By: Dionisio Babo Soares
On June 7th, 2025, I published an article titled “The Evolution of Timor-Leste’s Land Law Regime” in TATOLI (Timor-Leste State Broadcasting News). The article provides an overview of the trajectory of Timor-Leste’s land law regime and its current status. I believe this article can contribute to the study of land rights and further analysis of dispute mechanisms on land and property in Timor-Leste.
In this article, I address the issue of dispute mechanisms within the complexities of Timor-Leste’s land governance system. Based on the new indigenous law (No. 13/2017), I present several study cases on land disputes to illustrate what has been described in this paper.
Timor-Leste’s journey towards establishing a stable and just land governance system is a complex narrative: a turbulent colonial past, violent occupation, and the arduous task of post-independence state-building shape it. Land disputes, deeply rooted in historical dispossession, forced displacement, conflicting colonial land titles, and the absence of a unified legal framework for decades, represent a critical challenge to the nation’s stability and development. In confronting this legacy, Timor-Leste has adopted a distinctive, albeit evolving, approach that seeks to harmonize enduring customary mechanisms, primarily “Uso Capião,” with modern statutory frameworks, notably Law No. 13/2017 on Land and Property, and the supporting institutional architecture defined by Law No. 3/2017.
This dual-path strategy demonstrates a nuanced understanding of the socio-cultural fabric and the practical realities of land tenure across its diverse territory, particularly between urban centers and rural hinterlands. A comprehensive analysis reveals both the advantages of this hybrid model in promoting context-sensitive justice and the persistent challenges arising from the incomplete integration of these systems, particularly concerning the formal recognition and procedural codification of customary practices.
At the heart of rural land relations and dispute resolution lies Uso Capião, a customary practice embodying the principle of acquisitive prescription. Deeply rooted in communal consensus and the esteemed wisdom of local elders (liurai, dato, lia nain), this system operates outside the confines of written documentation. Its efficacy relies on oral histories, collective memory of ancestral land use, community mediation, and the authority vested in traditional leaders to guide negotiations and affirm agreements. In vast areas of Timor-Leste where formal land registries are nonexistent, incomplete, or deeply contested, Uso Capião provides a vital, accessible, and culturally resonant mechanism for resolving conflicts and establishing locally recognized ownership based on long-term, peaceful possession. Its operation reinforces social cohesion, leverages indigenous knowledge systems, and offers a degree of tenure security that the state’s formal apparatus cannot yet attain. The practice inherently values relationships and community harmony over rigid individual titles, reflecting a communal understanding of land stewardship.
Complementing and, in theory, integrating this customary foundation is the formal legal structure established primarily through Law No. 13/2017 (The Special Regime for the Definition of Immovable Property Rights). This landmark legislation represents the state’s primary tool for resolving the complex web of overlapping claims inherited from Portuguese colonial administration, Indonesian occupation, and the United Nations transitional administration period. Its core objectives are to provide legal clarity on land ownership, codify procedures for systematic land registration, establish a centralized cadastre under the National Directorate of Land, Property, and Cadastral Services (DNTPSC), and outline formal mechanisms for resolving disputes that cannot be settled amicably. Article 3 of the law explicitly recognizes “previous rights” as a basis for claiming ownership. This category encompasses rights arising from long-term possession exhibiting the fundamental characteristics of ownership (effectively capturing the essence of customary tenure such as Uso Capião), formal titles granted by previous administrations (Portuguese “propriedade perfeita,” Indonesian “hak milik” or Hak Guna Bangunan), and secondary rights (aforamento, Hak Guna Usaha). By acknowledging possession-based claims under this umbrella, the law makes a substantial concession to the historical and social reality of landholding in Timor-Leste. This concession seeks to reconcile traditional practices with state authority, enhance tenure security, mitigate conflicts, and establish a more predictable economic activity and investment environment.
The implementation of this formal system is underpinned by the institutional framework established by Law No. 3/2017 (Law on the Land Commission). This legislation establishes the Commission for Immovable Property Rights and Cadastral Services (commonly referred to as the Land Commission or Cadastral Commission). Operating under the jurisdiction of the Department of National and Territorial Property and Civil Service (DNTPSC), the Commission is vested with substantial authority central to the dispute resolution process within the formal system. Its mandated roles encompass adjudicating competing claims to land and property submitted during the registration process mandated by Law 13/2017; verifying evidence presented for “previous rights,” including claims based on long-term possession or customary use; resolving conflicts arising from overlapping claims discovered during cadastral surveying; issuing binding decisions on land ownership and boundaries within the formal registration system; and serving as the primary administrative body for resolving land disputes before their escalation to the courts. Consequently, the Commission’s work is pivotal in translating “previous rights” recognition into tangible, legally registered titles. Its ability to comprehend and fairly assess evidence of customary possession is paramount for the integration envisioned by Law 13/2017.
