Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
1.642
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JURNAL MAGISTER HUKUM UDAYANA Mulawarman Law Review Risalah Hukum
Mahendra Putra Kurnia
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Mulawarman
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 12 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 12 Documents
Search

 1   2 
Upaya Yang Dapat Ditempuh Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Dan Malaysia Dalam Menyelesaikan Sengketa Perbatasan Di Laut Sulawesi Ditinjau Dari Perspektif Hukum Laut Internasional Mahendra Putra Kurnia
Jurnal Risalah Hukum Volume 1, Nomor 1, Juni 2005
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Mulawarman

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

Abstract

ABSTRACT Indonesia and Malaysia involved on the teritorial waters conflict. After the sovereignty disputes over Sipadan and Ligitan Islands on 2002, nowadays they have a serious conflict in order to determine the sea teritorial border in Sulawesi waters. Malaysia was made a statement that Blok Ambalat is under Malaysian sovereignty, according to the statement, Malaysia Government give a petroleum concession to the Dutch – British Petroleum Company, Shell. Indonesian Goverments raise a protest against Malaysian statement and their action to giving a petroleum concession to the Dutch – British Petroleum Company, Shell. Indonesian Government think that Blok Ambalat is under Indonesian sovereignty. According to article 2 paragraph 3 and article 33 paragraph 1 United Nations Charter, every states shall settle their international diputes by peaceful means such as negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement resort to regional agencies or arranggements or other peaceful means on their own choice. The United Nations Convention On The Law of The Sea 1982 also furnished the settlement of disputes methods. Indonesia and Malaysia could use the UNCLOS 1982 settlement of disputes methods in view that both countries have ratified the convention. Key words : Indonesia, Malaysia, penyelesaian sengketa (settlement disputes), kedaulatan (sovereignty) dan teritorial (teritory).
Tinjauan Atas Upaya Penyelesaian Sengketa Lingkungan Hidup Di Luar Pengadilan Sesuai UU Nomor 23 Tahun 1997 Tentang Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup Emilda Kuspraningrum; Mahendra Putra Kurnia
Jurnal Risalah Hukum Volume 1, Nomor 1, Juni 2005
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Mulawarman

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

Abstract

Human being behavior very influence the continuity of human being prosperity and also the other mortal in an environment, positive human being behavior perhaps will affect positive also for continuity of environment, however if human being behavior instruct at negative behavior such as contamination or environmental mutilation perhaps will affect negativity for continuity of environment and harm other party. In This Case, contamination or environmental mutilation often cause incidence of environment dispute which in the end the harmed by party of effect the contamination or mutilation of environment will claim indemnation for grief which feeling of. Hitting problem of dispute of environment and indemnify, UU Nomor 23 Tahun 1997 about Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup provide alternative of solving of extrajudical dispute, which way of this looked into more effective, quickly and cheap compared to by the solving of through jurisdiction institute. Solving of this extrajudical dispute aim to to determine the level of indemnation and certain action utilize to guarantee do not recure of negative impact to environment. Key words : Environment,Environmental Dispute,The Parties,Extrajudicial Dispute Resolution, Service Institution
Upaya Penanganan Permasalahan Perbatasan Maritim Republik Indonesia Mahendra Putra Kurnia
Jurnal Risalah Hukum Volume 2, Nomor 1, Juni 2006
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Mulawarman

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

Abstract

Like most maritime countries, Indonesia has some problems concerning the maritime borders with its neighbouring states. As we know, Indonesia borders on 10 states, both on sea and land. Until now, there are some problems of border, especially maritime borders which have not yet been finished. If these problems are not immediately finished, they will generate problems in the future. As a solution, Indonesian Government can try using a preventive and repressive means. With both efforts, problems of border can be solved. Key words: perbatasan laut (maritime border), preventif (preventive), represif (repressive).
Sanksi Kepada Amerika Serikat Atas Tindakan Unilateralnya Terhadap Suriah Dengan Alasan Penggunaan Senjata Kimia Mutiara; Mahendra Putra Kurnia; Rika Erawaty
Jurnal Risalah Hukum Volume 17, Nomor 2, Desember 2021
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Mulawarman

