Resha Roshana Putri
Unknown Affiliation

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

INDONESIA’S NEW MODEL OF BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY: COMPARISON WITH BRAZIL Resha Roshana Putri
Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 3 No. 2 (2019): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 3, Number 2, June 2019
Publisher : International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v3i2.314

Abstract

AbstractIn the past few years, there has been a surge in lawsuits against the mechanism for resolving international investment disputes through the Investors State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) forum proposed by foreign investors who are host states, including Indonesia. Most of the claims are caused by the policies of the host country which are intended to protect the basic rights of the people such as the right to health, the right to a healthy environment, taxes, as well as the minimum standard of wages for workers. This policy provides a loss for foreign investors and is considered a violation of the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT). BIT is often recognized to be detrimental to Indonesia, because it can disrupt the sovereignty of the country, especially when dealing with international disputes with foreign investors. This study uses a comparative juridical approach, comparing the BIT model in Indonesia with Brazil, namely Cooperation and Investment Facilitation Agreement (CIFA). Brazil was chosen because it succeeds to reform its investment regime, specifically on its BITs. The results obtained were that Indonesia had to change several provisions in its BITs, which has been regulated CIFA provisions in Brazil, which is not member of the ICSID Convention.Keywords: BIT, CIFA, Investor State Dispute Settlement. AbstrakBeberapa tahun terakhir, ada lonjakan tuntutan hukum terhadap mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa investasi internasional melalui Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) forum yang diusulkan oleh investor asing yang menjadi host states, termasuk Indonesia. Sebagian besar klaim disebabkan oleh kebijakan negara tuan rumah yang dimaksudkan untuk melindungi hak-hak dasar masyarakatnya seperti hak atas kesehatan, hak atas lingkungan yang sehat, pajak, juga standar minimum upah pekerja. Kebijakan ini memberikan kerugian bagi investor asing dan dianggap sebagai pelanggaran Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT). BIT seringkali dianggap merugikan bagi Indonesia, karena dapat mengganggu kedaulatan negara, khususnya ketika berhadapan dengan sengketa internasional dengan investor asing. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan yuridis normatif dengan metode perbandingan, yaitu dengan membandingkan model BIT di Indonesia dengan Brazilia, yaitu Cooperation and Investment Facilitation Agreement (CIFA). Brazil dipilih karena merupakan negara yang berhasil melakukan reformasi terhadap rezim investasinya, khususnya pada BIT. Hasil yang diperoleh adalah bahwa Indonesia harus merubah beberapa ketentuan dalam BITs nya, seperti yang terkadung dalam CIFA di Brazil, yang bukan merupakan negara anggota dari Konvensi ICSID. Kata Kunci: BIT, CIFA, Penyelesaian Sengketa Investor-Negara
Konstitusi dan Masyarakat Hukum Adat: Meninjau Pengakuan dan Perlindungan Hak Ekonomi, Sosial, dan Budaya Masyarakat Hukum Adat dalam Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945 Resha Roshana Putri
Padjadjaran Law Review Vol. 5 (2017): PADJADJARAN LAW REVIEW VOLUME 5 NOMOR 1 DESEMBER 2017
Publisher : PADJADJARAN LAW RESEARCH AND DEBATE SOCIETY

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Abstrak Kongres Taman Dunia Kelima yang diselenggarakan di Durban menekankan adanya fakta bahwa hak masyarakat hukum adat di dunia mulai dilanggar dan dilupakan dalam tatanan internasional, termasuk di dalamnya hak hidup dan hak ekonomi, sosial, dan budaya (EKOSOB). Salah satunya adalah kasus Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate (MIFEE) di Papua. Secara teoritis dan konseptual, pengakuan dan perlindungan masyarakat hukum adat seharusnya tertuang di dalam Konstitusi masing-masing negara, mengingat masyarakat hukum adat merupakan bagian dari suatu warga negara. Pengakuan dan perlindungan hak EKOSOB masyarakat hukum adat tidak diatur secara komprehensif dalam UUD 1945, namun justru mengalami progresivitas setelah dikeluarkannya Putusan MK Nomor 35/PUU-X/2012 yang diajukan oleh Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara (AMAN) terhadap Undang-Undang Nomor 41 Tahun 1999 tentang Kehutanan. Tulisan ini menggunakan pendekatan yuridis normatif yang akan meneliti secara rinci pasal-pasal hak masyarakat hukum adat dalam Konstitusi yang akan dikaitkan dengan instrumen hukum lainnya yang berhubungan dengan penulisan ini. Keyword: Konstitusi, masyarakat hukum adat, hak EKOSOB. Abstract In the fifth World Park Congress held in Durban, there was a statement stated that the movement and the existence of indigenous people have been forgotten by international stages, including its right to live and its right of economic, social, and cultural. One of examples can be seen on the case of Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate (MIFEE). In a theoritical concept, the recognition and protection of indigenous people should be regulated in Constitution, remembering that indigenous people are parts of citizens. The recognition and protection of indigenous people rights of economic, social, and cultural are not regulated clearly in the Indonesian Constitution, yet experiencing its progressiveness after The Constitutional Court Judgement 35/PUU-X/2012 which submitted by AMAN over the Indonesian Act No. 41/1999 regarding Forestry. This paper uses normatif-yuridic approaches to examine in detail the concept of recognition and protection of indigenous people which are recorded in the Indonesian Constitution 1945 and will be related with the other law instruments which have relevances with this paper.