¹Yustina Niken Sharaningtyas,²Endang Sumiarni

^1,2Faculty of Law, Atma Jaya University Yogyakarta

DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v6-i2-49

Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT

This research is conducted out of our concerns about the preservation of cultural heritage buildings in Indonesia. One of the triggers is the Decision of Sumedang Regent Concerning the Designation of Special Regency-Ranked Cultural Heritage of a house on Jalan Geusan Ulun, Regency/City of Sumedang, Jawa Barat, Indonesia. The heirs of the house objected and filed a lawsuit to the State Administrative Court (Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara) Bandung. They won the case and the judge decided that the decision of the Regent of Sumedang was invalidated. The result, however, indicates that there is a legal problem. On the one hand, the Law on Cultural Heritage dictates that the regional government must preserve, develop, and utilize cultural heritages. It also regulates that it is compulsory for every one who possesses and/or controls cultural heritages to register them—free of charge—to the regency/city government. Moreover, the law emphasizes that unregistered cultural heritages could be taken over by the regional government. On the other hand, one of the legal considerations of the judge was that there had been no socialization. The judge did not describe the elements of the articles referred to as the legal material. The judge pointed out that the defendant’s actions that eventually made a house an object of dispute contradicted the principles of austerity in the principles of good governance. This study endeavors to conduct an in-depth discussion to answer these questions: (1) Could the lawsuit of the plaintiffs be interpreted as a way to hinder the efforts to preserve cultural heritage and (2) Have the legal consideration and judge's decision been oriented to the preservation of cultural heritage? This normative study uses secondary data—primary and secondary legal material. The primary legal material is analyzed by describing, systemizing, analyzing, and assessing the preservation of cultural heritage buildings using the theory of good-governance principles and the theory of preservation.

KEYWORDS:

Preservation, Cultural Heritage Building, Judge’s Decision, State Administrative Justice

REFERENCES

1) Zaki (ed.), UUD 1945 dan Amandemennya, Plus Sejarah Kemerdekaan Republik Indonesia, (Yogyakarta: Penerbit Second Hope , 2014), p. 11.

2) Kementrian Pendidikan dan kebudayaan, Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 Tahun 2010 tentang Cagar Budaya, (Jakarta: Direktorat Pelestarian Cagar Budaya dan Permuseuman, 2010), p.75.

3) Fajar Winarni, Aspek Hukum Peran serta Masyarakat dalam Pelestarian Cagar Budaya, Mimbar Hukum, Vol.30. No.1. Februari 2018, p. 96.

4) Hadjon, PM, Pengkajian Ilmu Hukum Dogmatik (Normatif), Yuridika FH Unair, No.6 Nov - Des. Lihat juga Ibrahim, Johnny, Teori & Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif, Bayu Media Publishing, 2006. Juga Marzuki, Peter Mahmud, Penelitian Hukum, Prenada Media, 2005; dan Marzuki Piter Mahmud, Penelitian Hukum, Yuridika Vol 16 No.1 Mar – Apr 2001, FH Unair.

5) F.Sugeng Istanto, 2007, Penelitian Hukum, CV.Ganda, Yogyakarta, p. 9.

6) Hans Kelsen, Teori Umum Tentang Hukum dan Negara (General Theory of Law and State), Terjemahan Raisul Muttaqien disunting Nurainun Mangunsong,SH.MHum. Penerbit Nusamedia & Penerbit Nuansa, Ujung Berung-Bandung, 2006, p.179.

7) H. Frunken, InLeiden tot de rechtswetenschap, 2 druk, Arnhem, Gouda Quint, 1983,, hlm. 139; see J. Gijssels and van Mark van Hoecke, 1982, What is Rechtsteorie?, Zwolle, Tjeenk Willink, p. 168.

8) Junus Satrio Atmodjo, tanpa tahun, Pemeringkatan Cagar Budaya, Prinsip, Metode, dan Manfaatnya, Unpublished Paper, p.1.

9) Monika Murzyn Kupisz dan Jaroslaw Dzialek, Cultural Heritage in Building and Enhancing Social Capital, “Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development”, Vol.3, Issue: i, pp. 35-54, https://doi.org/10.1108/20441261311317392.

10) Anonim, Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 Tahun 2010 tentang Cagar Budaya, Kementerian Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata, Direktorat Jenderal Sejarah dan Purbakala, 2011, pp. 16-19.

11) Naskah Akademik Undang Undang Cagar Budaya, Op.Cit., p. 25.

12) Ibid.

13) Kementrian Pendidikan dan kebudayaan, Undang Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 Tahun 2010 tentang Cagar Budaya, Direktorat Pelestarian Cagar Budaya dan Permuseuman, Jakarta, 2010, p.75.

14) Velpaus, Loes, Heritage Management and Sustainable Development in Perspective: Theory, Law, and Practice, “Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development”, Vol.5, Issue 3, 2013., p. 1, http://dx.doi.org./10.1108/JCHMSD-09-2015-0033.

15) Hamdan Zoelva, 2014, Proceeding International Symposium : Reactualization Of International Law In Protecting Archeological Properties And Its Implication TowardsThe Cultural Heritage Law In Indonesia, CLDS Fakultas Hukum UII, Yogyakarta, p. 2.

16) Ibid., p. 6.

17) Yadi Mulyadi, Museum Komunitas Alternatif Pelestarian Cagar Budaya Berbasis Masyarakat, ”Jurnal Museografi”, Vol. VI, Nomor 1, Desember 2012, p. 3.

18) Miguel Leon Portilla, 1990, Endangered Cultures, Terjemahan oleh Julie Goodsonlawes, Dallas : Southern Methodist University Press, pp. 799, 233.

19) Sedyawati, Edi., 1993, Arkeologi dan Jati Diri Bangsa (Pertemuan Ilmiah Arkelogi VI di Batu Malang), Pusat Penelitian Arkeologi Nasional Jakarta, pp. 24-25.

20) Grant Jim, Sam Gorin and Neil Fleming, 2002, The Archeology Coursebook, London : Routledge, p. 4.

21) Soerjanto Poespowardojo, 1993, Arkeologi dan Jati Diri Bangsa (Pertemuan Ilmiah Arkeologi VI di Batu Malang), Pusat Penelitian Arkeologi Nasional Jakarta, p. 15.

VOlUME 06 ISSUE 02 FEBRUARY 2023