| dc.description.abstract | Land ulayat or Golat in the customary law community of Batak Toba
refers to communal land collectively controlled by the descendants of the village
(huta) founder, holding significant economic, social, and spiritual value for the
survival and identity of the clan. In the era of increasingly rapid national
development, the existence of customary land rights faces various challenges,
including conflicts with infrastructure development and other economic interests.
This research aims to analyze the position of the village head in the land ulayat
(Golat) control system of Batak custom, the inheritance system of land ulayat
(Golat) in land ownership based on Batak customary law, and the analysis of
judges' considerations in providing legal protection for land ulayat (Golat) of the
Batak customary community based on Supreme Court Decision Number 529
PK/Pdt/2020.
This research is a normative juridical legal research that is descriptive in
nature. The data used are primary and secondary data with data collection
techniques through literature study and interviews as supporting data, then
qualitative data analysis was conducted.
The research results show that the Village Head in the Batak customary
land ulayat control system is positioned as a liaison between the customary law
system and the state law system, with administrative authority to provide written
statements, facilitate data collection and mapping of land ulayat, as well as
preventive and responsive responsibilities in preventing violations and resolving
disputes through customary deliberation, but not as the owner because land
ulayat remains communal property of the customary law community. The land
ulayat inheritance system in Batak customary law adheres to the patrilineal
principle that bequeaths land to male children as successors of the clan. The
judges' considerations in Supreme Court Decision Number 529 PK/Pdt/2020,
which upheld the granting of the unlawful act lawsuit, contain fundamental
weaknesses because they erroneously interpreted land ulayat as exclusive
property of one lineage, ignored the 1994 and 2013 clan agreements that stated
the equality of the four children of Toga Gultom, qualified the construction of a
monument to honor ancestors as an unlawful act when it is actually a cultural
right guaranteed by customary law, ignored previous decisions that had obtained
permanent legal force, and insufficiently encouraged resolution through
customary deliberation, thus failing to provide substantive justice and potentially
sharpening internal conflicts within the clan | en_US |
