Alleged Land Grabbing of Pesantren In Megamendung, UI Law Expert Says Rizieq Shihab Must Be Responsible

A supporter carries a Rizieq Shihab banner (Irfan Meidianto/VOI)

JAKARTA - University of Indonesia (UI) criminal law expert Indriyanto Seno Adji said Rizieq Shihab is the party responsible for the alleged grabbing of land belonging to PT. Perkebunan Nusantara (PTPN) VIII in Megamendung, Bogor Regency, West Java.

"Those responsible are those who exercise physical control over the land," said Indriyanto as quoted by Antara, Monday, February 22.

Indriyanto said law enforcers could confiscate land belonging to PTPN VIII which was allegedly controlled by Rizieq.

"In order to follow up on PTPN's criminal report, law enforcers can take coercive force action by confiscating the land," said Indriyanto.

According to Indriyanto, the land dispute between PTPN VIII and Rizieq Shihab should be resolved legally. The principle of rule of law that everyone is equal before the law must be upheld without discrimination of any kind.

Apart from being a criminal, Indriyanto assessed that PTPN could file a civil suit against physical control against the law by a third party.

"The civil lawsuit does not interfere with the ongoing criminal law process. Although it should only be done on a case by case basis," he said.

PTPN has reported this matter to the police. Rizieq is suspected of using PTPN VIII's land without permission to establish the Markaz Syariah Agro-Cultural Nature Islamic Boarding School (Pesantren). Rizieq is suspected of Article 107 of Law Number 39 of 2014 concerning the crime of plantation crime.

Then, Article 69 of Law Number 26 Year 2007 regarding crimes of spatial planning, Article 167 of the Criminal Code concerning entering yards without permission, Article 385 of the Criminal Code concerning Land Grabbing, and Article 480 of the Criminal Code concerning Detention.

Previously, a land expert from the National Council of the Consortium for Agrarian Reform (KPA) Iwan Nurdin assessed that FPI does not have the right to receive compensation if PTPN VIII takes its land. According to him, FPI violated many laws (UU) in this matter.

"Especially the Plantation Law they violated and there was a fine of approximately IDR 4 billion if they took possession of plantation land that already had HGU," said Iwan.

He considered that the land sale and purchase agreement carried out could not be justified under Indonesian law. Because, the holder of land rights is PTPN VIII, thus the land-related contract must be carried out by PTPN VIII.

Iwan added that the HGU owned by PTPN VIII is intended for plantation, agriculture, animal husbandry, and fishery ponds. Meanwhile, for buildings, the certificate is in the form of building use rights (HGB).

"It should be for plantations not for education and buildings," he said.

According to him, it was right for PTPN VIII to ask for the vacant land which had been occupied by FPI, except for small farmers who worked on plantation land just to make a living.