KOMPAS.SBS — JAKARTA — Jl. Yoka–Expo Waena, Behind Mega Waena (MMR), Heram District, Jayapura City
14 September 2026
Number: 15/S.Pers/ABH-JPR/IX/2026
Subject: Complaint Against the Governor of Papua to the President of the Republic of Indonesia Concerning the Alleged Non-Implementation of a Final and Binding Court Ruling in the Ring Road Land Case
Attachments: Acknowledgment Receipts from the Ministry of State Secretariat, Ministry of Home Affairs, and National Human Rights Commission
Court Ruling Reportedly Final, but Compensation for Land Used for Ring Road Project Has Yet to Be Realized
JAYAPURA, PAPUA — 14 September 2026 — A long-running land dispute involving land affected by the construction of the Ring Road in the Skyland Vihara area of Jayapura City, Papua, has once again drawn public attention after being escalated to the central government.
The Law Office of Agustinus, S.H., M.H. & Team, acting as legal counsel for the landowners, states that it has formally submitted a complaint against the Governor of Papua, Komjen Pol (Ret.) Mathius Derek Fakhiri, to the President of the Republic of Indonesia, Prabowo Subianto, through the Ministry of State Secretariat.
The complaint concerns the alleged failure to implement court rulings that, according to the legal counsel, have obtained permanent and binding legal force (inkracht van gewijsde) in relation to land affected by the Ring Road Skyland Vihara project.
According to the legal counsel, the matter is no longer merely a dispute over land ownership. It has developed into a broader issue concerning legal certainty, respect for judicial decisions, protection of citizens’ rights, and the government’s obligation to comply with legally binding court rulings.
The legal counsel has even used the expression “fighting against the state” to describe the seriousness of the situation if government officials allegedly fail to carry out obligations arising from a final court ruling.
However, all such allegations and assessments constitute the position and legal arguments of the complainant and his legal counsel. Their substantive truth remains subject to verification, examination, and clarification by the competent authorities.
COMPLAINTS SUBMITTED TO CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS
The Law Office of Agustinus emphasized that the complaint was not merely a public statement.
According to the legal counsel, the complaint was submitted in Jakarta on 8 August 2026, while several government institutions subsequently issued administrative acknowledgment receipts dated 10 August 2026.
The acknowledgment documents are included as attachments to the press statement distributed to the media.
Among the complaints submitted are:
First, a complaint addressed to the President of the Republic of Indonesia through the Ministry of State Secretariat, concerning what the complainant describes as alleged conduct by the Governor of Papua and the Head of the Papua Provincial Public Works and Spatial Planning Agency (PUPR) relating to the alleged disregard of court decisions and judicial institutions.
The complaint is stated to have been officially received and administratively acknowledged on 10 August 2026.
Second, a complaint was submitted to the Minister of Home Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia, containing substantially similar concerns. According to the legal counsel, the document was received by Ministry of Home Affairs staff on the same date.
Third, a letter was also submitted to the Director General of Regional Financial Development at the Ministry of Home Affairs, which, according to the complainant’s documentation, was received on 10 August 2026 at approximately 11:50 a.m. Western Indonesia Time (WIB).
The matter was also reportedly submitted to the Papua Representative Office of the National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM RI) and the Papua Representative Office of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Indonesia.
The legal counsel stated that these steps were taken because the dispute has continued for a considerable period and, in their assessment, has not yet received the resolution expected by their clients.
THREE LAND CASES REPORTEDLY HAVE FINAL AND BINDING COURT RULINGS
The central issue underlying the complaint concerns land belonging to the legal counsel’s clients in the Ring Road Skyland Vihara area of Jayapura City, which the legal counsel states was affected by road construction.
The Law Office of Agustinus identifies three civil cases as the legal basis for the landowners’ claims.
1. Fonny Hovan Case
Case Number:
124/Pdt.G/2013/PN Jpr jo. 858 PK/Pdt/2023
The land object is reportedly associated with Certificate of Ownership (SHM) No. 2398, covering approximately 7,529 square meters.
2. Alterina Hovan Case
Case Number:
125/Pdt.G/2013/PN Jpr jo. 844 PK/Pdt/2023
The land object is reportedly associated with SHM No. 2399, covering approximately 7,391 square meters.
3. Emi Surya Case
Case Number:
135/Pdt.G/2013/PN Jpr jo. 822 PK/Pdt/2023
The land object is reportedly associated with SHM No. 2400, covering approximately 7,314 square meters.
According to the legal counsel, all three cases went through judicial proceedings up to the judicial review stage (Peninjauan Kembali/PK) and have obtained final and binding legal force.
One of the most significant points raised by the legal counsel concerns an Order and Official Minutes of Execution issued by the Jayapura District Court.
According to the documents said to be in the possession of the legal counsel, the execution process was declared completed on 30 May 2024.
The legal counsel further states that the documents contain directions concerning the obligation of the Papua Provincial Government, through the relevant agencies, to budget and pay compensation arising from the legal consequences of the court proceedings.
According to the legal counsel, these documents were subsequently submitted to relevant parties, including the Governor of Papua, the Papua Provincial House of Representatives (DPR Papua), and the Papua Provincial PUPR Agency.
However, the legal counsel maintains that, as of 2026, the compensation payment being pursued by the clients has not been realized as expected.
