THE LEGITIMACY OF ONDOAFI IN CONFLICT SETTLEMENT OF ULAYAT LAND OWNERSHIP IN PAPUA
Tri Mulyadi, Kamsi, Surwandono, Trisno Raharjo, Hasse J
Political Islam-Political Science, Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta
Email: tri.2016@pasca.umy.ac.id

ABSTRACT
This paper explores the roles of ondoafi (head of tribes) in conflict settlement of ulayat land ownership in Sentani, Papua. Ondoafi is the highest leader of customary law community overseeing several leaders of tribes. The charismatic power of ondoafi as a leader in customary government can determine the direction of policy including the resolution of problems of indigenous people. In his duty, ondoafi in customary government is assisted by leaders of tribes, Abuafa, Ahona. In making customary decisions, ondoafi asks for opinions from the elders and leaders of tribes. Enforcement of customary law is carried out with customary council meeting. The roles of ondoafi in the post-New Order era was increasingly significant, especially in terms of policy making against conflicts related to ulayat land. In the New Order era, ondoafi was not involved further in resolving land issues, so he would not be labeled as part of the Free Papua Movement (OPM). In the Special Autonomy era, the roles of ondoafi got stronger as indicated by the privileges given by the government to indigenous people in Papua. Conflict over ownership of ulayat rights in customary law community, especially in Sentani, Papua, can be controlled well through the roles of ondoafi.
Keywords: Ondoafi, Ulayat Land, Conflict, Ownership

INTRODUCTION
Land is a basic human interest. In living a life, a person or a legal entity needs land to carry out daily activities or as a place to live (Pramukti & Widayanto, 2015: 1). The relationship between humans and land has always been closely related. The issue of land in human life has a very important meaning because most of human life is very dependent on land (Kobu, 2017: 36). Land is so important that it is considered as one of the elements in the implementation of construction. Therefore, the most principle component called land should be available before implementing construction. Without this main component, the implementation of construction cannot be realized optimally (Iskandar Syah, 2015: 96, Mebri, 2017: 74-75).
In the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in Article 33 paragraph (3), it is stated that "earth, water and natural resources contained are controlled by the state and used for the biggest prosperity of people". This constitution principally regulates the control of land by the state for development purposes. However, the control of land by the state for the benefit of development does not go smoothly. In a number of regions, some ethnic groups also claim ownership of land commonly referred to as ulayat land. The existence of ulayat land is recognized by the state as long as a certain community or ethnic group has a customary law community. Recognition of ulayat rights also exists in Article 18B paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution which states:
The state recognizes and respects traditional communities along with their traditional customary rights as long as these remain in existence and are in accordance with the societal development and the principles of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, and shall be regulated by law. 
In addition, Article 2 paragraph (4) of Act Number 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Regulations on Agrarian Principles (UUPA) states that "The implementation of the right control by the state may be delegated to the autonomous region and customary law community if deemed necessary and not being in conflict with the national interest in accordance with the provisions of Government Regulation.”  This regulation is the basis for regulating ulayat land.
In the context of national law, the concept of national land law derives from customary law, so it recognizes ulayat rights of customary law communities in various regions in Indonesia that have already existed and inhabited lands in Indonesia, even before Indonesia's independence. Although the definition of ulayat rights is not explained in detail, Article 3 of the Basic Agrarian Act (UUPA) provides recognition of the existence of ulayat rights in national land law. Ulayat rights are the highest tenure rights in certain customary law communities over land that belongs to its citizens. The provisions in the Basic Agrarian Act also provide limits related to the existence of ulayat rights of customary law communities. The limitations are in so far as they still exist, in accordance with the national and state interests, and should not be in conflict with the acts and other regulations of higher levels (Article 3 of the Basic Agrarian Act).
In the context of Papua, regulations concerning the existence of ulayat land are included in Act No. 21 of 2001 concerning Papua Special Autonomy which provides recognition of the existence of ulayat rights in Papua. Letter s in Article 1 explains that ulayat rights are the right of association owned by certain customary law communities over a certain area, which is the living environment of its citizens which includes the right to utilize land, forest, water and all their contents according to the regulations. Recognition of ulayat rights in Papua is also emphasized in Article 38 paragraph (2) of the Papua Special Autonomy Law which states that economic efforts in Papua Province that utilize natural resources must be carried out by respecting the rights of the community, providing legal certainty for entrepreneurs and sustainable development stipulated by Perdasus. Based on these provisions, the government must synchronize the interests of providing protection for ulayat rights by ensuring legal certainty to entrepreneurs. Article 43 of the Papua Special Autonomy Law also gives legitimacy to the recognition of Papua Provincial Government to the ulayat rights of customary law communities in Papua in which the article discusses the protection of the rights of the community. 
Principally, the land of ulayat rights in Papua should not be diverted by buying and selling, acquisition, building government infrastructure, privately owned plantations, and interests of other people who are not members of the customary law community. This is because the transfer of the land will have a big challenge, giving rise to the shock of the land conflicts in the customary law community since it is a major violation of the prevailing customary law. Lately, however, there have been many cases or conflicts rooted in land of ulayat rights because of the transfer of ownership. The conflicts that occur not only involve customary law community, but also the general public and even the government itself.
The conflicts over the transfer of ulayat land cause a difference in political perceptions among the people in customary law community. The problem stems from the conflict over ulayat land triggered by the implementation of government policies regarding land acquisition for transmigration program in Papua. As the central government's policy, not using the proper procedures to release ulayat land according to customary law has become a wider conflict. Land acquisition by the government by force, using a military approach and intimidation, also triggers a conflict over land of ulayat rights. Feeling the loss of their ulayat land rights, the customary law community continue to fight with blocking action demanding compensation from the government.

PROBLEM FORMULATION
This paper will answer the following three questions:
1. Why is there a conflict over the land of ulayat rights in Sentani, Jayapura, Papua?
2. What is the role of ondoafi in the conflict over ulayat land in the area?
3. What is the alternative strategy for resolving the conflict over ulayat land in Sentani, Jayapura, Papua?
The three questions above will be discussed sequentially in the discussion of this paper.

METHODOLOGY
This research is a qualitative research using documents as the main data source. The document referred to is state/government regulations regarding land, including important documents held by customary law community in Sentani. This research model did not use the population but certain cases and social situations that represent social similarities and the cases under study. This research is centered on the case of the conflict of ulayat land transfer in Sentani, Papua so that it is considered as an empirical sociological legal research. The primary data sources in this study were interviews with the head of tribes (ondoafi), the Customary Council of Sentani Tribe (DASS), members of the customary law community, and the settlers. Meanwhile, the secondary data were obtained from books as supplementary data for primary data sources. The secondary data sources of this research were data obtained by conducting literature studies, such as scientific books and documents. These secondary data were obtained from BPN Regional Office of Papua Province, BPN Jayapura Regency, Regional Government of Jayapura Regency, Jayapura District Court, and Notary/Land Deed Official. The collected data were then analyzed qualitatively. The analysis consists of three activities that occur simultaneously, namely data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion/verification.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Ulayat Land and Customary Law Community
The control and regulation as well as the implementation of land use by the state are directed towards its use by maintaining the rights to ulayat land, the people's land and social functions to realize social justice for all the people of Indonesia. This is further confirmed in Article 6 of the Basic Agrarian Act (UUPA) No. 5 of 1960 which states: "All rights on land have a social function". The Basic Agrarian Act (UUPA) itself does not define what is meant by ulayat land. In Article 3 of the Act, there is a term "ulayat rights and rights similar to that.” It is explained that what is meant by "ulayat rights and rights similar to that" is what is called "beschikkingsrecht” in the customary law library. The Article 3 of the Basic Agrarian Act is as follows:
In view of the provisions contained in Article 1 and 2, the implementation of the ulayat rights and other similar rights of adat-law communities – as long as such communities in reality still exist—must be such that it is consistent with the national interest and the State’s interest and shall not contradict the laws and regulations of higher levels.
