Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
2.133
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Yustisia PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum Jurnal HAM Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Indonesian Journal of International Law
Diajeng Wulan Christianti, Diajeng Wulan
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Padjadjaran
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 21 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 21 Documents
Search

 1   2   3 
Why We Need Erga Omnes Character for Obligations to Combat Impunity for International Crimes? Christianti, Diajeng Wulan
PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 4, No 2 (2017): PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Padjadjaran University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (609.696 KB)

Abstract

International law has recognized certain crimes as international crimes or the most serious crimes. However, it is arguable whether the prohibitions of international crimes that have reached the status of jus cogens carry with it the duty to combat impunity that has same legal consequences as jus cogens namely non-derogable and universal. In Barcelona Traction Case Judgment, ICJ purported the concept of erga omnes obligations that are obligations toward international community as whole and enables all states to establish their rights of protection in the case of the breach of obligations. Although the Court exemplified four examples of erga omnes obligations that generally reflect the prohibitions of certain international crimes, the relationship between jus cogens and erga omnes remains unclear. This article thus examines this relationship since it conceives as necessary element to determine the superior status of erga omnes obligations to combat impunity in international law. This status is significant for enforcing international criminal law and promoting global justice. The article aims to determine theoretically the added values of having erga omnes character. Mengapa Kita Membutuhkan Karakter Erga Omnes sebagai  Kewajiban dalam Memerangi Impunitas untuk Kejahatan Internasional?  AbstrakHukum internasional telah mengakui kejahatan tertentu sebagai kejahatan internasional atau kejahatan paling serius. Namun, terdapat perdebatan terkait larangan kejahatan internasional yang telah mencapai status jus cogens membawa serta tugas untuk memerangi impunitas yang memiliki konsekuensi hukum yang sama dengan jus cogens yang tidak dapat dikurangi dan universal. Mahkamah Internasional melalui Putusan Kasus Barcelona Traction mengakui konsep kewajiban erga omnes yang merupakan kewajiban terhadap masyarakat internasional secara keseluruhan dan memungkinkan semua negara untuk menetapkan hak perlindungan mereka dalam kasus pelanggaran kewajiban. Meskipun Mahkamah menyertakan empat contoh kewajiban erga omnes yang umumnya mencerminkan larangan kejahatan internasional tertentu, hubungan antara jus cogens dan erga omnes tetap tidak jelas. Dengan demikian, artikel ini akan menguji keterkaitan tersebut karena mengandung unsur yang diperlukan untuk menentukan status superior kewajiban erga omnes untuk memerangi impunitas dalam hukum internasional. Status ini penting untuk menegakkan hukum pidana internasional dan mempromosikan keadilan global. Selain itu, artikel ini pun bertujuan untuk mengetahui secara teoritis nilai tambah karakter erga omnes. Kata kunci: erga omnes, hak asasi manusia, impunitas, kejahatan internasional, jus cogens. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v4n2.a8
Analisa Kejahatan Penyelundupan Manusia Berdasarkan Smuggling of Migrants Protocol Ditinjau dari Perspektif Perlindungan Pencari Suaka: Studi Kasus Pengungsi Rohingnya Christianti, Diajeng Wulan
PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 3, No 3 (2016): PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Padjadjaran University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (616.618 KB)

