Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
3.746
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Gravity : Jurnal Ilmiah Penelitian dan Pembelajaran Fisika Diya Al-Afkar: Jurnal Studi al-Quran dan al-Hadis The Indonesian Journal of Public Administration (IJPA) SOSIOHUMANIORA: Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora JURNAL CENDEKIA HUKUM Polinter GLOBAL INSIGHT JOURNAL KRTHA BHAYANGKARA Journal of Judicial Review Amsir Law Jurnal (ALJ) TRANS-KATA: Journal of Language, Literature, Culture, and Education Ilomata International Journal of Social Science Papua Journal Of Diplomacy And International Relations Soshum: Jurnal Sosial dan Humaniora Aladalah: Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum dan Humaniora Kanun: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum JURNAL HUKUM STAATRECHTS Legalis : Journal of Law Review Politeia : Journal of Public Administration and Political Science and International Relations HUMANIORASAINS
Didi Jubaidi
Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Jakarta
Religion Arts Humanities Astronomy Earth & Planetary Sciences Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Environmental Science Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Materials Science & Nanotechnology Physics Social Sciences Other

Published : 28 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search
Journal : GLOBAL INSIGHT JOURNAL

 1 
Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa Internasional (Analisis Kasus Pertamina vs Karaha Bodas Company (KBC) dan PT Newmont Nusa Tenggara) Didi Jubaidi
GLOBAL INSIGHT JOURNAL Vol 8, No 2 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.52447/gij.v8i2.7057

Abstract

Penyelesaian sengketa internasional merupakan hal yang kompleks dan menantang dalam dunia bisnis global. Arbitrasi internasional telah menjadi alternatif yang populer untuk menyelesaikan sengketa antara perusahaan multinasional dan negara-negara. Penelitian ini menganalisis penggunaan arbitrase internasional sebagai mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa internasional dengan fokus pada dua kasus yang menarik, yaitu Pertamina vs Karaha Bodas Company (KBC) dan PT Newmont Nusa Tenggara. Kasus Pertamina vs Karaha Bodas Company melibatkan konflik dalam perjanjian produksi gas di Indonesia. Sementara itu, kasus PT Newmont Nusa Tenggara melibatkan sengketa antara perusahaan tambang asal Amerika Serikat dengan pemerintah Indonesia terkait perjanjian investasi. Melalui pendekatan kualitatif, penelitian ini menggali proses arbitrase internasional dalam menyelesaikan dua kasus tersebut. Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa arbitrase internasional memberikan keuntungan dalam penyelesaian sengketa internasional, seperti netralitas, kepercayaan, dan efisiensi. Namun, juga terdapat tantangan seperti biaya yang tinggi dan kekurangan transparansi. Perkembangan hukum internasional dan praktek arbitrase internasional yang terus berkembang menjadi kunci bagi keberhasilan mekanisme ini. Penelitian ini memberikan wawasan tentang pentingnya arbitrase internasional sebagai alternatif penyelesaian sengketa internasional. Implikasi temuan ini dapat digunakan oleh perusahaan multinasional dan pemerintah dalam merancang perjanjian dan mengelola sengketa internasional dengan lebih efektif. Selain itu, penelitian ini juga memberikan kontribusi untuk pemahaman lebih lanjut tentang penggunaan arbitrase internasional dalam konteks kasus-kasus tertentu di Indonesia.
Analysis of the Elimination of Strict Liability in the Omnibus Law on Massive Deforestation in Indonesia and its Effect on Global Warming and Climate Change Khoirunnisa, Khoirunnisa; Jubaidi, Didi
GLOBAL INSIGHT JOURNAL Vol 10, No 1 (2025)
Publisher : Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.52447/gij.v10i1.7913

Abstract

The Job Creation Law or omnibus law passed in 2020 has caused controversy among the public and legal experts. One aspect that has attracted attention is the elimination of corporations as parties that can be held criminally liable. Previously, corporations could be convicted if they were involved in environmental crimes. However, with the adoption of Omnibus Law, corporate criminal liability has been abolished, except in cases of environmental crimes that result in human death.  The elimination of Strict Liability in the Omnibus Law against perpetrators of Massive Deforestation in Indonesia can have a major effect on global warming and climate change. This article analyzes the impact of the elimination of corporate liability in criminal acts and the importance of considering the balance between economic interests and social justice. The purpose of this research is to find out how the impact of the elimination of the principle of strict liability in the criminal act of forest destruction passed in 2020 on Global Warming and Climate Change. This research uses a normative juridical approach, with a literature study that includes various sources such as scientific writings or articles in the form of books, online media, dissertations or other literature. The elimination of the principle of strict liability in the omnibus law has affected massive deforestation in Indonesia closely related to environmental protection and maintenance. Without strict liability, proving fault or negligence in deforestation cases becomes more. the elimination of strict liability for corporate criminal liability in cases of massive deforestation in Indonesia can have significant implications for global warming and climate change. It may reduce deterrence, make it harder to hold corporations accountable, and hinder efforts to protect the environment.
Between Power and Principle: A Study of Legal Legitimacy under International Law in the Iran–Israel–U.S. Trilateral Conflict Khoirunnisa, Khoirunnisa; Jubaidi, Didi
GLOBAL INSIGHT JOURNAL Vol 10, No 2 (2025)
Publisher : Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.52447/gij.v10i2.8559

Abstract

The trilateral conflict involving Iran, Israel, and the United States represents one of the most persistent and complex geopolitical tensions in the Middle East. Rooted in ideological opposition, strategic competition, and concerns over nuclear proliferation, this conflict has had far-reaching implications for regional stability and the credibility of international legal norms. Each actor, Iran, Israel, and the United States has engaged in actions that reflect differing perceptions of threat and power projection, often justified through contested interpretations of self-defense and sovereignty. This study raises a central question: to what extent do the actions of Iran, Israel, and the United States in their ongoing conflict reflect compliance with or violations of the core principles of international law, particularly those relating to state sovereignty, non-intervention, and the lawful use of force? The objective of this research is to analyze how the legal justifications and strategic behaviors of the three actors align with or undermine international legal norms. Employing a qualitative, descriptive-analytical method, the study draws on official documents, United Nations reports, and scholarly literature to assess relevant events, such as targeted killings, cross-border airstrikes, and proxy warfare. The findings suggest that all three states have frequently invoked self-defense in ways that stretch or sidestep legal boundaries, contributing to a pattern of norm erosion and legal ambiguity. In conclusion, this conflict illustrates a broader legitimacy crisis in international law and underscores the need for stronger, more consistent multilateral mechanisms to uphold legal accountability in global security affairs.
Co-Authors Khoirunnisa Khoirunnisa Nurfuadah, Hilda Saputra, Dedi Umayah, Umayah WAGIMAN Wagiman, Wagiman Widiatmoko, Dekki Widyaningrum, Tuti