In the Regulation of the Minister of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning/Head of the National Land Agency Number 10 of 2016 concerning Procedures for Determining Communal Rights to Land of Customary Law Communities and Communities in Specific Areas, ulayat rights to land is known as communal rights to land that is the joint ownership rights to the land of a customary law community, or joint ownership rights to land granted to a community within a certain area.
Regarding this matter, in accordance with the explanation of Article 67 paragraph (1) of Act Number 41 of 1999 concerning Forestry (Forestry Law), a customary law community is considered to exist if, according to reality, it fulfills the following elements:
a. the society is still in the form of a community (rechtsgemeenschap);
b. there are institutions in the form of traditional ruling officials;
c. there are clear areas of customary law;
d. there are legal institutions and instruments, especially customary justice which are still adhered to; and
e. the society still collects forest products in the surrounding forest area to fulfill their daily needs.

Conflict of Ulayat Land 
	Studies of conflicts related to ulayat land have been carried out by scholars. Research conducted by these experts discussed ulayat land conflicts from various perspectives. For example, Tri Mulyadi (2010) in Papua, Dominic Toubesaane Paaga (2013) in Ghana, Barbara Beckert, Christoph Dittrich, Soeryo Adiwibowo (2014) in Jambi, Micky Thambikeni (2015) in Tanzania, Benjamin Betey Campion, and Rosita Dewi (2014) in Ghana, Africa saw every conflict that involved either companies or communities was based more on economic motives. The perspective of legal politics in analysing ulayat land conflicts was put forward by Manji Ambrena (2014) in Kenya and Alawode Mahdi Abdile (2013) in Nigeria. The anthropological perspective on ulayat land conflicts was reviewed by Antonie Socpa (2010) in Cameroon, Fekadu Beyene (2009) in Ethopia, Patrick Bottazzi, Adam Goguen & Stephan Rist (2016) in Africa, Supriayanto (2014) in Indonesia, Satish Chand (2016) in Papua New Guinea, Rosita Dewi (2016) in Merauke, Papua, and Mahdi Abdile (2012) in Somalia.
Conflicts as a result of sharp differences and severe conflicts of interest are caused by several backgrounds. First, there are different socio-political, economic and socio-cultural backgrounds that have a very strong influence. Second, there are thoughts that cause disagreement between each other. Third, there is an unsympathetic attitude towards a party, system and mechanism that exist in an organization. Fourth, there is a sense of dissatisfaction with the organization's environment, frustration, unhappiness, etc but people cannot do anything, and if they have to leave the group, they have to bear the risks. Fifth, there is an urge to exaggerate self-esteem, and it results in the desire to tell lies and make manipulation (Hidayat, 2002: 124).
Simon Fisher (2001: 7-8) explains the theory of causes of conflicts in society. The first is public relation theory in which the conflict that occurs is due to polarization, distrust, and hostility between groups in the midst of our society. The second is theory of principle negotiations in which the conflict is caused by incongruous positions and perspective differences about conflicts between the parties involved. The third is theory of human needs in which the conflict that arises in the community is caused by the struggle for basic human needs, such as physical, mental and social needs. The fourth is identity theory in which the conflict is caused by an identity that is threatened, or it is rooted in the loss of something and the past unresolved suffering. The fifth is theory of conflict transformation in which the conflict is caused by the presence of problems of inequality and injustice in the realm of social, economic, political and cultural life.

DISCUSSION
Conflict of Ulayat Land in Papua
The conflict over the transfer of ulayat land occurred since Papua first integrated into the part of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia. Land, employees' houses, office buildings that were previously controlled by the Dutch government were handed over to the Indonesian government. Land of ulayat rights from the customary law community in Papua was given at the time of a joint agreement (overenkomst) in 1956 and in 1962 between the landowners of ulayat rights and the Dutch government. Land and buildings that were still used by the Papuan provincial government, the municipal government and Jayapura regency were recognized as state-owned land and not ulayat land because, according to the joint agreement, the Dutch government had provided compensation of 100,000 (one hundred thousand guilders) recognized by the customary law community as compensation of usage rights.
