Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study examines the implementation of the prohibition on absentee agricultural land ownership and the role of the Land Office (ATR/BPN) in Mentaya Hilir Selatan Sub-District, East Kotawaringin Regency, Central Kalimantan. Anchored in Article 10 of Law No. 5 of 1960 on the Basic Agrarian Law (UUPA), this prohibition is central to Indonesia's land-reform policy, yet faces persistent juridical and non-juridical obstacles. The research addresses two key questions: how the prohibition is implemented along with the challenges faced, and what measures the Land Office has taken to address them.Using an empirical legal (socio-legal) method combined with normative-juridical and statutory approaches, primary data were gathered through purposive-sampling interviews with the Head of the Land Office, three village heads, a land deed official (PPAT), and nine community members, analyzed descriptively. Results show ineffective implementation: operational mechanisms are limited to domicile verification at application and a rights-transfer statement when absentee land is identified, lacking post-registration monitoring.This ineffectiveness stems from outdated regulations and limited post-registration tracking (juridical), alongside weak inter-institutional coordination, minimal field supervision, low legal awareness, and entrenched kinship values tolerating cross-domicile control (non-juridical). Applying Soerjono Soekanto’s legal effectiveness theory, all five factors—law, enforcers, facilities, community, and culture—are simultaneously weak. John Rawls’ theory of justice further reveals a gap between formal administrative compliance and substantive fairness in land access.Resolving these issues requires regulatory evaluation and harmonization, alongside strengthened inter-institutional coordination, continuous data monitoring, and expanded, targeted public awareness campaigns. Integrating these legal and non-legal strategies can enhance implementation effectiveness, ensure legal certainty, and fulfill national land-reform goals of equitable agricultural land distribution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Putri et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: