Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
2.386
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Yustisia Lentera Hukum Bimbingan dan Konseling Jurnal Dinamika Hukum Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Sriwijaya Law Review Lex Renaissance Jurnal Yudisial Uti Possidetis: Journal of International Law Jurnal Rechts Vinding : Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional Unisia VISA: Journal of Vision and Ideas LamLaj Lex Scientia Law Review JILS (Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies)
Sefriani Sefriani
Faculty Of Law, Universitas Islam Indonesia
Religion Humanities Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Environmental Science Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Public Health Social Sciences

Published : 45 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 45 Documents
Search

 1   2   3   4   5 
FAIR AND EQUITABLE TREATMENT STANDARD IN THE INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT AGREEMENTS Sefriani, Sefriani
Yustisia Vol 7, No 1: April 2018
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/yustisia.v7i1.18536

Abstract

In the last five years, the number of investors who suit against host state in the international arbitration forum increased significantly. Almost all lawsuits used fair and equitable treatment (FET) standard which has been violated by the host state. Most of international investment agreements including those that were made by Indonesia contain FET standard clauses. However, there are no definitions related to this standard. This condition potentially raises a very wide interpretation of the standard. The problem formulations in this article are how the history of FET is, where its position in international investment law is and what elements of FET standard are. The results show that the FET standard has existed since Havana Charter followed by various FCN, BIT and other international investment agreements. FET standard can be categorized as customary international, legally binding on all countries regardless their national law. Although there is no universal approval regarding the scope of FET standard, the writings which have been published and the arbitral tribunal decision mentions that those elements are legitimate expectation; due process; denial of justice; rule of law; non- discrimination; transparency; consistency, good faith, and reasonableness.
INVESTMENT ARBITRATION BAGI NEGARA BERKEMBANG DAN TERBELAKANG Sefriani, Sefriani
Yustisia Vol 2, No 2: August 2013
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/yustisia.v2i2.10186

Abstract

AbstractThe main problem statements in this research is what factors cause almost no developing countries and last developing countries win before the investment arbitration. This thesis employs normative method of research with qualitative analysis. The result of this thesis show that BIT is the main factor caused it. The BIT contain vagueness term, arbitrator of investment arbitration do open ended interpretation toward the term, and  cause damage to developing countries and last developing countries. The solution for this phenomena is that developing countries as capital importer should be aware, careful and has equal bargaining power in the process of adoption of BIT with developed countries as capital exporter. Equal bargaining power can be achieved if developing countries has independency, have no dependency in any matters such as economic politics,, security and defence, etcKeywords: investment arbitration, Bilateral investment treaty, dispute resolutionAbstrakMasalah utama yang diteliti dalam penelitian ini   adalah faktor-faktor penyebab kekalahan negara berkembang dan terbelakang di depan forum investment arbitration. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif, jenis data yang digunakan adalah data sekunder yang terdiri atas bahan hukum primer, sekunder dan tersier. Pendekatan penelitian yang digunakan adalah pendekatan perundang-undangan, histori, dan konsep. Teknik analisis yang dilakukan adalah analisis kualitatif. Hasil penelitian disajikan secara deskriptif analitis. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa BIT menjadi factor utama penyebab semuanya itu. BIT berisikan ketentuan-ketentuan yang sangat berpihak pada kepentingan negara eksportir modal. Banyak ketentuan yang multitafsir dan kemudian diinterpretasikan secara sangat luas oleh arbitrator di forum investment arbitration untuk kepentingan negara maju, negara eksportir modal. Solusi untuk mengatasi hak tersebut adalah bahwa negara berkembang harus sadar, cermat dan memiliki posisi tawar yang seimbang dengan negara maju dalam penyusunan BIT. Semua ini dapat diraih apabila negara berkembang memiliki independensi, tidak memiliki ketergantungan pada segala bidang seperti, ekonomi, politik juga pertahanan keamanan pada negara eksportir modal.Kata Kunci: Arbitrase investasi, perjanjian bilateral investasi, penyelesaian sengketa
Legal Protection of Women’s Rights in Afghanistan During the Taliban Regime of 2021-2022 and the State Responsibility Alya Ananda Safitri; Sefriani Sefriani; Amalina Ghaisani
Lambung Mangkurat Law Journal Vol. 9 No. 1 (2024): March
Publisher : Program magister Kenotariatan Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lambung Mangkurat

