Garuda - Garba Rujukan Digital

Book Review: Jus Cogens â International Law and Social Contract Handayani, Irawati
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 (511.579 KB)

This book is based on the doctoral thesis completed by the author as an International Scholar of the Cambridge Overseas Trust at the University of Cambridge. The main idea of the books lies on the fact that jus cogens still become one of the most complex doctrines in contemporary international law. The legal foundation of jus cogens is still questionable, whether it lies on natural law, positive law or even to higher or divine origin. However, there is general agreement that jus cogens represent the fundamental value in international society or so-called higher norm in international law.Â DOI: https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v3n3.a11

Book Review: Peremptory International Law Jus Cogens - A General Inventory by Robert Colb Handayani, Irawati
PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 5, No 1 (2018): PADJADJARAN JURNAL ILMU HUKUM (JOURNAL OF LAW)
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Padjadjaran University

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

Book Review: Peremptory International Law Jus Cogens - A General Inventory by Robert Colb

Book Review: General International Law â Jus Cogens: A General Inventory Handayani, Irawati
PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) Vol 5, No 1 (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 (931.954 KB)

Jus cogens has been discussed for years by international law scholars around the world. Though there is no common agreement on the meaning of jus cogens of so-called peremptory norms, the majority of scholars seems to tacitly express their agreement on the highest position of jus cogens in international law. This book as mentioned in the title of the book is not an introductory book, refer to a book that explain the preliminary development of jus cogens.

Responsibility to Protect: A New Form of Humanitarian Intervention? Handayani, Irawati
Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol 1, No 1 (2017): PJIL Volume 1, Number 1, January 2017
Publisher : Padjadjaran Journal of International Law

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (398.283 KB)

AbstractHuman rights issues have become a common topic that continuously being discussed around the world. The major concern of international community on the protection of basic human rights leads to a challenge for the nation state to fulfill its commitment to protect the basic rights of their people from the possibility of harm that comes from internally or externally. Meanwhile, the principle of mutual understanding and respect among states and non-interference to domestic affairs of particular state has been generally recognized as the main principle in international law. Sometimes, a conflict that occurred inside a state, which is theoretically becomes a domestic issue, could be escalated and become a mutual concern of international society. When a human right violation occurred inside a state, ideally international community can not only ‘sit and watch’. Especially when the violations are classified as grave breaches of human rights. The world community has a moral obligation to offer an assistance and search a solution to end that violations. It is cleary noted that Article 2 (4) and Article 2 (7) United Nations (UN) Charter should not be regarded as an absolute prohibition of interference. Those articles are the limitation so that the intervention should not endangered territorial integrity, political independence and not contrary to the purposes of UN. However, the territorial integrity would be broken if the state lose their territory permanently, and in the context of humanitarian intervention there is no taking over a territory, since the main purpose is only to restore the condition as a result of human rights violation that occurred. Based on this assumption so intervention not contrary to UN Charter. One thing should be emphasized is that the requirements for intervention have to be very clear.Following an unsettled debate on criterion of humanitarian intervention, a few years ago there were a new concept which is believed as an improvement or a ‘new face’ from humanitarian intervention. It called the doctrine of Responsibility to Protect. Generally, both of these concepts have similarity, especially with the main purpose on guarantee basic human rights and provide such protection when the authorized government is unable and unwilling to do so. However, the RtoP doctrine can not also avoid its controversy. The main discussion on this doctrine particularly questioning the legal status of this doctrine in international law and whether RtoP is only a new form of humanitarian intervention.Keywords: humanitarian internvention, responsibility to Protect (R2P), duty to protect, non intervention, customary international law.AbstrakIsu mengenai HAM telah menjadi topik umum yang terus menerus didiskusikan diseluruh dunia. Perhatian utama dari komunitas internasional dalam hal perlindungan mendasar HAM selanjutnya menantang negara-negara untuk melakukan pemenuhan komitmen mereka agar melakukan perlindungan hak-hak mendasar dan tindakan yang dapat mengancam baik secara internal maupun secara eksternal. Sementara itu prinsip salaing pengertian dan penghargaan antar negara, prinsip non-intervensi dalam hubungan domestik telah diakui sebagai prinsip utama dalam hukum internasional. Kadang, konflik yang lahir di dalam negeri, yang secara teori adalah konflik domestik, dapat menjadi perhatian bersama masyarakat internasional. Pada saat terjadi pelanggaran HAM didalam suatu negara, seharusnya komunitas internasional tidak hanya ‘duduk dan melihat’. Khususnya pada saat terjadi pelanggaran yang dikategorikan sebagai pelanggaran berat terhadap HAM. Komunitas negara mempunyai kewajiban moral untuk menawarkan bantuan dan mencari solusi untuk mengakhiri pelanggaran tersebut.Seperti yang dijelaskan dalam Pasal 2 (4) dan Pasal 2 (7) Piagam PBB, pasal-pasal ini tidak dapat diangap sebagai larangan absolut intervensi. Pasal-pasal tersebut adalah pembatasan sehingga intervensi tidak membahayakan integritas wilayah, indpendensi politik dan tidak bertentangan dengan tuujuan PBB. Meskipun demikian, integritas wilayah dapat hilang apabila negara kehilangan wilayahnya secara permanen, dan dalam konteks intervensi kemanusiaan tidak ada pengambilalihan wilayah, karena tujuan utamanya hanya untuk mengembalikan kedaaan pada saat terjadinya pelanggaran HAM. Berdasarkan asumsi tersebut, maka intervensi tidak bertentangan dengan Piagam PBB. Hal lain yang harus diperjelas bahwa alasan intervensi haruslah jelas.Mengikuti perdebatan yang tidak kunjung sellesai tentang kriteria intervensi kemanusiaan, beberapa tahun yang lalu dibuatlah suatu konsep yang dianggap sebagai wajah baru dari intervensi kemanusiaan. Secara umum, kedua konsep ini mempunyai kesamaan, terutama dengan tujuan utama dalam menjamin HAM dan menyediakan sejumlah perlindungan pada saat pemerintah yang berwenang tidak mampu dan tidak dapat memberikan jaminan HAM. Meskipun demikian, doktin RtoP tidak dapat terhindar dari kontroversi. Diskusi utama dari doktrin ini adalah pertanyaan tentang status hukum dari doktrin hukum internasional dan apakah RtoP merupakan bentuk lain dari intervensi kemanusiaaan.Kata kunci: intervensi kemanusiaan, tanggung jawab untuk melindungi (R2P), kewajiban perlindungan, non intervensi¸ hukum kebiasaan internasional.

