PRIME NEWS POST 

The INDONESIAN (Labuan Bajo) – A dispute over an 11-hectare plot of land in Keranga, Labuan Bajo Subdistrict, has reignited conflict. The Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia’s Cassation Ruling No. 4758K/Pdt/2025 dated October 8, 2025 – which ruled in favor of the heirs of the late Ibrahim Hanta against the heirs of the late Nikolaus Naput – has instead sparked new controversy at the land administration level.

The spotlight is now on the West Manggarai Land Office. As of early March 2026, the legally binding (final and conclusive) ruling has yet to be concretely implemented by the National Land Agency (BPN) of West Manggarai.

Final Ruling Issued, But Certificates Remain Valid

Florianus Surion Adu, legal representative for Muhamad Rudini (heir of the late Ibrahim Hanta), explained that in the cassation order, the Supreme Court rejected the petition filed by Paulus Grant Naput, Maria Fatmawati Naput, and Erwin Kadiman Santosa.

“The ruling also upholds the decisions of the Labuan Bajo District Court No. 1/Pdt.G/2024/PN Lbj and the Kupang High Court No. 1/PDT/2025/PT KPG,” Florianus stated in a release on Friday (March 6, 2026).

Legally, he said the Ibrahim Hanta family is recognized as the rightful owner of the 11-hectare land.

“However, on the ground, two Certificates of Ownership (SHM) issued on January 31, 2017 – SHM No. 02549 covering 28,313 m² under Paulus Grant Naput’s name and SHM No. 02545 covering 27,724 m² under Maria Fatmawati Naput’s name – have not yet been administratively revoked,” Florianus disclosed.

In addition, two Survey Plans (GU) and land maps under the names of Karolus H. Sikone (27,874 m²) and Elisabet Eni H. (29,719 m²) are also included in the request for revocation.

He explained that on February 9, 2026, the heirs of the late Ibrahim Hanta submitted an application for a Survey Plan (GU) for the land. However, in an official letter dated February 26, 2026, the Head of the West Manggarai Land Office, Danial Imanuel Liunesi, S.ST, stated that the application must still comply with land-related laws and regulations.

Letter No. MP.01.02/1032–53.15/II/2026 clarified that before issuing a Survey Plan, the applicant must first file a request to revoke legal documents as part of implementing the court ruling, in accordance with Article 40 paragraph (1) of Minister of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning/BPN Head Regulation No. 21 of 2020.

Excerpt from the BPN Letter:

Regarding the ±110,000 m² (11 Ha) land plot located in Karangan, Labuan Bajo Subdistrict, Komodo District, West Manggarai Regency – which you applied for based on Labuan Bajo District Court Ruling No. 1/Pdt.G/2024/PN.Lbj dated October 23, 2024, as upheld by Kupang High Court Ruling No. 1/PDT/2025/PT.KPG dated March 18, 2025, and Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Ruling No. 4758K/Pdt/2025 dated October 8, 2025 – the application may be submitted with consideration of the following:

a. The subject of the above rulings involves Certificates of Ownership No. 02549/Labuan Bajo Subdistrict dated January 31, 2017 (28,313 m², registered under Paulus Grant Naput) and No. 02545/Labuan Bajo Subdistrict dated January 31, 2017 (27,724 m², registered under Maria Fatmawati Naput), which have been declared invalid and not legally binding;

b. As stated in point (a), revocation may be requested as part of implementing the final court ruling, in accordance with Article 40 paragraph 1 of Minister of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning/BPN Head Regulation No. 21 of 2020 on Land Case Handling and Settlement. “Applications for revocation of legal documents due to implementation of a final court ruling as referred to in Article 29 paragraph (1) letter b must meet the following requirements:

– Application letter;
– Legalized copy of the applicant’s identification and power of attorney (if applicable);
– Original power of attorney (if applicable);
– Legalized copy of the applicant’s land ownership/control proof;
– Proposed physical and legal data documents for revocation;
– Legalized copy of the court ruling;
– Legalized copy of the execution implementation report.”

c. For the land plot for which you are requesting a Survey Plan, the application may be submitted through a Cadastral Survey and Mapping Request, subject to requirements including a BPN Application Form per Minister of Agrarian Affairs/BPN Head Regulation No. 18 of 2021, legalized copies of the applicant’s ID card and family card, legalized copies of neighbors’ and witnesses’ ID cards, ownership basis/title deed (final court ruling and execution implementation report), latest property tax payment receipt (SPPT), spatial planning information, coordinated pillar photos, and a statement of willingness to close the application file and not claim a refund of non-tax state revenue.

Among these administrative requirements, Florianus Surion Adu objected to the demand for an execution implementation report, which he deemed unnecessary.

“What is the execution implementation report for? Since 1973 until now, the 11-hectare land has been fully controlled by the plaintiff Ibrahim Hanta. This is absurd and disrespectful to the Supreme Court ruling,” Florianus said.

He described the requirement as a form of obstruction.

“BPN should immediately process the application from the legally recognized heirs who won at the cassation level. This seems to disregard the Supreme Court’s decision,” Florianus emphasized on Tuesday (March 3, 2026).

He added that the court had stated there was a measurement error (misplotting) in the issuance of the previous certificates. Furthermore, the defendants were found to have acted unlawfully during the measurement, certification, and even sale and purchase processes of the disputed land.

Besides the two SHMs, the Land Maps under Karolus H. Sikone (27,874 m²) and Elisabet Eni H. (29,719 m²) are also included in the revocation request.

Contradicts Former Official’s Statement

Notably, the former Head of West Manggarai BPN Office, Gatot Suyanto, made a different statement on August 27, 2024. At the time, he said that if a final ruling ordering certificate revocation was issued, the office would process it promptly to serve the people of West Manggarai effectively and professionally.

“Now that the cassation ruling has been officially issued and is legally binding, the public is questioning the consistency and commitment of West Manggarai BPN,” Florianus said.

Florianus stressed that if the final ruling is not promptly enforced, the heirs will take firm action.

“When BPN fails to follow up on the final ruling, it causes hardship for the heirs. If necessary, we will hold a large-scale 10-day action at the West Manggarai BPN Office,” he stated.

Would you like me to adjust the tone or format of this translation for a specific news platform (e.g., headline style, shorter paragraphs for online reading)?