Padjadjaran Journal of International Law
Padjadjaran Journal of International Law (PJIL) is a peer-reviewed international law journal published by the Department International Law, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran. PJIL publishes its articles annually every January. The articles published by PJIL are scientific articles that explain a research result and analytical review in the field of international law.
Articles
109 Documents
<![CDATA[MEMBERSHIP STATUS OF TIMOR LESTE IN ASEAN BASED ON ASEAN CHARTER 2007: PROBLEM AND PROSPECT ]]>
<![CDATA[Rifqi Mahardika Putra]]>;
<![CDATA[Calvina Chaeria Ramadhany]]>;
<![CDATA[Sofiyanti Salsabila]]>
<![CDATA[ Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 5 No. 2 (2021): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 5, Number 2, June 2021 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v5i2.796
<![CDATA[As the youngest country in Southeast Asia, Timor Leste realizes that becoming a member of ASEAN is important, and even the Timor Leste government says joining ASEAN is a priority for the country. Following up on its seriousness, in 2011, Timor Leste officially submitted an application to become a member of ASEAN, but 11 years later, the application has not yet been approved. Based on this background, this study was conducted to determine the current status of Timor Leste's membership in ASEAN based on the ASEAN Charter 2007 and to find out what hinders Timor Leste's acceptance as a member of ASEAN and how the prospects for Timor Leste's membership in ASEAN in the future. The results of this study show that first, in terms of Article 6 paragraph 2 of the ASEAN Charter, Timor Leste's membership status in ASEAN has not been ratified because Timor Leste has not fulfilled all the requirements contained in the article so currently, it is still a non-member observer country. Second, the thing that hinders Timor Leste's acceptance as a member of ASEAN is the use of a rigid and absolute consensus as well as the growing era which makes ASEAN countries increasingly see many factors to accept Timor Leste, then seen from Timor Leste's economic growth which is the slowest in Southeast Asia and one of the poorest countries in the world makes the authors feel that Timor Leste's membership status in ASEAN will not be accepted in the near future.]]>
<![CDATA[Re-examining Indonesia’s Nickel Export Ban: Does it Violate the Prohibition to Quantitative Restriction? ]]>
<![CDATA[Yetty Dewi]]>;
<![CDATA[Mikaila Jessy Azzahra]]>
<![CDATA[ Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 6 No. 2 (2022): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 6, Number 2, Juni 2022 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v6i2.797
<![CDATA[The fundamental principles adopted by the WTO are free trade and trade liberalization, realized through the reduction of trade barriers like quantitative restrictions. This paper examines the parameters of a measure that can be construed as a quantitative restriction in violation of WTO law. It also examines whether Indonesia’s measures in prohibiting the export of nickel ores and imposing domestic processing requirements violate WTO law. The statutory and case study approaches were used to determine and analyze Indonesia’s measures. The parameter for quantitative restriction is imposed in Article XI: I of the GATT 1994. The parameter warrants that a measure shall be in the form of prohibitions or restrictions apart from duties, taxes, or charges. The measure must also be enacted through quotas, import or export licenses, or other measures such as import or export prohibitions. Finally, the nature of the measure must be limited in amounts. However, a measure that fulfills such parameters may not violate WTO law if it is justified under exclusionary articles under the GATT 1994. The paper concludes that Indonesia’s measures above constitute quantitative restrictions, as they fulfill the parameters above. However, there is a possibility that the measures may not violate WTO law. This is because the measures also fulfil the parameters of justifications under Article XX (g) of the GATT 1994 on general exceptions and to a lesser extent under Article XI: (2)(a) of the GATT 1994 on the exception to quantitative restrictions.]]>
<![CDATA[PARTICIPATION OF NON-PARTY STAKEHOLDERS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PARIS AGREEMENT TOWARDS COP26 ]]>
<![CDATA[Kimp Yustisiana Dewinta Hermawan]]>
<![CDATA[ Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 5 No. 2 (2021): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 5, Number 2, June 2021 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v5i2.800
<![CDATA[This article deals with the participation of Non-party Stakeholders (NPS) in implementing the Paris Agreement. Paris Agreement is an agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) signed in 2016. The 26th Conference of the Parties (COP26) has been delayed due to pandemics and will be conducted in November 2022 in Glasgow. However, the member states have not showcased any progress in its implementation. The method of this research is normative-analytical. Despite the roles of NPS are enhanced compared to its arrangement in Kyoto Protocol, the target of the Paris Agreement is not on track where there are member states who have not submitted their updated Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). Hence, the upcoming COP26 is expected to result progressive advancement of member states towards the implementation of Paris Agreement. The enhancement of Non-Party Stakeholders’ participation is deemed as a crucial factor in achieving the Paris Agreement’s goals. In this article, I argue that even if the agreement does not directly bind NPS, the participation of NPS can be realized and enhanced to advance the achievement of Paris Agreement’s goals, especially towards COP26 through national legislations of the member states that obliged NPS to cooperate and participate actively. Thus, the principle of cooperation is also applicable towards NPS.]]>
<![CDATA[IS THE AICHR AN UNWANTED HUMAN RIGHTS BODY IN THE ASEAN? THE ANSWER FROM THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONAL LAW PERSPECTIVE ]]>
<![CDATA[Rachminawati]]>