Abstract

Abstrak Eksodus besar-besaran etnis muslim Rohingya keluar Myanmar kembali terjadi sebagai akibat dilakukannya pembakaran desa, eksekusi, hingga pemerkosaan oleh militer Myanmar di Rakhine. Meskipun mereka harus rela membayar mahal, cara penyelundupan manusia kerap mereka gunakan karena cara formal untuk bisa masuk ke negara lain tidak dimungkinkan. Tindakan penyelundupan manusia adalah tindak pidana dalam Smuggling Protocol di mana negara-negara yang disinggahi pengungsi Rohingya seperti Thailand, Bangladesh, bahkan Indonesia telah menjadi negara pihak. Akibatnya, Pemerintah Thailand dan Bangladesh kerap menangkap pengungsi Rohingya yang masuk ke negaranya bahkan mengusir mereka untuk kembali ke Myanmar. Padahal, sebagai pencari suaka yang terancam persekusi, etnis Rohingya dilindungi oleh hukum Hak Asasi Manusia khususnya prinsip non-refoulement. Artikel ini menganalisa dilema antara aturan Smuggling Protokol yang bertujuan mencegah dan menegakan hukum atas terjadinya kejahatan penyelundupan manusia dengan kewajiban memberikan pengaman untuk melindungi hak-hak para pengungsi yang terancam persekusi. Artikel ini berkesimpulan bahwa meskipun Smuggling Protocol mampu untuk memberikan keseimbangan antara penegakan hukum kejahatan perlindungan manusia dan perlindungan pencari suaka, akan tetapi pada akhirnya semua tergantung dari keinginan negara untuk menerapkan Smuggling Protocol tersebut melalui aturan implementasi yang jelas namun proporsional. An Analysis of Smuggling of Migrants under Smuggling Protocol from Asylum Seeker Protection Perspective: Case Study Rohingya   Abstract Again, thousands of Rohingya flee Myanmar to escape persecution after they saw their homes burned down, their family executed, and also suffered rape and torture by the Myanmar’s Military. In order to flee to Thailand or Bangladesh, Rohingyas often resort to using people smugglers and have to pay large amount of money. It is the only option left for desperate Rohingyas trying to save their lives. Smuggling of Migrants is criminal act under Smuggling Protocol. Thai and Bangladesh authorities (which are state parties to Protocol) often detained the Rohingyas for illegal entrance or expelled them back to Burmese government. The state parties of the Smuggling Protocol are obliged to investigate and prosecute the smugglers as well as to prevent and suppress the crimes. Nevertheless, asylum seekers fearing of persecution are protected under international human rights law including the principle of non-refoulement. This paper thus examines whether the Smuggling Protocol can solve the aforementioned dilemma by providing adequate refugee rights safeguards. This paper concludes that whilst the Smuggling Protocol has potential to do such, its application ultimately depends on the will of the State parties to apply the Protocol through proportionate yet clear implementing regulations. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v3.n3.a3
Yurisdiksi International Criminal Court (ICC) terhadap Warga Negara Non-Pihak Statuta Roma dan Dampaknya bagi Indonesia Christianti, Diajeng Wulan
PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 2, No 1 (2015): PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Padjadjaran University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (612.612 KB)

Abstract

Prinsip pacta tertiis nec nocent nec prosunt menegaskan bahwa perjanjian internasional tidak melahirkan kewajiban dan hak bagi negara ketiga tanpa adanya consent. Tulisan ini akan mengkaji persoalan jurisdiksi International Criminal Court (ICC) terhadap warga negara non-pihak Statuta Roma dihubungkan dengan prinsip di atas dan dampaknya terhadap Indonesia. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa tidak ada pelanggaran hukum perjanjian internasional dalam hal  kewenangan ICC mengadili warga negara non-pihak meskipun tidak ada consent dari negara non-pihak tersebut. Fakta Indonesia bukan negara pihak Statuta Roma tidak lantas menghalangi warga negara Indonesia untuk diadili dimuka ICC.The Jurisdiction of International Criminal Court over Non-party States and Its Implication to Indonesia AbstractPrinciple of pacta tertiis nec nocent nec prosunt underlines that a treaty does not create either obligations or rights for a third State without its consent. This paper examines International Criminal Court’s (ICC) jurisdiction over nationals of non-state parties according to the said Principle and its implications for Indonesia. The research shows that ICC’s jurisdiction over nationals of non-state parties, without their consent, does not violate the law of treaty. Consequently, the fact that Indonesia is not party to ICC does not hamper the Court’s power to prosecute Indonesian nationals.Keywords: ICC, Rome Statute, non- state party, jurisdiction, international treaty.DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v2n1.a3
The “Modern” Concept of Erga Omnes to Establish the Obligation of Impunity Eradication: Towards the Primacy Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court Christianti, Diajeng Wulan
PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 5, No 2 (2018): PADJADJARAN JURNAL ILMU HUKUM (JOURNAL OF LAW)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Padjadjaran University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (389.975 KB)