Furthermore, the Expropriation Law introduces a structured framework for compulsory land acquisition for public purposes, augmenting the formal framework. Its fundamental principle of fair, timely, and adequate compensation is crucial in preventing the state from becoming a source of novel land conflicts and dispossession. This approach strives to balance development requirements and protect individual and communal land rights.
However, a critical tension emerges when examining the relationship between the customary practice of Uso Capião and its treatment within the formal statutory framework. While Law 13/2017 incorporates the substance of Uso Capião—long-term possession as a pathway to ownership—by including it within the broad category of “previous rights” in Article 3, it notably avoids using the Portuguese legal term “usucapião” or its local variant “Uso Capião” throughout the text.
More significantly, the law fails to codify the specific procedures, evidentiary standards, or community validation processes inherent in the customary practice. This omission has profound implications for the effectiveness and fairness of the hybrid system. The absence of formal codification generates substantial legal uncertainty. Customary mediators continue operating based on unwritten norms. Still, the outcomes of their deliberations lack clear, standardized pathways for conversion into formal titles recognized by the DNTPSC and the Land Commission. Consequently, rural claimants relying solely on Uso Capião encounter an opaque process when engaging with the formal system. They are uncertain about the evidence (beyond perhaps an affidavit) required to prove their long-term possession meets the state’s criteria for a “previous right.” This uncertainty can lead to uneven outcomes and disillusionment with the formal process.
Furthermore, the absence of codification grants substantial administrative discretion to the DNTPSC, and the Land Commission established under Law 3/2017. Officials must interpret the scope of “long-term possession” and the validity of customary claims on a case-by-case basis. Without explicit legislative guidelines defining the role of community elders’ testimonies, the required duration of possession, or the weight given to oral histories versus physical markers, the recognition of Uso Capião-based claims becomes susceptible to regional variations, individual biases, or inconsistent application of unwritten internal policies. This discretion undermines the fundamental principle of recognizing customary rights, as the depth of that recognition heavily depends on the interpreting agency’s understanding and willingness to engage with local practices. It also presents a missed opportunity for harmonization. Explicitly naming Uso Capião in the law and detailing its core elements—such as minimum occupation periods (possibly differentiated by region), the role and number of elder witnesses required, standardized forms for documenting customary agreements, and procedures for integrating these decisions with the cadastral mapping process—could have established a crucial procedural bridge. Such codification would enhance predictability, reduce the likelihood of appeals and litigation, and significantly expedite the national land registration process by providing clear rules for validating the substantial number of customary claims.
Consequently, while Timor-Leste’s dual-path approach, which integrates Uso Capião with contemporary legal instruments such as Laws 13/2017 and 3/2017, demonstrates a commendable and context-sensitive understanding of land governance, its implementation exposes a critical disparity. The formal system, primarily managed by the Land Commission’s adjudicatory function, acknowledges the outcome of customary practice (possession resulting in ownership) but fails to incorporate and regulate the process of Uso Capião itself formally. This creates friction at the juncture of integration, where community-based resolutions conflict with the state’s bureaucratic and legal requirements for registration. To fully realize the potential of its hybrid model and enhance rural land tenure security, Timor-Leste must transcend implicit recognition and adopt the constructive formalization of Uso Capião. Practical steps could include issuing detailed ministerial diplomas or implementing regulations under Law 13/2017 that explicitly define Uso Capião and outline sequential procedures for registering claims derived from it, specifying evidentiary requirements (including affidavits from recognized elders) and integration mechanisms with the cadastre. Establishing formal linkages between community dispute-resolution councils and the DNTPSC/Land Commission, potentially through training elders in standardized documentation and creating channels for their decisions to carry presumptive weight in the administrative process, would facilitate smoother transitions. Simultaneously, robust public awareness campaigns are imperative to educate rural communities about the formal recognition of “previous rights” under Article 3 and the necessity of filing formal Ownership Claims (Requerimento de Titularidade) with the DNTPSC to transform customary possession into state-secured title. Timor-Leste’s trajectory in land dispute resolution is undoubtedly one of escalating legal maturity and a genuine endeavor to harmonize tradition with modernity. Addressing the procedural gaps surrounding “Uso Capião” is the next critical step in integrating these elements into a more cohesive, predictable, and equitable framework for land governance for all its citizens.
Three Case Studies
The following section explains the above with three case studies that illustrate the hybrid operation of customary practice and formal land law in Timor-Leste.
These case studies were conducted and compiled using public cadastral data from the DNTPSC, supplemented with conflict monitoring conducted by the UNTL Legal Research Unit and the Land Network Forum Timor-Leste several years ago.
Case Study 1: Uso Capião and Intergenerational Transfer in Aileu Municipality
In the mountainous rural community of Maubisse, Aileu, a protracted land dispute emerged in 2019 between two extended families over a fertile parcel of terraced farmland. The land had been continuously cultivated by one family since the early 1970s, following informal allocation by the village elders during the final years of Portuguese rule. Although the cultivating family lacked a formal title, they asserted Uso Capião based on decades of unchallenged, peaceful possession. The opposing family, whose ancestors had once cleared the land but left during the Indonesian occupation, presented a faded Portuguese-era land document indicating historical ownership.
