Penipuan dalam Urus Niaga Tanah di Malaysia: Satu Kajian

Abstract

Artikel ini ditulis untuk mengkaji isu penipuan tanah yang berlaku dalam urus niaga tanah di Malaysia. Pelbagai modus operandi telah dilakukan oleh penjenayah untuk melakukan penipuan. Dengan modus operandi ini, pihak pejabat tanah telah berjaya diperdaya sehingga menyebabkan berlakunya penipuan dalam urus niaga tanah. Perkara ini telah menimbulkan rasa kebimbangan kepada orang awam tentang jaminan ketuanpunyaan yang merupakan bukti muktamad pemilikan terhadap tanah apabila pendaftaran dilakukan dan juga pemilikan tanah yang ditadbir menurut perundangan Kanun Tanah Negara (KTN). Kajian yang dilakukan berdasarkan kaedah analisis kes yang telah diputuskan oleh mahkamah. Hasil kajian mendapati pelbagai modus operandi (MO) telah dilakukan oleh penipu dan pelbagai faktor yang mendorong perbuatan penipuan ini. Penulisan ini turut mengutarakan beberapa cadangan penambahbaikan bagi mengekang cubaan penipuan dalam urus niaga tanah.

Comparison of the Principle of Freedom of Contract in Land Buying and Selling Between Indonesia and Malaysia

“…This registration results in the buyer becoming the new titleholder.In the implementation of information and communication technology, land registration affairs in the computerized system are designated in the fourteenth schedule, section 5A of the National Land Code. In 1990, the government introduced the Computerized Land Registration System (SPTB) to replace the manual Land Registration System that was previously in place [18].…”

“…According to Section 5 of the National Land Code (KTN), it establishes three essential elements that must be present in any transaction, namely (1) the existence of a transaction; (2) involving land ownership; and (3) the transaction must be different from a caveat [9].Therefore, it can be said that in land transactions in Malaysia, it is in harmony and not in conflict with the principle of freedom of contract. Land acquisition for development for public interest is an unavoidable demand by any government.…”

Responding to Land Fraud: Should torrens compensation scheme be introduced in Malaysia

“…Earlier writings by legal scholars (Wong, 1963;Sihombing, 2015) have cautioned the consequences of the non-availability of the compensation scheme in the Torrens system in Malaysia especially in land fraud cases. Several factors contribute to the occurrence of fraud in land dealings which include negligence on the part of land office (Maidin & Khadouf,2010), poor security measures in implementation of computerized land administration system (Ismail et al,2011;Zakariah et al;, weaknesses in the conveyancing procedures (Abu Bakar, 2019, Zakariah et al; and corruption among civil servants (Zakariah et al, 2020;2022). The need to provide a statutory remedy to land fraud victims was highlighted by various parties (Fook Hin, 2010;Buang, 2013;Zakaria & Hussein, 2013, Harun et al, 2017.…”

“…In addition to unsettled issue of the indefeasibility principle, external variables that contribute to land fraud include operational flaws in the land registration system (Maidin & Kadouf, 2001;Harun et al, 2022) and conveyancing practices (Abu Bakar,2019). For example, Identity theft is possible due to operational flaws in the identification and verification procedures at the land office or by attending solicitors.…”

“…Modernization of land administration system through the introduction of the Computerized Land Registration System (CLRS) has transformed the registration process from manual or paper-based registration to a combination of manual and electronic registration. The implementation of computerized system exposes the registration process to risks of potential errors and security issues because it depends on who has access and the nature of the review performed by the registry staff prior to and during the registration process (Low, 2008;Ismail et al, 2011& Harun et al, 2022. As a result of this development, a statutory compensation scheme is expected to protect against the additional risks that may arise.…”