Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
1.606
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Masalah-Masalah Hukum LAW REFORM Jurnal IUS (Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan) PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Journal of SouthEast Asian Human Rights Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum Undang: Jurnal Hukum Pancasila and Law Review Indonesia Law Review (ILREV) Pandecta : Jurnal Penelitian Ilmu Hukum (Research Law Journal)
Taqwa, Muhamad Dzadit
Unknown Affiliation
Arts Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 10 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 10 Documents
Search

 1 
THE NON-APPLICATIONS OF GOOD FAITH, TRUST, AND CONFIDENTIALITY IN ARBITRATION: A STUDY OF THE ANNULMENT CASES IN INDONESIA Roosdiono, Anangga W.; Taqwa, Muhamad Dzadit; Salsabila, Mayta Ciara
Indonesia Law Review
Publisher : UI Scholars Hub

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

Abstract

Arbitration is a dispute resolution method that is chosen by the parties for, mainly, avoiding weaknesses of resolving disputes through the general court. It has three principles, that strongly connect to one another, to hold: good faith, trust, and confidentiality. These principles determine whether a dispute resolution through arbitration will be successful. However, in many - if not all - cases, many disputing parties still do not maintain these principles. This reality can be observed in annulment cases. Although the annulment mechanism renders a protection to the parties from the errors made by intention, this mechanism opens an opportunity for these people just to pause the execution of the arbitral awards, makes their cases become open for the public, and even puts the final-and-binding status of the awards in question. On the other hand, there are still a few cases showing that such errors, made by the tribunals or the winning parties, occurred. From these cases, this paper is to question whether the existence of annulment is the key factor of the non-applications of these three principles or the tool to prevent the non-applications. First, a descriptive comprehension of these principles is elaborated. Afterwards, the annulment mechanism, provided by Article 70 of Law 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolutions, is comprehended to see its nature and practical implications. At the end, some annulment cases are dissected to answer the research question.
Inconsistency in Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards: Non-Compliance or Normative Factors? Taqwa, Muhamad Dzadit; Laksmi Prabhaswari, Amaraduhita; Putri Subiyanto, Maria Jasmine
Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum Vol. 8 No. 2 (2024): Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum Volume 8 Number 2 March 2024
Publisher : Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.23920/jbmh.v8i2.1310

Abstract

Recognizing and enforcing a foreign arbitral award has been becoming a global issue. To solve such an issue, the New York Convention 1958 turns out to be an important international legal product regarding the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards worldwide. States ratifying the convention are internationally bound to respect and assist in the execution of a foreign arbitration award in their respective countries; Indonesia is one of them. It ratified the convention by Presidential Decree Number 34 of 1981. Nonetheless, there is an impression that Indonesia has not implemented the convention consistently, compared to countries that are, considered, friendly to foreign arbitration awards due to the facts that there are several foreign arbitral awards that have been rejected by the District Court. This impression, however, needs to be re-examined by understanding textually the norm formula in the 1958 New York Convention and comparing its implementation among Indonesia and several countries that are considered friendly to foreign arbitration awards. This paper finds that there is a norm formula in the 1958 New York Convention that opens space for ratification countries not to always recognize and enforce foreign arbitral awards in the executing country of the award.
Gender-Affirming Treatments to Children with Gender Dysphoria Taqwa, Muhamad Dzadit; Yuubina, Venitta; Manurung, Stephen Joy Herald
Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights Vol 8 No 1 (2024): June 2024
Publisher : University of Jember

