Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM Mimbar Hukum
Erlangga, Vania Lutfi Safira
Unknown Affiliation
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

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

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
DILEMA PENGATURAN KEDUDUKAN HUKUM INTERNASIONAL DI DALAM KONSTITUSI INDONESIA Suwartono, Rahadian Diffaul Barraq; Erlangga, Vania Lutfi Safira
Mimbar Hukum Vol 36 No 1 (2024): Mimbar Hukum
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Gadjah Mada

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.22146/mh.v36i1.11985

Abstract

Abstract Indonesia faces a dilemma in its Constitution regarding the regulation of international law in relation to national law. Despite gaining independence over 78 years ago, there remains no unified stance on this issue. Indonesia actively participates in international relations and has adopted many international laws, creating a grey area that exacerbates legal issues. This article explores the Indonesian constitution’s challenges and shortcomings in regulating the position of international law, stemming from historical, sociological, and juridical factors. The primary issues are Indonesia’s inconsistent attitude towards international law and its indecisiveness in establishing a primary doctrine for its position, unable to decide between the monism and dualism theory. Nationalist groups, skeptical of international law, further complicate the situation by rejecting its inclusion in the Constitution. This confusion leads to derivative and latent problems within Indonesia’s legal system. The article examines why this dilemma exists and the resulting legal issues. The research is normative, employing conceptual, historical, and legal-policy approaches. It combines perspectives from Indonesian constitutional law and international law theories, prioritizing the Indonesian national interest paradigm. Abstrak Indonesia mengalami dilema untuk mengatur kedudukan hukum internasional terhadap hukum nasional di dalam konstitusi. Meski telah merdeka lebih dari 78 tahun yang lalu, Indonesia belum memiliki pandangan bulat dalam memosisikan hukum internasional. Hal ini membuka ruang abu-abu dan mengakibatkan efek domino yang memperkeruh permasalahan hukum di Indonesia. Artikel ini menyoroti dilema dan ‘kegagalan’ konstitusi Indonesia untuk mengatur posisi hukum internasional. Terdapat sumbangsih kegagalan penerapan teori hukum yang konsisten dalam munculnya dilema ini. Sikap fluktuatif Indonesia terhadap hukum internasional dan kebimbangan menentukan doktrin utama untuk memosisikan hukum internasional menjadi faktor paling dominan. Kebimbangan untuk menerapkan teori monisme atau dualisme menjadi akar masalah. Kondisi ini juga diperparah dengan adanya kelompok nationalist sentiment yang pesimistis terhadap hukum internasional dan menolak pengakuannya di dalam konstitusi. Kebimbangan ini mengakibatkan permasalahan turunan dan laten pada tata hukum di Indonesia. Artikel ini menjelaskan mengapa dilema ini terjadi dan apa saja permasalahan hukum yang diakibatkannya. Penelitian pada artikel ini disusun sebagai penelitian normatif yang menggunakan pendekatan konseptual, historis, dan politik hukum. Artikel ini menggabungkan perspektif hukum tata negaraIndonesia dengan perspektif teori hukum internasional dengan mengutamakan paradigma kepentingan nasional Indonesia.
Making Human Rights Law Work in Dismissal Cases: Insights from the Martinus Masa Dorita v. PT Musim Mas Case Hadi, Sahid; Erlangga, Vania Lutfi Safira
Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM Vol. 32 No. 2: MEI 2025
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Islam Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20885/iustum.vol32.iss2.art8

Abstract

The nature of private law is strongly embedded in dismissal cases. For this reason, human rights standards are rarely applied in the settlement of such cases in court. However, the Martinus Masa Dorita v. PT Musim Mas case demonstrated a different practice. Particularly in the court of first instance, the judges explicitly considered human rights law, resulting in a judgment that contrasted with the parties’ claims. In spite of the fact that the Supreme Court annulled the decision of the court of first instance, the presence of human rights argumentation in the journey of the case remains important to explore. By analyzing judges’ reasoning in the court decisions for the case, this doctrinal legal research developed a legal methodology for the application of human rights standards in dismissal cases. We found that the judges have made human rights standards work by reinterpreting pre-existing employment law provisions that govern employee-employer relations using an impact-oriented reasoning method. This work contributes to a greater understanding of how judges can put human rights law to work when developing their reasoning for dismissal cases. Based on the case, human rights-based reasoning enables judges to provide vigorous protection of workers’ human rights and deliver substantive justice. We argue that human rights considerations enable courts to create equilibrium in unequal employee-employer relations.
Co-Authors Hadi, Sahid Suwartono, Rahadian Diffaul Barraq