The Interrelation between Forced Eviction and the Right to Development Ghiblartar, Difa; Handayani, Irawati
Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol 3, No 2 (2019): PJIL VOLUME 3, NUMBER 2, JUNE 2019
Publisher : Padjadjaran Journal of International Law

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (393.842 KB)

AbstractCountry?s development is one of the most common reason to evict inhabitant forcibly. This is because individuals or communities are often placed as objects in the development process and hence causing the closure of a room of their participation in such process. In the perspective of human rights, development is deemed as an individual right from which, every human being has the right to participate, contribute, and receive benefits of the result. This article aims to analyse the cases of forced evictions according to the right to development in Human Rights Law and sees how such right has been implemented as a state obligation at the national level. The study thus reveals that certain principles of the right to development, such as a holistic development, placing humans as the central subject of development, as well as participation in the development process, can sufficiently protect individuals and communities from the case of forced evictions. This article further argues that state plays significant role to ensure the fulfillment of the right to development.Keywords: Forced Eviction, Human Rights, Right to Development, State Obligation AbstrakPembangunan negara merupakan salah-satu alasan paling umum penyebab terjadinya penggusuran paksa. Hal ini dikarenakan individu atau masyarakat ditempatkan sebagai objek pembangunan yang menyebabkan tertutupnya ruang partisipatif dalam pembangunan tersebut. Dalam perspektif hak asasi manusia, pembangunan diklaim sebagai hak dimana setiap orang berhak untuk berpartisipasi, berkontribusi dan menerima manfaat hasil pembangunan. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui perspektif hak atas pembangunan terhadap penggusuran paksa, serta bagaimana kewajiban Negara dalam menerapkan hak tersebut ditingkat nasional. Berdasarkan analisis terhadap prinsip-prinsip dalam hak atas pembangunan seperti pembangunan yang holistik; penempatan manusia sebagai subjek sentral dari pembangunan dan juga partisipasi dalam proses pembangunan dapat melindungi individu atau masyarakat dari penggusuran paksa. Untuk menjamin pemenuhannya, Negara dalam menerapkan hak atas pembangunan ditingkat nasional.Kata Kunci: Hak Asasi Manusia, Hak atas Pembangunan, Penggusuran Paksa, Kewajiban Negara