<![CDATA[ Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 6 No. 1 (2022): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 6, Number 1, January 2022 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v6i1.814
<![CDATA[The AICHR is a remarkable achievements of ASEAN after having the ASEAN Charter in 2007. However, since the TOR of AICHR has a serious institutional defect that makes the AICHR unable to protect peoples’ human rights, the AICHR could not be act as a human rights guardian in the region. It leads to the question whether the ASEAN and its member states want the body to be established to protect the people in the region? The answer to this question is important to figure out the future human rights mechanisms in the region. The question will be addressed through qualitative and normative legal research. Field research was conducted to resolve some questions that are not provided in the literature to enrich the understanding on the topic from the ASEAN elites, practioner, and academicians. It finds that The institutional defect and less political support showed that ASEAN and its member states do not want to have a reliable regional human rights mechanism. However, it finds that there was an evolutionary approach that has been conducted by the AICHR despite that situation to promote human rights in the region. The study suggests the AICHR to use strong words of the TOR and the ASEAN Charter to enhance their performance and reliability. A new approach for human rights mechanisms that sets in a formal way; under a legal-binding instrument are more favorable. Therefore, if the AICHR show that characteristic, it will be supported by the ASEAN and its member states.]]>
<![CDATA[THE PROSPECT OF INTERPLANETARY MISSION: ARE WE READY? ]]>
<![CDATA[Taufik Rachmat Nugraha]]>
<![CDATA[ Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 6 No. 1 (2022): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 6, Number 1, January 2022 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v6i1.821
<![CDATA[Mars exploration missions in the future will be focused on Mars Sample Return (MSR) and humans as space crew in late 2028 or early 2030 by NASA and other non-government entities, such as Space Exploration Technologies (Space X) and Blue Origin. MSR and sending humans to explore Mars raises environmental contamination issues, which are governed in law by Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty 1968 to “avoid harmful contamination.” Though there is no existing international law instrument to address this issue comprehensively, Article IX was not clear to explain harmful contamination. Thus, non-governmental entities involved in future missions to Mars face liability, especially in the case of an accident causing fatalities or adverse environmental impact for the Earth and Mars. This article examines related regulations in corpus iuris spatialis, including soft law and elaborating with astrobiological data to encourage new regulation, ensuring liability and environmental safety on future Mars missions.]]>
<![CDATA[THE UNITED NATIONS TRUSTEESHIP COUNCIL AND THE TRUSTEESHIP SYSTEM: JUSTIFICATIONS FOR REVIVAL AND LEGAL OBSTACLES ]]>
<![CDATA[Ahmad Risyad Sumartapraja]]>
<![CDATA[ Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 5 No. 2 (2021): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 5, Number 2, June 2021 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v5i2.885
<![CDATA[The Trusteeship Council as a principle organ of the United Nations has its functions to supervise territories in the United Nations Trusteeship system. However, since 1994, the Trusteeship Council had been inactive. This does not heed to its history, where the Council had helped 11 trust territories in gaining independence. Interestingly, a handful of thee territories that had been assisted by the Council had in recent years encountered problems especially in its own governance systems. Those States had lost its capacity to govern itself, not able to withstand internal and external pressures of the modern world. Aside from former trust territorieas, there had been many instances of other States experiencing instability, that could be forwarded as to be included in the job description of the Trusteeship Council. A revival seems to befit the Council, taking into account recent development. Nonetheless, a litany legal and political hurdles must be passed before the Council could rise once again.]]>
<![CDATA[Indonesia’s Approach to International Treaties: Balancing National Interests and International Obligations ]]>
<![CDATA[Atip Latipulhayat]]>;
<![CDATA[Susi Dwi Harijanti]]>
<![CDATA[ Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 6 No. 2 (2022): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 6, Number 2, Juni 2022 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v6i2.915
<![CDATA[The relation and interaction between international and domestic law is one of the classic issues in international and it controversy remains in the realm of theory and practice. This is an issue of which many generations of both international and constitutional lawyers have wrestled, are wrestling and will continue to wrestle. For the Indonesian context, this issue is also still far from clear. The Indonesian Constitution of 1945 stipulates that the President of the Republic of Indonesia has the authority to conclude treaties with other countries. However, it does not clearly and specifically govern the status and position of international treaties under the Constitution. As a result, the Indonesian approach to international treaty is rather pragmatic, which is susceptible to some inconsistencies. It can be seen for instance in several decisions of the Indonesian Constitutional Court that clearly demonstrates the ambiguity towards international treaty. The Indonesian Parliament (DPR) argues that Indonesia should put emphasize to the national interests when Indonesia concluded international treaties. For a certain extent this approach is vulnerable to disregard international obligations in the name of national interests. There are some legislation for instance in the field of trade, which contains national interests clause that potentially will put Indonesia as the party that disregards its international obligations. This paper argues that national interests and international obligations are mutually inclusive, and not mutually exclusive element. To this end, international treaties should have a clear status and position under the Indonesian constitution to ensure that national interest and international obligation are working in harmony.]]>
