Articles
<![CDATA[Khazanah: Friedrich Karl Von Savigny ]]>
<![CDATA[Atip Latipulhayat]]>
<![CDATA[ PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 2, No 1 (2015): PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (577.2 KB)
<![CDATA[Friedrich Karl von Savigny (1779-1861) adalah ahli hukum Jerman yang juga dianggap sebagai salah satu Bapak hukum Jerman. Savigny adalah tokoh mazhab sejarah (historical school jurisprudence ) yang dikembangkannya pada paruh pertama abad ke 19. Dia juga dianggap sebagai pelopor kajian mengenai relasi antara perkembangan hukum dan sosial. Sebagai seorang pemikir hukum yang senantiasa kreatif dalam membuat terobosan-terobosan (trail-blazing legal scientist), Savigny memberikan kontribusi penting dalam perkembangan ilmu hukum dan bahkan terhadap ilmu sosial. Dari sekian banyak kontribusinya antara lain teorinya mengenai kontinuitas antara institusi hukum saat ini dengan institusi hukum masa lalu, meletakkan fondasi bagi kajian sosiologi hukum, dan menegaskan mengenai urgensi metode historis dalam kajian hukum. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v2n1.a12]]>
<![CDATA[Editorial: Pengarusutamaan Pelayanan Publik Sebagai HAM ]]>
<![CDATA[Atip Latipulhayat]]>
<![CDATA[ PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 1, No 2 (2014): PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (453.937 KB)
<![CDATA[Pelayanan publik (public services) di Indonesia dalam arti bagaimana negara melayani warganegaranya belum pernah mendapat perhatian yang memadai, bahkan cenderung terabaikan. Klaim ini menjadi absah, karena Indonesia masih tetap bertengger pada peringkat puncak negara-negara berkategori buruk dalam penyelenggaraan pelayanan publik. Alasan utama dibalik buruknya pelayanan publik di Indonesia adalah belum sehatnya relasi antara negara dengan warganegaranya. Secara konvensional, relasi negara dan warganegara menempatkan warganegara sebagai pihak yang secara pasif menerima apapun bentuk pelayanan yang diterima dari negara. Namun, saat ini terjadi pergeseran yang cukup mendasar, warganegara yang semula sebagai penerima yang bersifat pasif menjadi penerima yang aktif dalam arti dapat melakukan gugatan jika pelayanan tidak memadai. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v1n2.a0]]>
<![CDATA[Encyclopedia: Dworkin ]]>
<![CDATA[Atip Latipulhayat]]>
<![CDATA[ PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 5, No 2 (2018): PADJADJARAN JURNAL ILMU HUKUM (JOURNAL OF LAW) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
<![CDATA[Ronald Myles Dworkin was born in 1931, in Worcester, Massachusetts. He served as professor of law and philosophy at New York University and professor emeritus at University College London. He has a substantial contribution in the fields of philosophy of law and political philosophy. For his services, he received the Holberg International Memorial Prize in the field of humanity in 2007. Dworkin's most influential view is that law as an act of interpretation. Law should be read as an integration in the sense that the judge should interpret the law consistently / coherently towards the principles of political morality of a society, especially pertaining to the value of justice, fairness, and legality. Dworkin is known as the most persistent critic of Hart's legal positivism. The targets of Dworkin's critic include the thesis of Hart's legal positivism regarding law as a system of rules and the separation between law and morality. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v5n2.a0]]>
<![CDATA[Editorial: Hukum dan Kekuasaan ]]>
<![CDATA[Atip Latipulhayat]]>
<![CDATA[ PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 4, No 1 (2017): PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (452.852 KB)
<![CDATA[Relasi dan interaksi hukum dan kuasa (kekuasaan) merupakan topik penting sekaligus kontroversial, karena keduanya memiliki daya dukung dan daya tolak yang sama kuat dan menentukan, satu dengan yang lainnya. Relasi keduanya menjadi sesuatu yang niscaya dan tak terbantahkan apabila menggunakan lensa positivisme hukum. Bagi mazhab positivisme, hukum harus bersumber dari sesuatu yang nyata dan ia menemukannya pada apa yang ia sebut sebagai ‘sovereign’ (daulat atau kuasa) yang bisa berwujud kuasa monarki seperti Raja atau kuasa demokratis semisal Parlemen. Sesuatu disebut hukum, bukan karena penilaian subjektif bahwa sesuatu itu bersifat baik atau buruk, melainkan karena berasal atau diproduksi oleh ‘sovereign'. Atas semua klaimnya itu, John Austin seorang positivist garda depan mengatakan sebagai berikut: “the existence of law is one thing; its merit or demerit is another.”DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v4n1.a0]]>
<![CDATA[Editorial: Mencari Sistem Hukum Indonesia yang Otentik ]]>
<![CDATA[Atip Latipulhayat]]>
<![CDATA[ PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 1, No 3 (2014): PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Faculty of Law, Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (449.656 KB)