Concept and Position of Peremptory Norms (Jus Cogens) in International Law: A Preliminary Study Handayani, Irawati
Hasanuddin Law Review VOLUME 5 ISSUE 2, AUGUST 2019
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Hasanuddin University

Peremptory norms or jus cogens hold a unique position in international law. Unlike customary international law and treaty law, they abide no derivation and bind all states regardless of their willingness to be bound. Some scholars had elaborated fundamental theories to answer the theoretical background of jus cogens. However, they have never reached a satisfactory result. This study aims to elaborate the theoretical background of jus cogens and to observe the relationship between jus cogens, obligation erga omnes, and customary international law. The positivists recognize that jus cogens is an imperative norm within state practice and opinio juris. The positivist theory is not in line with the concept that jus cogens bound to states without their consent since every state has their sovereignty and cannot be bound by any kind of provision without consent. The proponents of the natural law theory stated that peremptory norms are inherited from the tradition of natural law so that it is the highest norm in international law that directly binds countries. On the other hand, the public order theory states that international law recognizes important (imperative) norms, which are hierarchically higher than ordinary norms and customary international law to advance the interests of the international community and to preserve the main values of international law. The three theories are considered insufficient to answer the philosophical basis of jus cogens. In its development, therefore, some new theories have been developed to challenge the basis of jus cogens.

RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT: A NEW FORM OF HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION? Irawati Handayani
Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 1 No. 1 (2017): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 1, Number 1, January 2017
Publisher : International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v1i1.276

AbstractHuman rights issues have become a common topic that continuously being discussed around the world. The major concern of international community on the protection of basic human rights leads to a challenge for the nation state to fulfill its commitment to protect the basic rights of their people from the possibility of harm that comes from internally or externally. Meanwhile, the principle of mutual understanding and respect among states and non-interference to domestic affairs of particular state has been generally recognized as the main principle in international law. Sometimes, a conflict that occurred inside a state, which is theoretically becomes a domestic issue, could be escalated and become a mutual concern of international society. When a human right violation occurred inside a state, ideally international community can not only ‘sit and watch’. Especially when the violations are classified as grave breaches of human rights. The world community has a moral obligation to offer an assistance and search a solution to end that violations.It is cleary noted that Article 2 (4) and Article 2 (7) United Nations (UN) Charter should not be regarded as an absolute prohibition of interference. Those articles are the limitation so that the intervention should not endangered territorial integrity, political independence and not contrary to the purposes of UN. However, the territorial integrity would be broken if the state lose their territory permanently, and in the context of humanitarian intervention there is no taking over a territory, since the main purpose is only to restore the condition as a result of human rights violation that occurred. Based on this assumption so intervention not contrary to UN Charter. One thing should be emphasized is that the requirements for intervention have to be very clear.Following an unsettled debate on criterion of humanitarian intervention, a few years ago there were a new concept which is believed as an improvement or a ‘new face’ from humanitarian intervention. It called the doctrine of Responsibility to Protect. Generally, both of these concepts have similarity, especially with the main purpose on guarantee basic human rights and provide such protection when the authorized government is unable and unwilling to do so. However, the RtoP doctrine can not also avoid its controversy. The main discussion on this doctrine particularly questioning the legal status of this doctrine in international law and whether RtoP is only a new form of humanitarian intervention.Keywords: humanitarian internvention, responsibility to Protect (R2P), duty to protect, non intervention, customary international law.AbstrakIsu mengenai HAM telah menjadi topik umum yang terus menerus didiskusikan diseluruh dunia. Perhatian utama dari komunitas internasional dalam hal perlindungan mendasar HAM selanjutnya menantang negara-negara untuk melakukan pemenuhan komitmen mereka agar melakukan perlindungan hak-hak mendasar dan tindakan yang dapat mengancam baik secara internal maupun secara eksternal. Sementara itu prinsip salaing pengertian dan penghargaan antar negara, prinsip non-intervensi dalam hubungan domestik telah diakui sebagai prinsip utama dalam hukum internasional. Kadang, konflik yang lahir di dalam negeri, yang secara teori adalah konflik domestik, dapat menjadi perhatian bersama masyarakat internasional. Pada saat terjadi pelanggaran HAM didalam suatu negara, seharusnya komunitas internasional tidak hanya ‘duduk dan melihat’. Khususnya pada saat terjadi pelanggaran yang dikategorikan sebagai pelanggaran berat terhadap HAM. Komunitas negara mempunyai kewajiban moral untuk menawarkan bantuan dan mencari solusi untuk mengakhiri pelanggaran tersebut.Seperti yang dijelaskan dalam Pasal 2 (4) dan Pasal 2 (7) Piagam PBB, pasal-pasal ini tidak dapat diangap sebagai larangan absolut interfensi. Pasal-pasal tersebut adalah pembatasan sehingga intervensi tidak membahayakan inegritas wilayah, indpendensi politik dan tidak bertentangan dengan tuujuan PBB. Meskipun demikian, integritas wilayah dapat hilang apabila negara kehilangan wilayahnya secara permanen, dan dalam konteks intervensi kemanusiaan tidak ada pengambil alihan wilayah, karena tujuan utamanya hanya untuk mengembalikan kedaaan pada saat terjadinya pelanggaran HAM. Berdasarkan asumsi tersebut, maka intervensi tidak bertentangan dengan Piagam PBB. Hal lain yang harus diperjelas bahwa alasan intervensi haruslah jelas.Mengikuti perdebatan yang tidak kunjung sellesai tentang kriteria intervensi kemanusiaan, beberapa tahun yang lalu dibuatlah suatu konsep yang dianggap sebagai wajah baru dari intervensi kemanusiaan. Secara umum, kedua konsep ini mempunyai kesamaan, terutama dengan tujuan utama dalam menjamin HAM dan menyediakan sejumlah perlindungan pada saat pemerintah yang berwenang tidak mampu dan tidak dapat memberikan jaminan HAM. Meskipun demikian, Doktin RtoP tidak dapat terhindar dari kontroversi. Diskusi utama dari doktrin ini adalah pertanyaan tentang status hukum dari doktrin hukum internasional dan apakah RtoP merupakan bentuk lain dari intervensi kemanusiaaan. Kata kunci: intervensi kemanusiaan, tanggung jawab untuk melindungi (R2P), kewajiban perlindungan, non intervensi ̧ hukum kebiasaan internasional.