The customary law community recognized 100,000 (one hundred thousand guilders) as compensation for the payment of ulayat land use rights from the Dutch government. During the sovereignty of the government of the Netherlands New Guinea, it was not a payment of compensation for the release of land of ulayat rights. The surrender of the sovereignty of the Netherlands New Guinea government to the government of the Republic of Indonesia on May 1, 1963 was initially carried out through a peace agreement in New York, United States on August 15, 1962 known as the New York agreement between the Indonesian government and the Dutch kingdom. The negotiations resulted in an agreement between the Republic of Indonesia and the kingdom of the Netherlands regarding West Irian. This agreement was signed on 15 August, 1962 in New York and was taken note by the General Assembly of the United Nations based on the resolution dated 21 September 1962 No. 1752 (XVII). This is what we know as New York Agreement (Pemda, 1972).
Based on the agreement between the Indonesian government and the Kingdom of the Netherlands regarding unresolved financial matters between the two countries dated September 7, 1966, later stated in Act number 7 of 1966 on November 8, 1966, all assets in the form of land and buildings belong to Indonesia. The Dutch government used land of ulayat rights as usage rights because the customary law community did not release the land only to receive compensation. The Dutch government with propaganda and intimidation threatened and forced to take the land of ulayat rights away by establishing houses for the employees and buildings for Dutch government. The agreement between the Dutch government and the customary law community was only the right to use the land. If it was not used, it would be returned to the community. This agreement was a trigger for the conflict over ulayat land because the Dutch government handed the land over to Indonesia.
	The conflict over the transfer of ulayat land in Jayapura Regency was not out of touch with the policies of the New Order government for acceleration of development, economy development and transmigration programs. On the implementation of the policy, the central government violated Article 3 of the Basic Agrarian Act (UUPA) in which the implementation and transfer of ulayat land from customary law community was not in accordance with the customary law procedures.
At the beginning of the New Order government, in addition to Act No. 20 of 1961 concerning Revocation of Land Rights, there was the Regulation of the Minister of Home Affairs No. 15 of 1975 concerning the Acquisition of Land Rights. However, in its implementation, this regulation was misused by the authorities with many interests. Then, the Presidential Decree No. 55 of 1993 concerning the procurement of land for the implementation of construction in the interest of the public was enacted. This Presidential Decree regulates the establishment of committees of land acquisition consisting of government officials both central and regional, responsible for carrying out an inventory of land, estimating and proposing the amount of compensation, as well as holding discussions with landowners. If there is an objection from the landowner regarding the committee's decision, the community can raise the objection to the governor concerning only on the amount of compensation (Fitriyah Farida, 2016: 99-100).
According to the Information and Documentation Coordinator Elsam Ari Yurino, the transmigration program to Papua is proved to have a negative impact on the social life of indigenous people of Papua. The uneven transmigration and development program has resulted in an increase in the number of migrants to the land of Papua and a horizontal conflict between migrant communities and indigenous people of Papua. Therefore, according to him, the transmigration program must be stopped, and the transmigration policy that has been carried out so far should be evaluated. As an alternative solution to regional development, the central government must facilitate a program of cooperation among regions to strengthen local governments so that they can seek independent development, he said. One recommendation for the local governments, he added, is that they must also arrange a special regional regulation for Papua Province that encourages the assimilation of migrant residents into Papuan culture through formal and informal education (Yurino Ari, 2015).
The national land policy and transmigration program freed the ulayat land on the basis of the Regulation of the Minister of Home Affairs No.15 of 1975 concerning Provisions on the procedures of land acquisition. The land acquisition for the transmigration program in Papua has become a conflict over the transfer of ulayat land due to the lack of process according to customary law. The acquisition is carried out with a militarization approach and intimidation to traditional leaders in order to release their land. They finally felt disadvantaged because they did not fight back.

Ondoafi and Politics of Ulayat Land Control
Ondoafi as the highest leader of customary law community oversees several leaders of tribes and has charismatic power as a leader in customary government. Position and great power determine the direction of policy in the government. On his duty, ondoafi is assisted by leaders of tribes, Abuafa, Ahona so that in making customary decisions, ondoafi asks for opinions from the elders and leaders of tribes. Enforcement of customary law was carried out with customary council meeting.