<![CDATA[Mencari dan menemukan sistem hukum Indonesia yang asli dan otentik, yang akan menjadi identitas sekaligus pedoman bangsa Indonesia dalam berhukum dan bernegara, tampaknya masih panjang dan berliku. Menemukan otentisitas sistem hukum Indonesia adalah usaha untuk menelusuri jejak kehidupan bangsa Indonesia dan nilai-nilai hukum yang dianut dan dipraktikkan dalam kehidupan bernegara dan bermasyarakat. Salah satu upaya yang harus dilakukan adalah dengan menggali tradisi hukum (legal tradition) yang pernah ada dan hidup dalam masyarakat Indonesia. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v1n3.a0]]>
<![CDATA[THE FUNCTION AND PURPOSE OF AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION ACCORDING TO THE INTERNATIONAL AIR LAW ]]>
<![CDATA[Atip Latipulhayat]]>
<![CDATA[ Mimbar Hukum - Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada Vol 27, No 2 (2015) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
Full PDF (341.348 KB)
|
DOI: 10.22146/jmh.15890
<![CDATA[The main objective of an aircraft accident investigation is to find out the most probable causes of such accident. This represents a technical investigation in nature. At the practical level, however, this report is often used as legal evidence before the court. This paper argues that the main purpose of an aircraft acccident investigation is technical in nature and judicial investigation is carried out when the technical investigation found elements of crime that has been alleged as the most probable cause of the accident. Menurut Konvensi Chicago 1944, tujuan utama suatu investigasi kecelakaan pesawat udara adalah untuk menemukan penyebab terjadinya kecelakaan tersebut. Jadi, investigasi ini bersifat teknis. Namun, laporan investigasi ini seringkali dijadikan alat bukti di pengadilan khususnya apabila faktor kesalahan manusia dianggap sebagai penyebab utama terjadinya kecelakaan tersebut. Investigasi teknis berubah menjadi investigasi yuridis. Tulisan ini berpendapat bahwa hakikat investigasi kecelakaan pesawat udara adalah bersifat teknis dan investigasi yuridis hanya akan dilakukan apabila laporan investigasi teknis menunjukkan adanya elemen kriminal. ]]>
<![CDATA[Indonesia’s Approach to International Treaties: Balancing National Interests and International Obligations ]]>
<![CDATA[Atip Latipulhayat]]>;
<![CDATA[Susi Dwi Harijanti]]>
<![CDATA[ Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 6 No. 2 (2022): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 6, Number 2, Juni 2022 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v6i2.915
<![CDATA[The relation and interaction between international and domestic law is one of the classic issues in international and it controversy remains in the realm of theory and practice. This is an issue of which many generations of both international and constitutional lawyers have wrestled, are wrestling and will continue to wrestle. For the Indonesian context, this issue is also still far from clear. The Indonesian Constitution of 1945 stipulates that the President of the Republic of Indonesia has the authority to conclude treaties with other countries. However, it does not clearly and specifically govern the status and position of international treaties under the Constitution. As a result, the Indonesian approach to international treaty is rather pragmatic, which is susceptible to some inconsistencies. It can be seen for instance in several decisions of the Indonesian Constitutional Court that clearly demonstrates the ambiguity towards international treaty. The Indonesian Parliament (DPR) argues that Indonesia should put emphasize to the national interests when Indonesia concluded international treaties. For a certain extent this approach is vulnerable to disregard international obligations in the name of national interests. There are some legislation for instance in the field of trade, which contains national interests clause that potentially will put Indonesia as the party that disregards its international obligations. This paper argues that national interests and international obligations are mutually inclusive, and not mutually exclusive element. To this end, international treaties should have a clear status and position under the Indonesian constitution to ensure that national interest and international obligation are working in harmony.]]>
<![CDATA[Perlindungan Pencari Suaka di Laut Lepas Eropa Ditinjau Dari Hukum Pengungsi di Eropa Dan Hukum Laut Internasional ]]>
<![CDATA[Salwa Salsabila]]>;
<![CDATA[Atip Latipulhayat]]>
<![CDATA[ Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan Vol. 9 No. 3: December 2021 : Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Magister of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Mataram ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.29303/ius.v9i3.958