THE INTERRELATION OF FORCED EVICTION AND THE RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT Difa Ghiblartar Gastina; Irawati Handayani
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.v3i2.320

AbstractDevelopment is one of the most common reasons to evict inhabitant forcibly. This happens because individuals or communities are placed as objects of development, causing the closure of participation space in development. In the perspective of human rights, development is claimed as a right, which every human being has the right to participate, contribute, and receive benefits for everything that results from development. This study aims to understand the perspective of the right to development towards forced evictions and the implementation od state obligation on the right to development at the national level. The study reveals that based on the principles in the right to development (such as holistic development;placement of humans as the central subject of development as well as participation in the development process) can protect individuals or communities from forced evictions. Futhermore, to ensure the fulfillment, state has key role to implement the right to development at the national level. Keywords: Forced Eviction, Human Rights, Right to Development. AbstrakPembangunan merupakan salah-satu alasan paling umum penyebab terjadinya penggusuran paksa. Hal ini dikarenakan individu atau masyarakat ditempatkan sebagai objek pembangunan yang menyebabkan tertutupnya ruang partisipatif dalam pembangunan tersebut. Dalam perspektif hak asasi manusia, pembangunan diklaim sebagai hak dimana setiap orang berhak untuk berpartisipasi, berkontribusi dan menerima manfaat hasil pembangunan. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui perspektif hak atas pembangunan terhadap penggusuran paksa, serta bagaimana kewajiban Negara dalam menerapkan hak tersebut ditingkat nasional. b Berdasarkan analisis terhadap prinsip-prinsip dalam hak atas pembangunana seperti pembangunan yang holistik; penempatan manusia sebagai subjek sentral dari pembangunan dan juga partisipasi dalam proses pembangunan dapat melindungi individu atau masyarakat dari penggusuran paksa. Untuk menjamin pemenuhannya, Negara dalam menerapkan hak atas pembangunan ditingkat nasional. Kata Kunci: Hak Asasi Manusia, Hak atas Pembangunan, Penggusuran Paksa.

