IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/ijentr/0202.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Synergy For The Existence Of Customary Forests After The Decision Of The Constitutional Court Number 35/Puu-X/2012 Review Of Law No. 41 Of 1999 Concerning Forestry

Author

Listed:
  • Dewi Sartika

    (FKIP Universitas Graha Nusantara Padangsidimpuan, Indonesia)

  • Yuliandri S

    (Faculty of Law Andalas University Padang, Indonesia)

Abstract

In Law Number 41 of 1999 concerning Forestry, it is stated that customary forest is a state forest located within the territory of customary law communities (MHA). This creates injustice and great loss for MHA. And it is clearly against the constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, the 1945 Constitution. After the Constitutional Court Decision Number 35 / PUU-X / 2012 it was stated that customary forest is forest located in the territory of MHA, and no longer State forest. This is a decision that MHA all over the country have been waiting for. But in reality in the field there are still many customary forests that are still claimed unilaterally by the Government. And it is made worse by the process of conditional recognition of the existence of MHA through a Regional Regulation which is considered very difficult and convoluted. In this regard, the problem discussed in the research is what are the inhibiting factors for returning customary forests to MHA after the Constitutional Court Decision Number 35/PUU-X/2012? This research is a normative legal research. With a statute approach and a historical approach. This study uses secondary data, namely data obtained through primary legal materials as well as secondary legal materials and tertiary legal materials, namely materials that provide instructions for primary legal materials and secondary legal materials. The focus in this qualitative analysis is a study related to the integration of the substance (material) of laws and regulations regarding the synergy of the existence of customary forests after the Constitutional Court Decision. The results of the study show that the inhibiting factors for the return of customary forests are a) Conditional recognition of Article 67 paragraph (2) of the Forestry Law which is considered administratively burdensome to MHA. Although there has been a legal product of regional regulations concerning the recognition of MHA, the return of customary forest cannot be enjoyed automatically. There are still steps as stipulated in Article 4 paragraph (1) and paragraph (3) of the LHK Ministerial Regulation. It is made worse by the absence of budgetary political alignments in the determination of customary forests, a) Differences in perspectives across ministries (sectors). The current sectorial laws are still considered unfair to MHA, b) Another contributing factor is the lack of good will from several local governments.

Suggested Citation

  • Dewi Sartika & Yuliandri S, 2021. "Synergy For The Existence Of Customary Forests After The Decision Of The Constitutional Court Number 35/Puu-X/2012 Review Of Law No. 41 Of 1999 Concerning Forestry," International Journal of Entrepreneurship, Allied Business Academies, vol. 25(4).
  • Handle: RePEc:ris:ijentr:0202
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Synergy; Customary Forest; Constitutional Court Decision 35/PUU-X/ 2012;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:ijentr:0202. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Mouawiya Al Awad (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.abacademies.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.