Supaphorn Akkapin
Rajamangala University of Technology Krungthep, Thailand

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

Reparative Justice and State Responsibility: Reactualizing the Due Diligence Principle in Ensuring Civil Remedies for Human Rights Violations: Reparative Justice and State Responsibility: Reactualizing the Due Diligence Principle in Ensuring Civil Remedies for Human Rights Violations Simon S. Condro Kitono; Dedy Ardian Prasetyo; Supaphorn Akkapin
PENA LAW: International Journal of Law Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): May
Publisher : Yayasan Pusat Cendekiawan Intelektual Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56107/penalaw.v4i1.284

Abstract

The right to civil redress is a central pillar of reparative justice for victims of human rights violations. Although international legal instruments, such as the United Nations Basic Principles on the Right to Remedies and Reparation, affirm states’ obligation to guarantee this right, many have failed to establish mechanisms that are effective and accessible to victims. This article conceptualizes the principle of due diligence as a binding international legal standard that obliges states to prevent and respond to human rights violations and ensure the availability of accessible and enforceable civil restitution. Employing a normative legal method and a comparative case study of Argentina, Germany, and Indonesia, the analysis demonstrates that civil restitution remains the most fragile dimension of state accountability frameworks, with reparations frequently regarded as discretionary policies rather than legal mandates. To address this gap, this study advances a set of normative indicators for assessing states’ compliance with their reparation obligations. The findings highlight the imperative of embedding the principle of due diligence within national legal systems as a concrete legal obligation, thereby advancing victim-centered justice.
Bridging Constitutional Regulations and International Standards in Political Finance: Preventing Electoral Corruption from a Comparative Perspective: Bridging Constitutional Regulations and International Standards in Political Finance: Preventing Electoral Corruption from a Comparative Perspective Mad Romli; Indah Riyanti; Supaphorn Akkapin
PENA LAW: International Journal of Law Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): May
Publisher : Yayasan Pusat Cendekiawan Intelektual Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56107/penalaw.v4i1.291

Abstract

Electoral corruption triggered by opaque political financing systems poses a serious threat to democratic integrity in many countries. Although international legal instruments such as UNCAC and GRECO guidelines have established principles of transparency and accountability, many national constitutions have not effectively adopted these norms. This study analyzes the normative and institutional gaps between constitutional regulations and international standards in political financing in five jurisdictions: Indonesia, Germany, the United States, Brazil, and South Korea. Using a legal-normative approach and comparative law methods, it finds that the absence of constitutional recognition of political financing principles weakens the effectiveness of oversight and opens space for systemic electoral corruption. This article contributes to the global discourse by proposing a hybrid legal model that combines constitutional transparency mandates, the independence of oversight institutions, and public accountability mechanisms. This study encourages the harmonization of national political financing regimes with international anti-corruption frameworks to strengthen democratic legitimacy and governance.
Mediation in Medical Disputes as a Pathway to Substantive Justice: Reframing Global Health Law through Human-Centered Dispute Resolution: Mediation in Medical Disputes as a Pathway to Substantive Justice: Reframing Global Health Law through Human-Centered Dispute Resolution Raymond Nadeak; Risma Situmorang; Supaphorn Akkapin
PENA LAW: International Journal of Law Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): May
Publisher : Yayasan Pusat Cendekiawan Intelektual Nusantara

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56107/penalaw.v4i1.293

Abstract

Medical disputes are increasingly common worldwide as patients become more aware of their rights and healthcare providers face stricter professional standards. Conventional litigation, while ensuring procedural justice, often fails to address the ethical, moral, and psychological aspects of medical conflicts. This research highlights a key gap in the literature: the limited recognition of mediation not just as a cost-effective alternative but as a tool for achieving substantive justice. Using a qualitative normative approach, this study combines doctrinal and comparative analyses. Findings show that mediation resolves disputes more efficiently than litigation and at much lower costs. Beyond efficiency, mediation improves access and delivers substantive justice by addressing patients’ emotional needs, rebuilding trust, and maintaining professional integrity. However, challenges still exist, including limited legal recognition of mediation outcomes, a shortage of specialized mediators, and cultural resistance favoring litigation. This study contributes theoretically by reframing mediation as a justice-oriented process aligned with restorative justice and practically by offering policy suggestions to strengthen mediation’s legitimacy and institutional role in global health governance. Therefore, mediation should be recognized not only as an alternative procedure but as a key instrument for substantive justice within international health law.