ESTABLISHING THE STATUS OF RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT (R2P) AS CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW AND ITS ROLE IN PREVENTING MASS ATROCITIES Sigar Aji Poerana; Irawati Handayani
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.v5i1.362

ABSTRACTResponsibility to Protect (R2P) was unanimously adopted and is articulated in paragraphs 138 and 139 of General Assembly Resolution A/Res/60/1. On the one hand, R2P has presumed a new name for humanitarian intervention that is still debatable in international law. On the other hand, R2P attempts to connect State’s sovereignty and responsibility to protect human rights. R2P recognizes State’s sovereignty while bestowing States the primary responsibility to protect human rights and allowing the international community to intervene if States fail to fulfill their obligation. Considering the original idea of R2P is to protect human rights, the essential issue that should be addressed is the position of R2P as source of international law. Suppose States should implement the R2P without a prior commitment to a treaty, which sources of international law that can underlie the legal basis for R2P? This article argues that R2P can fulfill the criteria of customary international law based on the notion of ‘Grotian moment,’ which ‘compensates’ R2P from the traditional burden of state practice and opinio juris since R2P is a paradigm-shifting development in which new rules and doctrines of custom emerge with unusual rapidity and acceptance. Further, this article also highlights the importance of responsibility to prevent, which is one of the pillars of R2P, and argues that commitment to prevent is the “heart” of R2P. It is argued that such responsibility is vital in saving States from avoidable conflicts and from the trouble in responding to mass atrocities and rebuilding the affected population. Keywords: Customary International Law, Grotian Moment, Responsibility to Protect, Responsibility to Prevent, Sources of International Law ABSTRAKResponsibility to Protect (R2P) diadopsi dengan suara bulat dan dicantumkan dalam paragraf 138 dan 139 Resolusi Majelis Umum A/Res/60/1. Di satu sisi, R2P dianggap sebagai nama baru untuk intervensi kemanusiaan yang masih diperdebatkan dalam hukum internasional. Di sisi lain, R2P berupaya untuk menjembatani kedaulatan negara dan tanggung jawab untuk melindungi Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM). R2P tetap mengakui kedaulatan negara dan memberikan tanggung jawab utama kepada negara untuk melindungi HAM, namun mengizinkan masyarakat internasional untuk mengintervensi jika negara gagal memenuhi kewajibannya. Mengingat ide awal R2P adalah untuk melindungi HAM, maka isu penting yang harus ditelaah adalah posisi R2P sebagai sumber hukum internasional. Misalnya, negara harus mengimplementasikan R2P tanpa komitmen terlebih dahulu terhadap suatu perjanjian internasional, sumber hukum internasional manakah yang dapat mendasari pelaksanaan R2P? Artikel ini berpendapat bahwa R2P dapat memenuhi kriteria hukum kebiasaan internasional berdasarkan konsep ‘Grotian moment', yang 'mengkompensasi' R2P dari beban tradisional state practice dan opinio juris karena R2P merupakan perkembangan yang mengubah paradigma yang mengakibatkan aturan baru dan doktrin kebiasaan muncul dengan laju dan penerimaan yang luar biasa. Lebih lanjut, artikel ini juga menyoroti pentingnya tanggung jawab untuk mencegah, yang merupakan salah satu pilar dari R2P, dan berpendapat bahwa komitmen untuk mencegah adalah esensi dari R2P. Tanggung jawab untuk mencegah sangat penting dalam menjauhkan negara dari konflik yang dapat dihindari dan dari kesulitan dalam merespon krisis kemanusiaan dan membangun kembali penduduk yang terkena dampaknya. Kata Kunci: Grotian Moment, Hukum Kebiasaan Internasional, Tanggung Jawab untuk Melindungi, Tanggung Jawab untuk Mencegah, Sumber Hukum Internasional

ENVIRONMENTAL-INDUCED DISPLACEMENT: POTENTIAL PROTECTION UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW? Irawati Handayani; Anisa Fauziah
Yustisia Jurnal Hukum Vol 9, No 2: May - August 2020
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/yustisia.v9i2.43507

Climate change, environmental degradation, and natural disasters are some of the push factors of cross-border displacement. The consequence of this movement is the loss of legal protection from the country of origin of the displaced persons. They are not categorized as refugees as such and no international law specifically regulates the protection of climate displaced persons. This paper will try to analyze the legal protection of climate refugees based on international law. The paper elaborates the context of migration caused by climate change and its relevance with the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugee, possibility of interpretation of the convention to cover environmental induced displacement and protection under international human rights instruments. The research concludes that it is quite difficult to include climate change-induced displacement under the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugee even through interpretation. However, it does not mean that the people cannot be protected. International law, especially International Human Rights Law extends protection to peoples belongs to that group.

Title

Found 23 Documents
Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title Search

Found 23 Documents Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title

Found 23 Documents
Search