Abstract

AbstractDespite the fact that there is no universally accepted definition, international crimes are related closely to civilian casualties and mass destruction, armed conflict, patriotism, and involvement of state. Consequently, domestic jurisdictions often fail to prosecute perpetrators, leaving international law enforcement as the only option for accountability. However, international law remains incarcerated within state-centric image. In the absence of their consent, states do not perceive that they have a duty to prosecute perpetrators of international crimes. This situation triggers impunity. On the other hand, there is a long-standing recognition of jus cogens as a universal and superior norm and the concept of erga omnes obligation for violation on important rights. These two concepts are based on the interest of ‘the whole international community’. All states are required to comply the concepts despite of their willingness to be bound by these concepts. This study was conducted to identify the characters of erga omnes obligation and to examine the possibilities of their application to prosecute international crimes. It also discusses the difficulties of the current erga omnes concept to enforce obligation of impunity eradication, especially for International Criminal Court (ICC). As the one and only permanent international criminal court, ICC received accusations and criticisms for being ‘a selective justice’. Hence, this study puts forward a ‘modern’ erga omnes concept as shift of paradigm from ‘state sovereignty’ to ‘humanity-based approach’. This modern concept is a significant theoretical foundation for the primacy jurisdiction of the ICC because this primacy is the only option that the ICC can apply universally to achieve global justice.AbstrakMeskipun tidak ada definisi yang disepakati secara internasional, kejahatan internasional seringkali dikaitkan dengan korban sipil, kehancuran luar biasa, konflik bersenjata dan semangat patriotisme serta keterlibatan negara. Akibatnya, hukum nasional seringkali gagal dalam menuntut pelaku sehingga mekanisme internasional menjadi satu-satunya cara untuk menuntut pertanggungjawaban pidana pelaku. Namun, hukum internasional masih terpenjara dalam sistem yang terpusat pada negara, sehingga tanpa adanya kesepakatan, negara tidak merasa harus patuh pada kewajiban untuk menuntut pelaku. Hal ini melahirkan iklim impunitas. Sementara itu, hukum internasional sejak lama telah mengakui keberadaan sebuah norma yang universal dan superior yakni jus cogens serta konsep kewajiban erga omnes sebagai sebuah konsekuensi pelanggaran dari suatu “hak-hak yang penting”. Kedua konsep hukum tersebut mendasarkan pada kepentingan masyarakat internasional secara keseluruhan sehingga mengharuskan semua negara untuk patuh terlepas dari keinginan mereka untuk terikat atau tidak dengan norma tersebut. Artikel ini mengidentifikasi karakter dari kewajiban erga omnes dan menelaah apakah karakter tersebut terpenuhi dalam sifat dari kewajiban untuk menghapuskan impunitas. Artikel ini kemudian memaparkan kesulitan-kesulitan yang dihadapi bagi konsep erga omnes saat ini dalam perannya menegakkan kewajiban untuk menghapuskan impunitas khususnya bagi International Criminal Court (ICC) untuk berlaku universal. Sebagai satu-satunya mahkamah pidana internasional permanen, ICC telah mendapat banyak kritikan karena dianggap masih “pilih-pilih” dalam menerapkan keadilan. Artikel ini menawarkan konsep erga omnes ‘modern’ sebagai dasar untuk merubah paradigma dari pendekatan berbasis kedaulatan negara menjadi berbasis umat manusia. Konsep modern ini dapat menjadi landasan teori bagi ICC untuk memberlakukan primacy jurisdiction kepada seluruh negara dan mewujudkan keadilan global. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v5n2.a1
THE USE OF AUTONOMOUS WEAPON SYSTEMS IN ARMED CONFLICT : LEGALITY AND CHALLENGES FOR FUTURE WEAPON REGULATION Andreas Wilia; Diajeng Wulan Christianti
Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 3 No. 2 (2019): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 3, Number 2, June 2019
Publisher : International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v3i2.322