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32801/abc.v9i1.154

Abstract

This paper discusses women’s rights in Afghanistan during the Taliban regime from 2021 to 2022. Having seized power in Afghanistan by the Taliban in August 2021, a wide range of regulations seem to discriminate against women. The discriminatory restrictive regulations enforced by the Taliban have prevented women and girls in Afghanistan from receiving the same rights as men, such as access to education, employment, and access to public facilities. This is clearly inconsistent with The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Given that Afghanistan ratified CEDAW in 2003, it guarantees the protection of women’s rights, it means that Afghanistan has become a state party, then Afghanistan has the responsibility to comply with this convention. This research uses the type of normative legal research - searching for material in the form of library materials or secondary data as sources in writing research. The purpose of this study is to find out how the legal protection of women’s rights during the Taliban regime considering that Afghanistan has ratified CEDAW. Furthermore, to find out whether Afghanistan can be held responsible for the restrictions on women’s rights imposed by the Taliban. The approach used in this study is the conceptual approach and the statute approach. This research also uses a historical approach and a case approach. This study finds the legal protection that Afghanistan has provided for women’s rights based on the ratification of CEDAW, namely the Law on Elimination of Violence against Women (EVAW). The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan’s Constitution also protects women’s rights. However, the EVAW law has not been enforced at all since the Taliban took over. It indicates that Afghanistan can be held responsible.
Shedding Light on WTO Jurisdiction and Preventing Abuse of The Security Exception Provision Sefriani Sefriani; Aris Rahmat Julian; Seguito Monteiro
Lex Scientia Law Review Vol. 8 No. 2 (2024): Advancing Justice, Rights, and Governance in a Digital and Decentralized World
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/lslr.v8i2.13473

Abstract

This paper critically analyzes the World Trade Organization (WTO) jurisdiction over disputes involving the use of the Security Exception (SE) under Article XXI(b) of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994, and explores measures the WTO could take to prevent the abuse of this provision. The study utilizes legislative, case-based, and historical approaches within a normative juridical framework to examine the complexities surrounding the invocation of the SE. First, the paper demonstrates that the WTO does indeed have jurisdiction over disputes involving the SE, countering the perception that the 'self-judging' nature of Article XXI(b) absolves the WTO of oversight. This argument is supported by the WTO panel’s ruling in Russia – Traffic in Transit and reinforced by historical precedents, which confirm that affected countries can engage in consultations with the invoking state. Second, the paper identifies two critical instruments that could prevent the abuse of the SE provision. These instruments are rooted in the interpretation of the SE’s text, guided by the ordinary meaning of its terms, in accordance with the principle of good faith. The paper argues that more precise definitions of what constitutes an emergency situation affecting state security are essential to prevent the misuse of the SE for protectionist or politically motivated purposes. Ultimately, the research calls for a more robust framework to ensure that the Security Exception serves its intended purpose—protecting legitimate national security interests—while preventing its exploitation for unjustifiable trade barriers. The WTO must develop clearer guidelines and stronger mechanisms for transparency and accountability to maintain the integrity of the global trading system.
Potential Investor Claims and Possible State Defences During the Covid-19 Emergency Sefriani Sefriani; Seguito Monteiro
Sriwijaya Law Review Volume 5 Issue 2, July 2021
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Sriwijaya University, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.28946/slrev.Vol5.Iss2.1067.pp236-246

Abstract

Since it was announced as a public health emergency of international concern in 2019, Covid-19 has caused enormous loss of property and life. The country's emergency policies in responding to the Covid outbreak are numerous, such as closing public transportation and prohibiting the export of medical devices. These policies have potentially harmed the interests of investors. This study has three purposes: investors' potential claims to challenge state measures addressed to Covid-19, the legal defences of states, and the possibility of an international investment dispute. This study shows that investors' potential claims may be delivered based on violations of the principles of fair and equal treatment, full protection and security, and national treatment and the most favoured nations. While a state can defend itself based on the principles of force majeure and state necessity, states can also defence through Non preclude measures or right to regulate clause in international investment agreements. In addition, it would also be better to build international solidarity and cooperation to mitigate and defeat the Covid-19 pandemic than sue the government before ISDS. States need collective action to avoid a surge of investor-state Arbitration. Governments’ policy to combat Covid-19 is to be considered as acting in necessity and therefore cannot be found in breach of their investment treaty obligations as long as that policy meet the necessity, proportionate, and non-discrimination requirements.
Co-Authors Alya Ananda Safitri Amalina Ghaisani Aris Rahmat Julian Bugivia Maharani Setiadji Putri Dodik Setiawan Nur Heriyanto Erlangga, Vania Lutfi Safira Febriani, Yasyfa Fitria Kasih Ghaisani, Amalina Kazimi, Omida Khoirunnisa, Hafara Mohammad Ikhsan, Mohammad Monteiro, Seguito Putra, Jaya Indra Santosa Putra, Jaya Indra Santoso Putro, Yaries Mahardika Ramadhan, Muhammad Rizki Safitri, Alya Ananda Seguito Monteiro Seguito Monteiro Setiadji Putri, Bugivia Maharani Sri Wartini Tamas, Fezer Tolo, Arezo Yusnetti Yusnetti