Different Legal Origins, Equal Evidentiary Force: A Comparative Study of Redistribution and Sale-Based Land Certificates in Indonesia

Nurbaedah Nurbaedah

Abstract

In the unified land registration system of Indonesia, the land title certificates are the primary evidence of ownership. Certificates issued through land redistribution and private sale have the same legal validity under the same registration framework, but their different legal origins present unsolved concerns of legal certainty, property rights, and agrarian justice. There is a large body of literature on land redistribution, land markets, and tenure security in Vietnam, China, and the Philippines, but little research on how different acquisition mechanisms affect the evidentiary character of land certificates in a single registration system. This study aims to fill such a gap by legal research using statutory, conceptual, and comparative methods. The results show that redistribution and sale-based certificates have the same evidentiary strength as strong but rebuttable proof of ownership under Indonesian land law. But they vary considerably in terms of legal origin, transferability, administrative constraints, and policy purposes. The market-oriented certificates are meant to expedite the process of property sales, while the redistribution certificates have temporary transfer restrictions to maintain the aims of agrarian reform.The findings position Indonesia within the global debate on balancing market efficiency and social justice in land governance. This study claims that Indonesia's unified land registration system demonstrates how certificates with equal legal validity can embody different property rights while promoting legal certainty, equitable land distribution, and sustainable land governance

Keywords

Agrarian Reform ; Land Certificates; Legal Certainty; Redistribution.

References

Afif Mahfud, M., & Chin, S. C. (2024). Incongruence in the Definition of Land Rights in National Agrarian Law: A Path to Legal Uncertainty. Law Reform: Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum, 20(1), 22–33. https://doi.org/10.14710/lr.v20i1.49047

Anrova, Y., Suparman, E., & Kusmayanti, H. (2021). Proof Power of Authentic Deed Transfer of Land Rights in Legal Perspective of Civil Procedures. Jurnal Hukum Novelty, 12(2), 237–247. https://doi.org/10.26555/novelty.v12i2.a18604

Arribas, G. (2024). Property without law?Why land titling and adverse possession do not solve the problem of informal property. Iberoamerican Journal of Development Studies, 13(1), 188–210. https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_ried/ijds.908

Chimhowu, A., & Woodhouse, P. (2005). Vernacular land markets and the changing face of customary land tenure in Africa. Forum for Development Studies, 32(2), 385–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/08039410.2005.9666321

Chimhowu, A., & Woodhouse, P. (2006). Customary vs private property rights? Dynamics and trajectories of vernacular land markets in sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Agrarian Change, 6(3), 346–371. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0366.2006.00125.x

Chimhowu, A., & Woodhouse, P. (2010). Forbidden but not suppressed: A “vernacular” land market in svosve communal lands, Zimbabwe. Africa, 80(1), 14–35. https://doi.org/10.3366/E0001972009001247

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Dagdeviren, H., & Oosterbaan, L. (2022). Gender differences in effective use of land rights in South India. Land Use Policy, 119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106212

Deininger, K., & Jin, S. (2008). Land sales and rental markets in transition: Evidence from rural Vietnam. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 70(1), 67–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2007.00484.x

Deininger, K., Jin, S., & Nagarajan, H. K. (2009). Land reforms, poverty reduction, and economic growth: Evidence from India. Journal of Development Studies, 45(4), 496–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380902725670

Dimitruk, K., Du Plessis, S., & Du Plessis, S. (2021). De jure property rights and state capacity: Evidence from land specification in the Boer Republics. Journal of Institutional Economics, 17(5), 764–780. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137421000266

Dy, K. B., & Chau, K. W. (2023). Compulsory land redistribution from the perspective of the theory of price control. Land Use Policy, 131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106726

Fittschen, G. (1998). Methodik der Gesetzesauslegung. Carl Heymanns Verlag.

Graziadei, M. (2006). Comparative law as the study of transplants and receptions BT - The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law. Oxford University Press.

Graziadei, M, & Smith, L. (2017). Comparative property law: Global perspectives. In Comparative Property Law: Global Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781785369162

Graziadei, Michele. (2021). What Does Globalisation Mean for the Comparative Study of Law? J. Comp. L., 16, 511.

Grinlinton, D. (2023). The intersection of property rights and environmental law#. Environmental Law Review, 25(3), 202–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614529231193804

Harris, C., Cai, M., Murtazashvili, I., & Murtazashvili, J. B. (2020). Elements in Austrian Economics: The Origins and Consequences of Property Rights: Austrian, Public Choice, and Institutional Economics Perspectives. In Elements in Austrian Economics: The Origins and Consequences of Property Rights: Austrian, Public Choice, and Institutional Economics Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108979122

Ho, S., Tanyag, M., & Scalise, E. (2023). Women’s land rights, gendered epistemic tensions, and the need for a feminist approach to land administration. Land Use Policy, 132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106841

Isaksson, A.-S. (2015). Unequal Property Rights: A Study of Land Right Inequalities in Rwanda. Oxford Development Studies, 43(1), 60–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600818.2014.955466

Kimura, S., Otsuka, K., Sonobe, T., & Rozelle, S. (2011). Efficiency of land allocation through tenancy markets: Evidence from China. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 59(3), 485–510. https://doi.org/10.1086/649639

Levi, M., & Russell, E. (2025). Property Righting: The Politics of Rights Over Land and Labor. Annual Review of Political Science, 28(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-033123-021046

Li, L., Gao, H., Song, B., & Cui, C. (2024). How to Use Evidence Rules Reasonably to Resolve Land Disputes: Analysis of Typical Land Dispute Cases from China. Land, 13(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/land13081187

Marzuki, M. (2017). Penelitian Hukum: Edisi Revisi. Prenada Media.

NWAECHEFU, H., ADELEKE, V. A., & OMIDIJI, T. (2024). ADDRESSING THE IMPEDIMENTS TO THE PERFECTION OF LAND TITLE IN NIGERIA: A COMPARATIVE DISCOURSE WITH ENGLAND. African Journal of International and Comparative Law, 32(4), 543–557. https://doi.org/10.3366/ajicl.2024.0504

Peters, P. E. (2004). Inequality and social conflict over land in Africa. Journal of Agrarian Change, 4(3), 269–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0366.2004.00080.x

Platteau, J.-P. (1996). The evolutionary theory of land rights as applied to sub-saharan Africa: A critical assessment. Development and Change, 27(1), 29–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.1996.tb00578.x

Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2017). Penelitian Hukum Normatif: Suatu Tinjauan Singkat. Rajawali Pers.

Van Hoecke, M. (2011). Methodologies of Legal Research: What Kind of Method for What Kind of Discipline? Hart Publishing.

Whitehead, A., & Tsikata, D. (2003). Policy discourses on women’s land rights in sub-Saharan Africa: The implications of the re-turn to the customary. Journal of Agrarian Change, 3(1–2), 67–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0366.00051

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v15i1.109908

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.