Based on the decision of the kerapatan mantir/let perdamaian mantir Basara Hai Number B./01/T.9.DKA.-KTG/IV/2024 consisting of a team of nine (consisting of traditional leaders or damang, customary chiefs or customary judges), this team accepted, examined, and decided on the customary case of the injured victim that occurred in Bangkal Village, Seruyan Regency. According to an interview with Kardinal Tarung (traditional leader of kerapatan mantir/let perdamaian, personal communication, May 5, 2024), the decision emphasized that Dayak customary law is directed toward the goal of orderliness aiming for justice and the goal of manantilang sial kawe (neutralizing aspects of bad luck) and mampatende mampataduh karidu kalait (creating magical peace). This means that in living on the island of Kalimantan there is the principle of Bagawan Bawi Lewu Telo (whoever and wherever people come from are required to live with the completeness of customary life regarding politeness/ethics/high morals/belom bahadat). The belom bahadat expression is dominant in every Dayak person’s life.

The families of the harmed victims have made a written statement to hand over the case to be resolved based on the customary law through a kerapatan mantir/let perdamaian/a meeting of peace whose members consist of the Damang Kepala Adat (Damang Customary Chief) who are members of the Central Kalimantan Damang Customary Chief forum. During a protest against PT HMBP, the harmed victims received security from the Central Kalimantan Regional Police Force. In this case, the following sanctions were imposed:

Article 17, which regulates Singer Banguhan, Penyau Sangguh, Penyau Penyang (the imposition of fines for killing by washing the spear). The banguhan (murderer) is fined. Then, the weapon used to kill is washed/purified. The perpetrator is threatened with a fine of 30-75 kati ramu/unit of measurement of customary fines. If the act of killing is carried out based on the perpetrator's own free will, the person concerned is threatened with a fine of 60-135 kati ramu for more than one person.

Article 23, which regulates Singer Biat Himang (customary fines for bleeding wounds). This article is imposed on someone who intends to kill, but the victim does not die but bleeds (bahimang). In such a case, the victim's wounds are examined, whether they are severe (deep) or not. This is because a severe wound has a greater singer (fines) than a minor wound. According to customary law, a murder that causes the victim to die is called Sahiring. However, if the victim is only injured, it is called biat. There are divisions of fines based on the condition of the wound, for example, minor or severe wounds. Besides, shallow or deep wounds are determined by the statements of the traditional mantir or witnesses and the existing evidence. Likewise, there is the arrangement of singer and animal blood, which starts from chicken eggs, chicken coops, chicken blood, cows, and buffaloes. Likewise, in arranging this article, traditional leaders consider the arrangement of the singer's material value. The customary sanctions for minor injuries that are not intentional, the singer's order is a major wound of 5-50 kati ramu. For minor injuries that are intentional, the order is a major wound of 15-150 kati ramu. The activity ended with the Salem Bunu ritual in the form of a small but simple traditional party.

Article 20, which regulates Singer Selem Balai (fines for entering the hall). One of the murderers appears as the accused. Further investigation has the role of the initiator to avoid revenge killing (habunu or asang from the heirs of the murdered victim). In this case, there is a guarantor who offers a peace invitation called salem balai to the claimant who may be from a distant country. The singer sanction in this matter is the basic customary law in this article in the amount of batun singer (customary sanction that must be paid), namely 30-60 kati ramu (a unit of measurement of the value of the customary fine, namely the value attached to its form and type) ije kungan hadangan (one buffalo), due lamiang panyinggau (two marjan stones, lilis lamiang as customary equipment), sanakan tampajat and other accessories with an amount of 75 kati ramu (this basic fine is ultimately paid by the person who actually killed the person who has been investigated).

Article 22, which regulates Singer Tipuk Danum (water spray fine). This singer is a ritual based on the customary law which aims to remove bad luck. It is carried out on the heirs of the murderer. The goal is to neutralize the curse caused by the murderer's sin, which has the potential to cause illnesses for the murderer's family. This ritual is carried out by having the murderer's family and the murderer splash/wash the feet of the murdered victim's heirs. In addition to rejecting the curse, the goal is to apologize to each other, and at the same time neutralize the grudge or potential hakayau-habunu from the victim's family due to the murderer's faults. In addition, there is a singer that must be issued by the murderer in the form of batun singer of 75 kati ramu (jipen lime) plus bawui saki, lilis peteng, sanaman pangkit. The murderer's family covers the cost of a traditional party where the people eat and drink together as a closing. The proceeds of the singer are shared by all community members who became victims.

One kati ramu is equal to Rp. 250,000,- (two hundred and fifty thousand rupiahs). In this case, the victim has received attention from the Central Kalimantan Provincial Government, the Seruyan Regency government, and other parties in the form of sympathy. The Bangkal tragedy on October 7^th, 2023, which caused the victim to die and be injured has been brought to the State Court.