Abstract

AbstractAutonomous Weapon Systems (AWS) has been developed as an alternative weapon system in the battlefield. It has a fundamental difference with other weapons systems which lies in decision making carried out without human intervention. AWS is able to make decisions about life and death and it has been legally, morally and ethically challenged since it has potential to distract moral and ethical on the battlefield. However, as a smart weapon, it gives a significant advantage since it can be deployed in very dangerous areas for the purpose of self-defense in critical situations. This article argues that AWS is still a conventional weapon and cannot be absolutely prohibited even if it is deemed as a vulnerable and destructive weapon which potentially violates international humanitarian law (IHL). AWS is still fully compliant with IHL basic principles for as long as there is a sufficient legal basis that provides the limit and legality of the use of AWS. Accordingly, this article also suggests that the future AWS regulation should be followed by appropriate technical provision on the development, production, ownership, transfer and use in armed conflict.Keywords: Armed Conflict, Autonomous Weapon Systems, International Humanitarian Law, Weapon Regulation AbstrakSistem Senjata Otonom (AWS) telah dikembangkan sebagai sistem senjata alternatif dalam pertempuran dan memiliki perbedaan fundamental dengan sistem senjata lain yaitu, keputusan yang diambil tanpa adanya intervensi manusia. AWS mampu untuk memutuskan hidup dan matinya target kombatan sehingga penggunaannya ditentang baik secara hukum, moral, dan etika karena berpotensi merusak moral dan etika dalam peperangan. Namun demikian, sebagai senjata modern, AWS memberikan keuntungan yang nyata mengingat AWS dapat ditempatkan di daerah yang berbahaya bagi manusia untuk alasan bela diri dalam situasi yang sangat sulit. Penelitian ini menyatakan bahwa AWS tetap merupakan senjata konvensional yang penggunaannya tidak dapat dilarang secara absolut sekalipun berpotensi menjadi senjata penghancur yang dapat melanggar hukum humaniter. AWS mampu untuk mematuhi prinsip-prinsip dasar hukum humaniter sepanjang pengaturan dan pembatasan penggunaannya diatur dalam instrumen hukum humaniter yang memadai yang hingga saat ini belum tersedia. Dengan demikian, penelitian ini menyarankan bahwa aturan AWS masa depan harus juga mencakup aturan-aturan teknis tentang pengembangan, pembuatan, kepemilikan, pengalihan serta penggunaan dari AWS dalam sengketa bersenjata. Kata Kunci: Aturan Senjata, Konflik Bersenjata, Hukum Humaniter Internasional, Sistem Senjata Otonom
THE BEGINNING OF THE INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW APPLICATION TO CYBER ATTACK: THE STATUS OF RULE 30 TALLINN MANUAL 1.0 Iradhati Zahra; Diajeng Wulan Christianti
Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 5 No. 1 (2021): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 5, Number 1, Januari 2021
Publisher : International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v5i1.366

Abstract

ABSTRACTTechnological development has given rise to new means and methods of warfare such as cyber-attack and can potentially have devastating humanitarian consequences. In times of armed conflict, International Humanitarian Law (IHL) limits certain use of weapons, however, it is questionable whether an armed conflict exists in the situation where cyber-attack is employed alone. In 2007, Estonia suffered severe damages due to cyber-attacks that were equal to the damages caused by kinetic weapons. Yet, there is a debate whether IHL applies in the Estonia case due to the shortage of a kinetic weapon. The Estonia case has generated NATO and other states to draft a cyber-warfare manual (Tallinn Manual 1.0) that, in its Rule 30, affirms the IHL applicability in the case of only cyber-attack. Due to the importance of this Rule, this article argues that Rule 30 shall be considered as a legally binding provision in the form of customary international law. This Rule has satisfied widely practiced and opinio juris elements although it is not as ideal as other customary norms. Taking into consideration the rapid development of technology, it is not necessary for Rule 30 to meet the ideal condition of customary law since, according to Grotian Moment Theory, the formation of a new customary international law can be accelerated in times of fundamental change as can be seen in the practice of customary air and space law. Keywords: Customary International Law, Cyber-Attack, Grotian Moment Theory, IHL, Tallinn Manual 1.0 ABSTRAKPerkembangan teknologi telah melahirkan cara dan metode berperang yang baru seperti serangan siber dan dapat berpotensi menimbulkan kehancuran umat manusia. Hukum Humaniter Internasional (HHI) membatasi penggunaan senjata tertentu saat perang, sayangnya penerapan hukum ini masih dipertanyakan dalam kasus yang hanya melibatkan serangan siber. Tahun 2007 Estonia menderita kerugian akibat dari serangan siber yang tingkat keparahannya dapat disamakan dengan serangan kinetis. Namun, fakta bahwa serangan tersebut tidak melibatkan senjata kinetis melahirkan perdebatan perihal penerapan HHI. Kasus Estonia telah mendorong NATO dan negara-negara lainya untuk merumuskan Manual tentang Perang Siber (Tallinn Manual 1.0) yang mengkonfirmasi penerapan HHI untuk kasus yang hanya melibatkan serangan siber. Pentingnya pengaturan dalam Pasal 30, artikel ini berpendapat bahwa pasal tersebut harus memiliki kekuatan hukum yang mengikat dalam bentuk aturan hukum kebiasaan internasional. Pasal 30 telah memenuhi unsur hukum kebiasaan internasional yakni praktek negara yang luas serta opinio juris. Sekalipun tidak dipenuhi secara sempurna seperti layaknya aturan hukum kebiasaan internasional yang lain. Dengan mempertimbangkan perkembangan teknologi yang pesat, Pasal 30 tidak perlu secara ideal memenuhi unsur norma hukum kebiasaan internasional, karena menurut Grotian Moment Theory pembentukan norma hukum kebiasaan internasional baru dapat dipercepat karena adanya perubahan yang fundamental. Hal ini dapat terlihat dari praktek hukum kebiasaan ruang angkasa. Kata Kunci: Hukum Kebiasaan Internasional, Hukum Humaniter Internasional, Serangan Siber, Tallinn Manual 1.0, Teori Grotian Moment
Cyber-Attack in Estonia: a New Challenge in The Applicability of International Humanitarian Law Iradhati Zahra; Irawati Handayani; Diajeng Wulan Christianti
Yustisia Vol 10, No 1: April 2021
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/yustisia.v10i1.48336

