Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
1.607
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Dialektika kontemporer Tamaddun International Journal of Law and Society Pinisi Journal of Social Science
Nabiebu, Miebaka
Unknown Affiliation
Humanities Education Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences Other

Published : 9 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search
Journal : Pinisi Journal of Social Science

 1 
A Comparative Study Of Islamic And International Humanitarian Law Nabiebu, Miebaka
Pinisi Journal of Social Science Vol 2, No 2 (2023): September
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Makassar

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.26858/pjss.v2i2.51301

Abstract

Human communities have always been marked by conflicts, which came to be controlled by ethical and legal standards that developed along with human civilization. These widely accepted standards were eventually established as contemporary International Humanitarian Law (IHL). Additionally, it is commonly believed that this legislation has developed largely as a result of modern European activities, diminishing any potential contributions from other cultures and ethical traditions to its development and codification. However, it is noteworthy that the principles of jus ad bellum (law governing the use of force) and jus in Bello (content of the law of war) were evident in Islamic literature centuries before modern IHL was codified, with little attention paid to them. Jihad, or Islamic conflict, has been the subject of some existing literature, but the notion of Islamic humanitarian law within the context of IHL has not been thoroughly explored. Therefore, this study aims to fill a gap in the existing literature by reviewing Islamic humanitarian law within the ambit of IHL. This essay argues that Islamic humanitarian law, which regulates the treatment of prisoners of war, is extensive and comparable to the 1949 Geneva Convention's provisions. Additionally, the concepts of Siyar Islamic literature are strikingly similar to those of the Geneva Convention. This research adds to international relations by examining the degree of conformity between the requirements of Islamic Humanitarian Law and Modern IHL with regard to a matter of immediate practical relevance in an era when some regions of the world are suffering armed conflict
The Illicit Commodification of Deportation: The Trump Administration’s “Third-Country Prisoner Transfer” Policy as a Violation of Jus Cogens Norms and the Law of State Responsibility Nabiebu, Miebaka; Eja, Alobo Eni; Ipuole, Roland; Njong, Cleverty Afu
Pinisi Journal of Social Science Vol 4, No 2 (2025): September
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Makassar

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.26858/pjss.v4i2.51008

Abstract

This paper examines the Trump administration’s initiative to deport non-citizen prisoners to third countries through bilateral agreements as a fundamental challenge to international legal order. We argue this policy of “strategic exile” constituted an internationally wrongful act that engaged United States state responsibility by violating peremptory norms (jus cogens) and established principles of international law. The analysis demonstrates how the policy violated the prohibition on arbitrary deprivation of nationality and the right to a nationality, breached the absolute principle of non-refoulement, and contravened customary rules governing lawful expulsion. By seeking to transfer individuals to states with which they lacked genuine legal bonds, the United States attempted to create conditions of de facto statelessness while exposing individuals to foreseeable risks of persecution and indefinite detention. The paper further examines how recipient states could bear shared responsibility under the International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility for aiding in these violations. This case represents a dangerous precedent for the erosion of fundamental human rights protections through bilateral coercion, demanding a robust international response to affirm that state sovereignty cannot legitimate the unilateral severance of an individual’s legal bond to the international community of states.
The Legal Vacuum of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems: From Meaningful Human Control to Algorithmic Accountability in the Age of AI Warfare Nabiebu, Miebaka; Ekpo, Mokutima; Njong, Cleverty Afu; Anukanti, Vivien
Pinisi Journal of Social Science Vol 4, No 1 (2025): May
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Makassar

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.26858/pjss.v4i1.61759

Abstract

The rapid and opaque development of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS) has created a profound crisis in the foundational frameworks of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). This paper argues that the current diplomatic discourse within the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, centered on the nebulous concept of “Meaningful Human Control,” is insufficient and strategically stalled. It posits that the advent of sophisticated artificial intelligence driven targeting, as seen in contemporary conflicts, necessitates a fundamental shift in the legal paradigm. The analysis contends that IHL's core principles of distinction, proportionality, and precaution in attack cannot be authentically complied with by opaque algorithms whose decision making processes are inscrutable and whose parameters may be shaped by biased data sets. The paper examines how the deployment of LAWS fractures the chain of legal accountability, creating a responsibility gap where no human can be held legally responsible for an unlawful algorithmic kill decision. Moving beyond critique, the paper proposes a new regulatory framework based on Algorithmic Accountability. This framework demands legally binding prohibitions on autonomy in critical functions, mandatory human rights impact assessments, transparent algorithmic auditing, and the establishment of an international registry for military artificial intelligence systems. This research aims to break the diplomatic impasse by providing a concrete, legally rigorous pathway to govern the weaponization of artificial intelligence before its integration erodes the very essence of humanitarian law.
Co-Authors Agube, Ntamy Anukanti, Vivien Anukanti, Vivien Chioma Eja, Alobo Eni Ekpo, Mokutima Ekpo, Mokutima Etido Ipuole, Roland Njong, Cleverty Afu Otu, Michael Takim