty.

Paulus Effendi Lotulung. “Hukum Tata Usaha Negara dan Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara.” Jakarta: Salemba Humanika.

Peraturan Menteri ATR/BPN Nomor 11 Tahun 2016 tentang Penyelesaian Kasus Pertanahan.

Peraturan Menteri ATR/BPN Nomor 3 Tahun 1997 tentang Ketentuan Pelaksanaan PP No. 24 Tahun 1997.

Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 24 Tahun 1997 tentang Pendaftaran Tanah.

Philipus M. Hadjon. “Pengantar Hukum Administrasi Indonesia.” Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.

Putusan Mahkamah Agung RI yang menegaskan doktrin termijn vervallen dalam sengketa administrasi.

Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Tata Usaha Negara Jakarta Nomor 243/B/2025/PT.TUN.JKT.

Putusan PTUN Jakarta terkait sengketa pembatalan Sertipikat HGB No. 1444/Kebon Kelapa.

Ridwan HR. “Hukum Administrasi Negara.” Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada.

S.F. Marbun. “Implementasi Tenggang Waktu Gugatan PTUN dan Kepastian Hukum.” Jurnal Hukum Administrasi Negara.

SF Marbun. “Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara dan Sengketa Administrasi Pemerintahan.” Yogyakarta: FH UII Press.

Sitompul, A. (2023). Kebijakan Kriminal Dalam Sistem Peradilan Serta Penanggulangan Kejahatan di Indonesia.

Sitompul, A., Gayo, S., & Mary, D. (2024). Mediation in the Settlement of Inheritance and Joint Property Matters in the Medan Religious Court. International Asia Of Law and Money Laundering (IAML), 3(2), 34-39.

-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1986 tentang Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara.

Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan.

Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1960 tentang Peraturan Dasar Pokok-Pokok Agraria (UUPA).

Undang-Undang Nomor 51 Tahun 2009 tentang Perubahan Kedua atas UU No. 5 Tahun 1986 tentang PTUN.

Undang-Undang Nomor 9 Tahun 2004 tentang Perubahan atas UU No. 5 Tahun 1986 tentang PTUN.

Yance Arizona. “Sengketa Pertanahan dan Peran Peradilan Administrasi.” Jurnal RechtsVinding.

Yurisprudensi Mahkamah Agung tentang tenggang waktu gugatan PTUN (berbagai putusan relevan).