This is where the dispute has developed into a broader legal and administrative controversy.
According to the legal counsel, once a case has been resolved through judicial proceedings and a court ruling has obtained permanent legal force, concrete steps should be taken to ensure that the ruling is respected and implemented in accordance with applicable law.
The legal counsel also stated that on 2 March 2026, the Jayapura District Court issued another letter of clarification or reaffirmation to the relevant parties.
According to the Law Office of Agustinus, the letter concerned a request for the compensation obligation to be accommodated through an Addendum or Amendment to the 2026 Regional Budget (APBD).
Nevertheless, according to the complainant, no compensation payment had been realized as demanded by the landowners as of the publication of this press statement.
The situation subsequently prompted the legal counsel to escalate the matter to the central government.
Agustinus, S.H., M.H., emphasized that the matter should be viewed from a broader legal perspective.
«“The execution of the three civil court rulings, which have obtained permanent legal force, has been completed. Our clients’ rights have been affirmed through the judicial process. What we are questioning now is the obligation to realize the payment in accordance with the rulings and the execution documents.”»
He argued that if obligations arising from a court ruling continue not to be realized, the situation could raise serious questions concerning legal certainty and respect for the judiciary.
«“This is no longer merely an administrative matter. It concerns the authority of law, legal certainty, and citizens’ rights to lawful property. The state must be present when citizens have gone through the entire legal process.”»
The legal counsel also issued a strong statement:
«“When a court ruling that has obtained permanent legal force is not implemented, what is at stake is not merely the interests of our clients, but also public confidence in law enforcement.”»
The statement represents the legal position of the legal counsel and does not constitute a judicial finding that the reported officials have committed a legal violation.
Through the complaint, the Law Office of Agustinus is asking the central government to give serious attention to the Ring Road Skyland land issue.
The legal counsel is requesting the President, through the relevant ministries and institutions, to conduct an administrative and legal review of the matter and ensure that there is no disregard of a final court ruling.
According to the legal counsel, central government involvement is necessary to ensure legal certainty for the people of Papua, particularly where a dispute has already gone through a lengthy judicial process.
Among the requests submitted by the legal counsel are:
1. The President of the Republic of Indonesia, through the Minister of State Secretary and the Minister of Home Affairs, is requested to give serious attention to the matter and take appropriate action within their respective authorities.
2. The Governor of Papua and the Head of the Papua Provincial PUPR Agency are requested to ensure the implementation of obligations arising from the court rulings in accordance with applicable legal and budgetary mechanisms.
3. The Papua Provincial Government is requested to follow up on the compensation obligation concerning the Ring Road land through the mechanism for amending the 2026 Regional Budget, provided that such obligation is legally and administratively established by the relevant court rulings and execution documents.
4. Komnas HAM, the Ombudsman of the Republic of Indonesia, and the Ministry of Home Affairs are requested to pay attention to the matter and conduct supervision within their respective authorities.
According to the legal counsel, the objective is to ensure that the matter receives a transparent, accountable, and definitive resolution rather than remaining unresolved indefinitely.
The Law Office of Agustinus views the gap between judicial decisions and their implementation as one of the fundamental issues in this case.
According to the legal counsel, citizens who have spent significant time, effort, and financial resources pursuing justice through the courts are entitled to certainty concerning the implementation of a final ruling.
«“Citizens should not have to win their case in court, only to spend years fighting again to obtain the implementation of a final and binding decision.”»
The legal counsel further emphasized that the struggle would continue through legal and institutional channels, rather than through actions outside the law.
With the complaint now submitted to the President, Ministry of Home Affairs, Komnas HAM, and Ombudsman, the legal counsel hopes that the Ring Road Skyland land issue will not simply become another administrative file.
The legal counsel is asking every institution that has received the complaint to conduct a comprehensive examination based on the relevant court rulings, execution orders, official minutes of execution, land ownership documents, government budget documents, and other supporting evidence.
The Law Office of Agustinus also states that it is prepared to provide all supporting documentation if requested by the central government or other competent state institutions.
The message conveyed by the legal counsel is straightforward but firm:
If a court ruling has genuinely obtained permanent legal force and there are valid orders concerning its implementation, there must be clarity regarding how and when the resulting obligations will be fulfilled in accordance with applicable law and government budgetary procedures.
Ultimately, the authority of the state is also reflected in the state’s consistency in respecting the law, upholding judicial decisions, and providing legal certainty to its citizens.
All allegations, claims, assessments, and legal interpretations contained in this press statement constitute the statements and legal position of the Law Office of Agustinus, S.H., M.H. & Team, acting as legal counsel for the complainants.
The editorial team does not conclude that the Governor of Papua, the Papua Provincial PUPR Agency, or any other reported party has committed a legal violation before the matter has been examined and determined by the competent authorities.
The right of reply and right to clarification remain fully open to the Governor of Papua, the Papua Provincial Government, the Papua Provincial PUPR Agency, and all other parties concerned, in accordance with journalistic principles and applicable Indonesian Press Law.
Jakarta–Jayapura, 14 September 2026
Respectfully,
AGUSTINUS, S.H., M.H.
Legal Counsel for the Ring Road Skyland Vihara Landowners
Law Office of Agustinus, S.H., M.H. & Team
RED DAVID E,S.E.