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30872/risalah.v17i2.155

Abstract

Amerika Serikat, Inggris dan juga Perancis melakukan tindakan unilateral berupa menembakkan rudal ke negara Suriah dengan alasan penggunaan senjata kimia yang dilakukan oleh pemerintah Suriah terhadap rakyatnya sendiri. Hal ini menimbulkan pertanyaan apakah tindakan yang dilakukan oleh Amerika Serikat tersebut merupakan suatu pelanggaran bagi hukum humaniter internasional dan bagaimana sanksi yang akan didapat oleh Amerika Serikat, Inggris dan juga Perancis jika perbuatan tersebut telah melanggar hukum humaniter internasional. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian yang dilakukan bahwa Sanksi Amerika Serikat atas tindakan unilateralnya terhadap Suriah dengan alasan penggunaan senjata kimia. Bahwa dalam hal tersebut Amerika Serikat melakukan tindakan sepihak kepada Suriah karna dugaan penggunaan senjata kimia yang dilakukan oleh Suriah yang hingga saat ini masih belum mendapatkan bukti yang kuat terkait kebenaran tersebut. Oleh karena itu Amerika Serikat telah melanggar ketentuan hukum internasional yaitu Piagam Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa (PBB), atas perbuatannya Amerika Serikat, Inggris dan Perancis harus bertanggungjawab sesuai prosedur dari Dewan Keamanan PBB dan diberikan sanksi sesuai Piagam PBB. Keywords: unilateral action, chemical weapon, international law
Pertanggungjawaban Negara terhadap Pencemaran Minyak West Atlas Montara di Wilayah Laut Indonesia ditinjau dari UNCLOS 1982 Yusnia Tika Safitri; Mahendra Putra Kurnia; Rika Erawati
Jurnal Risalah Hukum Volume 16, Nomor 1, Juni 2020
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Mulawarman

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30872/risalah.v16i1.156

Abstract

Hydrocarbon oil and gas leakage due to explosion in The Montana Well Head Platform (PTTEP Australasia at Blok West Atlas) Australian waters (690 Km west of Darwin and 250 Km northwest of western Australia Truscott) with a spill estimate of 400 barrels/day (64 tons/day) resulted in cross-border pollution due to entering ZEE Indonesia. The purpose of this discussion is to study and analyze Thailand's position in the case of cross-border pollution due to leakage of Montara atlas oil wells in the Timor Sea. The writing method uses the type of doctrinal approach consistent with the 1982 perspective of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and relevant legal theories that will be used and constructed with the principles of legal law, principles, and doctrine. Based on Article 139 Paragraph (1) of 1982 UNCLOS, the State shall be responsible for the activities carried out in the sea area, either by the participating State, individuals, or companies of the State or legal entities or individuals who have the nationality of their country. The peaceful settlement of disputes chosen by the disputing parties can be carried out, as stipulated in Chapter XV Article 279-293 of UNCLOS 1982. The settlement of this dispute can be carried out, provided it does not cause more significant harm to the people of East Nusa Tenggara, especially the people of Rote Island. Keywords: pollution, cross border, responsibility
Tindakan Amerika Serikat Dalam Menarik Diri Dari Paris Agreement Dalam Kerangka Hukum Internasional Mush'ab Al Ma'ruf; Mahendra Putra Kurnia; Syukri Hidayatullah
Jurnal Risalah Hukum Volume 16, Nomor 2, Desember 2020
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Mulawarman

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30872/risalah.v16i2.158

Abstract

This research is motivated by the United States, which withdrew from the Paris Agreement because for the United States, the Paris Agreement is an agreement that weakens the economy. Following Article 28 of the Paris Agreement, this action raises problems that the United States cannot withdraw before 2020. In this case, there needs to be legal clarity in binding the country to global climate protection. The act of withdrawing the United States from the Paris Agreement would undoubtedly be a problem for the countries incorporated in it. In this case, the Paris Agreement continues to run as it should because the United States withdrew using the mechanisms contained in the Paris Agreement. Still, the United States continues to handle climate change because it does not come out of the Convention (UNFCCC). Then in the campaign and carbon trading, the United States should compensate for having left obligations as a developed country party following the Paris Agreement.
Problematika Penanganan Pengungsi di Indonesia Dari Perspektif Hukum Pengungsi Internasional Cipta Primadasa Primadasa; Mahendra Putra Kurnia; Rika Erawaty
Jurnal Risalah Hukum Volume 17, Nomor 1, Juni 2021
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Mulawarman

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30872/risalah.v17i1.380

Abstract

A refugee is a person who, due to a well-founded fear of persecution, for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group and membership of a particular political party, is outside his country of nationality and does not want protection from that country. The refugees, seeking protection in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol or what is often referred to as a third country. This study describes and examines issues, first, regarding the handling of refugee flows in Indonesia according to the perspective of International Refugee Law. Second, Regarding the legal consequences when Indonesia did not ratify the 1951 Refugee Convention agreement and the 1967 Refugee Protocol regarding the status of Refugees to international Refugee law. This study is a descriptive doctrinal legal research. The source used is primary legal material consisting of legal products such as the 1945 Constitution, Laws, International Treaties and other Regulations relevant to Refugee Handling activities. The results of the research show that first, the action of handling refugees in Indonesia from the perspective of international refugee law has been able to realize some of the most important principles of the 1951 Convention and the 1967 protocol on refugee status that is not refoulment, non-expulsion, no differentiate (non discrimination) and also do not commit criminal offenses for refugees who enter Indonesian territory. Secondly, Indonesia as a transit country for asylum seekers and refugees experiences a buildup of refugee flows due to the process of granting an uncertain status of time from UNHCR and moreover, a third country limits the acceptance of refugees. Indonesia did not ratify the 1951 convention and the 1967 protocol and therefore Indonesia did not have the authority to grant refugee status because the granting of status was in the hands of the UNHCR, this was a legal consequence and consequences carried by Indonesia when it did not ratify the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol. Keywords: Conventions; Refugees; Indonesia Law.
Legal Status of MoU Determining The Limits of The Territory Area Between Indonesia and Malaysia Dwi Ambarina Rita Kadarsih; Mahendra Putra Kurnia; Syukri Hidayatullah
Jurnal Mulawarman Law Review VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2 DECEMBER 2020
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Mulawarman University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30872/mulrev.v5i2.343

