Indonesian Journal of International Law
Not a member yet
636 research outputs found
Sort by
The Heterogeneous of State and State Governance: Case of Indonesian Irregular Migrants in the Netherlands
Full text linkThe core of issues of Indonesian migrant workers abroad lies mostly at the phase of pre-departure. One of most issues is on the administration of processing the travel document. Many migrant workers use false documents or false data on their passport. This has existed for years. From the bigger picture, this occurs because the level of corruption within the immigration office is still high. However, the problematic issues of documents and working abroad are not only the responsibility of the immigration department. The other departments such as BNP2TKI (National Body for the Placement and Protection of Indonesian Overseas Workers) and the Ministry of Manpower are also responsible because they are the bodies that establish the regulations and procedures for workers to work abroad. In addition to this, the Department of Foreign affairs, which accommodates and oversees all Indonesian embassies and consulates abroad, also plays a role concerning the legal and political protection of Indonesian citizens. The embassies or consulate consist of officials from many departments (immigration department, department of education and cultural affairs, etc.), and they are not only responsible to the ambassador but also their departments in Indonesia. The lack of integrated legal understanding between these four departments and the imbalance of work between them could be the factors of the issues related to the rights of migrant workers. The heterogeneity of the state above and the state governance happens not only in Indonesia but also in the destination country and migrant workers should deal with two systems of legal governance which also experience transformations through time. This paper will discuss the impact of the heterogeneous state and state governance to Indonesian migrant workers in the Netherlands and how the migrants themselves navigate with these two systems
Law Enforcement over Fishery Activities in Contested EEZs
Full text linkThe Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) was introduced with the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. In the vast waters extending from the baselines to 200 nautical miles, the Convention allows coastal States to enjoy sovereign rights over―fishing resources but has created delimitation issues with neighboring States. Law enforcement is vital to maintain fishery order for sustainable utilization of resources in EEZs, even in the contested maritime zones. Therefore, in this paper, the mechanism of law enforcement in the complicated contested maritime zone is described, taking the Japan-China Fisheries Agreement as an example of a possible practical solution
Maintaining Freedom of Navigation and Overflight in the Exclusive Economic Zone and on the High Seas
Full text linkEfforts to expand coastal State jurisdiction to include security jurisdiction in the EEZ were soundly rejected by a majority of the nations that participated in the UNCLOS negotiations The delegates present achieved consensus on provisions that accommodate the resource interests of the coastal State in the EEZ without diminishing user State interests in freedom of navigation and other internationally lawful uses of the sea in the zone. Continued efforts by some States to reinterpret the Convention to unilaterally and unlawfully advance their national interests in the EEZ impinge on traditional uses of the oceans by all States and are inconsistent with international law, long-standing state practice and the intent and negotiating history of UNCLOS. If these efforts succeed, the Convention will unravel over time and the international community will once again be plagued by a new wave of excessive maritime claims. Coastal State competency in the EEZ is strictly limited to resource rights, jurisdiction over resource-related offshore installations and structures, marine scientific research, and protection of the marine environment. Coastal States do not retain security jurisdiction in the EEZ, and may not regulate lawful military activities in the EEZ that are consistent with the UN Charter, UNCLOS, the Chicago Convention, and other relevant international law instruments. The creation of the EEZ was a package deal—coastal States were granted exclusive resource rights and user States retained the high seas freedoms of navigation and overflight, and other lawful uses of the seas associated with those freedoms, which have always applied beyond the territorial sea
THE NECESSITY TO REFORM INDONESIAN LEGAL FRAMEWORK ON PROVISIONAL ARRANGEMENT TO COMBAT IUU FISHING
