Kekuatan Hukum Sertifikat Hak Milik Berdasarkan Alas Hak Cacat dalam Perspektif Asas Nemo Plus Juris: Studi Kasus Putusan PN Tondano Nomor 97/Pdt.G/2024/PN Tnn
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55606/khatulistiwa.v5i2.5900Keywords:
Certificate of Ownership, Legal Power, Principle of Nemo Plus JurisAbstract
The authoritative document entity commonly referred to as the Certificate of Ownership (SHM) is legally constructed as a supremacy manifestation of the dominant right to geocadastral space, as determined by the legislative norm of lex generalis contained in Law Number 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Agrarian Principles (UUPA). Terminologically, Article 20 paragraph (1) of the UUPA affirms that the dominant right is an absolute hereditary prerogative and has the highest legal density in the agrarian civil structure. This study is intended as an academic examination of the legal empire of the SHM document which was born from a legal substratum that experienced validity dysfunction, using the doctrinal paradigm of the principle of Nemo Plus Juris ad alium transferre potest quam ipse habet. This research is articulated through a doctrinal-normative legal approach based on the explication of positive legal literature and judicial jurisprudence. The results of the investigation conclude that the SHM entity derived from the legal anomaly-affected legal basis does not have normative validity that can be constitutionally maintained. The internality of the Nemo Plus Juris principle shows that legal actors do not have the authority to transfer rights that are not legally attached to them, so that the legal alienation process by the defendants in the form of a sale and purchase is null and void in material law. The implication is that the plaintiff's legal standing as a legal subject with land rights that are previously legally valid has the legitimacy to file an administrative cancellation of the SHM and reconstruction of the ownership status to the entity that is legally entitled. The judicium issued by the Panel of Judges at the Tondano District Court in the a quo case has substantially been in line with the principles of proportionality and legality, and has utilized legal instruments as a protective medium for the existence of legitimate agrarian rights. This confirms the supremacy of law in maintaining the integrity of the national land system from manipulative penetration based on flawed formalities of the right base.
References
Alimuddin, N. H. (2021). Implementasi Sertifikat Elektronik Sebagai Jaminan Kepastian Hukum Kepemilikan Hak Atas Tanah di Indonesia. SASI, 27(3), 335–345. https://doi.org/10.47268/sasi.v27i3.509Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pattimura
Darnus, A. B. B., Nawi, S., & Poernomo, S. L. (2022). Analisis Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Pemegang Sertifikat Hak Milik Atas Tanah yang Mengalami Sengketa. Journal of Lex Generalis (JLG), 3(2). https://pasca-umi.ac.id/index.php/jlg/article/view/1004Yustisia+7Pasca UMI+7Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pattimura+7
Gayatri, N. M. S., Seputra, I. P. G., & Suryani, L. P. (2021). Pembatalan Sertifikat Hak Milik Atas Tanah Akibat Cacat Administrasi. Jurnal Analogi Hukum, 3(1), 79–83. https://doi.org/10.22225/ah.3.1.2021.79-83Ejournal UNIS+5ejournal.warmadewa.ac.id+5Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pattimura+5
Hadiyanto, I. P., & Anggraini, F. (2023). Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Pemilik Tanah Sertifikat Hak Milik Atas Gugatan Orang Lain. CERMIN: Jurnal Penelitian, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.36841/cermin_unars.v4i1.574Unars
Haryanti, T. W., Simanjuntak, S. Y., & Widayati, N. (2023). Peran PPAT Terhadap Pelaksanaan Asas Nemo Plus Juris Pada Pendaftaran Peralihan Hak Atas Tanah Karena Jual Beli. Jurnal Education and Development, 11(1). https://journal.ipts.ac.id/index.php/ED/article/view/4799Journal Education and Development
Karyani, S., & Umam, K. (2024). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Ahli Waris Pembeli Tanah Dengan Alas Hak Letter C. Journal Equitable, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.37859/jeq.v9i2.6874Muhammadiyah Riau Journals+1Ejournal UNIS+1
Nahumury, S., Matuankotta, J. K., & Radjawane, P. (2023). Analisis Yuridis Kekuatan Hukum Sertifikat Hak Milik Atas Tanah Menurut Peraturan Pemerintah No. 24/1997 Tentang Pendaftaran Tanah Dikaitkan Dengan Putusan PN No. 242/Pdt.G/2020/PN Ambon. TATOHI: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 2(11). https://doi.org/10.47268/tatohi.v2i11.1451UNES Law Review+3Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pattimura+3Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pattimura+3
Ricci, C., Azheri, B., & Mulyati, N. (2024). Kedudukan Hukum Sertipikat Hak Milik Karena Cacat Yuridis Sebagai Bukti Kepemilikan Hak (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Batusangkar Nomor 67/Pid.B/2021/PN Bsk). UNES Law Review, 5(4), 4869–4877. https://doi.org/10.31933/unesrev.v5i4.1938UNES Law Review
Sitania, A. D., Pesulima, T. L., & Pariela, M. V. G. (2021). Jaminan Sertifikat Hak Milik Atas Tanah Bukan Oleh Pemegang Hak Milik Dalam Perjanjian Kredit Perbankan. TATOHI: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 1(6), 577–589. https://doi.org/10.47268/tatohi.v1i6.641Pasca UMI+2Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pattimura+2Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pattimura+2
Sumiati, H., Andriansah, & Kadaryanto, B. (2021). Kepastian Hukum Sertifikat Hak Milik atas Tanah Dalam Hukum Pertanahan Indonesia. Yustisia Merdeka: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.33319/yume.v7i2.111Yustisia
Wibhawa, F. R., & Dewi, A. A. I. A. (2022). Kekuatan Pembuktian Sertifikat Hak Milik atas Tanah sebagai Alat Bukti Kepemilikan yang Sah. Acta Comitas: Jurnal Hukum Kenotariatan, 7(1), 94–104. https://doi.org/10.24843/AC.2022.v07.i01.p08Open Journal Systems+1Pasca UMI+1
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Khatulistiwa: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Sosial Humaniora
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