Abstract

The border region is the front territory of the country jurisdiction and posses an important role in the matter of enforcement of national law sovereignty. Sebatik Island owned by two countries, Indonesia and Malaysia. Demarcation of territorial boundaries in Sebatik Island refers to Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of Malaysia and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia regarding Surveys and Demarcation of the Border Line of 1973 which is followed up with the results of a joint Surveys and Demarcation on the island of Borneo poured in the form of an advanced Memorandum of Understanding containing each boundary point which has been agreed upon.From 1973 to 2017 there are 9 (nine) points of Outstanding Boundary Problem (OBP) on Sebatik Island that have not been agreed by both countries. The boundary disputes have led to unclear legal status of Sebatik Island's land border territory within the framework of international treaty law and also led to the uncertainty of the status of the MoU as the legal basis for the determination of state borders between Indonesia and Malaysia on Sebatik Island.This law research questioning two issue. First, what factors make the border region not yet regulated by international agreements on borders. Second, how the legal status of the 1973 Memorandum of Understanding in stipulate the point of demarcation between Indonesia and Malaysia in the perspective of international treaty law. Based on the research, the factor that caused the border area not yet been regulated by a definitive border agreement is the disparity of reference between Indonesia and Malaysia to determining the land boundary in Sebatik Island. Indonesia uses the provisions of 4o 10 'LU degree while Malaysia uses existing pillar references. This dispute involve the overlap of the Sebatik Island border area from both countries. Thus, the legal status of the 1973 Memorandum of Understanding has not been binding as law either in national law or as an agreement in international law.
Tindakan Amerika Serikat Dalam Menarik Diri Dari Paris Agreement Dalam Kerangka Hukum Internasional Mush'ab Al Ma'ruf; Mahendra Putra Kurnia; Syukri Hidayatullah
Jurnal Risalah Hukum Volume 16, Nomor 2, Desember 2020
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Mulawarman

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30872/risalah.v16i2.158

Abstract

This research is motivated by the United States, which withdrew from the Paris Agreement because for the United States, the Paris Agreement is an agreement that weakens the economy. Following Article 28 of the Paris Agreement, this action raises problems that the United States cannot withdraw before 2020. In this case, there needs to be legal clarity in binding the country to global climate protection. The act of withdrawing the United States from the Paris Agreement would undoubtedly be a problem for the countries incorporated in it. In this case, the Paris Agreement continues to run as it should because the United States withdrew using the mechanisms contained in the Paris Agreement. Still, the United States continues to handle climate change because it does not come out of the Convention (UNFCCC). Then in the campaign and carbon trading, the United States should compensate for having left obligations as a developed country party following the Paris Agreement.
Extrajudicial Killing dalam Kebijakan War on Drugs di Filipina Ditinjau dari Hukum Pidana Internasional Salasmita Salasmita; Mahendra Putra Kurnia; Rika Erawaty
Jurnal Risalah Hukum Vol 18 No 2 (2022): Volume 18, Nomor 2, Desember 2022
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Mulawarman

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

Abstract

The threat of drug abuse in the Philippines has prompted President Rodrigo Duterte to intensify a campaign to combat it, through the War on Drugs, a program to neutralize drug abusers. However, the implementation of the policy is allegedly loaded with serious human rights violations in the form of extrajudicial killings committed against civil society. This research aims to analyze whether extrajudicial killings carried out in the War on Drugs Policy during the administration of President Duterte were qualified as gross human rights violations and the application of international court jurisdiction over the situation. The research method used in this research is doctrinal research. The results showed that extrajudicial killings in the Philippines met the elements of crimes against humanity so that they could qualify as gross violation of human rights. The International Community has rightly sought to enforce the law on this situation through the International Criminal Court with President Duterte as the individual who must be held responsible.
Co-Authors Anak Agung Gede Sugianthara Cipta Primadasa Primadasa Dwi Ambarina Rita Kadarsih Emilda Kuspraningrum Grizelda Grizelda Mush'ab Al Ma'ruf Mutiara Rika Erawati Rika Erawaty Salasmita Salasmita Sofwan Rizko Ramadoni Syukri Hidayatullah Turnip Mega Marta Yusnia Tika Safitri