Recognition Of Marinatama Mangga Dua Residents Was Threatened By Bombs When Making Lawsuits

JAKARTA - A number of residents who own the Marinatama Mangga Dua (MMD) shop have complained about a number of interventions from shophouse managers related to the ongoing lawsuit process at the Jakarta State Administrative Court (PTUN).

Representative of the residents of MMD, Wisnu Hadi Kusuma, complained that all residents who sued received a letter of coercion on the emptying of the shophouse after the trial related to the request for the cancellation of the Right to Use Certificate (SHP) and clarity on the Building Use Rights Certificate (SHGB) at the Jakarta Administrative Court.

"In this trial process, Inkopal and the manager should not send a letter of forced emptying," said Wisnu after the trial at the Jakarta Administrative Court, Cakung, East Jakarta, last Wednesday, October 29, 2025.

The lawsuit against the Jakarta Administrative Court began when 42 residents bought a shophouse in 1997 with the Sale and Purchase Binding Agreement (PPJB) to PT Wisma Benhil (WB). However, over time, suddenly in 2001, North Jakarta BPN issued SHP Number 477.

The issuance of the SHP then worried the residents of the shophouse owners. In fact, after the shop owner signed the PPJB, PT WB promised to issue a Build Use Rights Certificate (SHGB). However, until now, the SHGB has not been issued.

The shophouse is currently managed by cooperatives in one of the institutions. Shophouse owners are also required to pay an extension rental with an unreasonable value of Rp. 300 million per year, but get a 50 percent discount, so they only pay Rp. 150 million.

"We have mediated for negotiations, but we cannot. The price of 300 million discounts is 50 percent fixed," said Wisnu.

Therefore, his party was forced to test the certificate of use rights (SHPL) held by the Ministry of Defense (Kemhan) through the Jakarta Administrative Court.

"Is it true that the certificate? Well, it's still in process, but in this process, how come there is legal action from Inkopal. Even though we have bought it," said Wisnu.

Residents of Marinatama Mangga Dua, he said, hoped that President Prabowo Subianto could listen to residents' complaints regarding the lawsuit filed with the Jakarta Administrative Court.

"We ask that this voice be heard by Mr. President Prabowo. Hopefully, the extortion carried out by the officers can be eradicated. I think this is a good momentum for Mr. President Prabowo," he said.

Another intervention was also felt by Rini, one of the residents of the MMD shophouse admitted that she had received threats that it would be bombed by the management. The threat was felt in 2022.

According to him, the incident began when he had a building measuring about 6x2 meters for the photocopy site. Then he was summoned by TNI personnel regarding his building. The TNI officer ordered Rini to immediately dismantle the building in a short time.

"I was called to his office and he said that the building had to be demolished or I was a bomb right now. I feel threatened too. 'Today you dismantled it yourself or a bomb'. Its nature is too arrogant, 'you dismantle or bomb'. Maybe he's an officer, I'm civilian because ordinary employees might intervene in order to be afraid," he complained.

The continued trial of MMD residents with the agenda of a proof letter from the Ministry of Defense as the holder of the use rights certificate at the Jakarta State Administrative Court (PTUN) on Wednesday, October 29, 2025, was postponed next week.

Present at the trial were the attorney for the North Jakarta National Land Agency (BPN) and the Ministry of Defense's attorney and dozens of residents who owned the Marinatama Mangga Dua (MMD) shop as the plaintiff. The trial will continue on Wednesday 5 November 2025.

The delay was due to an interven or defendant from an individual who also claimed the land.

"Actually, today the trial is proof of the letter, but because there are other parties who submitted an interven plaintiff's request, the letter proof event has been postponed while waiting for a decision from the panel of judges," said MD resident Subali's attorney to reporters.

According to Subali, the interven plaintiff assumed that the land was not the right of the plaintiffs, not the right of the Ministry of Defense, but other parties who felt they owned the land object.

"That's because it's only limited to verbal, we can't confirm yet. Therefore, we object while waiting for the determination of the attitude of the panel of judges," he said.