Implikasi dualisme kebijakan pertanahan terhadap industri properti Kota Batam

PAMADI, Mulia, Prof.Dr. Nindyo Pramono, SH.,MS

2007 | Tesis | S2 Ilmu Hukum (Magister Hukum Bisnis)

Pertanahan di Pulau Batam menjadi menarik untuk dikaji sejak terbitnya surat kakan BPN Kota Batam no.246/640/VIII/2006 tanggal 4 Agustus 2006 yang melarang PPAT se kota Batam melaksanakan Akta Notariel Jual Beli dan pemindahan hak sebelum diterbitkan sertifikat HGB induk atas nama pengembang, padahal 4 kepala kantor BPN kota Batam sebelumnya tidak pernah mempersoalkannya dan hal ini sudah berlanjut dua puluh tahunan, bahkan puluhan ribu sertifikat telah diterbitkan melalui kantor BPN kota Batam. Apa sesungguhnya permasalahannya ? Hal inilah yang mendorong penulis untuk melakukan kajian secara konprehensif dengan terlebih mengumpulkan data-data dan informasi dari berbagai pihak yang terkait seperti Otorita Batam, BPN kota Batam dan asosiasiasosiasi profesi seperti REI Batam, KADIN Batam, APINDO provinsi Kepri, HKI Batam, INI/IPPAT Batam dan Perbankan yang secara langsung juga terlibat dalam kajian bersama permasalahan pertanahan kota Batam. Secara kronologis, Keppres 41/1973 menetapkan OPDIPB sebagai pemegang HPL pulau Batam dan berlandaskan peraturan perundang-undangan yang ada diantaranya PMDN 1/1977 dan Kepmendagri 43/1977, OPDIPB menentukan prosedur pengalokasian lahan kepada pihak investor dan permohonan HATnya yang tentunya sudah berkoordinasi dengan kantor BPN kota Batam sehingga prosedur OPDIPB dan BPN sejalan dan berkesinambungan dalam penyelesaian sertifikat tanah di pulau Batam, walaupun saat itu dikenal dua mekanisme pengurusan sertifikat yaitu pertama melalui pemecahan PL induk yang dikenal prosedur “Pecah PL” versi OPDIPB dan kedua melalui pemecahan sertifikat induk yang dikenal prosedur “Pecah SI” versi BPN. Kedua sistim ini berjalan efektif dan saling melengkapi sehingga sangat kondusif dan memenuhi kebutuhan industri realestat. Permasalahan mulai muncul saat surat kakan BPN kota Batam yang ke-5 melarang prosedur “Pecah PL”, terjadi stagnase industri realestat, meningkatnya NPL dan potensi kredit macet perbankan, permasalahan sosial terhadap legalitas sertifikat dan kepastian penyelesaiannya, ketidak-pastian hukum pertanahan di Batam dan kekacauan administrasi pertanahan yang dapat menimbulkan konflik di masa depan. Hal ini terjadi karena pemberlakuan secara dadakan, tanpa sosialisasi dan transisi waktu, tanpa dikaji apakah dimungkinkan untuk dilaksanakan dan memperhitungkan dampaknya. Hal inilah yang menarik untuk dikaji, apakah benar OPDIPB bersama ke-4 kakan BPN sebelumnya salah dalam penerapan kebijakan pertanahan atau justru Kakan BPN kota Batam yang ke-5 yang keliru dalam penerapannya. Bagaimana implikasinya terhadap industri realestat dan alternatif penyelesaiannya. Harapan penulis, analisa dalam tesis ini berguna untuk kalangan akademisi dalam mencermati hukum pertanahan dan kalangan praktisi dalam mencari solusi atas permasalahan pertanahan kota Batam saat ini.

Land matters in Batam has become interesting to investigate since the office head of BPN (National Land Board) in Batam stipulated a decree no 246/640/VIII/2006 dated on 4 August 2006 forbidding all PPATs (Land Deed Official) in Batam to conduct any selling transactions with notarized documents and right transfer, unless the certificate of building right title (HGB) on the name of developers was issued. In fact, this matter had never been an issue among the previous four office-heads of BPN in Batam, and such a practice had been taking place for more than twenty years. Moreover, hundred thousands of certificates had been issued by BPN office in Batam prior to the decree. What does it seem to be the problem? This matter motivated the writer to carry out a comprehensive study on the issue by collecting data and information from various parties involved in land matters in Batam among others: Otorita Batam, BPN in Batam, professional associations such as REI Batam, KADIN Batam, APINDO Propinsi Kepri, HKI Batam, INI/IPPAT Batam, and banking as well. Chronologically, Keppres 41/1973 stipulated that OPDIPB was the holder of cultivation right title (HPL) in Batam island, and based on the existing laws, PMDN 1/1977 and Kepmendagri 43/1977, OPDIPB had the rights to determine the procedures of land allocation to investors, and coordinated with the head office of local BPN for its HAT request so that the procedures set by OPDIPB complied with those set by BPN and could support the settlement of land certificates in Batam island. Although two mechanisms of certificate applications were applied at that time, i.e. through the OPDIPB version of main PL split procedure known as “Pecah PL” and the BPN version known as “Pecah SI”, the system could run effectively and mutually equip so that it was very conducive and fulfilling for the growth of real estate industry. A problem arose after the decree to terminate the application of “Pecah PL” procedure was issued by the fifth office head of local BPN. This brought about stagnation in real estate industry and increase in banking non performing loan (NPL). It also created an uncertainty in agrarian laws and certificate legality as well as disorder in land administration, which could cause social problems and conflicts in the future. This happened because of the rush implementation of the policy without any socialization and further consideration on the impacts it might bring. The writer was interested in analyzing and figuring out whether OPDIPB and the previous four office-heads of BPN in Batam had implemented agrarian policies wrongly, or it was the latter office head of BPN who implemented them wrongly. This study also aimed at finding out the effects of this policy on real estate industry and proposing alternative solutions. Hopefully, the analyses in this thesis could be a reference for the academia in studying agrarian law and for practitioners in finding out the solutions to the land matters in Batam.

Kata Kunci : Hak ATas Tanah,Kebijakan Pertanahan,Industri Properti