Conflict actors are parties having a conflict with disagreement in values, goals and interests. The different roles as conflict actors in the transfer of ulayat land are that they carry out blocking action and sue the former owner of ulayat land with certificate issued by the National Land Agency. Buyers affected by the conflict defend their rights and interests by using proof of ownership. The conflict actors of ulayat land can be grouped into the roles, interests and objectives of each party in the conflict.
In the conflict of ulayat land transfer, ondoafi in his power summons Abuafa, Ahona and leaders of tribes in the customary trial. The decision in the trial must be obeyed by all parties. If there are parties who do not obey, a trial of customary council of Sentani tribe (DASS) will be proceeded, and ondoafi/ondofolo summons all parties involved in the conflict to the trial. The parties in the conflict must attend the invitation of the ondoafi to the trial of DASS to listen and respond to the testimony of the parties in the conflict. Likewise, the power and authority of ondoafi/ondoafolo can force attendance to the customary trial. If the parties are absent and do not suffice the number of attendees, the trial will be postponed and determined according to the results of customary deliberations in the trial. Ondoafi/ondoafolo will summon Ahona and leaders of tribes for the legitimacy of the ratification of the requirements for the release of ulayat land. 
The role of ondoafi is very significant in the context of ulayat land ownership in Papua. In the New Order era, ondoafi did not dare to take control of ulayat land because he was worried that he would be accused of being part of the Free Papua Movement (OPM), but now the roles played by ondoafi are getting stronger. This is definitely because the authority structure in the government of Sentani customary law community is led by ondofolo or ondoafi assisted by Ketelo or Keselo as the head of the tribes (clan head), also assigned as Abuafa (ondofolo’s advisor) and Abu-akho that is ondofolo’s assistant in leading the community (Akha-Peakhe). Ondofolo and kaselo as a companion and accompanying includes the oldest position in a village called "Yo" according to the lineage formed of the village. The task of the customary government of Sentani tribe "Holeinarei" is to find food and care for children, think about prosperity, maintain culture and customs, maintain all areas of authority over other tribes fully responsible (Akha Peakhe) to the authority of the customary law community.
Conceptually, authority is formed from giving strength, authority and power to someone by another party in one group consciously and without compulsion (willingness to obey) because of the confident quality that someone/a group has to regulate and control by giving orders or making decisions obeyed by other parties. The authoritative nature is indicated by practical abilities or impressive theoretical knowledge of a subject, status and social position that makes other parties know or obey. From this definition, it is clear that a person is considered a religious authority because of theoretical or practical superiority in the field of religion through certain standards and recognition of others. Basically, the recognition of a religious authority is contractual bonds through opinions or advice and is totally independent of coercive elements (Kamsi, 2015).
	
The Role of DASS and Alternative Solutions for Conflict over Ulayat Land Transfer
DASS as the organizers of the implementation of customary government authority, on the basis of the responsibility of ondoafi (executive) and kaselo/Katelo (legislative), maintains and fights for ulayat land to be transferred to the proper customary procedure. DASS has duty and customary role in protecting and maintaining the solidarity of Sentani tribe. The aim is to defend the basic rights of Sentani indigenous people as well as to overcome the internal barriers of the people and external influences to the condition of Sentani indigenous people. The authority of ondofolo is very broad to protect the community with special rights to prosper the customary law community covering the fields of religion, social, economy, politics and justice. With the intervention of the central and local governments, ondoafi no longer has strong authority. At present, customary government only plays a role in custom affairs. The shift of obedience of customary law community is a dilemma towards the authority of the community despite the Law Number 21 of 2001 on Special Autonomy for the people of Papua. In the implementation, the central and local governments have more roles than the customary government in relation to the rights of the customary law community. 
For customary law communities, the first and foremost asset is land because the community itself is an agrarian society. An agrarian society is a community living dependently on land. Customary law community cannot be separated from land. If we talk about land, we indirectly talk about humans. In other words, if we talk about human existence, we indirectly talk about land. Land and this concept must be understood broadly and holistically, covering the earth even within certain wider boundaries that is the universe. In principle, land of ulayat rights in Papua should not be diverted by buying and selling, acquisition for the construction of government infrastructure, private plantations and interests of other people who are not members of the customary law community. The transfer of ulayat land is in reality carried out by members of customary law community and traditional leaders. The conflict occurrs because the process of transferring ulayat land is not in accordance with the procedures of customary law.
