F-Gerindra DPR Member Pushes for the Establishment of a National Agrarian Conflict Resolution Agency

ILLUSTRATION/ANTARA FOTO/Umarul Faruq/bar/am.

Member of Commission II of the House of Representatives from the Gerindra Faction, Azis Subekti, raised basic questions about the endless resolution of agrarian conflicts.

The case has changed locations, the actors have changed, but the pattern is almost similar - overlapping rights, unclear land status, and a state that came too late.

As long as this problem continues to recur, legal certainty is said by Azis will remain a promise that feels far from the lives of residents.

According to him, the problem of agrarian conflict is not because Indonesia lacks rules. Constitutionally, the land is owned by the state for the greatest prosperity of the people. We have the 1960 Agrarian Basic Law, various derivative regulations, to agrarian reform programs and systematic land registration.

However, conflicts continue to grow. This means, continued Azis, that the problem is not the legal text, but rather the way the state executes and aligns land policies.

"In practice, the state often appears very firm when giving permission - whether for investment, development, or strategic projects. But that firmness often weakens when conflicts arise. The state turns into a spectator, encouraging the parties to face each other in court, while social tensions on the ground are growing. This is where the inequality of the state's role is clearly visible: strong as a regulator, weak as a guarantor of justice," Azis said in a written statement, Monday, January 19.

According to Azis, the position of the Ministry of Agrarian and Spatial Planning/National Land Agency is at the center of this vortex.

"ATR/BPN carries a dual mandate - administration, legal certainty, and conflict resolution - without being supported by a solid command system. When data is not fully integrated, authority is spread across institutions, and economic pressures are present at the same time, agrarian conflict becomes a structural problem, not an incidental one," he said.

In fact, the experience of other countries according to Azis gives an important lesson.

Japan, for example. The country did not resolve the land conflict with many new rules, but rather with a firm and trusted system.

The single cadastral map becomes a legal reference. The state stands neutral as a referee. Disputes are filtered and resolved administratively before going to court. The principle is simple: if the state hesitates, conflicts will grow; if the state is firm, conflicts shrink.

Indonesia certainly has its own complexities. But the basic principle is relevant. Agrarian conflicts can only be permanently resolved if the state stops half-heartedly. Therefore, the beginning of this year must be a momentum to establish a clear, bold, and executable road map.

"First, the form of the National Agrarian Conflict Resolution Agency (BPKAN) with binding administrative authority," said Azis.

This body, he said, must be cross-ministerial, state-led, and mandated to resolve conflicts before going to court.

His decision is administrative-final at the initial stage, so that the dispute does not immediately turn into a long legal case. This does not replace the court, but filters conflicts so that they do not burden the legal and social system.

"Second, apply a limited and selective moratorium on land objects that are currently in conflict," he continued.

As long as the status is not clear, new permits are stopped. This step must be regulated firmly and transparently. This is not an anti-investment policy, but rather pro-certainty. Healthy investors need land that is free of conflict, not permits on issues that will eventually explode.

"Third, raise the policy of one map from data coordination to a single legal reference," said Azis.

If a piece of land is not recorded as valid in the national agrarian map, then there should be no permits, there should be no new rights. This principle is simple, but the impact is huge. Many conflicts occur not because of evil intentions, but because the state gives permission based on different data.

"Fourth, repositioning ATR/BPN as an authority for agrarian certainty and justice," said Azis.

ATR/BPN must be strengthened in terms of mediation authority, data quality, and administrative decision-making capacity. This ministry is not enough to just issue certificates; it must be an institution that ensures that the certificate really closes the conflict, not opens new disputes.

The ongoing programs - land registration, digitization of certificates, and agrarian reform - need to continue. But without fundamental changes to the conflict resolution mechanism, these programs will work on the surface, while the root of the problem remains embedded. Certificates without certainty, digitization without integration, and reform without conflict resolution will only move the problem to the next generation.

"In the end, agrarian conflict is the most concrete test of the presence of the state. The community does not demand the state to always be on their side. They demand the state to be firm, consistent, and fair. A state that dares to stop conflicts, not just manage them," he said.

Azis emphasized the beginning of the year as the right time to make a choice.

Solving agrarian conflicts permanently is called, indeed, requires political courage and policy firmness. But delaying it is much more expensive: prolonged social conflicts, fragile investments, and public trust continue to be eroded. The state has laws, institutions, and constitutional mandates.

"What is needed now is a decision to use it in its entirety. That is where the certainty of the state really begins," said Azis Subekti.