Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.882
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Widya Yuridika Jurnal Ilmu Hukum The Juris Jurnal Ilmiah Penegakan Hukum Yustisi: Jurnal Hukum dan Hukum Islam Jurnal Ilmu Hukum: Alethea
Freidelino P. R. A. de Sousa
Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana
Arts Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences Other

Published : 5 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 5 Documents
Search

 1 
LEGALITAS INTERVENSI INTERNASIONAL BERDASARKAN PRINSIP RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT (R2P) Amanda Gita Pattisina; Freidelino P. R. A. de Sousa
Jurnal Ilmu Hukum: ALETHEA Vol 5 No 2 (2022): Jurnal Ilmu Hukum: ALETHEA
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24246/alethea.vol5.no2.p129-150

Abstract

Diadaptasinya Responsibility to Protect (R2P) sebagai sebuah prinsip internasional pada UN World Summit 2005 menciptakan landasan baru bagi pemberlakuan intervensi internasional. R2P merupakan sebuah prinsip yang lahir dari adanya kekhawatiran akan kurangnya kesepahaman komunitas internasional tentang intervensi internasional yang kerap menghambat proses pengambilan keputusan, bahkan dalam situasi mendesak yang membutuhkan pengambilan tindakan sesegera mungkin. Membuka ruang bagi komunitas internasional untuk mengambil tindakan dalam bentuk intervensi internasional, tujuan utama prinsip R2P adalah memberikan perlindungan bagi penduduk sebuah negara dari atrocity crimes, yang mencakup kejahatan genosida, kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan, kejahatan perang, dan pembersihan etnis, saat negara tersebut gagal memberikan perlindungan terhadap penduduknya. Meskipun begitu, intervensi internasional, apapun alasannya, hingga saat ini masih menuai kontroversi karena dianggap menciderai kedaulatan sebuah negara. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menegaskan bahwa intervensi internasional merupakan sebuah bentuk pertanggungjawaban komunitas internasional dalam upaya melindungi dan menegakkan hak asasi manusia dan bukan merupakan pelanggaran terhadap kedaulatan sebuah negara.
Mahkamah Konstitusi Setengah-Hati: Final tetapi Tidak Mengikat dalam Kewenangan Pengujian Konstitusional Kishan, Marcelino Ceasar; Rauta, Umbu; Alves de Sousa, Freidelino Paixao Ramos
Widya Yuridika Vol 7, No 1 (2024): Widya Yuridika: Jurnal Hukum
Publisher : Universitas Widya Gama Malang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31328/wy.v7i1.4678

Abstract

This article aims to discuss the bindingness of constitutional review decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia (MKRI). In particular, this article looks at the relevance between the grand design of the nature of the MKRI decision in Article 24C paragraph (1) The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (UUD NRI 1945) with the practice of constitution disobedience. Based on that issue, this article argues that the MKRI is designed not to have a final and binding decision, but only final decisions. Because based on the Supremacy-of-Text Principle which is coherent with the concept of applying law based on regulations in the Rule of Law, the non-appreance of binding phrases in Article 24C paragraph (1) of the 1945 UUD NRI 1945 makes the decision of the Constitutional Court in the authority of constitutional review has no binding legal force. Grammatical argumentation comes from interpretation with original meaning and textualism methods which find that the word final does not mean binding due the two words stand separately. By drawing on the concepts of strong-form judicial review and weak-form judicial review, the non-binding nature of MKRI decisions can legitimize the disagreement. Because the indecisivenesss of the Constitution establish a half-hearted form of MKRI, namely the partial weak-form judicial review. Thus, the form of MKRI is a strong and weak-form judicial review that makes MKRI decisions can be opposed. This article uses normative research methods with conceptual approach, statutory approach, and comparative approach.
Mekanisme Self Report Perpres No. 57 Tahun 2023 dengan Kewajiban Negara Memenuhi Hak Bekerja Irgiansyah, Krisna; Sella Rahma Maulida; Freidelino P. R. A. de Sousa
Jurnal Ilmiah Penegakan Hukum Vol. 11 No. 2 (2024): JURNAL ILMIAH PENEGAKAN HUKUM DESEMBER
Publisher : Universitas Medan Area

