Written by Erwin Dwi Kristianto

In the 1945 Constitution before the amendment, there was no phrase “traditional rights”, which existed as the phrase of the right of origin. In its formation, it was discussed about the rights of origin of the special areas. From Soepomo’s explanation at the Second Session of BPUPKI on July 15, 1945, at least the phrase right of origin – although not limited to – requires recognition and respect for the original composition of indigenous peoples as special areas.¹

In amendment II, August 18, 2000, Article 18 was developed. One of them is Article 18B paragraph (2) which contains the phrase traditional rights.² In connection with this, the Constitutional Court Decision Number 35/PUU-X/2012 states: The rights of origin in the 1945 Constitution before the amendment can be equated with traditional rights as referred to in Article 18B paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution after the amendment.³

This short manuscript will try to understand the original intent of the phrase traditional rights in the 1945 Constitution after the amendment. The author realizes that original intent is not the only method of understanding the Constitution. This manuscript is processed from one of the research sub-chapters -conceptual part- conducted by the Indonesian HuMa Association in 2020 entitled Legal Framework of Customary Forests. A study that intends to explore the spaces of movement to determine the existence of Indigenous Peoples and the recognition and protection of their traditional rights, including in customary forests.

Original Intent of Traditional Rights

One method of interpreting “originalism” is to base oneself on the original intent of the formulation of the 1945 Constitution article. After the amendment of the 1945 Constitution, the phrase “right of origin” was replaced by “traditional rights.” In its formulation, there were several opinions from the participants of the relevant session.

At the 23rd meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee (PAH) I of the BP MPR Second Amendment to the Constitution, February 29, 2000, Pastor Pattiasina from PGI said: “… local governments with special autonomy or broad autonomy in order to revive the structure of the local community such as customary density, and be made an agency by the village government, because then what will appear is the Primus Interparis system in the village.”⁴

Furthermore, at the 25th meeting of PAH I, on March 2, 2000, Lukman Hakim Saifuddin of the F-PPP stated: “… the changes we make to the Constitution should include full recognition of the sovereignty of communities, especially indigenous peoples. It is not only limited to the use of natural resources but also related to the law of governance.”⁵

At the same meeting, Sandra Moniaga from ELSAM said: “… talking about customary rights here, it is not only customary rights over natural resources. But customary rights that are more holistic in nature.” Sandra

Moniaga adds: “There is an autonomy for indigenous peoples to self-govern which we know as self-determination…”⁶

A few days later, at the 36th PAH I Meeting, 29 May 2000, the F-PG proposed: “… The State recognizes customary and territorial law communities to have their own government based on their rights, origins in special and special areas regulated by law.” ⁷

In the same meeting, Abdul Khaliq Ahmad alluded to: “… related to the right of origin of the regions. I think we should still appreciate this as a form of regional uniqueness, therefore the naming of regions should not be standardized…”⁸

Two days later, at the Meeting of the Drafting Team of PAH I BP MPR, May 31, 2000, Hobbes Sinaga also proposed a rule on the protection of customary law communities: “Recognize and protect customary law communities, their history, to regulate their communities based on their customary law.”⁹

In the Meeting of Commission A of the 3rd Annual Session of the Extended People’s Consultative Assembly on August 12, 2000, Lukman Hakim Saifuddin again proposed that the division of regions should not only be provinces and districts/cities, but also like the original 1945 Constitution where small areas such as villages, nagari, and others are also recognized as regions.¹⁰

Happy Bone also agrees with this opinion and states that the structure of local government must reach the lowest layer, so lift villages, nagari, customary institutions.¹¹

Three days before the 55th Anniversary of the Republic of Indonesia, precisely in the Lobby Meeting of Commission A of the People’s Consultative Assembly on August 14, 2000, Bagir Manan as an expert submitted a proposal for the formulation of Article 18B paragraph (2): “The State recognizes and respects the units of the legal community, the original legal community and its traditional rights as long as it is alive and in accordance with the development of society and the principles of the unitary state of the Republic of Indonesia.”¹²

At that time, Bagir Manan’s proposal for various indigenous peoples’ rights presented by the forum was summarized by Bagir Manan under the term “traditional rights”. Several members of the meeting asked Bagir Manan about the meaning of these traditional rights. Bagir Manan replied, “Traditional rights are the result of debate because besides customary rights, there are other rights so that we extend them into customary rights, other customary rights, the right to ride on the reef, and all kinds of rights if there are any.”¹³

In the minutes of the session to amend the Constitution, it is not discussed what rights are traditional rights. From the minutes of the session to amend the 1945 Constitution, it can be concluded that the term “traditional rights” is indeed intended to make the meaning of these rights deductible, because until the end of the ratification of Article 18B paragraph (2) it was not agreed in detail on the scope of traditional rights.

