ABSTRAK

Kata Kunci: Sertipikat Ganda, Yurisprudensi, Mahkamah Agung

Tujuan penulisan tesis ini adalah untuk menganalisis kedudukan dan kepastian hukum sertipikat hak atas tanah serta menganalisis aspek keadilan dan perlindungan hukum terhadappemegang hak atas tanah yang sertipikatnya tidak terbit lebih dahulu padapenyelesaian sengketa sertipikat ganda dalam Yurisprudensi MahkamahAgung. Jenis penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif yang bersifat preskriptif analitis dengan menggunakan pendekatan Perundang-undangan (Statute Approach), Pendekatan Konseptual (Conceptual Approach), dan Pendekatan Kasus (Case Approach).

Hasil penelitian yang diperoleh, yaitu: Pertama, Sertipikat hak atas tanah merupakan tanda bukti hak yang memilikikedudukan hukum sebagai alat pembuktian yang kuat dalam memberikanjaminan kepastian hukum dan perlindungan hukum, hal ini sebagaimanatertuang di dalam UUPA Pasal 19 ayat (1), Pasal 19 ayat (2) huruf c, Pasal23 ayat (2), Pasal 32 ayat (2), dan Pasal 38 ayat (2), serta PP No. 24/1997Pasal 3 huruf a, dan Pasal 32 ayat (1). Namun pembuktian yang kuattersebut tidaklah bersifat mutlak, hal ini sebagaimana penafsiran dari bunyiayat yang tertuang pada Pasal 32 ayat (2) PP No. 24/1997. Kedua, Dalam persidangan, pemegang hak atas tanah harus memiliki jaminan keadilandan perlindungan hukum terhadap sertipikat hak atas tanahnya, hal inisebagaimana tertuang pada Pasal 28 D ayat (1) UUD dan Pasal 2 ayat (2)UU No. 48/2009. Terlebih sertipikat hak atas tanah merupakan produkKTUN yang merupakan suatu penetapan tertulis yang dikeluarkan olehbadan atau pejabat tata usaha negara yang berisi tindakan hukum tatausaha negara yang berdasarkan peraturan perundang-undangan yangberlaku, yang bersifat konkret, individual, dan final, yang menimbulkanakibat hukum bagi seseorang atau badan hukum perdata, hal inisebagaimana tertuang pada Pasal 1 angka 9 UU No. 51/2009.

PRADIPTA, MOCH. ALAN. 2022. “The Jurisprudence Of Supreme Court In Dispute Completion Of Double Certificate”. Master Of Law Program, Postgraduate Program. Lambung Mangkurat University. AdvisPostgraduate Program or I: Dr. Mulyani Zulaeha, S.H., M.H. and Advisor II: Dr. Hj. Rahmida Erliyani, S.H., M.H., 101 Pages.

ABSTRACT

Keywords: Double Certificate, Jurisprudence, Supreme Court

The purpose of writing this thesis is to analyze the position and legal certainty of land rights certificates as well as analyze the aspects of justice and legal protection for land rights holders whose certificates were not issued first in the resolution of dual certificate disputes in the Jurisprudence of the Supreme Court. The type of research used is normative legal research with analytical prescriptive nature by using The Statute Approach, Conceptual Approach, and Case Approach.

The results of the research obtained, namely: First, the certificate of land rights is proof of rights that have legal standing as a strong evidentiary tool in providing guarantees of legal certainty and legal protection, this is as stated in the Basic Agraria Law Article 19 paragraph (1), Article 19 paragraph (2) letter c, Article 23 paragraph (2), Article 32 paragraph (2), and Article 38 paragraph (2), as well as Government Regulation. 24/1997 Article 3 letter a, and Article 32 paragraph (1). However, the strong evidence is not absolute, this is as the interpretation of the verse contained in Article 32 paragraph (2) Government Regulation No. 24/1997. Second, in the trial, the holder of land rights must have guarantees of justice and legal protection for the certificate of land rights, this is as stated in

Article 28 D paragraph (1) of the Constitution and Article 2 paragraph (2) of Law

No. 48/2009. Moreover, the certificate of land rights is a product of State Administrative Decisions which is a written determination issued by a state administrative agency or official containing legal actions for state administration based on applicable laws and regulations, which are concrete, individual and final, which have consequences. for a person or civil legal entity, this is as stated in Article 1 point 9 of Law No. 51/2009.