Flooring Guide by Cinvex – , JAKARTA — The Central Jakarta District Court (PN Jakpus) has dismissed a significant lawsuit filed by PT Indobuildco against the Ministry of State Secretariat (Mensesneg), specifically the Bung Karno Sports Complex Management Center (PPKGBK), concerning the contentious management of Hotel Sultan. The verdict, delivered by Head Judge Guse Prayudi via an e-court system on Friday, November 28, 2025, marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing land dispute.
According to PN Jakpus Spokesperson Sunoto, confirming details in Jakarta on Friday, the dispute involved two primary civil cases: Number 208/Pdt.G/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst. and Number 287/Pdt.G/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst. In a definitive ruling on case 208, the court firmly asserted that the State, through its Right to Manage Land (HPL) Number 1/Gelora, is the legitimate and rightful owner of the disputed property.
This crucial determination means that PT Indobuildco’s Right to Build (HGB) for Hotel Sultan was legally nullified as of 2023. The court affirmed the legitimacy of the state’s actions and unequivocally ordered Indobuildco to vacate the entire Hotel Sultan complex, including both its land and buildings. This judgment is declared “uitvoerbaar bij voorraad” (immediately executable), underscoring the urgency of the ruling.
Furthermore, in case 287, the court mandated that PT Indobuildco pay outstanding royalties for its use of the HPL land. This payment, covering the period from 2007 to 2023, amounts to a substantial US$45.36 million (to be converted to rupiah at the time of payment), while Indobuildco’s counter-claim was entirely rejected.
Beyond these significant sums, PT Indobuildco was also ordered to pay court fees totaling Rp 530,000.
Civil lawsuit Number 208/Pdt.G/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst. saw PT Indobuildco as the plaintiff, bringing legal action against multiple governmental entities. The defendants included the Minister of State Secretariat, the Bung Karno Sports Complex Management Center (PPKGBK), the Minister of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning/National Land Agency, the Minister of Finance, and the Central Jakarta Administrative City Land Office.
In its petition, Indobuildco contended that the Rights to Build (HGB) numbers 26/Gelora and 27/Gelora, which cover the Hotel Sultan property, were originally issued over unencumbered state land, not over the State’s Right to Manage Land (HPL) Number 1/Gelora. Based on this, Indobuildco argued that the renewal of its HGBs should not have required a recommendation from either the Minister of State Secretariat or the PPKGBK, who are the designated holders of HPL 1/Gelora.
Furthermore, Indobuildco sought substantial damages for the land and buildings, estimated at approximately Rp28 trillion. Concurrently, civil case Number 287/Pdt.G/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst. involved the Minister of State Secretariat and the PPKGBK as plaintiffs, with PT Indobuildco named as the defendant.
In their lawsuit, the Minister of State Secretariat and the PPKGBK demanded that PT Indobuildco, in its capacity as the operator of Hotel Sultan in Jakarta, settle outstanding royalty obligations, including interest and penalties. This cumulative amount reached US$45 million, equivalent to approximately Rp742.5 billion (based on an exchange rate of Rp16,500 per US dollar), for its partial use of HPL Number 1/Gelora land between 2007 and 2023.
Summary
The Central Jakarta District Court (PN Jakpus) dismissed PT Indobuildco’s lawsuit against the Ministry of State Secretariat and the Bung Karno Sports Complex Management Center (PPKGBK) concerning the management of Hotel Sultan. The court firmly ruled that the State is the legitimate owner of the disputed property through its Right to Manage Land (HPL) Number 1/Gelora. Consequently, PT Indobuildco’s Right to Build (HGB) for Hotel Sultan was nullified as of 2023, and the company was ordered to immediately vacate the entire complex.
In a related case, the court mandated PT Indobuildco pay US$45.36 million in outstanding royalties for its use of the HPL land from 2007 to 2023. Indobuildco’s counter-claim was entirely rejected, as was its petition for substantial damages. These judgments resolve a significant land dispute, affirming the state’s ownership and financial claims.