Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.562
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Al-Qadha: Jurnal Hukum Islam dan Perundang-Undangan Trunojoyo Law Review Unnes Law Journal : Jurnal Hukum Universitas Negeri Semarang
Muhammad Siddiq Armia
Universitas Islam Negeri Ar-Raniry Banda Aceh
Religion Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
The Concept of Safe Houses for Domestic Violence Victims in Aceh: A Maṣlaḥah Perspective Muslem Abdullah; Muhammad Siddiq Armia; Husni Mubarrak
Al-Qadha : Jurnal Hukum Islam dan Perundang-Undangan Vol. 13 No. 1 (2026): Al-Qadha: Jurnal Hukum Islam dan Perundang-Undangan
Publisher : Hukum Keluarga Islam IAIN LANGSA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32505/qadha.v13i1.14478

Abstract

The conventional criminal justice system often marginalizes the rights of domestic violence victims due to its predominantly offender-oriented approach. This article aims to reconstruct the concept and operational standards of safe houses (Rumah Aman) for domestic violence victims under the Integrated Service Unit for Women and Children Empowerment (UPTD PPA) in Aceh Province. Employing empirical legal research methods through field observations, this study analyzes the dialectic between Indonesian positive law and Islamic law through the lens of Mashlahah Theory. The main findings reveal that within the context of Aceh, the existence of safe houses transforms from a mere state administrative mandate into a theological obligation. Through the Mashlahah framework, safe houses serve as a frontline instrument to protect the five fundamental principles of Islamic law (al-mabadi' al-khams): religion, life, intellect, lineage, and wealth. The novelty of this study lies in its integration of the state's formal protection system with local cultural-theological legitimacy. This research concludes the necessity of a holistic reconceptualization of safe house standardization encompassing high-level physical security, psychological rehabilitation, and economic empowerment reinforced by religious authorities to ensure effective victim protection in a special autonomous region.
International Lawfare and Transactional Peacemaking: Indonesia’s ‘Board of Peace’ and the Question of Palestinian Sovereignty Chairul Fahmi; Muhammad Siddiq Armia; Mizaj Iskandar; Laila Muhammad Rasyid; Faisal Fauzan
TRUNOJOYO LAW REVIEW Vol 8, No 2 (2026): August
Publisher : Faculty of Law Universitas Trunojoyo Madura

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21107/tlr.v8i2.33636

Abstract

The Board for Peace (BoP), established by President Trump, is integral to the execution of the America-First and transactional strategy. This board indicates a transition in international collaboration from multilateralism under the UN mandate to a multi-corporate framework for handling the post-conflict transition in Gaza. This article analyses the legitimacy of the BoP under international law and the ramifications of Indonesia's permanent membership and its allocation of one billion US dollars to the BoP, while also evaluating its implications for Palestinian sovereignty and the international legal system. This research utilizes an interdisciplinary approach that combines international law, political economy, and international relations. The research indicates that the creation of the BoP was prompted by UN Security Council Resolution 2803, although it has diverged from the resolution's aims. Moreover, the BoP has invalidated the 2024 Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) about the Palestinian people's right to self-determination. Moreover, the BoP, which possesses a comprehensive strategy for Gaza's reconstruction post-Israel's devastation, represents an infringement on the rights of the Palestinian populace in Gaza, undermines Palestinian sovereignty, overlooks the Palestinian Authority, and imposes a fiscal obligation on nations, especially permanent members like Indonesia. This paper asserts that the BoP framework is designed exclusively to sustain informal imperialism that advantages Israel, hinders the two-state solution, and constrains Indonesia’s foreign policy—ideally independent and proactive—under the influence of U.S. interests during the Trump administration.
Navigating a Critical Issue: The Legal Status of the Strait of Hormuz in International Law Chairul Fahmi; Muhammad Siddiq Armia; Badri Hasan Sulaiman; Malahayati Malahayati; EMK Alidar
Unnes Law Journal Vol. 12 No. 1 (2026): Transforming Law and Protecting Rights: Contemporary Issues in Legal Reform an
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/ulj.v12i1.48098

Abstract

The Strait of Hormuz connects the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and is indispensable to international energy trade. Its legal status remains contested because Iran signed but did not ratify the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), while Oman is a party. This article examines three questions: the treaty and customary rules governing passage; the rights and duties of coastal, belligerent, and neutral states during armed conflict; and the implications for maritime security and economic stability. Using doctrinal legal analysis, the article examines UNCLOS Part III, the 1958 Geneva Convention, the Corfu Channel judgment, the 1994 San Remo Manual, and documented state practice in Hormuz and comparable waterways. It argues that Iran’s 1982 declaration is relevant to, but does not conclusively establish, persistent-objector status, and that the customary minimum of non-suspendable innocent passage cannot simply be displaced by unilateral security claims. The transit-passage regime affords additional rights whose customary reach requires careful evaluation. The analysis distinguishes lawful navigation-safety and pollution controls from discriminatory tolls, indiscriminate interdiction, and closure, while recognizing the jurisdictional limits of UNCLOS dispute settlement vis-à-vis non-parties. It concludes that cooperative incident management, evidence-based restraint, and enforceable environmental safeguards provide a more legally defensible policy response than unilateral restrictions on international navigation.
Co-Authors Badri Hasan Chairul Fahmi EMK Alidar, EMK Faisal Fauzan Husni Mubarrak Laila Muhammad Rasyid Malahayati Malahayati Mizaj Iskandar Usman Muslem Abdullah