The legal challenge by Bali’s Head of the National Land Agency against his own criminal investigation touches on deep anxieties about property rights, regulatory certainty, and the use of expired laws in Indonesia’s most iconic island.
DENPASAR, Bali — In a courtroom packed with observers, the legal fate of Bali’s most senior land official hung on a technical yet profound question: can one be charged under a law for which the statute of limitations has allegedly expired? The pre-trial hearing for I Made Daging, Head of the Bali Provincial Land Agency (BPN), resumed on Friday, scrutinizing the validity of his designation as a suspect in a case with wide implications for Bali’s property landscape.
Daging is challenging the legality of his December 2025 criminal suspect designation by Bali Police, related to his prior tenure as Head of the Badung Regency Land Office in 2020. His legal team’s core argument is that the investigation relies on an expired legal basis and is marred by administrative flaws, raising critical questions about legal certainty for landowners and investors.
A Central Question of Time
The defense contends that the alleged offense—if it occurred during Daging’s 2020 term—falls outside the three-year statute of limitations for the cited articles of the Criminal Code (KUHP), which carry a maximum one-year sentence. “If it’s calculated at over three years, it has expired by law,” argued his lawyer, Gede Pasek Suardika. He emphasized that the police have failed to specify the exact date of the alleged crime, a fundamental requirement in criminal proceedings. “The most basic element in criminal law, namely the certainty of when the act occurred, has never been concretely explained by the investigators,” Suardika stated.
Alleged Administrative Flaws and Broker Stakes
Beyond the issue of time, the defense highlighted an alleged clerical error in the suspect designation letter itself, which bore an incorrect year. These procedural objections frame the defense’s narrative that the case is structurally weak. The hearing attracted significant attention, including from prominent anti-corruption figure Bambang Widjojanto, signaling that the case is seen as a test of institutional integrity beyond the individual.
For Bali’s international community of property owners, developers, and investors, the proceedings strike at the heart of operational stability. The island’s land market, already complex due to customary (adat) laws and high demand, is highly sensitive to perceptions of legal predictability. A case that questions whether old allegations can be resurrected under potentially expired statutes creates an atmosphere of uncertainty. It touches on a fundamental fear: can a property transaction or administrative decision from years past be unexpectedly re-examined under a criminal lens?
A Microcosm of Bali’s Land Dilemma
This legal battle is a microcosm of the tensions in Bali’s development. Land is the island’s most contested and valuable resource, caught between preservation, tradition, and investment. Cases that appear to criminalize administrative decisions from years ago can have a chilling effect, causing developers and officials to become overly cautious, potentially stifling the very investment Bali’s economy relies on.
The Bali Police maintain that a suspect designation is not a declaration of guilt and that the case could be reopened with new evidence. However, the pre-trial judge’s upcoming decision will send a powerful signal. A ruling in favor of the official would reinforce principles of legal finality and the strict application of statutes of limitation. A ruling against him would affirm broad prosecutorial discretion but may deepen anxieties about retrospective legal scrutiny in Bali’s high-stakes property environment.
For now, all parties—and the watching world of Bali stakeholders—await the next hearing on February 3rd, where arguments over dates, documents, and deadlines will continue to shape the narrative of justice and certainty on an island where land is never just dirt, but destiny.
