Octavia Alida Mochtar (1)
General Background Land remains a fundamental economic and social asset, and legal certainty in land administration is central to rights protection. Specific Background Girik is still widely used in Jakarta, Banten, and West Java as evidence of historical control over former customary land, yet its legal position has weakened after Government Regulation No. 18 of 2021 on land registration, with a recognition deadline of 2 February 2026. Knowledge Gap The available transitional legal safeguards and practical obstacles for girik holders whose parcels remain outside the national land administration system require clearer articulation. Aims This study examines the forms and mechanisms of legal protection for unregistered girik holders and identifies the main barriers they face. Results Using a normative juridical approach, the study finds that safeguards remain available through recognition of physical control, access to civil litigation provided no good-faith protected certificate exists, and the state obligation to systematically organize land registration; however, low public awareness, BPHTB cost burdens, limited historical documentation, and institutional capacity constraints hinder optimal legal certainty. Novelty The study consolidates a transitional protection framework that links physical possession recognition and civil remedies to the post-deadline evidentiary shift under PP 18/2021. Implications The study recommends accelerating PTSL, subsidizing registration fees, harmonizing BPHTB regulations, and digitizing legacy evidence to support an inclusive transition to formal land titles.
Highlights:
Historical tax-based documentation becomes limited to evidence of physical control after 2 February 2026.
Civil claims remain available unless a good-faith certificate is legally protected.
PTSL acceleration, fee subsidies, BPHTB harmonization, and legacy-evidence digitization are proposed to advance legal certainty.
Keywords: Girik Land, Legal Protection, Legal Certainty
G. Putri, J. Fionita, and J. Matheus, “Lelang Eksekusi Kepailitan Atas Tanah Dan Bangunan Yang Dimiliki Bersama Oleh Pihak Ketiga Dan Debitur Pailit,” Jurnal Supremasi, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 1–15, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.35457/supremasi.v14i2.3810.
I. Bandiyah and A. F. Rosando, “Kepemilikan Hak Atas Tanah Warga Negara Indonesia Yang Melaksanakan Perkawinan Campuran,” DiH: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, vol. 13, no. 25, pp. 105–123, 2017.
I. E. Sihombing, Segi-Segi Hukum Tanah Nasional Dalam Pengadaan Tanah Untuk Pembangunan. Jakarta, Indonesia: Universitas Trisakti, 2005.
M. D. P. Huzaini, “Menyoal Makna Fungsi Sosial Dan Kepentingan Umum Yang Melekat Pada Tanah,” HukumOnline, 2021.
Waskito and H. Arnowo, Pertanahan, Agraria, Dan Tata Ruang. Jakarta, Indonesia: Prenadamedia Group, 2017.
W. P. Windia and I. K. Sudantra, Pengantar Hukum Adat Bali. Denpasar, Indonesia: Swasta Nulus, 2016.
B. F. Sihombing, Hukum Agraria Nasional: Buku II—Hukum Tanah. Jakarta, Indonesia: Rajawali Press, 2013.
U. Santoso, Hukum Agraria: Kajian Komprehensif. Jakarta, Indonesia: Kencana, 2013.
B. F. Sihombing, Hukum Agraria Nasional: Buku II—Hukum Tanah. Jakarta, Indonesia: Rajawali Press, 2019.
S. Soekanto and S. Mamudji, Penelitian Hukum Normatif: Suatu Tinjauan Singkat, 16th ed. Jakarta, Indonesia: Rajawali Pers, 2014.
B. Sunggono, Metodologi Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta, Indonesia: RajaGrafindo Persada, 2003.
D. Tejawati, “Asas Kepastian Hukum Dalam Kedudukan Girik Terhadap Sertipikat Hak Atas Tanah,” Jurnal Suara Hukum, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 251–272, 2021, doi: 10.26740/jsh.v3n2.p251-273.
S. Hajati, A. Sekarmadji, S. Winarsi, and O. Moechthar, Politik Hukum Pertanahan Indonesia. Jakarta, Indonesia: Prenada Media, 2021.
M. Ikhwan, “Prinsip Itikad Baik Dalam Rechtsverwerking Pada Hukum Agraria Indonesia,” RechtIdee, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 193, 2022.
A. Y. Hernoko, Hukum Perjanjian: Asas Proporsionalitas Dalam Kontrak Komersial. Jakarta, Indonesia: Prenada Media Group, 2010.
L. Ratrisnanti, “Implikasi Yuridis Kepemilikan Letter C, Patuk D, Dan Landrente Pasca Berlakunya PP 18 Tahun 2021,” Jaksa: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Dan Politik, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 19–30, 2025, doi: 10.51903/jaksa.v3i1.2329.
S. Novitasari, R. E. Saragih, and E. N. C. Amita, “Land And Building Rights Acquisition Fee (BPHTB) Payable On Complete Systematic Land Registration (PTSL),” Rewang Rencang Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis, vol. 5, no. 9, p. 8, 2024.
M. R. A. Utama and B. E. Turisno, “Solusi BPHTB Dan PPh Final Dalam Program PTSL Di Kabupaten Malang,” NOTARIUS, vol. 17, no. 1, 2024.
S. P. Puteri and A. Ramli, “Kepastian Hukum Letter C Sebagai Bukti Kepemilikan Tanah Dalam Perspektif PP Nomor 18 Tahun 2021,” JIHHP: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, vol. 5, no. 5, p. 3758, 2025.
P. R. T. U. Sitinjak, I. A. A. Ratnadunita, J. Maharani, D. A. F. Rikuser, and M. A. H. Fikri, “Pendaftaran Tanah Dan Kepastian Hukum: Mengurai Problematika Warisan Serta Implikasinya Secara Hukum,” JICN: Jurnal Intelek Dan Cendikiawan Nusantara, vol. 2, no. 5, p. 10066, 2025.
V. S. Ramba, A. Tehupeiory, and W. S. Widiarty, “Efektivitas Pelaksanaan Pendaftaran Tanah Pada Kantor Badan Pertanahan Nasional Kabupaten Luwu Timur Provinsi Sulawesi Selatan,” Action Research Literate, vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 2327–2342, 2024, doi: 10.46799/arl.v8i8.501.