cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Akbar Kurnia
Contact Email
akbarkurnia@unja.ac.id
Phone
+6282111131311
Journal Mail Official
uti_possidetis@unja.ac.id
Editorial Address
Universitas Jambi, Faculty of Law Jl. Lintas Jambi - Ma. Bulian KM. 15, Mendalo Darat, Jambi Luar Kota, Muaro Jambi, Jambi, Indonesia 36122
Location
Kota jambi,
Jambi
INDONESIA
Uti Possidetis: Journal of International Law
Published by Universitas Jambi
ISSN : 27218031     EISSN : 27218333     DOI : https://doi.org/10.36565/up
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
Uti Possidetis: Journal of International Law is a peer-reviewed journal published by the Faculty of Law Universitas Jambi. It aims primarily to compile innovative research in the studies of International Law, facilitates professional discussion of the current developmnetas on international legal issues and is intended to build the interest of Indonesian scholars and decision makers on the important roles of International Law
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 115 Documents
 8   9   10   11   12 
Preventing Investment Treaty Violations during Political Crises: Lessons from De Sutter v. Madagascar (II) Case Manitra, Ramalina Ranaivo Mikea; Fenitra, Rakotoarisoa Maminirina; Brico, Randrianasolo Tsanganasy
Uti Possidetis: Journal of International Law Vol 7 No 3 (2026): Oktober
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Jambi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.22437/nb08zp53

Abstract

Background: Political crises often expose structural weaknesses in State governance, raising critical questions about the extent of State responsibility under international investment treaty law, particularly in ensuring Full Protection and Security (FPS) for foreign investors. The De Sutter v. Madagascar (II) case provides a relevant context to reassess how domestic political instability interacts with legal obligations of Host State. Methodology: This study employs a doctrinal legal research method using a case study approach centred on the De Sutter v. Madagascar (II) award and a conceptual approach based on the doctrines of due diligence, FPS, and State responsibility. Objectives: The paper aims to explain how State responsibility operates during political crises and to develop practical pathways for future prevention of investment treaty violations through strengthened legal and institutional frameworks. Findings: The analysis shows that political instability does not reduce international obligations but increases the expectation of vigilance, preparedness, and coordinated State action. Liability arises primarily from the failure to anticipate and respond to foreseeable risks. At the same time, the study identifies preventive measures, including early warning mechanisms, institutional coordination, and post-crisis judicial integrity, as essential tools to minimise future violations. Originality/Novelty: This research proposes a clear preventive action of State responsibility by integrating a context-sensitive due diligence standard with concrete institutional reforms, offering a focused framework for managing recurring political instability.
Beyond Territoriality: Jurisdiction, Accountability, and Human Rights in Algoritmic Governance Syafri Hariansah; Gussman, Angga Aldilla; Amsyah, Ainulisa; Qhistina, Laila
Uti Possidetis: Journal of International Law Vol 7 No 3 (2026): Oktober
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Jambi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.22437/q8zks556

Abstract

Background: The evolution of algorithmic governance has created an operational gap regarding the application of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to decision-making systems. This gap does not reflect a structural inadequacy of the ICCPR; rather, it highlights the need to translate the treaty’s guarantee specifically regarding privacy (Article 17), freedom of expression (Article 19), effective remedy (Article 2(3)), and fair procedure (Article 14) into international legal standards for algorithmic governance. Methodology: This research employs a normative legal method with doctrinal and prescriptive approaches, examining ICCPR obligations through comparative case studies of Robodebt (Australia), SyRI (the Netherlands), and Indonesian practices (DTKS, IKD, and SSCASN). Objectives: This study analyzes the application of ICCPR guarantees within algorithmic governance to develop a doctrinal operational framework for the digital legal order, aiming to ensure the effectiveness of these guarantees through doctrinal expansion and interpretive adaptation. FindingsResearch indicates that the primary issue lies not in any normative inadequacy of the ICCPR, but rather in the absence of concrete procedural and institutional standards for its implementation within an algorithmic context. Domestic algorithmic systems give rise to compliance failures regarding transparency, explainability, contestability, and effective remedy. Meanwhile, the governance of cross-border platforms introduces jurisdictional complexities under Article 2(1), potentially revealing protection gaps between a state's territory and the jurisdiction where a platform is incorporated. Novelty: This research introduces a digital legal order as a framework for prescriptive harmonization based on functional jurisdiction, shared responsibility, and algorithmic due process. Its contribution lies in operationalizing ICCPR obligations into applicable international standards—encompassing the designation of authority, individual explanation, meaningful contestation, substantive review, auditability, and reasoned redress—thereby advancing the doctrinal development of international human rights law in response to digital transformation
Legitimate Interests Under the GDPR and International Human Rights Law: A Proportionality Critique Ilmi, Febrida Himni; Najwan, Johni; Putra, Akbar Kurnia
Uti Possidetis: Journal of International Law Vol 7 No 3 (2026): Oktober
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Jambi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.22437/jfbbec84