Directions of Regulations in the Indigenous Peoples Bill

On one occasion, former Constitutional Judge Jimly Asshiddiqie once gave an opinion about original intent. According to him, reading original intent is only one way to understand the constitution.¹⁴ Contextual interpretation (according to the context) is another example of a method.¹⁵ Decision No. 005/PUU-IV/2006 also states that the interpreter of the constitution should not be solely fixated on the method of interpreting “originalism” by basing himself only on the “original intent” of the formulation of the 1945 Constitution, especially if such interpretation actually causes the provisions of the 1945 Constitution as a system to not work and/or contradicts the main idea underlying the constitution itself as a whole in relation to the purpose to be realized.

In that situation, research by the Indonesian HuMa Association in 2024 maps that there are at least 12 (twelve) rights of Indigenous Peoples in various laws. In addition, there are 4 (four) rights regulated in 3 (three) international treaties that are binding on Indonesia. In addition, 2 (two) international treaties that are not yet binding on Indonesia, which provide protection for the rights of indigenous peoples. ¹⁶¹⁷

The author argues that the original intent of the phrase traditional rights can be one of the references to formulate the rights of indigenous peoples in the Indigenous Peoples Bill. Moreover, from the minutes of the meeting above, the phrase traditional rights is indeed designed to be deductible. The author also argues that various norms that have been applied and situations faced by Indigenous Peoples are other references.

1. BAB VI PEMERINTAHAN DAERAH, Pasal 18 UUD 1945 sebelum amandemen berbunyi: Pembagian daerah Indonesia atas daerah besar dan kecil, dengan bentuk susunan pemerintahannya ditetapkan dengan undang-undang, dengan memandang dan mengingati dasar permusyawaratan dalam sistem pemerintahan negara, dan hak-hak asal-usul dalam daerah-daerah yang bersifat istimewa. ↩︎
2. Soepomo menyatakan: “Hak-hak asal-usul dalam daerah-daerah yang bersifat istimewa harus diperingati juga. Daerah-daerah yang bersifat istimewa itu ialah pertama daerah kerajaan (Kooti), baik di Djawa maupun di luar Jawa, daerah-daerah yang dalam bahasa Belanda dinamakan zelfbesturende landschappen”. Kedua, daerah-daerah kecil yang mempunyai susunan asli, ialah Dorfgemeinschaften”, daerah-daerah kecil yang mempunyai susunan rakyat asli seperti desa di Jawa, negeri di Minangkabau, dusun dan marga di Palembang, huta dan kuria di Tapanuli, gampong di Aceh. Maksud panitia ialah
   hendaknya adanya daerah-daerah istimewa tadi. Ialah daerah kerajaan (zelfbsturende landschappen) dan desa-desa itu dihormati dengan menghormati dan memperbaiki susunannya asli. Begitulah maksud Pasal 16.” Lihat: Muhammad Yamin, Naskah Persiapan Undang-Undang Dasar 1945, Jakarta: Prapantja,
   1959, hlm. 46. ↩︎
3. Pasal 18B ayat (2) UUD setelah amandeman berbunyi: “Negara mengakui dan menghormati kesatuan-kesatuan masyarakat hukum adat beserta hak-hak tradisionalnya sepanjang masih hidup dan sesuai dengan perkembangan masyarakat dan prinsip Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia, yang diatur dalam
   undang-undang.” ↩︎
4. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 35/PUU-X/2012, hlm. 40. ↩︎
5. Tim Penyusun Naskah Komprehensif Proses dan Hasil Perubahan UUD 1945, Naskah Komprehensif Perubahan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945: Buku IV Kekuasaan Pemerintahan Negara Jilid 2, Jakarta: Sekretariat Jenderal dan Kepaniteraan Mahkamah Konstitusi,
   2010, hlm.1137.  ↩︎
6. Ibid., hlm. 1140. ↩︎
7. Ibid., hlm. 1140. ↩︎
8. Ibid., hlm. 1165. ↩︎
9. Ibid., hlm. 1178. ↩︎
10. Ibid., hlm. 1239.  ↩︎
11. Ibid., hlm. 1348. ↩︎
12. Ibid., hlm. 1350.  ↩︎
13. Ibid., hlm. 1362.  ↩︎
14. Ibid., hlm. 1372. ↩︎
15. Ahli Minta MK Tak Gunakan Original Intent, https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/ahli-minta-mk-tak-gunakan-ioriginal-intenti-hol20299/ diakses 7 Maret 2025. ↩︎
16. Menafsir Konstitusi, dari Original Intent hingga Judicial Activism, https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/menafsir-konstitusi–dari-original-intent-hingga-judicial-activism-lt5d5aa2e2269ec/?page=1 diakses 7 Maret 2025.  ↩︎
17. Lihat: Irena Lucy Ishimora et.al, Evaluasi Dan Analisis Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Terkait Masyarakat Adat, Jakarta: Perkumpulan HuMa Indonesia, 2024.  ↩︎

Disclaimer: This article was written in Indonesia and has been translated by Google Translate. In case of dispute or discrepancy, the original language of the article should prevail.