Pergeseran Hak Atas Tanah-Tanah Komunal Masyarakat Hukum Adat Oleh Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Berdasarakan Undang-undang Nomor 86 Tahun 1958 Tentang Nasionalisasi Perusahaan Belanda (Studi Terhadap Tanah-tanah Eks Konsesi Kesultanan Deli di Areal PTPN II (Persero) Tanjung Morawa)

Abstract

Law No. 86 of 1958 on the Nationalization of the Dutch-owned Enterprises, by substance, was fully discriminatory. It was only applied upon the Dutch-owned enterprises and not upon other foreign enterprises. The said nationalization had been in the form of the transfer of foreign-owned rights by force into to the hands of the State, in the name of law. The neglect by means of the principles of law and the doctrines of a legal State can potentially be revoked through a judicial review by Constitutional Court of Republic of Indonesia. The enactment of this law has caused an emergence of juridical consequence against the existence of the Sultanate of Deli, as well as of the civil rights of indigenous people of Deli. The position of Sultan Deli, as the holder of the civil rights over communal land of the indigenous people of Deli and the land under his reign of power, has been blindly negated. Important to note, long before Indonesia's Independence, most of the said land was reported to have been put into a concession to the later known as the Dutch-owned enterprises, which was made based on concession agreement. Much worse, the expropriation of the Dutch-own enterprises by the state should have been done merely and only for the assets, however, in practice, it is going over than it should be - namely seizing the said indigenous land, which is of communal land of Deli to be almost all included along with the so called the nationalization. This has not only been all the root-cause of implication over the juridical aspects, but also the social conflict, as a result of the incorrect and wrong law enforcement. This research is meant to reveal 3 (three) main important problems, namely: a. what was the situation like of the civil rights over the customary land of indigenous people of Deli before the formal enactment of the nationalization law, b. Has the enactment of the nationalization law been something of an acceptable practice, most especially context of the ex-concession land of indigenous Deli, and c. What has been the impact arising from the enactment of the said law with regard to legal norms and its related subjects and objects. This research uses a combined method of normative juridical, sociological empirical and history method in order to obtain comprehensive data as an effort to find out something new. This research has resulted in the following outputs, namely: a. the situation of civil rights over the communal land of Deli, short after Indonesia's Independence, was still under the reign of the Sultan. However, due to the emerging social conflicts, there had been a rampant land occupation happening so massively done by the people that led the government to downsizing the area coverage of plantation concession by means of issuing various impending regulation. As a result, either the existing concession land and the land whose concession has been fully over to be downsized in width from 25,000 to 125,000 hectares and the latest width to be only 59,000 hectares wide. This all culminated when the nationalization law was enacted in 1958, in which time the government nationalized all of the Dutch-owned enterprises, including almost all concession lands belonging to the Sultanate of Deli. This situation has caused the Sultan Deli and the customary people of Deli to be deprived of their civil rights as well as their primordial rights over the concession land. The incorrect enactment of law that is due to the neglect of the principles of agreement rules to have caused the emergence of chaos in the area of agrarian laws; the emerging protests launched by the Sultanate of Deli along with various elements of customary people; as well as the emergence of various brutal and inhumane cases with regard to the transfer of rights of concession land such as the annexation by other institutions; bad divestment leading to criminalization and various different inconsistent decision-making and other structural transfer of rights.