Abstract

This article aimed to analyze the classification of armed conflict in Estonia's cyber-attack and how the existing IHL are answering this problem, and whether those regulations are enough for future cases of cyber-attack. This article uses the normative method by comparing the Geneva Convention 1949 and Additional Protocol I 1977 with Rule 30 Tallinn Manual 1.0 and some relevant literary works, using a descriptive-analytic to explain the object comprehensively. The result shows that Estonia's cyber-attack could be classified as an International Armed Conflict, which first started as a Non-International Armed Conflict by proving attribution from Russia to Nashi Youth Group following the Overall Control in Tadic Case. The distinction between information warfare and cyber-attack is related to the physical impact, which a threshold of a cyber-attack under Tallinn Manual 1.0. It means Rule 30 of Tallinn Manual 1.0 also answered Jus ad Bellum's threshold and Jus in Bello in terms of cyber-attack. Although, this article needs some improvements regarding the limitation of this issue only focused on the Material Scope of IHL. In addition, Rule 30 of Tallinn Manual 1.0 is not legally binding because it is not one source of international law. However, it is possible for the Rule 30 Tallinn Manual 1.0 to be a new norm and becoming customary international law in the future.
The Right to Water in Jakarta: Limitation in a Sinking City Ahmad Risyad Sumartapraja; Diajeng Wulan Christianti
PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 9, No 1 (2022): PADJADJARAN JURNAL ILMU HUKUM (JOURNAL OF LAW)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Padjadjaran

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

Abstract

Unsustainable groundwater extraction in Jakarta has resulted in the subsidence of its land. Said effect had prompted the Regional Government to limit groundwater extraction. Consequently, the limitation threatens Jakarta residents’ minimum core enjoyment of the Human Right to Water (HRtW). People who live in coastal areas are the most affected. Northern Jakarta have considered the limitation as a burden that force them to spend more on necessities. Since there are no safeguards nor alternatives and that the limitation is from the Regional Government is disproportionate, this study argues that there is a violation of Jakarta residents’ Human Right to Water since their access towards water has been impeded, especially in areas without piped water. The Human Right to Water is a fundamental right, a foundation of the enjoyment of other rights. Like other human rights, it can be limited if the alternatives have already been installed. This study argues that, in the case of Jakarta, the safeguards that are supposed to be put into place is the progressive realization of Human Right to Water. It is the installation of a holistic piped water network. Indonesia has an obligation to provide piped water as a safeguard to its limitations otherwise international human rights law will be violated. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v9n1.a3
Yurisdiksi International Criminal Court (ICC) terhadap Warga Negara Non-Pihak Statuta Roma dan Dampaknya bagi Indonesia Diajeng Wulan Christianti
PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 2, No 1 (2015): PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Padjadjaran

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (612.612 KB)