Considering the facts mentioned above, there is a very close relationship between the community and the land it occupies. This close and religio-magical relationship allows the community to obtain the right to control the land, to use the land, to collect products from plants living on the land, and to hunt for the animals living there. Principally, ulayat land cannot be transferred by buying and selling, with a letter of release of the land. As a result of Papua being part of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI), ulayat land was transferred with the release and acquisition for government programs. Transactions of ulayat land have been freely traded, and the land ownership has been freely transferred to other parties, government, private companies and individuals.
The importance of this transaction is transfer or delivery accompanied by cash payments from other parties at the same time. In land law, this legal action is called buying and selling transaction (in Javanese, it is called "odol" or "sade"). This transaction can be divided into three types according to its contents:
a. Transfer of land with cash payments accompanied by provisions that those who hand the land over have the right to take back the land with payment of the same amount of money.
b. Transfer of land and cash payments without conditions, forever.
c. Payment of land with cash payments accompanied by an agreement in which the land is returned to the former landowner if there is no other legal action after several harvests. 
This transaction is a legal action that is valid, meaning that in order to be entitled to legal protection, it must be carried out with the help of the head of the community so that it becomes clear.
Conflict over the transfer of ulayat land occurring since a long time ago is related to the borders of ulayat land occupied by tribes bordering each other. The conflict spreads into a war among tribes to defend the ulayat rights of each tribe. Violence resulting from the war causes casualties, property, and resentment among the tribes involved in the war. War will occur again if one tribe feeling disadvantaged does not receive compensation and settlement. After the war, the conflict of the customary law community will continue before there is a peace agreement from the tribes that fight each other. The revenge of the war continues until the next descendants as a result of the trigger of the conflict of ulayat land transfer.
The boundaries of ulayat land between villages and tribes often change because the people use natural boundaries, such as large trees, rocks, rivers, lakes, seas, and mountains. Conflicts as a result of borders occur between Tablasupa village and Yepase village, Yepase village and Wambena village, Wambena village and Waiya village, Waiya village and Dormena village, Dormena village and Yonsu Safari village, Maributua village and Tablanusu village, as well as Tablanusu village and Kendate village. The conflict of ulayat land transfer is resolved through the Papuan Customary Consultative Council (DMAP) which functions as a customary trial of an arbitration judge and as a protector of customary law community.
The conflict of ulayat land transfer cannot be resolved easily because the young generation, as the successor to the existence of ulayat land, does not understand the true root of the conflict. Betina E. Schmidt and Ingo N. Schorder in her book Anthropology of Violence and Conflict state that war, in the end, seen as a long-term condition and acts of violence between groups is clearly defined by the leading actor. This focus of perspective violence requires the idea that war is the result of an escalation that moves dynamically (Betina, 2017: 18).
Conflict over the transfer of ulayat land cannot be resolved by the positive law that applies. The conflict continues to move horizontally between traditional leaders and leaders of tribes whose territory of the ulayat land borders each other so that it spreads among the people of the customary law community. The community maintains the existence of ulayat land with their customary law. The conflict over the transfer of ulayat land to individuals from outside Papua who are not the members of customary law community has resulted in the denial of the release of customary rights, blocking action, a lawsuit against ulayat land released with a transfer process, an acquisition through a statement letter of the release of ulayat land made by traditional leaders, leaders of tribes, ondoafi/ondofolo and heads of districts from the government.
In the Papuan context, particularly with regard to the customary authority of Sentani tribe, ondoafi, koselo (katelo), leaders of tribes consider the position of customary law to be higher than the national law, while investors consider that national law is higher. The strict difference because of maintaining the objectives and interests of each party from the customary law authorities and the investors is the main cause of a conflict over ulayat land. This condition will certainly trigger conflicts over the ownership of ulayat land between Sentani indigenous people in Papua and capital owners, private companies, as well as the government.