Under the authority of the lia nain (custodian of customary law), local mediators conducted several rounds of deliberations involving testimony from neighboring elders, review of land use history, and site visits. The traditional verdict supported the cultivating family’s claim, citing continuous use, visible investment in the land, and the communal understanding of the land’s transfer.
However, when the case reached the DNTPSC as part of a broader cadastral registration effort under Law No. 13/2017, the absence of a formal title initially delayed the acceptance of the claim. Only after the family submitted sworn declarations from the lianain, photographic evidence, and a notarized community witness list did the Land Commission formally recognize the previous right and issue a land certificate. This case highlights both the resilience of customary systems and the growing openness of formal institutions to locally mediated claims—though it also underscores the need for clearer procedural channels to translate customary rulings into legal titles.
Case Study 2: Post-Conflict Overlap of Colonial Titles and Customary Possession in Liquiçá
In Likisá, a coastal town with a history of layered administrative control, a land dispute in 2022 between a returning diaspora member and a local farming collective drew national attention. The returning claimant presented an authenticated copy of a Portuguese-era propriedade perfeita title granted to his grandfather in 1958, covering approximately 12 hectares of prime land near the main road. However, local residents had used the land communally since the 1980s under a traditional rotational farming scheme (tare lisan) re-established after forced evacuations during the Indonesian occupation.
The matter was submitted to the Land Commission during the systematic cadastral registration under Law 13/2017. While the Commission recognized the colonial title as a previous right, it also considered affidavits from the local data and lia-nain, who testified to uninterrupted community use and maintenance of the land for more than 30 years. The Commission ultimately awarded partial recognition to both parties: the diaspora claimant received title to 4 hectares not currently under cultivation. The remaining 8 hectares were registered as community land under collective possession, guided by principles derived from Uso Capião.
This case study illustrates the hybrid adjudicatory role the Land Commission must assume. It must navigate the complexities of historical titles, reconcile them with post-conflict customary possession, and craft equitable outcomes that prevent new grievances. The judiciously calibrated hybrid system can uphold legal continuity and social justice.
Case Study 3: Women’s Customary Land Rights in Oekusi and the Role of Local Mediation
Within the enclave of Oekusi-Ambenu, where Portuguese influence persists, and local adat is deeply ingrained, a widowed woman from the village of Citrana faced eviction by her late husband’s extended family. They asserted her lack of entitlement to inherit communal land under customary law. However, local practice has recently transformed, influenced by gender rights awareness campaigns and state-led land tenure initiatives that championed women’s land claims.
With the assistance of a local non-governmental organization (NGO) and the village’s liaison, the woman invoked Uso Capião. She emphasized that she had maintained the land independently for over a decade since her husband’s demise and was widely recognized as its steward. The mediation council validated her claim through testimony from neighboring households and a ritualized reaffirmation ceremony. This process was subsequently supported by a formal Ownership Claim (Requerimento de Titularidade) submitted to the Department of Natural Resources and Parks (DNTPSC).
Statutory law does not explicitly distinguish between genders when recognizing previous rights. However, the oral and community-based nature of Uso Capião can pose risks for women if traditional norms do not align with contemporary rights. In this instance, the local evolution of practice and external support mechanisms facilitated a just resolution. Her claim was successfully registered, establishing a precedent for combining customary authority with contemporary principles of gender equity.
These case studies demonstrate that Timor-Leste’s dual-track land governance model—albeit still in its formative stages—can accommodate the intricate realities of post-conflict society, intergenerational stewardship, gender equity, and the legacy of colonialism. However, they also highlight the persistent fragility of the system when customary rulings lack formal codification, evidentiary standards remain ambiguous, and community elders act without structured interaction with state institutions.
The path forward necessitates deeper institutionalizing of these interfaces through codified regulations, elder training programs, community-state mediation frameworks, and robust monitoring mechanisms. Only by implementing these measures can Timor-Leste transform its hybrid tapestry from a patchwork into a resilient foundation for land justice. (*)
Bibliography:
- Law No. 13/2017, Regime Especial para a Definição da Titularidade dos Bens Imóveis, Art. 3.
- Law No. 3/2017, Comissão de Direitos sobre Bens Imóveis e Serviços de Cadastro.
- UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/27 on Property Dispute Mediation (precursor to the current frameworks).
- Silva, A., & Mendes, E. (2020). “Customary Tenure in Post-Independence Timor-Leste.” Asia Pacific Journal of Legal Anthropology, 8(2), 88–112.
- DNTPSC Land Registration Report, 2024.
- Land Network Forum (Rede de Terra), “The Role of Women in Customary Land Disputes,” Policy Brief, March 2023.
- UN-Habitat Timor-Leste, “Land Tenure Regularisation in Rural Areas: Lessons from Liquiçá,” 2022.