Full text linkIndonesia has not yet concluded its maritime boundaries with neighbouring countries. Incidents often occur including Illegal Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (IUU) Fishing conducted by fishers from neighboring countries. In fact, their actions are sometimes backed by their /coast guard. Maritime delimitation is the final goal that must be achieved to provide legal certainty over the territory and Exclusive Economic Zone of Indonesia and its neighbours. However, achieving that goal is never been easy. Article 74(3) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982 determines joint or provisional arrangements between disputing countries as temporary solution before reaching agreement on delimitation in EEZ. Indonesia must utilize and optimize this provision in order to combat the IUU Fishing, to protect fisheries resources and to support in achieving maritime boundary delimitation. The state already has the relevant legal and institutional framework to implement the provisional arrangement and, once, had a provisional arrangement with Australia decades ago although in the field of hydrocarbon. The arrangement was deemed as the most prominent one at that time. The experience of other countries in implementing of provisional arrangement in combating IIU Fishing, protecting the resources and achieving maritime delimitation might encourage Indonesia to utilize and optimize provisional arrangements in disputed areas
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Challenges of Policy Reform on Asset Recovery in Indonesia
Full text linkAbsence of umbrella regulation on asset recovery is not the only challenge for effective enforcement of asset recovery and mutual legal assistance in Indonesia. Contradictory legislations, poor interagency coordination, weak capacity of law enforcement personnel and absence of center of excellence on asset recovery and mutual legal assistance are other contributing elements. Similarly, Indonesia’s commitment to fulfill the targets of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), especially goal 16.4, has not been met with concrete efforts. The government is hesitant to commit itself on national indicator for SDG 16.4. on asset recovery. This was shown during the two years of Kemitraan’s program to strengthen asset recovery and mutual legal assistance (SIGAP).This paper seeks to provide descriptive analysis on the results of SIGAP by posing a question on how does a development program on asset recovery in Indonesia supported by international donor contribute to overcome Indonesia’s legal and institutional challenges on asset recovery amidst Indonesia’s global commitment to SDGs. As evidenced, SIGAP exemplifies collaborative actions between various actors, state and none-state actors and national and international agencies, to increase the effectiveness of asset recovery and mutual legal assistance and policy reform needed for long term sustainability strategy in Indonesia. On SDGs, SIGAP’s decision to propose the adoption of existing national indicator on Long Term National Plan on Anti-Corruption is a deliberate and calculated decision to push for stronger commitment of Indonesian government in achieving the SDGs. The strategy indicated that by 2025, 96% of asset from corruption crimes is recovered
Facility Security Measures at Ujung Jabung Port: a Review in Terms of The International Ship and Port Facility Security Code
Full text linkUjung Jabung is a region located in the District of Sadu at Tanjung Jabung Regency, Jambi Province, Indonesia. The area strategically lies in the Indonesian Archipelagic Sea Lane 1 (ALKI 1), which is the international trading and shipping lane. It brings about an excellent opportunity for economic development in Jambi Province. With this in mind, the Government of Jambi develops the region into a strategic area that includes Ujung Jabung Port. Based on the 2011-2031 Region’s Spatial Plan (RTRW) of East Tanjung Jabung Regency, the regency designed it to be the main port with the name of Samudera Ujung Jabung Port. The international shipping routes at the port are Ujung Jabung-West Asia-East Europe and Ujung Jabung-Southeast Asia-East Asia. Due to its international nature, the construction of Samudera Ujung Jabung Port should follow the international measures on the security of the port, shipping, and facility. As a Member of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), Indonesia is subject to international law. It ratifies the United Nations Convention on Safety on Life at Sea (SOLAS) 1974 and the auxiliary instrument of International Ships and Port Facility Code (ISPS Code). Accordingly, the construction of Samudera Ujung Jabung Port should comply with the international safety standard as written in the ISPS Code
Legal Protection of Indonesian Citizens in Mixed-marriage with Rohingya Refugees
Full text linkThere are 14 marriages that occurred between the Rohingyas and Indonesian citizens carried out in 2017. Only nine of them were reported to the refugees handling agency. Some have been made before coming to Indonesia and some after arrival. These situations resulted in legality problems of the marriage and its implications. The right to marry is fundamental in the life of human and is protected as human rights. However, Indonesia is not a signatory to the Convention on the Status of Refugees 1951 and has no legal mechanism to govern their marriages. Consequently, life for both asylum seekers and refugees is a relentless struggle and one of the significant challenges for them is in the area of marriage and family. This paper will discuss how Indonesian private international law provisions and the marriage law accommodate and protect the rights to marry stateless refugees in Indonesia. This paper primarily discusses the legal status of stateless persons and refugees amidst the lacuna in Indonesia. Noting the shift from the principle of nationality evident in case laws, this paper explores the possibility to use lex domicili as a surrogate connecting factor in determining the law applicable to stateless refugees’ personal status. In relation to marriage, subsequent validation (isbat nikah) could be the solution to ensure family unity. As the lack of valid documentation remains a challenge, the goodwill of the couple to enter into marriage and establish a family become the most important element
