DENPASAR, Bali — FFU.WartaGlobal

The land dispute surrounding Pura Dalam Balangan in Jimbaran, Badung, has entered a new chapter.

On September 4, 2026, the Bali Police Directorate of Special Criminal Investigation (Ditreskrimsus Polda Bali) named former Head of the Bali Regional Office of the National Land Agency (BPN), I Made Daging, A.Ptnh., M.H., as a suspect in an alleged case involving the making and/or use of a forged document related to Letter No. MP.01.03/3200-51.03/IX/2020 dated September 8, 2020.

The designation is contained in Suspect Designation Letter No. S.Tap.Tsk/44/IX/RES.1.24./2026/Ditreskrimsus. Investigators reportedly examined witnesses and experts and seized 37 pieces of evidence.

Now, one question sits at the center of the case:

Does the official letter actually reflect what happened on the ground?

The custodians of Pura Dalam Balangan, through their legal counsel Adv. Harmaini Idris Hasibuan, S.H., have challenged several statements contained in the document.

They allege that 17 points may not correspond to the actual facts, including statements concerning Ombudsman corrective measures, land measurement, mediation and internal audits.

The dispute becomes even more contentious over a land measurement conducted on August 5, 2020, which the temple custodians describe as a “rolling-carpet” measurement—an allegation that land parcels with different legal statuses were incorporated into a single land configuration.

The figures at stake are substantial:

7,050 square meters of land claimed by the temple custodians as sacred temple land, along with approximately 3,000 square meters of cliff area that they claim constitutes state land.

If that allegation is proven true, the question is straightforward:

How could land parcels with different legal statuses end up within a single certified parcel?

And if the allegation is not true:

BPN can simply produce the maps, land records, measurement documents, coordinates and legal basis for the measurement.

The dispute also intersects with Ombudsman RI Final Assessment Report (LAHP) No. 0095/LM/IX/2018/DPS-JKT, which, according to the temple custodians, previously identified maladministration in the handling of the land dispute.

Even more troubling, the temple side claims that the 2020 BPN letter subsequently became part of the basis for the closure of the Ombudsman complaint.

That raises another question for the public:

Was the Ombudsman given an accurate account of the facts?

If yes, prove it.

If not, who bears responsibility?

And if the disputed land was subsequently linked to a 2024 lease agreement for commercial purposes, another question becomes unavoidable:

Did the land itself change—or did only the boundary lines on paper change?

This is where the Bali Police investigation becomes critical.

Open the documents.

Test the maps.

Verify the coordinates.

Compare them with the actual conditions on the ground.

Because certificates may speak, officials may explain—but coordinates cannot play politics.

The designation of a suspect is, of course, not a conviction. Nevertheless, the case is serious enough to demand one thing:

NO MORE FACTS HIDDEN BEHIND A SINGLE SHEET OF PAPER.

FFU.WartaGlobal — Journalistic Work

Editorial Note: The allegations presented in this report constitute matters under investigation and/or statements made by the temple custodians and have yet to be established by a final court judgment. FFU.WartaGlobal remains open to the right of reply from all parties mentioned.