<![CDATA[THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY OF WARSHIPS TO UNMANNED UNDERWATER VEHICLES (UUV) UNDER LAW OF THE SEA ]]>
<![CDATA[Naomi Catherine Felencia]]>;
<![CDATA[R. Achmad Gusman Catur Siswandi]]>;
<![CDATA[Imam Mulyana]]>
<![CDATA[ Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 6 No. 1 (2022): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 6, Number 1, January 2022 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v6i1.954
<![CDATA[Along with the times, there have been advances in marine technology which includes Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUV). Some countries have started using UUVs for both commercial and military marine activities since UUVs have several advantages that ordinary ships do not have. However, the development and application of UUVs for marine purposes raises numerous problems since there isn’t clear regulation regarding UUV. Current legal instruments only explain the meaning of ship without classifying the type of ship itself. It raises a problem since it led to different interpretations between countries and the determination of legal rules for UUV. One incident related to UUV technology can be seen from the Bowditch incident where from this incident there are differences in interpretation on the classification of UUV between America and Tiongkok. Other incidents can also be seen from the entry of foreign UUVs into Indonesia waters for research purposes. From several incidents, there are main issues to the classification of UUVs which are connected to warships and their military activities. The classification of UUVs as merchant ships or warships is necessary considering that the rights of immunity owned by warships will affect the legal status of UUVs and their activities. Regulations that are still ambiguous will affect the Coastal State’s actions if there are foreign UUVs entering their sea areas, especially if the UUVs are used for military activities. Therefore, it is necessary to have clear regulations regarding UUVs including their classification and determine marine activities that allowed for the use of UUVs.]]>
<![CDATA[INDONESIAN LEGAL PERSPECTIVES ON INTERNATIONAL MARITIME TRANSPORT OF ULTRAHAZARDOUS RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS AT SEA ]]>
<![CDATA[Ratu Rikfi Ismuha]]>;
<![CDATA[Garry Gumelar Pratama]]>
<![CDATA[ Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 5 No. 2 (2021): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 5, Number 2, June 2021 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v5i2.991
<![CDATA[In 1992, the voyage of the Akatsuki Maru from France to Japan showed the practice in the sea transport of ultrahazardous radioactive materials. The voyage route was nearly around one-half of the planet earth and passed through many countries. Although many countries have openly protested, the vessel has continued because the ship has international navigational rights under UNCLOS 1982. This paper attempts to research international regulations concerning the legal regime governing safety in the sea transport of ultrahazardous radioactive materials in UNCLOS 1982, MARPOL 73/78, SOLAS 1974, PPNM 1980, SCTW 1978, and Indonesia’s national laws and regulations concerning this matter. This research uses normative approach and analysis descriptive methods that is based on international conventions, Indonesia’s national laws and regulations related to the safety of ultrahazardous radioactive materials shipment. The result of this research shows that the legal regime governing safety in the sea transport of ultrahazardous radioactive materials is not yet adequate, because it is partially regulated. However, Indonesia has attempted to harmonize international regulations and Indonesia’s national laws concerning the safety navigation of transport of ultrahazardous radioactive materials.]]>
<![CDATA[POTENTIAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSBOUNDARY HARM CAUSED BY GENETIC MODIFIED ORGANISM AS MECHANISM FOR BIOREMEDIATION: A CASE STUDY IN CORAL TRIANGLE BIODIVERSITY HOTSPOT ]]>
<![CDATA[Rahmadhitya M Putra]]>
<![CDATA[ Padjadjaran Journal of International Law Vol. 6 No. 1 (2022): Padjadjaran Journal of International Law, Volume 6, Number 1, January 2022 ]]>
Publisher : <![CDATA[International Law Department, Faculty of Law Universitas Padjadjaran ]]>
Show Abstract
|
Download Original
|
Original Source
|
Check in Google Scholar
|
DOI: 10.23920/pjil.v6i1.992
<![CDATA[Biotechnology was introduced to the world of industries in the early 2000s. Its profound impact has continued shaping the mechanism of environmental clean-up. The development of biotechnology has received a wide variety of attention. Hence, bioremediation becomes integral to the notion of sustainability for environment quality. Especially, within oil & gas sector the damage can be substantial towards the environment longevity. Specifically, one of the most monumental in terms of potential harm is offshore oil & gas operations. On the other hand, the sophistication within oil & gas sector has become a rapid development over the last few years. It’s based on fact the oil & gas ought to be drilled deeper within the ocean floor. As the depth of drilling increase, so does the complexity of the oil composition. With this, regular bioremediation mechanism might not be able to handle the structural chemical complexity. Thus, a genetic modification appeared as the most efficient effort to reduce environmental damage and strike out the oil chemical complexity. However, it’s easier said than done. This because ethically, the modification potentially could harm the natural environment. Not just nationally but also transboundary. Therefore, the issue also discusses a new area of multidisciplinary approach where expected law meets an unprecedented amount of scientific efficiency.]]>
