Nusantara Indigenous Peoples' Alliance Sued Act on Forestry

Jakarta MK Online - The Act on Forestry, for the indigenous people, not given the uncertainty of their communal rights. In fact, the unity of the rights of indigenous people for indigenous territories is a right that is hereditary, and the unity of indigenous people have a history of land tenure and its own resources which impact on differences in claim basis with other parties including the government.

That is one of the basic problems of indigenous peoples are revealed, during a press conference with reporters at the House of the Constitutional Court (MK).Therefore, Monday (19/3), representing the Indigenous Peoples of the Archipelago, the Alliance of Indigenous Peoples of the Archipelago (AMAN), came to the Constitutional Court to examine the Law no. 41 of 1999 on Forestry, in particular Article 1 paragraph (6), Article 4 paragraph (3), and Article 5 paragraph (1), (2), and (3) of the 1945 Constitution. As the Petitioners, they consist of the Secretary General of AMAN Abdon Nababan, Bustamir, and Moch. Okri.

Provisions of the Act on Forestry 41/1999 particularly Article 1 paragraph (6), according to the Petitioners, unconstitutional to the extent not read "indigenous forest is a forest located in the territory of indigenous peoples." And Article 4 paragraph (3), unconstitutional to the extent not read "forest tenure the state shall respect the customary law, as long as it exists.”

And, the final chapter is Article 5, paragraph (1), (2), and (3), according to the Petitioners, unconstitutional to the extent not read subsection (1) "The forest is based on its status as follows: a. state forests, and b. forest rights, and forests. Subsection (2) Forest country referred to in paragraph (1). "

"To the law, so back in the agreed constitutional path by the founders of our nation," said Abdon Nababan, accompanied by a number of indigenous leaders from various regions in Indonesia, told reporters after registering at the trial Court.

During the meeting, Abdon also said that he filed a law of indigenous peoples and forest, because they have not succeeded through political channels include the revision of Law 41 was passed the House of Representatives. "Therefore, the Court can be safe in hope to ensure the recovery of the rights of indigenous peoples in this country. Because we assume the Law no. 41/1999 on Forestry is contrary to the mandate of the Constitution of 1945, "said the secretary general SAFE.

In addition, the Petitioners' petition reveals that basically there is a regulation that specifically governs how Natural Resources (SDA) of forest are protected and utilized in an important and necessary, so that natural resources and forests are owned by the nation's can be well managed and sustainable in order to achieve welfare and prosperity of the people fairly.

"However, it turns out in the implementation of the Forestry Law has been used to displace and drive out the unity of indigenous peoples from their traditional forest areas, which are inseparable from their lives," explained the Petitioner in the petition.

On the basis of these thoughts, advanced to the Petitioner, this petition expressly states deny the existence and enforceability of the Forestry Act No. 41 of 1999, particularly Article 1 paragraph (6), Article 4 paragraph (3), and Article 5 paragraph (1), (2), and (3). According to them, article a quo against the guarantee of legal certainty, as regulated in Article 28D paragraphs (1), the 1945 Constitution. (Shohibul Umam / mh/Yazid.tr)