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.19184/jseahr.v8i1.43469

Abstract

Gender dysphoria occurs not only in adults but also in underage children. Their inner conviction that their gender identity does not align with their physical body leads to a desire to alter their physical appearance through gender-affirming treatment(s) that affirm their gender identity. Examples include genitoplasty, puberty blockers, and cross-sex hormone therapies. Proponents argue that these desires should be accommodated because everyone, including children, has the right to determine what can be done to their own bodies. Moreover, some findings suggest that such treatments can have positive psychological benefits for these children. On the other hand, opponents question whether the consent given by children who desire such treatments is legitimate. Additionally, providing irreversible medical treatments solely to affirm gender identity can have physiological and psychological impacts. Thus, instead of affirming the desires of these children, medical physicians should focus on saving them from irreversible medical actions. This discourse is conducted by considering proportionally the constitutional rights of children, which need to be balanced with ensuring their knowledge and maturity in making decisions. Keywords: Children, Gender Dysphoria, Gender-affirming Treatments, Constitutional Rights
The Future of Sex Robots in Indonesia: Law, Science, And Technology Taqwa, Muhamad Dzadit; Alfarizy, Ahmad; Lasmaida Sirait, Melinda Yunita
Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan Vol. 11 No. 2: August 2023 : Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan
Publisher : Magister of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Mataram

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29303/ius.v11i2.1200

Abstract

Sex robots are humanoid machines used to fulfill sexual desires of their users. Their presence has created debates around the world. Currently, sex robots are not sold freely in Indonesia. Although, the future of such an innovation has to be scrutinized through the Indonesian laws. From the proponent side, the existence of such robots has possibly several justifications: (1) their usage has no implications on other people other than their users; (2) the market is potentially high; and (3) the use of this object entails some psychological benefits for those in need of them. Conversely, the opposing group will potentially argue that this technology is not in line with the religious values, decency, and even the laws in Indonesia. We did not find any journals that had discussed sex robots, especially through a law, science and technology approach, so there is still a research gap. This article scrutinized sex robots through the law, science, and technology perspective in the context of Indonesia in order to bring up their impacts that may require legal involvement. In principle, the use of sex robots that are used individually does not mean that they cannot be prohibited, especially if they are against the law, violate moral values, and/or disrupt the public interests in Indonesia.
The Entry Selection System in Indonesia’s Public High Schools: Quo vadis Taqwa, Muhamad Dzadit; Putra, M. Irfan Dwi; Putra, Edmond Wangtri
LAW REFORM Vol 19, No 1 (2023)
Publisher : PROGRAM STUDI MAGISTER ILMU HUKUM FAKULTAS HUKUM UNIVERSITAS DIPONEGORO SEMARANG

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14710/lr.v19i1.51552

Abstract

The selection mechanism for students seeking admission into public high schools still leaves the question: is it going to solve problems or even worsen them? The zoning, age, and affirmation bases were initially oriented to be an inclusive selection system based on the concept of equity. Conversely, these bases lead to new problems, such as (1) the disappearance of a fair selection mechanism based on merit, (2) the inability of students from low-quality educational backgrounds to compete with students from high-quality educational backgrounds, (3) the challenges experienced by teachers in adjusting the quality gap between the students selected by the merit-based system and those selected by the current system, (4) the damaged school culture, and (5) the occurrence of legal manipulation. Using the legal normative approach, the aim of the study analyzed this issue through the right and freedom of education. The result that the status quo system is not in line with the freedom of education, and even creates new problems. The government should have improved the quality of the education infrastructures such as teachers, curriculum, and school facilities, before focusing on the access to education. This mechanism becomes an unfair hurdle on their right to and freedom of education. The government to carefully review and re-examine the status quo system; the end might be a significant revision on the existing regulations.
CHOICE OF PARADIGM IN ARBITRATION: ARBITRATOR’S AUTONOMY OR PARTIES’ AUTHORITY? Roosdiono, Anangga W.; Taqwa, Muhamad Dzadit
Masalah-Masalah Hukum Vol 53, No 3 (2024): MASALAH-MASALAH HUKUM
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Diponegoro