Considering the willingness of the Petitioner and the Respondent for the Settlement of Customary Peace, Kerapatan Mantir Basara, Let Perdamaian adat (customary peace assembly) Decides:

Stipulated:

First: Respondent I (First) and Respondent II (Second) must pay a criminal fine to the Applicant (Second) who was injured, namely Mr. Taufik Nurahman, with:

Singer Biat Himang 100 kati ramu x Rp. 250.000 =Rp 25.000.000,-

Singer Banguhan, Penyau Sangguh, Penyau Penyang 130 kati ramu X Rp. 250.000=Rp 32.500.000,-

Singer Selem Balai 125 kati ramu x Rp. 250.000 =Rp 31.250.000,-

Singer Tipuk Danum 75 kati ramu x Rp. 250.000 =Rp 18.750.000,-

Singer Kasukup Belom Bahadat =Rp 228.000.000,-

Total =Rp 335.500.000,-

Second: Singer Penyau Lewu Panyuali Bunu is included in the cost of the traditional party covered by Respondent I (First) and Respondent II (Second).

Third: The criminal fine in the form of goods has been cashed and included in the first, second, and third nominal amounts of money.

Fourth: Starting from the date of the stipulation of this Customary Peace Decision, Hinting (customary ritual of the Dayak ethnic group to defend their rights) is released by the Grand Council of Hindu Kaharingan Religion of Central Kalimantan Province and/or the local Grand Council of Hindu Kaharingan Religion.

Fifth: This decision, starting from the date it is read and stipulated, is final and binding.

The national legal system can apply to all citizens after going through a long process by considering some elements. For instance, this system must be in line with the existing laws and it must create a sense of justice for all elements of society (Achmadi et al., 2020).

The discovery of law in the decisions of customary judges (Rechtvinding) in applying customary law to deal with concrete events must provide justice for the disputing parties. Customary law as a rule protects human interests. This is in line with the view of Soejono Koesoemo Sisworo, who stated that the essence of legal discovery is always related to the situation and conditions of society and remains within its legal system’s environment (Salman, 2010). (Alkostar, 2009) states that a decision must contain the following points:

Article 18B clause (2) and Article 28I clause (3) recognize and respect the existence of customary law community units along with their traditional rights as well as cultural identities. Traditional community rights are part of the human rights that must receive protection, advancement, enforcement, and fulfillment from the state. This recognition and respect constitutes an appreciation from the state for the values ​​of humanity and human rights based on Pancasila (“The Five Principles” that make Indonesia’s state ideals). This provision provides a constitutional basis for the direction of legal policy in recognizing customary law community units’ traditional rights.

The Regional Regulation of Central Kalimantan Province No. 16 of 2008 regulates Dayak Customary Institutions in Central Kalimantan. Article 27 clauses (1) and (2) on Dispute Resolution states:

According to (Haar & Poesponoto, 1979) who are famous for their Beslissingenleer theory (decision theory), it is stated that customary law includes all regulations that are embodied in the decisions of authorized and influential legal officials. Furthermore, the law's implementation is immediately applied and wholeheartedly obeyed by those who are regulated by the decision. The decision can be in the form of a dispute resolution that may be decided based on the values of harmony and deliberation. In his writing, Ter Haar also stated that customary law can arise from the decisions of community members. In addition, every behavior of community members always shows legal awareness. However, it has not become customary law because only judicial decisions can become customary law.

Therefore, the applicable customary law can only be known from the decisions of officials in power in a community, such as community leaders, judges, public deliberations, land guardians (ulayat leaders), religious officials, and village officials. These officials may be directly or indirectly involved in the dispute. Such decisions directly depend on the ties and values ​​in a society (Sekaquaptewa, 2007). The decision that becomes a basis for understanding customary law as taught by Ter Haar has consequences in the efforts to understand it (Syamsudin, 1996).

All the things relating to customary decisions are final. They are used as a settlement of cases or considerations for decisions as stated in the Regional Regulation of Central Kalimantan Province No. 16 of 2008 on Dayak Customary Institutions in Central Kalimantan. Article 29 of this law states, "Customary decisions that have been imposed on parties in dispute or who violate customary law can be used as considerations for law enforcement officers in resolving a case.”

The philosophy of Huma Betang for the Dayak indigenous community means prioritizing deliberation and consensus on the values of equality between humans, togetherness, family/brotherhood, local wisdom, unity, cultural center, and obedience to the law (Rico et al., 2022). So, this philosophy becomes the basis for the Dayak community to uphold a sense of mutual cooperation and tolerance as a symbol of harmony in the Central Kalimantan society (Haridison, 2024).

Based on the construction of the decision of the kerapatan mantir/let perdamaian mantir Basara Hai No. B./01/T.9.DKA.-KTG/IV/2024, a team of nine consists of traditional leaders or damang, customary chiefs, or customary judges who accepted, examined, and decided on the customary case of the harmed victim that occurred in Bangkal Village, Seruyan Regency. Customary law’s values, principles, and norms are used to maintain social cohesion, i.e., strengthening unity and togetherness in kinship, family, and togetherness.