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31289/jiph.v11i2.12796

Abstract

The objective of this article is to examine the relationship between the right of citizens to employment and the state's obligation to fulfil that right. In this context, it is necessary to consider the role of the state as an active agent in ensuring the realisation of this right. Furthermore, it seeks to justify the incompatibility of implementing the self-report mechanism in relation to the state's obligation to fulfil citizens' right to employment. The issue can be defined as a conceptual inaccuracy in the implementation of a theoretical framework for the fulfilment of human rights. This theoretical framework should, in theory, oblige the state to fulfil the rights of every citizen as set out in the constitution. Nevertheless, the state appears to be abdicating its responsibilities by delegating them to employers. This article employs a normative juridical approach with a statutory methodology. Data are collected through literature studies that are pertinent and current, and which inform the qualitative analysis of the material to be reviewed. This study finds that the self-report mechanism set forth in Article 4, paragraph (2) of Presidential Regulation No. 57 of 2023 is incompatible with the state's obligation to fulfill the right to work. This is because the mechanism makes the state passive in carrying out its obligations. It is incumbent upon the government to take proactive measures to fulfil its obligations regarding citizens' rights to employment, as enshrined in Article 27, paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution and Article 38, paragraph (1) of Law No. 39 of 1999.
PEMASANGAN ALAT PERAGA KAMPANYE TANPA SEIZIN PEMILIK TEMPAT Hutapea, Brahmantya Putra; Simandjuntak, Jeremia Putra Ferliano; Sousa, Freidelino P.R.A. de
The Juris Vol. 8 No. 2 (2024): JURNAL ILMU HUKUM : THE JURIS
Publisher : Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat STIH Awang Long

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56301/juris.v8i2.1291

Abstract

The Campaigns as a part of the stages of elections, are regulated by KPU Regulation Number 23 of 2018 concerning General Election Campaigns. However, the implementation of the campaign carried out by the campaign participants, was not in line with the provisions of campaigns, one of which was the installation of campaign props without the permission of the owner of the place. Campaign props that are part of the election should also be supervised by the KPU. If the installation of campaign props does not follow the provisions and then no action is taken by the KPU to issue a decision, then for this act of silence, the KPU is deemed to have issued a decision that is the same as a written State Administrative Decree containing a rejection which is referred to as a negative or fictitious negative decision. These violations can be resolved through Bawaslu as an institution that is given authority by-laws, one of which is to receive, examine, review, and decide on administrative election violations. Apart from that, when the process in Bawaslu still did not result solution, the process can be resolved by the PTUN.
DISHARMONI PENGATURAN TENTANG MODAL DALAM PERATURAN DAERAH KOTA SALATIGA NOMOR 6 TAHUN 2020 TENTANG PDAM Gerryn Mauretha Indrawan; Freidelino P.R.A de Sousa
YUSTISI Vol 11 No 2 (2024)
Publisher : Universitas Ibn Khaldun Bogor

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32832/yustisi.v11i2.16696

Abstract

Penelitian ini menjelaskan mengenai disharmony of regulations yang terdapat dalam Peraturan Daerah Kota Salatiga Nomor 6 Tahun 2020 Tentang Perusahaan Daerah Air Minum dengan Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 54 Tahun 2017 Tentang Badan Usaha Milik Daerah terkait pengaturan syarat modal dasar. Peraturan Daerah sebagai inferior lex tidak mengatur tentang syarat modal dasar untuk BUMD dimana hal tersebut disyaratkan oleh lex superior yaitu PP Nomor 54 Tahun 2017. Dalam legisprudence suatu aturan pelaksana (secondary legislation) yang materi muatannya telah diperintahkan oleh primary legislation harus diatur seturut yang diperintahkan dan tidak dimungkinkan untuk ditambahkan atau dihapus untuk sebagian atau seluruhnya. Metode penelitian yaitu metode penelitian hukum dengan pendekatan konseptual dan pendekatan perundang-undangan. Hasil penelitian menyimpulkan bahwa: pertama, Perda yang berisi norma pelaksana (delegated legislation) tidak dapat menghapus untuk sebagian atau seluruhnya norma yang diperintahkan melalui peraturan yang lebih tinggi. Kedua, Perda Kota Salatiga tentang PDAM yang tidak mengatur tentang syarat modal dasar dalam BUMD bertentangan dengan PP Nomor 54 Tahun 2017. Ketiga, sebagai rekomendasi agar disharmoni norma ini tidak terus berjalan maka usulan perubahan Perda perlu dilakukan berdasarkan teknik perubahan peraturaan perundang-undangan yang diatur dalam UU Nomor 12 Tahun 2011 tentang Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan. Kata Kunci: Disharmoni Peraturan, Delegated Legislation, Perubahan Perda
Co-Authors Amanda Gita Pattisina Gerryn Mauretha Indrawan Hutapea, Brahmantya Putra Irgiansyah, Krisna Kishan, Marcelino Ceasar Sella Rahma Maulida Simandjuntak, Jeremia Putra Ferliano Umbu Rauta