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14710/mmh.53.3.2024.293-303

Abstract

The choice of paradigm in dispute resolution through arbitration raises a fundamental question: should the arbitral tribunal render its decision based on the law or ex aequo et bono? Most legal scholars affirm that the disputing parties have the full authority to dictate the tribunal's choice of paradigm in resolving disputes. This perspective, in Indonesia, is justified by two grounds: the Elucidation of Article 56(1) of Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution Law, and the party autonomy principle in arbitration. Against this mainstream view, this paper repositions the role of arbitrators, emphasizing that they should possess autonomy -rather than being dictated to-when choosing the paradigm dispute resolution. This paper concludes that the choice of paradigm should rest within the authority of arbitrators.
Reevaluating the Necessity of a State of Emergency: Lessons from the Covid-19 Pandemic Taqwa, Muhamad Dzadit; Al Bone, Nayla Amalia
Pancasila and Law Review Vol. 5 No. 2 (2024)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lampung

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25041/plr.v5i2.4033

Abstract

Jimly Asshiddiqie argued that Indonesia should have declared a state of emergency during COVID-19 to ensure effective governance, asserting that, without it, the government lacked legitimacy to implement restrictive policies. This paper critically examines this claim through a doctrinal and regulatory policy analysis, assessing the necessity of an emergency declaration in managing the pandemic. The research evaluates regulatory effectiveness, legal implications, constitutional rights restrictions, and governmental legitimacy. While a state of emergency could enhance policy enforcement, the government retained legitimacy to implement necessary measures without it. Moreover, invoking Article 12 of the 1945 Constitution could have worsened the situation due to its broad legal consequences. However, the absence of an emergency declaration did not necessarily lead to a more effective response, as the government’s initial inaction and public unpreparedness contributed to financial difficulties. Ultimately, Indonesia managed to conclude the pandemic without declaring a state of emergency..
Genitoplasti untuk Disforia Gender di Indonesia: Justifikasi Status Positif Negara Taqwa, Muhamad Dzadit; Boasrifa, Kimberly Natali; Rusdiana, Rofy Candra
Undang: Jurnal Hukum Vol. 7 No. 1 (2024)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Jambi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.22437/ujh.7.1.75-117

Abstract

State intervention in the issue of genital surgery (genitoplasty) for gender affirmation can spark a constitutional rights debate. Proponents of state involvement, allowing or even providing facilities for genitoplasty, base their arguments on the constitutional right of individuals to benefit from scientific and technological advancements to improve quality of life and access healthcare services. Furthermore, every individual is presumed to have the freedom to determine any treatment they wish to undergo for their body. On the other hand, opponents argue that the state has a justification for not fulfilling its positive status, as it also holds the responsibility to protect individuals from medical decisions that could jeopardize their health. Additionally, the legalization of genitoplasty could be considered contrary to religious values in Indonesia. The legal question addressed in this paper is: should the state entirely prohibit genitoplasty, or should it legalize and provide the necessary infrastructure, particularly in the context of Indonesia? Through the use of proportionality as a systematic method to assess the justification for state intervention, this paper argumentatively concludes that the state should refrain from fulfilling its positive status in this context. Abstrak Intervensi negara dalam isu operasi genital (genitoplasti, genitoplasty) untuk afirmasi posisi gender dapat memunculkan suatu perdebatan hak konstitusional. Pihak yang pro terhadap keterlibatan negara untuk membolehkan atau bahkan menyediakan fasilitas genitoplasti dilandaskan pada hak konstitusional individu untuk mendapatkan manfaat dari ilmu dan teknologi demi meningkatkan kualitas hidup dan memperoleh pelayanan kesehatan; terlebih setiap individu, dianggap, memiliki kebebasan untuk menentukan perlakuan apa pun yang dapat dilakukan terhadap tubuhnya. Di sisi lain, pihak yang berpandangan sebaliknya, melihat bahwa negara memiliki justifikasi untuk tidak merealisasikan status positifnya karena negara juga berkewajiban untuk melindungi individu dari keputusan medis yang dapat membahayakan kesehatan mereka. Di samping itu, legalisasi genitoplasti dapat dianggap bertentangan dengan nilai agama di Indonesia. Pertanyaan hukum dalam tulisan ini: apakah negara harus melarang sama sekali atau melegalkan dan menyediakan infrastrukturnya, khususnya dalam konteks di Indonesia? Melalui pendekatan proporsionalitas sebagai metode sistematis untuk melihat justifikasi intervensi negara tersebut, tulisan ini secara argumentatif berpandangan bahwa negara tidak seharusnya merealisasikan status positifnya.
Resolving the Conflict of Interests Issue within the Laws Concerning the Political Matters: Deliberative Democracy or Empowering Dewan Perwakilan Daerah? Taqwa, Muhamad Dzadit; Sirait, Melinda Yunita Lasmaida; Alfarizy, Ahmad
PADJADJARAN JURNAL ILMU HUKUM (JOURNAL OF LAW) Vol 10, No 3 (2023): PADJADJARAN JURNAL ILMU HUKUM (JOURNAL OF LAW)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Padjadjaran