<![CDATA[Badan pengungsi PBB UNHCR mengatakan telah menerima banyak laporan dalam beberapa bulan terakhir yang menunjukkan para pencari suaka di laut Eropa telah didorong kembali kelaut lepast atau terapung-apung di laut. Mayoritas pencari suaka diangkut dengan kapal yang tidak layak. Selain itu, terdapat aturan Frontex yang bertujuan untuk mencegah kapal mendarat di wilayah UE bertentangan dengan dasar landasan perlindungan pengungsi Eropa. Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengulas mengenai perlindungan pencari suaka yang berada di laut lepas Eropa, dan faktor penghambat dalam memberikan perlindungan pencari suaka di laut lepas. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum yuridis normative dengan mengguna studi kepustakaan. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa selain didasarkan pada konvensi pengungsi 1951 dan konvensi HAM internasional, Eropa juga telah memiliki instrument hukum yang komprehensif dalam memberikan perlindungan pencari suaka tetapi ada aturan frontex di laut mediterania yang bertentangan dengan prinsip non-refoulment. Namun, negara-negara Eropa tetap dapat memberikan perlindungan terhadap pencari suaka di laut lepas dengan dasar pada konvensi hukum laut internasional seperti UNCLOS 1982, SOLAS, SAR dan SALVAGE. Faktor-faktor penghambat dalam memberikan perlindungan pencari suaka di laut lepas adalah dalam menentukan place of safety dan adanya interception oleh negara.]]>
<![CDATA[Liability To Third Parties Due to State Aircraft Accidents According to International And National Air Law ]]>
<![CDATA[Hanifaturrizqi, Yasmin Fara]]>;
<![CDATA[Latipulhayat, Atip]]>
<![CDATA[ Journal of Law and Policy Transformation Vol 8 No 2 (2023) ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[Universitas Internasional Batam ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
<![CDATA[This research highlights the pressing issue of the absence of state aircraft regulations demanding immediate attention. The coexistence of civil and state planes in the same airspace necessitates a thorough understanding of their interaction. However, international and national legal instruments have largely neglected state aircraft, focusing primarily on regulating air transportation and navigation for civil aviation. The research methodology employed for this study was normative juridical, involving examining library materials or secondary data using deductive thinking methods. The study's findings are clear: Firstly, in international law, the Convention on Compensation for Damage Caused by Aircraft to Third Parties 2009 and the Convention on Compensation for Damage to Third Parties 2009, Resulting from Acts of Unlawful Interference Involving Aircraft 2009 should be the standard for compensating third parties for losses resulting from aircraft activities. Secondly, at the national level, Law No. 1 of 2009 concerning Aviation and Minister of Transportation Regulation No. 77 of 2011 concerning the Responsibility of Air Transport Carriers must be used as a benchmark for fair compensation for losses to third parties due to aircraft activities. Governments must step up and ensure the safety and well-being of their citizens.]]>
<![CDATA[Arbitration as the Dispute Settlement Method to Address Harmful Interference in the Age of Mega-Constellations of Satellites ]]>
<![CDATA[Pratidina, Safira]]>;
<![CDATA[Latipulhayat, Atip]]>;
<![CDATA[Handayani, Irawati]]>
<![CDATA[ Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 8 No. 1 (2024): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 8, Number 1, January 2024 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v8i1.1448
<![CDATA[The increasing demand for radio frequency spectrum usage for the launch of mega-constellations of telecommunication satellites will potentially increase incidents of harmful interference to radiocommunication. International law has yet to regulate a compulsory method of dispute settlement for harmful interference disputes. Currently, most cases of harmful interference are solved through technical and political means. However, those methods cannot address damage claims that may be caused by harmful interference, which may become increasingly common with the growing participation of private entities. Article 56 of the ITU Constitution has regulated several dispute resolution methods related to telecommunications, namely negotiation, diplomatic channels, other methods mutually agreed upon by the parties, and arbitration. This study aims to analyze these methods of dispute settlement and determine the most appropriate method to address harmful interference disputes. As the diplomatic dispute settlement methods do not result in enforceable legally binding decisions, this study argues that arbitration is the most appropriate method to settle disputes concerning harmful interference because it offers more neutrality in its proceedings and the confidentiality of sensitive information. It may also decide on damages as part of the arbitral award. Arbitration awards are final and binding, thus offering legal certainty to the parties to the dispute. States have generally recognized arbitration awards and created mechanisms to enforce arbitral awards. This study also recommends that the ITU implement compulsory arbitration with limitations and create a harm-claim threshold.]]>
