The Implications Of The Phrase 'Masih Ada' In Article 3 Of The Basic Agrarian Law (Uupa) On The Recognition Of Indigenous Peoples And Ius Constituendum Policy

Abstract

The phrase "sepanjang menurut kenyataannya masih ada" in Article 3 of the UUPA creates normative ambiguity that places indigenous peoples in a vulnerable position. This study aims to analyze the juridical implications of the phrase and formulate ius constituendum policies. The discussion results indicate that this phrase is a transitional arrangement resulting in sectoral regulatory fragmentation and complex administrative burdens of proof for indigenous peoples. In conclusion, a paradigm shift from conditional to inherent recognition is required. Future policies must remove the phrase, adopt self-identification principles and harmonize regulations to ensure legal certainty and justice for indigenous peoples.