Abstract

Prinsip pacta tertiis nec nocent nec prosunt menegaskan bahwa perjanjian internasional tidak melahirkan kewajiban dan hak bagi negara ketiga tanpa adanya consent. Tulisan ini akan mengkaji persoalan jurisdiksi International Criminal Court (ICC) terhadap warga negara non-pihak Statuta Roma dihubungkan dengan prinsip di atas dan dampaknya terhadap Indonesia. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa tidak ada pelanggaran hukum perjanjian internasional dalam hal  kewenangan ICC mengadili warga negara non-pihak meskipun tidak ada consent dari negara non-pihak tersebut. Fakta Indonesia bukan negara pihak Statuta Roma tidak lantas menghalangi warga negara Indonesia untuk diadili dimuka ICC.The Jurisdiction of International Criminal Court over Non-party States and Its Implication to Indonesia AbstractPrinciple of pacta tertiis nec nocent nec prosunt underlines that a treaty does not create either obligations or rights for a third State without its consent. This paper examines International Criminal Court’s (ICC) jurisdiction over nationals of non-state parties according to the said Principle and its implications for Indonesia. The research shows that ICC’s jurisdiction over nationals of non-state parties, without their consent, does not violate the law of treaty. Consequently, the fact that Indonesia is not party to ICC does not hamper the Court’s power to prosecute Indonesian nationals.Keywords: ICC, Rome Statute, non- state party, jurisdiction, international treaty.DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v2n1.a3
Analisa Kejahatan Penyelundupan Manusia Berdasarkan Smuggling of Migrants Protocol Ditinjau dari Perspektif Perlindungan Pencari Suaka: Studi Kasus Pengungsi Rohingnya Diajeng Wulan Christianti
PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 3, No 3 (2016): PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Padjadjaran

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (616.618 KB)

Abstract

Abstrak Eksodus besar-besaran etnis muslim Rohingya keluar Myanmar kembali terjadi sebagai akibat dilakukannya pembakaran desa, eksekusi, hingga pemerkosaan oleh militer Myanmar di Rakhine. Meskipun mereka harus rela membayar mahal, cara penyelundupan manusia kerap mereka gunakan karena cara formal untuk bisa masuk ke negara lain tidak dimungkinkan. Tindakan penyelundupan manusia adalah tindak pidana dalam Smuggling Protocol di mana negara-negara yang disinggahi pengungsi Rohingya seperti Thailand, Bangladesh, bahkan Indonesia telah menjadi negara pihak. Akibatnya, Pemerintah Thailand dan Bangladesh kerap menangkap pengungsi Rohingya yang masuk ke negaranya bahkan mengusir mereka untuk kembali ke Myanmar. Padahal, sebagai pencari suaka yang terancam persekusi, etnis Rohingya dilindungi oleh hukum Hak Asasi Manusia khususnya prinsip non-refoulement. Artikel ini menganalisa dilema antara aturan Smuggling Protokol yang bertujuan mencegah dan menegakan hukum atas terjadinya kejahatan penyelundupan manusia dengan kewajiban memberikan pengaman untuk melindungi hak-hak para pengungsi yang terancam persekusi. Artikel ini berkesimpulan bahwa meskipun Smuggling Protocol mampu untuk memberikan keseimbangan antara penegakan hukum kejahatan perlindungan manusia dan perlindungan pencari suaka, akan tetapi pada akhirnya semua tergantung dari keinginan negara untuk menerapkan Smuggling Protocol tersebut melalui aturan implementasi yang jelas namun proporsional. An Analysis of Smuggling of Migrants under Smuggling Protocol from Asylum Seeker Protection Perspective: Case Study Rohingya   Abstract Again, thousands of Rohingya flee Myanmar to escape persecution after they saw their homes burned down, their family executed, and also suffered rape and torture by the Myanmar’s Military. In order to flee to Thailand or Bangladesh, Rohingyas often resort to using people smugglers and have to pay large amount of money. It is the only option left for desperate Rohingyas trying to save their lives. Smuggling of Migrants is criminal act under Smuggling Protocol. Thai and Bangladesh authorities (which are state parties to Protocol) often detained the Rohingyas for illegal entrance or expelled them back to Burmese government. The state parties of the Smuggling Protocol are obliged to investigate and prosecute the smugglers as well as to prevent and suppress the crimes. Nevertheless, asylum seekers fearing of persecution are protected under international human rights law including the principle of non-refoulement. This paper thus examines whether the Smuggling Protocol can solve the aforementioned dilemma by providing adequate refugee rights safeguards. This paper concludes that whilst the Smuggling Protocol has potential to do such, its application ultimately depends on the will of the State parties to apply the Protocol through proportionate yet clear implementing regulations. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v3.n3.a3
Co-Authors Ahmad Risyad Sumartapraja Andreas Wilia Angela Jessica Desmonda Bratajaya, Yogi Chloryne Trie Isana Dewi Christyanti, B. Lora Dewi, Chloryne Trie Isana Gregory Joshua Manogar Iradhati Zahra Iradhati Zahra Irawati Handayani Jaka Hananta Rizkullah Simanjuntak, Calvin Paulus Marcelito Siswandi, Ahmad Gusman Catur Siti Rochmah Aga Desyana Zhahira, Tsabita