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

Abstract

This study examines whether the concept of deliberative democracy could offer a viable solution to the issues surrounding laws on political matters, commonly referred to as Paket Undang-Undang Politik in Indonesia. These laws, including general election regulations, have become problematic due to their close association with the drafters. Over the past two decades, presidents and the majority in the House of Representatives have formed coalitions to maintain government stability. However, this success has had a detrimental impact on the system of checks and balances during the drafting of these laws. While the Constitutional Court could potentially intervene by reviewing these laws, it has often not addressed the conflict of interest issues arising from open legal policies, especially in cases related to reviewing election laws. This paper addresses this issue by proposing a solution integrated into the drafting process to mitigate conflicts of interest in political matters legislation. The proposed approach involves incorporating an additional institution in the drafting process not directly influenced by political interests. In other countries, similar issues are tackled through practical implementations of deliberative democracy, which directly involves citizens as the decisive factor, using methods such as citizen assemblies and deliberative polling. We suggest empowering the Regional Representatives Council could offer a more practical solution to this issue.DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v10n3.a2
Questioning the Validity of the New York Convention 1958 on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in Indonesia Roosdiono, Anangga W.; Taqwa, Muhamad Dzadit
Pandecta Research Law Journal Vol. 19 No. 2 (2024): December (2024)
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/pandecta.v19i2.4099

Abstract

This article questions the legal validity of the New York Convention of 1958 ("NYC 1958") on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. A critical review is conducted based on the principle of lex posterior derogat lex priori when the provisions of NYC 1958 are compared with Articles 65 to 69 concerning the enforcement of international arbitral awards in Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (Law 30/1999), which emerged approximately 18 years after (posteriori to) the ratification of NYC 1958 through Presidential Decree No. 34 of 1981. There appears to be—from the perspective of legal scholars—a paradigmatic difference between the two, namely that NYC 1958 places greater value on foreign arbitral awards, while Law 30/1999 is less appreciative of them, leading to the presumption that Law 30/1999 nullifies the legal validity of NYC 1958. Can this perception be justified? The answer to this question shapes the judicial paradigm when faced with applications for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. This article, doctrinally, compares and links the paradigmatic nuances between NYC 1958 and Law 30/1999 with regard to the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards by closely examining the textual provisions of each regulation.
Co-Authors Al Bone, Nayla Amalia Alfarizy, Ahmad Boasrifa, Kimberly Natali Laksmi Prabhaswari, Amaraduhita Lasmaida Sirait, Melinda Yunita Manurung, Stephen Joy Herald Putra, Edmond Wangtri Putra, M. Irfan Dwi Putri Subiyanto, Maria Jasmine Roosdiono, Anangga W. Rusdiana, Rofy Candra Salsabila, Mayta Ciara Sirait, Melinda Yunita Lasmaida Yuubina, Venitta