PPK GBK Sultan Hotel Employee Somasi, PT Indobuildco: That's Intimidation

JAKARTA - The Bung Karno Gelora Area Management Center (PPK GBK) through its attorney, Saor Siagian, sent a subpoena to the Sultan Hotel employees if they were still carrying out activities or activities in the hotel area without permission.

Employees can also be caught in the law if they are still carrying out activities or activities in the hotel area.

Responding to this, the attorney for PT Indobuildco as the manager of the Sultan Hotel, Amir Syamsudin, assessed that the statement submitted by the GBK PPK Legal Counsel was a form of intimidation and manipulation.

"We consider the statement of the GBK PPK attorney as an act of intimidation, manipulation, and harassing the court," Amir said in a press statement, Wednesday, November 1.

Amir explained that the Panel of Judges had determined the mediation trial on Monday, November 6, 2023.

However, PPK GBK is considered to have taken action that preceded the court's decision by forcibly installing a permanent concrete wall at the entrance to the Sultan Hotel.

"So the PPK GBK actions on the HGB land No. 26 and HGB No. 27 belonged to PT Indobuildco on the basis of ownership on HPL No. 1/Gelora is an unlawful act," he said.

Furthermore, Amir said that at a press conference the GBK PPK Legal Counsel also made a statement that was considered to be intimidating Sultan Hotel employees with a criminal threat not to carry out activities within the Sultan Hotel area without permission from PPK GBK.

Thus, continued Amir, Secretariat cq. PPK GBK consciously has harassed the court, violated the ethics of the act and did not respect the ongoing legal process.

"Why should there be a permit from PPK GBK? Since when did PPKGB own HGB land No. 26 and HGB No. 27 on behalf of PT Indibuildco," he said.

According to Amir, the PK Decision No. 276 PK/Pdt/2011 does not give the right at all to the Secretary of State. PPK GBK on HGB No, 26 and HGB No. 27 on behalf of PT Indobuildco. Secretariat cq.

Amir said that PPK GBK is the holder of HPL No. 1/Gelora since 1989 which was published above HGB No. 26 and HGB No. 27 on behalf of the existing PT Indobuildco first, so the GBK PPK cq Secretariat must first acquire the land with compensation before HGB No. 26 and HGB No. 27 is part of HPL No. 1/Gelora.

"In fact, the Secretariat cq. PPK GBK has never freed or relinquished the rights to HGB No. 26 and HGB No. 27 from PT Indobuildco, and vice versa PT Indobuildco has never relinquished its right to HGB No. 26 and HGB No. 27 so that HGB No. 26 and HGB No. 27 was never part of HPL No.1/Gelora," he said.

According to him, there has never been a legal basis for HGB No. 26 and HGB No. 27 will return to become state assets based on HPL No. 1/Gelora if the validity period expires.

"We reiterate that PT Indobuildco still has rights to HGB land No. 26/Gelora and HGB No. 27/Gelora because it is in accordance with national land law, if HGB has expired the extension period of its rights, then PT Indobuildco will still be given the right to renew its rights no later than 30 years," he said.

Amir said PT Indobuildco had also registered a lawsuit against the law to the court registered with No. 667/Pdt.G/2023/PN Jkt.Pst.

Therefore, he hopes that the GBK PPK will obey the law to follow the ongoing legal process.