The trial of ulayat land transfer, as a medium for resolving conflicts, is carried out on the basis of requests from the parties to resolve the conflict. The parties must be present at the customary trial. If the number is not enough compared to the number of traditional leaders, the trial will be postponed for a period of time determined later by the customary council. The decisions of the customary trial must be adhered to by the parties involved in the conflict. As an alternative solution to a conflict over land in Sentani, Papua, there is a process that must be followed. The process in the customary deliberation is as follows.
a.	The applicant must explain the allotment of the ulayat land which will be released provided that it does not cause disadvantages to the customary law community.
b.	The land to be released belongs to the customary law community. The rightful tribe must attach a map of land ownership and the history of the origin of the land.
c.	The customary deliberation should be attended by ondoafi/ondofolo, leaders of tribes, Abufa, Ahona and the members of the customary law community involved in the conflict.
d.	There is legitimacy of the ratification of the statement letter of customary release by ondoafi/ondoafolo, leaders of tribes, and traditional leaders on the basis of customary deliberations also known by the head of the district as the representative of the government.
e.	Customary law community receives compensation from buyers given to the community through official report of the release as receipts of payments and distributed by customary parties. Each party signed as a sign of agreement in the release of ulayat land.

CONCLUSION
The conflict over the transfer of ulayat land is because the customary law community defends their ownership of communal rights for all customary law communities that cannot be transferred. The community is formed based on territory, customary law society, and a biological relationship. The solidarity between one another is very inseparable, even the members of customary law community who do not have a sense of togetherness towards other members will be exiled by the other members of the community. The customary law that applies is very firm, upheld, respected and further becomes a culture in customary law community by enacting a penalty obeyed by the community itself.  
The conflict over the transfer of ulayat land to the government, privately owned enterprises, and migrants from outside Papua is because the customary law community has different perceptions of understanding, giving rise to a conflict between the parties with the interests of each party and the state. The state controls the land based on Article 33 paragraph 3 of the 1945 Constitution. The constitutional foundation is the formation of the politics of national land law. During the New Order era, the transfer of the land was carried out with a militarization approach by intimidating traditional leaders to obtain a statement letter of release of ulayat land for the government program of transmigration. The conflict over the transfer of ulayat land in Jayapura, Papua has not been completely resolved from the New Order era until the Reformation period, so it received a lawsuit from the customary law community which was harmed.
The dignity of the ondoafi and customary land is preserved to protect the authority of the customary government. Supervision is carried out with the customary council institution by all tribes of the customary law community, and fear of ondoafi in leading customary trials. The leaders of the trials must fear of losing the charismatic trust in their position towards the people they lead. The noble values ​​in customs continue to be upheld because of the beliefs of the people. The leaders of the trials, ondoafi, and traditional leaders will always be obeyed and respected in every decision of the results of customary trials to enforce the authority of the customary government.

REFERENCES
Alawode. 2013. Determinants of land use conflicts among farmers in southwestern Nigeria Journal Research in Peace, Gender and Development (JRPGD) Vol. 3(4) pp. 58-67, June.
Beckert, Barbara, Christoph Dittrich, Soeryo Adiwibowo. 2014. “Contested Land: An Analysis of Multi-Layered Conflicts in Jambi Province, Sumatra, Indonesia”. Sterreichische Zeitschrift für Südostasienwissenschaften, 7 (1), 75-92.
Bottazzi, Patrick, Goguen, Adam & Rist, Stephan. 2016. “Conflicts of customary land tenure in rural Africa: is large-scale land acquisition a driver of ‘institutional innovation’?” The Journal of Peasent Studies, Vol. 43, Issue 5, 1 Januari 2016, hlm. 971-988.
Campion, Benjamin Betey and Acheampong, Emmanuel. 2014. “The Chieftaincy Institution in Ghana: Causers and Arbitrators of Conflicts in Industrial Jatropha Investments”. Sustainability, 6, 6332-6350; doi:10.3390/su6096332.
Dewi, Rosita. 2016. “Gaining Recognition Through Participatory Mapping The Role of Adat Land in the Implementation of the Merauke Integrate Food and Energy Estate in Papua, Indonesia” ASEAS – Austrian Jour-nal of South-East Asian Studies, 9(1), 87-106.