The construction of the judge's decision in resolving the conflict was based on the philosophy of Huma Betang, which can be seen in the close relationship between the application of customary law called Belom Bahadat (the obligation to apply the customary principles regarding politeness/ethics/high morals in life). The contents of the judge's decision construction can be interpreted in a sociological, juridical, and philosophical manner. They are described as follows:

The decision of the mantir/customary judge reflects the customary judges' freedom as a mouthpiece of justice for indigenous peoples. The factor of freedom of judges is a requirement for the creation of a fair and impartial court decision (Rumadan, 2017). The judicial institution has an important role in implementing the concept of a legal state during the democratization process, especially in the transition from an authoritarian political system to a democratic, transparent society. This is seen from the judicial institution's role in the use of the judicial process for the benefit of the community. This is because the judiciary is an institution that implements the constitution, protects human rights, as well as guarantees fair and democratic procedures to ensure every seeker of justice legal certainty and justice (Soekanto, 1982)(Hanisa & Firdaus, 2023).

The goal of justice in law enforcement cannot be separated from assumptions that have dimensions of subjectivity, egocentrism, primordialism, etc. to establish a law (court decision) for the community seeking justice. This is to achieve progress, happiness, and legal certainty for the community (Bottoms & Tankebe, 2012). Related to the independence of the judicial institution, efforts are made to realize quality judicial decisions as a representation of the judicial institution that reflects a sense of justice, which in turn also becomes one of the components to realize a quality judicial body to achieve judicial excellence (court excellence) (Manan, 2005)(Ferejohn & Kramer, 2002).

The authors believe that it is interesting to analyze the Palangka Raya District Court Decision No. 55/Pid.B/2024/PN Plk. In the decision, the panel of judges, among other things, applied considerations to mitigate circumstances on the basis that the defendant had undergone a customary trial and provided compensation to the victim/his family. The community had obedience to the customary law in an effort to resolve the conflict in Seruyan Regency. In the decision of the District Court, the panel of judges also made a decision that was in line with the applicable regulations, namely sentencing the defendant to 10 (ten) months in prison. After the decision of the Palangka Raya District Court was stipulated, both parties accepted it and did not file objections or appeals to the High Court.

Judges have the freedom to provide legal justice and certainty to uphold the rule of law that is the core of truth (Kant, 2021). The argument proposed is that the rule of law, as a mere legal/institutional construction, has no transcendence for development (Fonseca, 2015). To maintain and create a fair judicial decision and to receive a peaceful response from justice seekers, two important aspects must be implemented, i.e., the procedure for enforcing the law (procedural justice) and the results of law enforcement itself (substantive justice) (Cohen, 2015).

Procedurally, the goal of to realize justice can only be achieved in a fair manner. The methods in question include certainty of the institutional roles and the certainty of mechanisms. This is called legal certainty (rechtszekerheid). In principle, certainty is not the same as justice. Moreover, certainty and justice may be the opposite of each other. However, without certainty, there is no justice (Buijze, 2013). Justice in uncertainty is highly subjective as it entirely depends on the judge who has control over that certainty.

In substance, there are many views on the content of justice. Some perceive it from the level of satisfaction achieved (Rescoe Pound) (As-Suvi & Zainullah, 2022). Meanwhile, some perceive it from the perspective of benefits (Bentham). The rest perceive it from the perspective of justice measured solely from the implementation of the law itself (Hans Kelsen). To find the exact substance of justice, a distinction must be made between individual justice and social justice (Sadurski, 1984). It is ideal for individual justice to be reflected in social justice; or vice versa, social justice becomes nothing other than a sublimation of individual justice. Thus, in every individual justice, there is social justice (Manan, 2005).

A theory of justice known as restorative justice emphasizes the importance of repairing the losses caused by criminal activity. All parties are involved in the cooperative procedure to restore the condition. There are guiding principles in restorative justice that control how the process is carried out. First, restorative justice states that for justice to be upheld, victims, perpetrators of crimes, and communities that were affected by the crime must be repaired and healed. Second, the community, perpetrators of crimes, and victims must be allowed to actively participate in the legal system whenever and to the extent they deem appropriate. Third, to advance justice, the respective roles and duties of the community and government must be examined. The government is tasked with enforcing law and order to foster peace (Subroto et al., 2024).

In making a decision, judges do not only consider the provisions of the law. However, they must also consider the facts presented to them. In addition, court decisions cannot be separated from the basis of the judge's behavioral capacity known as the code of ethical behavior. This code contains a commitment to moral integrity based on 3 (three) principles of inner attitude (character), namely accuracy, innovation, and persistence. These principles are crucial in determining three reasons, namely the rational, practical, and actual reasons. Such reasons are the basis for the judge's "mental process" in the trial process (Mertokusumo, 1996). The alignment between social and individual justice or the behavioral capacity of judges that are applied through court decisions will certainly create an atmosphere of peace for the people who seek justice.