THE IMPACT OF POLITICAL DECISIONS WITHIN THE WTO DISPUTE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM: POLITICAL NEGOTIATIONS WITHIN ADJUDICATION
Full text linkIt is traditionally contended that politics and law are two separate domains of international relations among the main actors, states. As opposed to this thinking, international relations of the twenty-first century have been characterized by the continuing interaction of law and politics. As the main actors and participants in international law, states played and still play significant roles in this development. The growing sense of nationalism within states and the concomitant consequence of prioritizing their respective national interests led to the use, by these states, of international law as an instrument of justification. When international law is used this way, politics, and law inevitably confluence to serve the interests of those states with strong national objectives that they seek to achieve in any way possible. International trade has become very essential in international relations more than ever while it at the same time is affected by the political decisions of states at different levels. When the World Trade Organization was established (January 1, 1995), its first aim was to institutionalize the international trade relation among states so that more trade liberalization and integration would be achieved. It has been doing a remarkable job in working towards a more integrated world through its laws, systems, and institutions. The WTO Dispute Settlement System, with its establishing agreement (Dispute Settlement Understanding) and adjudicating bodies, is such a crucial system of the WTO with a good reputation in the past two decades. It has a complex procedure consisting of both political negotiation and adjudication in the judicial process. This paper limits itself to examining how political decisions by Member states within the WTO affect the WTO dispute settlement system’s progress to ‘judicialization’ of its adjudication process
International Protection of Cultural Heritage in Armed Conflict: Revisiting the Role of Safe Havens
Full text linkIn 2017, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2347, lauded as “a historic milestone” in the international struggle to safeguard cultural heritage in armed conflict. Among a wide spectrum of recommended actions, this instrument encourages the UN State Members to establish a network of “safe havens” in their own territories to protect cultural property, “while taking into account the cultural, geographic, and historic specificities of the cultural heritage in need of protection.” In this regard, Resolution 2347 makes explicit reference to the 2016 Abu Dhabi Declaration on heritage at risk in the context of armed conflicts, a Declaration which promotes the creation of a network of “safe havens” in the country of origin, and as a last resort in another country. This article discusses the international law framework of extraterritorial “safe havens” for cultural property. In particular, it analyses: 1) the legal notion of safe haven in international law documents; 2) the operationalisation of safe havens for endangered cultural property in the practice of states, analysing recent regulatory initiatives at the national level; and 3) safe havens in the global, multi-faceted governance of cultural heritage, examining the relevance of safe havens for peacekeeping operations and for the development of the UN doctrine of Responsibility to Protect
The Usage of Non-Nuclear Weapon in Outer Space: A Legal Outlook and Recent Developments
No full textOuter Space, as the area on which freedom of use is guaranteed by the Treaty, creates a condition in which nations conduct their military activities. These activities however, were only limited to those conducted using nuclear weapons and/or containing nuclear materials. The principle of Peaceful Uses of Outer Space has been proven inadequate to regulate these activities. This has resulted to launches of weapons to Outer Space to destroy satellites, as conducted by the United States and China. These launches, whatever the purposes are, may cause hazardous repercussion to other State’s activity in Outer Space. This article will comprehensively elaborate on related International Law and other measures which regulate military activities in Outer Space, especially on the launch of non-nuclear weaponry under any purposes. From these analyses, we can conclude that however inadequate the Outer Space Treaty article’s stipulation in the matter, there are other stipulations of international law that we can gather that regulates military activity in Outer Space