Sengketa Tanah terhadap kepastian hukum di Sulawesi Selatan pada tahun 2023

Abdil Rahman Zaenal

Abstract


Objective To begin with, the plaintiff is questioned about the contents of his claim. The judge can make a decision with the help of local examination. When it comes to the construction of evidence in civil cases, the duties and responsibilities of local examination of the object of land dispute is an issue that arises. shows that local examination based on Article 153 HIR, Article 180 RBg, and Articles 211-214 Rv as well as SEMA No. 7 of 2001 does not reflect legal certainty because it does not regulate the mechanism of local examination in the field thoroughly, which leads to many interpretations.In addition, it is still ambiguous whether local examination is a means of evidence whose value is left to the judge or whether local examination is only an examination tool or method of obtaining evidence. Research Results and Discussion Local inspection results are a valid source of evidence In civil cases, local examinations have the following legal consequences: (1) court costs if the judge requests a local examination; and (2) the evidentiary power of the local examination. Both of these are legal consequences that need to be clarified in future regulations. elements that need to be clarified in future regulations. Conclusion In civil cases, all cases relating to immovable property are required to ensure legal certainty in the future regulation of local inspection of land.To create legal certainty regarding local inspection, the diversity of this regulation is very important. In order to create legal certainty regarding local examination, diversity of regulation is essential. Regulations regarding local examination should be established at the level of a law so that they have strong legal force against all parties involved in the case, including judges, clerks, and all other parties.


Keywords


Legal Certainty, Land Disputes, South Sulawesi

Full Text:

pdf

References


Babcock, B. A., Massaro, T. M., & Spaulding, N.W. (2021). Civil Procedure: Cases and Problems. Aspen Publishing.

Baihaqi, I. F. (2020). Urgensi Pemeriksaan Setempat (Descente) Dalam Sistem Pembuktian Perkara Permohonan Izin Poligami (Studi Putusan Izin Poligami Pengadilan Agama Tulungagung Tahun (2016-2019). UNIVERSITAS ISLAM NEGERI SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Benu, M. O. (2023). Tinjauan Yuridis Tentang Pemeriksaan Setempat Terhadap Objek Sengketa Tidak Bergerak Sebagai Alat Bukti Dalam Perkara Perdata Di Wilayah Hukum Pengadilan Negeri Oelamasi. Jurnal Hukum Online, 1(4), 77–90.

Gélinas, F., Camion, C., Bates, K., Anstis, S.,Piché, C., Khan, M., & Grant, E. (2015). Foundations of civil justice. Springer.

Glynn, A. N., & Sen, M. (2015). Identifying judicial empathy: does having daughters cause judges to rule for women’s issues? American Journal of Political Science, 59(1), 37–54.

Guest, J. W. (2017). Justice as Lawfulness and Equity as a Virtue in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics. The Review of Politics, 79(1), 1–22.

Hamidi, J. (2006). Makna dan Kedudukan Hukum Naskah Proklamasi 17 Agustus 1945 dalam Sistem Ketatanegaraan Republik Indonesia. Risalah Hukum, 68–86.

Harahap, M. Y. (2017). Hukum acara perdata:tentang gugatan, persidangan, penyitaan, pembuktian, dan putusan pengadilan. Sinar Grafika.

Huneeus, A. (2013). International criminal law by other means: the quasi-criminal jurisdiction of the Human Rights Courts. American Journal of International Law, 107(1), 1–44.

Ibrahim, A.-S., Abubakari, M., Akanbang, B. A. A., & Kepe, T. (2022). Resolving land conflicts through alternative dispute resolution: Exploring the motivations and challenges in Ghana. Land Use Policy, 120, 106272.

Law, D. S. (2017). The anatomy of a conservative court: judicial review in Japan. In Public Law in East Asia (pp. 3–44). Routledge. Mappasessu, M. (2023). Penerapan Teori Pembuktian dalam Sengketa Milik Tanah Agar Putusan Makin Efektif. Jurnal Pendidikan Tambusai, 7(2), 18891–18901.

Marzuki, P. M. (2016). Legal Research Revised Edition (12th Printing). Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.

Moeliono, A. M. (1990). Kamus besar Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Balai Pustaka.

Panjaitan, D. S., & Puryanto, P. (2022). Penyelesaian Sengketa Pelayanan Publik Oleh Lembaga Ombudsman Republik Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah Ekotrans & Erudisi, 2(1), 88– 96.

Robertson, B., Vignaux, G. A., & Berger, C. E. H. (2016). Interpreting evidence: evaluating forensic science in the courtroom. John Wiley & Sons.

Rosalina, M. (2018). Pengaturan pemeriksaan setempat (Decentee) dalam peraturan perundang-undangan di Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Kaidah: Media Komunikasi Dan Informasi Hukum Dan Masyarakat, 18(1), 1–10.

Scoones, I. (2013). Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. In Critical perspectives in rural development studies (pp. 159–184). Routledge.

Wiggins, D. (2013). Claims of need. In Morality and Objectivity (Routledge Revivals) (pp. 149–202). Routledge.

Wignjosoebroto, S. (2013). Hukum Konsep dan Metode.

Wixted, J. T., & Wells, G. L. (2017). The relationship between eyewitness confidence and identification accuracy: A new synthesis. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 18(1), 10–65.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.31293/lg.v9i2.8185

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 LEGALITAS : Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Hukum