Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami Agus Sahbani, Robert Sidauruk
Constitutional Court (MK) has partially granted the petition for judicial review of Law No. 41 of 1999 on Forestry (Forestry Law). The petition was filed by the Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara (AMAN) and two customary communities (masyarakat adat), namely Kanegerian Kuntu and Kasepuhan Cisitu.
The decision will change the status of million hectares of customary forest, which previously was owned by the state. MK revoked the word “state” from Article 1 (6) of Forestry Law that has made the customary forest or hutan adat, as part of state forest. According to MK, there should be a differentiation between state forest and customary forest.
In regards to state forest, the state has absolute authority in regulating and utilizing it. Meanwhile, in customary forest, the state has limited authority pursuant to the recognized customary rights.
“Customary communities must have rights to possess and utilize their customary forest for their personal and family needs. Customary rights cannot be abolished provided they are in accordance with the Constitution,” said M. Alim, MK judge, Thursday (16/5).
Furthermore, MK divided forest areas into two types: state forest and allocated forest areas (hutan hak). Forests can be allocated to customary communities or corporations.
“Therefore, by this categorization, state forest cannot be located within the area of non-state forest and vice versa,” Alim added.
Abdon Nababan, General Secretary of AMAN, appreciated MK’s decision because it sets out to protect rights of customary communities.
Prior to the decision, the state had absolute authority of the customary forest and sometimes it would license corporate use of customary forests, thus leading to conflict with the communities.
“Now, customary communities hold the right over their forests,” he confirmed.
However, Abdon urged the Government to issue an implementing regulation for this decision to set out the legal basis and procedure for customary communities to use the forest.
“Further stipulation by the Government is needed to decide the exact location of customary forest and state forest,” he concluded.
(hot/jt)
Agus Sahbani, Robert Sidauruk
Constitutional Court (MK) has partially granted the petition for judicial review of Law No. 41 of 1999 on Forestry (Forestry Law). The petition was filed by the Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara (AMAN) and two customary communities (masyarakat adat), namely Kanegerian Kuntu and Kasepuhan Cisitu.
The decision will change the status of million hectares of customary forest, which previously was owned by the state. MK revoked the word “state” from Article 1 (6) of Forestry Law that has made the customary forest or hutan adat, as part of state forest. According to MK, there should be a differentiation between state forest and customary forest.
In regards to state forest, the state has absolute authority in regulating and utilizing it. Meanwhile, in customary forest, the state has limited authority pursuant to the recognized customary rights.
“Customary communities must have rights to possess and utilize their customary forest for their personal and family needs. Customary rights cannot be abolished provided they are in accordance with the Constitution,” said M. Alim, MK judge, Thursday (16/5).
Furthermore, MK divided forest areas into two types: state forest and allocated forest areas (hutan hak). Forests can be allocated to customary communities or corporations.
“Therefore, by this categorization, state forest cannot be located within the area of non-state forest and vice versa,” Alim added.
Abdon Nababan, General Secretary of AMAN, appreciated MK’s decision because it sets out to protect rights of customary communities.
Prior to the decision, the state had absolute authority of the customary forest and sometimes it would license corporate use of customary forests, thus leading to conflict with the communities.
“Now, customary communities hold the right over their forests,” he confirmed.
However, Abdon urged the Government to issue an implementing regulation for this decision to set out the legal basis and procedure for customary communities to use the forest.
“Further stipulation by the Government is needed to decide the exact location of customary forest and state forest,” he concluded.
(hot/jt)