Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JUSTICES: Journal of Law
Vanesha Salsabila Keisya
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Implementation of Hubbard ACT in the United States Military Sole Survivor Policy Vanesha Salsabila Keisya
JUSTICES: Journal of Law Vol. 3 No. 4 (2024): Progressive and Critical Law Review
Publisher : Perkumpulan Dosen Fakultas Agama Islam Indramayu

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58355/justices.v3i4.139

Abstract

This article discusses the influence of the Sole Survivor Policy on US military policy. Under the “Sole Survivor Policy” of the United States Department of Defense, service members who lose all their family members in war cannot be reassigned to a combat zone and will be 'honorably discharged' from the military. It aims to protect “the last son to carry the family name”. This research focuses on the case of the Hubbard brothers who became the forerunner of the Hubbard Act, which was passed by President George W Bush on August 29, 2008. This policy also resulted in veterans who were honorably discharged before the end of their contract not receiving adequate benefits. This has certainly harmed the fundamental rights of war veterans who have fought for their country, but are not given the rights they deserve. The method used in this research is normative juridical research method. The data used is secondary data. The data is presented qualitatively and analyzed descriptively. The result of this research is that the Hubbard Act, which is outlined in a United States public document entitled PUBLIC LAW 110-317, closes the gap in the existing “Sole Survivor” policy by providing veterans with a number of benefits that have been offered to other honorably discharged military members.
Implications of Russia's Aggression Against Ukraine for its Membership at the UN Human Rights Council Vanesha Salsabila Keisya
JUSTICES: Journal of Law Vol. 4 No. 2 (2025): Progressive and Critical Law Review
Publisher : Perkumpulan Dosen Fakultas Agama Islam Indramayu

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.58355/justices.v4i2.160

Abstract

Russia has engaged in military operations leading to aggression since 2014 on the Crimean peninsula, culminating in Russia opposing Ukraine's desire to join the North Treaty Organization (NATO) in 2022. Russia is a member state in the UN Human Rights Council since 2020, as a result of violating human rights has resulted in Russia's membership status in the UN Human Rights Council being suspended. In accordance with the provisions of the establishment of the UN Human Rights Council through the UN General Assembly Resolution, namely MU-UN Resolution 60/251 entitled "UN General Assembly Resolution: Human Rights Council". The problems in this study, namely: How is Russian aggression against Ukraine based on international law. What are the implications of Russia's aggression on its membership status in the UN Human Rights Council. The research method is based on descriptive normative juridical research and the data is analyzed in qualitative terms. The results of the research are drawn conclusions: Russian aggression against Ukraine based on international law has violated several provisions of international law, namely the UN Charter in Article 62 paragraph (2), the 1998 Rome Statute in Article 5 and Article 8 bis, the 1949 Geneva III Convention especially Chapter II Articles 13, 14, 15, the Geneva IV Convention, and several UN General Assembly Resolutions. The implications of Russia's aggression against Ukraine caused Russia's membership status in the UN Human Rights Council to be suspended based on UN Resolution 60/251 of 2006, especially in paragraph 8.
Co-Authors