ABSTRACT
This chapter focuses on the social relationships, ideas, and practices that de facto regulate land tenure on the ground, their interactions with the formal system, and the limitations of state systems in contexts such as the Timorese. Based on a survey, the chapter shows that, at least until the approval of the Land Law, the formal system failed to give any legal tenure security to most Timorese. Even in Dili, most people depend on (informal) customary systems to access and avail of land. This central role of customary systems does not mean that the formal system is disregarded by those who live outside of it. Most respondents, perhaps aware of the risks of being outside the formal system, see land titles as a path to protect their rights against state interventions and other threats. Moreover, respondents view mixing the customary and formal systems as adequate for land disputes. Regarding land expropriation, a large majority of respondents agree that their land can be expropriated for projects with clear public purpose, such as roads and schools, but only a few agree with expropriations with fuzzy public benefits, such as hotels and factories. This chapter provides examples of the differences between the formal and customary systems, such as different conceptualisations of ownership and the reluctance to accept adverse possession. More generally, this chapter shows the importance of understanding the gaps and contradictions between the formal system and the customary norms, institutions, and practices that de facto regulate land tenure.