Abstract

Background: The concept of legitimate interests as a basis for the lawful processing of personal data occupies a unique and vulnerable position in international data protection law. The GDPR formally adopts this concept under Article 6(1)(f); however, its operationalization raises fundamental questions regarding the adequacy of the doctrine of proportionality in protecting informational self-determination as a human right under Article 17 of the ICCPR and regional human rights instruments. Methodology: This article employs a normative juridical method integrating international human rights law analysis, the doctrine of proportionality, comparative legal analysis, and doctrinal analysis of judicial decisions. Purpose: This study critically examines whether the formal proportionality model underlying the legitimate interests framework in the GDPR can protect fundamental rights under conditions of radical informational asymmetry, surveillance capitalism, and data colonialism that characterize the global digital economy. Findings: The analysis shows that the GDPR proportionality model, although sophisticated, contains structural weaknesses when applied to diverse socio-economic contexts. The proposed framework consists of a mandatory three-step test, a Legitimate Interests Assessment (LIA), an anti-catch-all doctrine, and an allocation of the burden of proof based on international human rights law. Originality/Novelty: This article advances three arguments: first, the normative uncertainty of the GDPR legitimate interests clause challenges its adequacy as an international model; second, the transplantation of a proportionality-based balancing model without adequate institutional prerequisites risks creating accountability gaps; third, in the context of surveillance capitalism as data colonialism, a rights-first proportionality framework is required.
Addressing the Gap in International Criminal Liability through Layered Accountability and Algoritmic Sanctions for Autonomous AI Fransisco, Wawan; Hafrida, Hafrida; Kusniati, Retno; Akbar, Muhamad
Uti Possidetis: Journal of International Law Vol 7 No 3 (2026): Oktober
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Jambi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.22437/75fr5372

Abstract

Background: Autonomous AI poses a challenge to international criminal law because liability based on human actus reus and mens rea is no longer sufficient to address crimes involving AI. Objective: This study aims to analyze and reconstruct the framework of international criminal accountability for crimes involving autonomous AI by examining the principles of ethics, accountability, and AI regulation in international and regional instruments, and their implications for attribution and criminal liability under international criminal law. Methodology: This study employs a normative legal research approach, incorporating conceptual, statutory, comparative, and international-law perspectives to analyze the framework governing criminal liability for international crimes involving autonomous AI. Findings: The analysis shows that accountability for international crimes involving autonomous AI requires developing the concept of corporate liability, attributing responsibility to the relevant human actors, and imposing unconventional sanctions to prevent and control AI behavior. Originality/Uniqueness: This study proposes a risk-based, layered accountability model to address the responsibility gap in international crimes involving autonomous AI by attributing responsibility to human actors and applying unconventional sanctions.
Dari Konservasi ke Komodifikasi? Analisis Komparatif Tata Kelola Perikanan Berbasis Kuota di Indonesia, Islandia, dan Selandia Baru Arafat, Yasser; Handayani, I Gusti Ayu Ketut Rachmi; Karjoko, Lego
Uti Possidetis: Journal of International Law Vol 7 No 3 (2026): Oktober
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Jambi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.22437/12a0dn73

Abstract

Background: Quota-based fisheries management aims to reconcile stock conservation with efficient access, yet harvesting entitlements may evolve from public allocations into asset-like interests. International lawof the Sea provides conservation frameworks but does not mandate private rights or quota markets. MethodologyThis research employs a qualitative doctrinal-comparative design, combining doctrinal interpretation, content analysis, comparative matrices, and process tracing across UNCLOS 1982, UNFSA 1995, national legislation, policy documents, and literature. Objectives: This study examines how international obligations and domestic legal choices regulate the transformation of harvesting rights from conservation instruments into commodity-like economic interests in Indonesia, Iceland, and New Zealand, and identifies regulatory safeguards for Indonesia's Measured Fishing Policy.  Findings: UNCLOS and UNFSA require science-based conservation, precaution, cooperation, monitoring, and adaptive adjustment, but do not mandate private ownership, transferability, or quota markets. Commodification develops cumulatively through domestic choices concerning exclusivity, security, duration, divisibility, leasing, transferability, capitalisation, and concentration. Iceland and New Zealand demonstrate stronger legal and market commodification while retaining formal public authority over catch limits. Indonesia remains closer to an administrative allocation model, although unequal access to capital, information, infrastructure, contracts, and bureaucratic capacity may generate functional commodification. The Conservation-Commodification Continuum framework shows that each country's position depends on the balance between rights strength, market intensity, access and rent distribution, and State corrective capacity. Originality/Novelty: This research develops the Conservation-Commodification Continuum as a multidimensional diagnostic framework integrating international law, property-rights analysis, common-pool resource governance, and Blue Justice. Its theoretical contribution connects international normative dimensions with domestic institutional choices and distributive effects. Its practical contribution formulates conditional, reviewable, transparent, and socially protective regulatory safeguards for Indonesia's Measured Fishing Policy.

Page 12 of 12 | Total Record : 115

 8   9   10   11   12 

Filter by Year

2020 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol 7 No 3 (2026): Oktober Vol 7 No 2 (2026): Juni Vol 7 No 1 (2026): Februari Vol 6 No 3 (2025): Oktober Vol 6 No 2 (2025): Juni Vol 6 No 1 (2025): Februari Vol 5 No 3 (2024): Oktober Vol 5 No 2 (2024): Juni Vol 5 No 1 (2024): Februari Vol 4 No 3 (2023): Oktober Vol 4 No 2 (2023): Juni Vol 4 No 1 (2023) Vol 3 No 3 (2022) Vol 3 No 2 (2022) Vol 3 No 1 (2022) Vol 2 No 3 (2021) Vol 2 No 2 (2021) Vol 2 No 1 (2021) Vol 1 No 3 (2020) Vol 1 No 2 (2020) Vol 1 No 1 (2020) More Issue