Analisis Yuridis Penyelesaian Sengketa Kepemilikan Tanah berdasarkan Bukti Sertifikat di Pengadilan Negeri Kabupaten Probolinggo (Studi Kasus Perkara Nomor 10/Pdt.G/2023/PN Pbl) Juridical Analysis of Land Ownership Dispute Resolution Based on Certificate Evidence at the District Court of Probolinggo Regency (Case Study of Case Number 10/Pdt.G/2023/PN Pbl)
Article Sidebar
Page Numbers:
763-775
Digital Object Identifier:
10.58578/ahkam.v4i3.6681
Viewed: 282 times
Downloaded: 212 times
LYAS Publisher cordially invites qualified professionals to serve as Editors or Reviewers. Your expertise will make an important contribution to maintaining and strengthening the academic quality of our publications. Interested applicants are kindly requested to complete the application form at the following link: Editors & Reviewers
Please feel free to contact us if you need any further information about the submission process or if you have any additional questions.
Authors:Moh. Samsul Aji1*, Herdi Pratama Susantyo2
Copyright :Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication.
Main Article Content
Abstract
Land ownership disputes involving dual certificates represent a serious issue within Indonesia’s land administration system, as they directly impact legal certainty and the resolution of agrarian conflicts. This study aims to analyze the application of law in resolving land ownership disputes based on certificate evidence and to examine the judicial considerations in Decision Number 10/Pdt.G/2023/PN Pbl at the Probolinggo District Court. The research employs a normative juridical method with a case study approach. Data were obtained through literature review and analyzed using qualitative juridical analysis. The findings reveal that the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff as the rightful owner of the disputed land, based on legally valid evidence including a land ownership certificate and a legitimate deed of sale and purchase. The panel of judges considered administrative negligence and indications of bad faith in the issuance process of the second certificate. These findings affirm that land certificates serve as the primary legal evidence in guaranteeing land ownership certainty and highlight the importance of meticulous administrative practices by the National Land Agency (BPN). The study concludes that improving land administration systems and strengthening oversight of certificate issuance are strategic steps to prevent certificate overlaps. The implications of this study include theoretical contributions to the development of agrarian law scholarship and practical recommendations for BPN and the judiciary to enhance accountability and integrity in the land registration system. Future research is recommended to assess the effectiveness of implementing electronic land certificates (e-Certificates) in reducing land disputes.
Citation Metrics:
Downloads
Citation Metrics & Similar Scopus Articles
-
Couto M. (2026)Exploiting topic analysis models to explore psychological dimensions in social media dataScientific Reports, 16(1)
-
Ricaldi Echevarria M.L. (2026)Educational inequalities in academic performance in secondary education in Peru: a multilevel analysisPraxis Educativa, 21
-
García Sarria J.J. (2026)The gap in scientific production between Andean countries: A longitudinal analysis of publications in Scopus (2000-2024)Iberoamerican Journal of Science Measurement and Communication, 6(1)
Article Details
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
References
Abdullah, R. (2024). Meningkatkan kinerja pelayanan publik: Sistem tata kelola pendaftaran tanah. Jurnal Hukum dan Administrasi Negara, 2, 584–594.
Aini, Q., Ramadhani, R., Kamilah, A., Mulyana, A., & Yulianah, Y. (2025). Harmonisasi hukum negara dan norma adat: Analisis sosiologis atas penyelesaian sengketa tanah adat di Indonesia. Journal of Contemporary Law Studies, 2(3), 209–222. https://doi.org/10.47134/lawstudies.v2i3.3363209
Arifin, F. (2024). Optimalisasi upaya administratif penyelesaian. Jurnal Yustisi: Jurnal Hukum dan Hukum Islam, 11(3), 461–475.
Assidiqih, G., & Susilowati, I. F. (2021). Tinjauan yuridis sertifikat tanah elektronik sebagai alat bukti kepemilikan tanah di Indonesia. Novum: Jurnal Hukum, 2(1), 57–72.