Fitriyah, Farida. 2016. Hukum Pengadaan Tanah Trasmigrasi, malang: Setara Press.
Iskandar Syah, Mudakir. 2015. Pembebasan Tanah Untuk Pembangunan Kepentingan Umum, Upaya Hukum Masyarakat Yang Terkena Pembebasan dan Pencabutan Hak. Jakarta: Jala Permata Aksara. 
Kamsi. 2015. “Perilaku penistaan agama dalam struktur budaya politik lokal pada kerajaan di jawa (sebuah telaah politik hukum). As-Syir’ah, Jurnal Ilmu Syari’ah dan Hukum, Vol. 49, No. 2, Desember.
 Kobu Kobu, Djestylona. 2017. “Pelaksanaan Peralihan Hak Atas Tanah Berdasakan Hukum Adat Suku Tobelo di Kabupaten Halmahera Selatan”, Lex Crimen Vol. VI/No. 2/Mar-Apr, hlm. 36-43.
Mahdi, Abdile. 2012.  “Customary dispute resolution in Somalia’’ dalam jurnal  African Conflict and peacebuilding riview, vol. 2, No.1, pp. 87-110. 
Manji, Ambrena. 2014. “The politics of land reform in Kenya 2012”. African Studies Review 57 (1), hlm. 115-130.
Mebri, Jhon A. 2017. “Kedudukan Hak Atas Tanah Masyarakat Hukum Adat Untuk Kepentingan Umum”, DiH Jurnal Ilmu Hukum. Volume 13 Nomor 25, Februari.
Mulyadi, Tri. 2010. “Jual Beli Tanah Hak Ulayat Dengan Pelepasan Adat sebagai Syarat Pendaftaran Tanah Pada Suku Tobatdji Enj'ros di Kota Jayapura Papua”. Tesis. Semarang: Universitas Diponegoro. Tidak Dipublikasikan.  
Paaga, Dominic Tuobesaane. 2013. “Customary Land Tenure and Its Implications for Land Disputes in Ghana: Case form Wa. Weehau And Lambussie” International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, Vol. 3 No. 18; October. 
Pemda. 1972. Serba-serbi mengenai sejarah masuknya Papua ke Indonesia.https://www.kompasiana.com/begawan.durni/54136718745513712b6c743d/serbaserbi-mengenai-sejarah-masuknya-Papua-ke-Indonesia (Diakses: 21-09-2018, Pukul 13.22)
Pramukti, Angger Sigit & Erdah Widayanto. 2015. Awas jangan beli Tanah Sengketa. Pustaka Yustisia, Yogyakarta.
Schmidt, Betina E. and Schroder, Ingo N (eds,). 2001. Anthropology of Violence and Conflict. London: Routledge.
Socpa, Antoin. 2010. “New Kinds of Land Conflict in Urban Cameroon: the Case of the ‘landless’ Indigenous Peoples in Yaoundé” Africa 80 (04):553 – 572.
Supriyanto. 2014. Implementasi Kebijakan Pertanahan Nasional. Purwokerto: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Jendral Sudirman Purwokerto.
Thambikeni, Micky and Anael Sam. 2015. “Analysis of ICT Application InMitigating Land Conflicts: Case Study of Tanzania”. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security (IJCSIS), Vol. 13, No. 11, November.
Yurino, Ari. 2015. http://elsam.or.id/2015/12/potret-kebijakan-pemerintah-di-tanah-Papua-selama-46-terakhir/ (Diakses 29-05-2018).
Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.
Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1960 tentang Pokok-Pokok Agraria.
Undang-Undang (UU) Nomor 21 Tahun 2001 tentang Otonomi Khusus Papua.
Undang-Undang Nomor 41 Tahun 1999 tentang Kehutanan.
Peraturan Menteri Agraria dan Tata Ruang/Kepala Badan Pertanahan Nasional Nomor 10 Tahun 2016 tentang Tata Cara Penetapan Hak Komunal Atas Tanah Masyarakat Hukum Adat dan Masyarakat yang Berada dalam Kawasan Tertentu.