Você está na página 1de 4

Impact of Establishment of Factories in the Society Residence Neighborhood

Legal Framework

Legal basis of the establishment of shall get a lisence along with the Act
which governs it, that is Undang-Undang Lingkungan Hidup (UULH) Law on
Environment year 1982, Article 1 and article 2 and analysis regarding on the
impact of environment (Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan AMDAL) year
1993 in article 5 which stated the requirements on having the lisence on planning
the activities.
Discussion
The establishment of factories extremely affects the people who live in
society residence neighborhood, one of the example is in Sukabumu di Kecamatan
Gunung Guruh, Province of Jawa Barat. The local people refuse the establishment
of Cement Factory where the society believe that the establishment of the factory
causes air pollution and the result of waste of the factory which flow in the area of
society could threat the existence and the development of the environment nature
due to the factories create a dangerous and poisonous waste (Limbah Bahan
Berbahaya dan Beracun B3)
The distance of the Cement Factory in Kecamatan Gunung Guruh,
Sukabumi Regency, Province of Jawa Barat is very near from the residence of the
Society. It is only 2 until 4 meters. The furthest distance is only 100-300 meters.
This conditions is not ideal if the Cement Factories establish in the socity
residence neighborhood
Conclusion
It will be better if the establishment of the factories do not conducted if the
neighborhood of the socity reidence, but if the factories establish near from the
society resince it will make the people who live in the neigborhood will feel the
impact from tyhe activity of the operated factories. Further more, the
establishment of the factories shall get a lisence based on the Law which governs
it.

NAME: REZA FAHLEVI


NIM: 20140610474 (IPOLS B)
Legal Analysis Case against Land Dispute Settlement Project navy in
Pasuruan Associated with Law No. 5 of 1960 About the Agrarian
Case Object Remedies, land titling implemented Lantamal III Surabaya since
January 20, 1986 can be realized BPN in 1993 with the issuance of certificates of
as many as 14 areas with an area of 3,676 hectares. Yet there are still people who
do not carry out the move from land that has been liberated Navy. On 20
November 1993 the Regent of Pasuruan sent a letter to the Commander Lantamal
III Surabaya, concerning the proposed resettlement nonpemukim Navy in the area
Prokimal RoW. Then Regent of Pasuruan submitted a letter to the Navy Chief on
January 3, 1998 to propose that land for the relocation of residents non settlement
Navy to be given an area of 500 square meters per family
Legal Framework In The Law No. 5 of 1960 on Basic Agrarian (BAL) actually
contained a provision would be guaranteed for every citizen to own land and
benefit from the results (article 9, paragraph 2). Referring to the provisions and
also refer to the PP 24/1997 on Land Registration (especially chapter 2) of the
National Land Agency (BPN) should be able to publish legal documents
(certificates) required by every citizen with a mechanism that is easy, especially if
the concerned citizen had previously had a long proof of rights their land.
Discussion Disputes over land and agrarian resources in general seems to be a
latent conflict. From the various cases, rise up and sharpening of a land dispute
does not happen instantly, but to grow and develop from seeds so long it has been
deposited.
The parties to the dispute was largely if not be called, is almost entirely not only
the individual, but it involves a communal level. Communal involvement is what
allows a land dispute erupted into riots that claimed many victims. When riots
occurred, the people who often bear the brunt of the most severe.
In the context of cases of land disputes this, presumably not just a rumor if there is
a story, the state is often in cahoots with the owners of capital. People's enough
given the illusion of all for the sake of the country, for the realization of a society.
Conclusion Disputes over land and agrarian resources in general seems to be a
latent conflict and the parties to the dispute was largely if not be called, is almost
entirely not only the individual, but it involves a communal level it may be
imagined how great a time bomb that will explode if case- land disputes are not
immediately get proper handling and settlement, and in favor of the interests of
the people.

LAND DISPUTE SETTLEMENT IN CASE MERUYA


Case Object
Some time ago a land dispute case made headlines most of the mass
media. One of the hotly discussed is Meruya land disputes between citizens and
PT. Portanigra. This case Meruya sticking when residents protested the Supreme
Court decision that ruled in favor of PT. Portanigra the land area of 44 hectares.
Multiple land ownership stems from fraud Djuhri, foreman of the land, for the
trust given to Benny through Toegono in the liberation in South Meruya in 1972.
Djuhri sell the land back to the other party knowing that the purchase of land in
violation of the rules. Then, Toegono enrich to the West Jakarta District Court and
ultimately Djuhri sentenced to probation by paying 175 million plus 8 hectares of
land. Portanigra party has not considered the matter finished and sued civilly
Djuhri back to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of PT.
Portanigra
Legal framework
Justice was filled by Judges ad hoc legal expert who is not only a formal
land but land issues are multidimensional understanding. Justice was formed by
BAL 1960 and Law No.4 / 2004 on judicial power.
Discussion Land disputes between Djuhri and PT.Portanigra turned out to have an
impact for third parties, namely the citizens Meruya. They are in danger of losing
land and buildings. As a third party, should obtain legal considerations. This is in
accordance with Article 208 (1) of article 207 HIR and citizens can sue re-PT.
Portanigra.
According to Prof. Endriatmo Sutarto, legal experts Agricultural College
Land Yogyakarta, the government should be a mediator. As a first step, the
government should reexamine the truth status of land ownership. Not only that,
the government should improve administrative systems and institutions of
governance. Based on the cases of irregularities in the administrative system in
BPN. BPN issue a certificate on the disputed land. Likewise MA, chronology
shows that the Supreme Court decision No. 2683 / PDT / G / 1999 has the
peculiarity because land boundaries Portanigra in letter C remains unclear. Looks
for a "game" there. The government should establish an independent judicial body
under the agrarian public courts like the tax court, commercial, etc. child. Justice
was filled by judges who are not only experts Adhoc formal land law but the
multidimensional understanding of land issues. Justice was formed by BAL 1960
and Law No.4 / 2004 on judicial power.

Conclusion
Many lessons can be drawn from the case of land disputes in Meruya PT
Portanigra as the developer made a mistake because it did not do the transaction
and purchase of land by the rules and not take care of the post-transaction
certificates. Through mistakes made by PT. Portanigra it is instructive that the
certificate is very important as a proof of land ownership. Residents Meruya also
make mistakes because they are not careful in buying land. Therefore, it is
important for us to know the status of land ownership and the conditions in detail.
Government agencies such as BPN and the Supreme Court also made a mistake in
taking the decision. BPN issue a certificate on the land dispute and the Supreme
Court ruled in favor of PT. Portanigra without considering the completeness proof
of ownership of the land owned by PT. Portanigra. In these conditions, the
Supreme Court only looked at the legal formalities between individuals or
communities with the land alone so that the decision is contrary to the public
sense of justice. Therefore, it is important for the government to make
improvements in government institutions.