Dahlan, M., Karadona, R. I., & Ismail, I. (2025). Efektivitas LKBH Maros sebagai mediator dan advokat dalam penyelesaian sengketa tanah masyarakat Kabupaten Maros. Participatory: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat, 4(1), 38–59. https://doi.org/10.58518/participatory.v4i1.3472
Fahrani, A., Djaja, B., & Sudirman, M. (2023). Kepastian hukum terhadap pemegang hak milik atas tanah atas penerbitan sertifikat ganda. UNES Law Review, 6(1), 3507–3515. https://www.review-unes.com/index.php/law/article/view/1122
Gea, P. P. P. T., Ariqah, N., & Pitang, G. R. (2024). Perspektif yuridis atas kasus Gregorius Ronald Tannur: Menelusuri keberlakuan hukum dalam berkeadilan melalui peradilan. Jurnal Kewarganegaraan, 8(2), 1506–1513. https://journal.upy.ac.id/index.php/pkn/article/view/5998
Harini, M., & Rahmat, D. (2025). Peran hakim pada proses penemuan hukum sebagai upaya penegakan keadilan berdasarkan kode etik hakim. Journal Evidence of Law, 4(1), 207–230. https://doi.org/10.59066/jel.v4i1.1097
Kadri, M. F., & Mukti, H. (2025). Pembatalan sertipikat hak atas tanah: Tinjauan atas Peraturan Menteri Agraria Nomor 21 Tahun 2020. International Journal of Politic, Public Policy and Environmental Issues, 5(1), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.53622/ij3pei.v5i1.379
Mariana, S. (2020). Peran Badan Pertanahan Nasional dalam sistem pertanahan nasional. Jurnal Hukum Agraria, 17(2), 241–260.
Nurhikmah, Hafidz, M., & Arief, A. (2022). Perlindungan hukum bagi pemilik sertifikat hak atas tanah yang menjadi objek sengketa. Journal of Lex Theory, 1(31), 82–98. http://download.garuda.kemdikbud.go.id/article.php?article=2906157
Pangidoan, D., Franciska, W., & Hutomo, P. (2022). Analisis yuridis dalam penyelesaian sengketa sertipikat ganda hak atas tanah di pengadilan negeri. Seikat: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Politik dan Hukum, 1(2), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.55681/seikat.v1i2.246
Panjaitan, J. G. (2019). Analisis yuridis upah pekerja dalam proses pemutusan hubungan kerja berdasarkan putusan hakim. Jurnal Hukum Perburuhan, 44(1), 121–147.
Ramadhan, A. N. V. A. W. R. A. D. Z. (2023). Pengaruh tindak kejahatan mafia tanah terhadap konflik dan sengketa pertanahan: Optimalisasi kebijakan pertanahan elektronik dalam pembuatan akta peralihan hak atas tanah. Jurnal Hukum Nusantara, 1(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.11111/nusantara.xxxxxxx
Ramadhan, A. N. V. A. W. R. A. D. Z. (2025). Pembaharuan hukum agraria dan perlindungan hak-hak masyarakat hukum adat. Locus Journal of Academic Literature Review, 4(2), 52–60.
Riyadi, S. (2025). Tinjauan yuridis atas upaya pemulihan hak pemegang SHM bertumpang tindih: Kasus Putusan PN Cikarang Nomor: 285/Pdt.G/2023. Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Dirgantara, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.35968/jihd.v15i2.1531
Rosidi, A., Zainuddin, M., & Arifiana, I. (2024). Metode dalam penelitian hukum normatif dan sosiologis (Field Research). Journal Law and Government, 2(1), 46–58.
Saputra, R. A., Silvana, S., & Marino, E. F. (2021). Penyelesaian sengketa sertifikat tanah ganda serta bentuk kepastian hukumnya. Jentera: Jurnal Hukum, 4(2), 555–573.
Sumarna, D., & Kadriah, A. (2023). Penelitian kualitatif terhadap hukum empiris. Jurnal Penelitian Serambi Hukum, 16(2), 101–113. https://doi.org/10.59582/sh.v16i02.730
Tunggu, R. (2023). Implikasi yuridis dianutnya causal stelsel terhadap kekuatan mengikat sertifikat tanah objek hak tanggungan. UNES Law Review, 6(1), 7546–7557. https://www.review-unes.com/index.php/law/article/view/1650
Yurika, P., Prasetya, M., Hartono, M. S., Adnyani, S., & Ketut, N. (2023). Analisis yuridis frasa "membiarkan" dalam Pasal 76C Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2014 tentang Perlindungan Anak. Ilmu Hukum Sui Generis, 3(35), 15–24.