Publication Search

Indonesia, as a rule-of-law state (rechstaat), regulates the life of the nation and state based on law, as reflected in the provisions of civil law that govern relationships between individuals, including matters of inheritance. Inheritance distribution in Indonesia follows various legal systems, such as Islamic inheritance law, civil inheritance law, and customary law, each with different principles and rules. Inherited assets include a wide range of properties, such as movable and immovable assets, property rights, debts, money, businesses, and wills. In practice, the distribution of inheritance in Indonesia often involves an administrative process requiring a Certificate of Inheritance Rights (Surat Keterangan Hak Waris or SKHW) to verify who is entitled to inherit and the share each heir is entitled to receive. This study aims to educate the public, particularly customers of Bank Rakyat Indonesia, about inheritance law and the procedures involved. Additionally, the research highlights the crucial role of notaries as Land Deed Officials (Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah, PPAT) in the legalisation of inheritance ownership, particularly concerning the management of land certificates and other legal documents. Through community service conducted at the Bank Rakyat Indonesia (BRI) branch in Central Semarang, this study educates the public on inheritance rights and the role of notaries in ensuring the legal validity of inheritance distribution in accordance with applicable laws. Indonesia's plural inheritance law system provides flexibility in choosing the applicable legal system, whether Islamic law, civil law, or customary law. In the case of disputes, notaries play a role in resolving conflicts by creating peace agreements, cancellation deeds, or waivers of claim deeds. This study is expected to help the public better understand inheritance law and the role of notaries in ensuring that inheritance rights are distributed fairly and legally in accordance with the prevailing laws.

Land ownership disputes are a common issue in Indonesia, particularly considering that land is a highly valuable asset for the community. Conflicts related to land ownership not only impact individuals but can also trigger disputes involving communities and families. The Certificate of Ownership Rights (SHM) serves as legal proof of land ownership and plays a crucial role in resolving disputes. This study aims to analyze the evidentiary strength of SHM in resolving land disputes in Bondowoso Regency. By using normative legal research methods, this study explores the role of SHM within the context of Indonesia's positive law and how this certificate is applied in dispute cases. The findings indicate that SHM possesses strong evidentiary power in resolving land disputes, provided its validity is recognized and supported by effective law enforcement.

This article analyzes the responsibilities of the National Land Agency (BPN) and Land Deed Officials (PPAT) regarding title certificates for land subject to ownership disputes. The research method used is normative legal research with statutory, conceptual and case approaches. Based on the case studied, the legal owner of the land, Ansar Lause, filed a lawsuit because the land certificate was changed to be in the name of Ratna Lause illegally. After the trial process, the court decided to partially grant Ansar Lause's lawsuit and stated that the certificate in the name of Afandi Surya Ningrat had no binding legal force. The research results show that the legal impact on BPN of canceling property rights certificates by the court based on a decision is that BPN can be subject to administrative sanctions in the form of a written warning, temporary dismissal, honorable dismissal, or dishonorable dismissal; and a Notary/PPAT who is subject to the cancellation of a certificate of ownership by a court based on a decision is that the Notary/PPAT may be subject to administrative sanctions in the form of a written warning, temporary dismissal, honorable dismissal, or dishonorable dismissal; and the form of BPN accountability, this responsibility can be in the form of administrative improvements, review of the certificate issuance process, as well as protection of the rights of parties who suffer losses due to administrative errors and PPAT/Notary for property rights certificates that have been canceled by the court. PPAT/Notary can be held civilly responsible. , criminal, and administrative.

Land ownership was part of the civil rights, and the state gave legal evidence to probed peoples with land certificates. Inaccuracies in the making of the land papers/certificates could be due to deliberate or fraud (fraud) and/or coercion (dwang) in the making of the physical or legal data recorded on the land list. Hence, the certificate given may be invalid. The purpose of this research is to 1. Analyzing how the settling of the overlapping land-ownership disputes led to a dual certificate. 2.  BPN responsibility analysis and legal protection methods in the making of double certificates. The study is conducted using a methodological study of prescriptive law and a field investigation approach. The land dispute was a dispute between two or more persons to retain a legal property rights against each person or group to maintain an interest in the same land or item inside or above the ground.