Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"ABSTRAKSkripsi ini membahas mengenai konsep pertanggungjawaban pidanadalam hukum pidana internasional dan secara spesifik membahaskonsep pertanggungjawaban individual yang diatur dalam Statuta Roma.Konsep pertanggungjawaban individual mulai dikenal dalam hukuminternasional moderen pada masa Perang Dunia II tepatnya dalamPeradilan Nuremberg, dengan menghukum individu atas kejahataninternasional. Konsep ini selanjutnya diterapkan di berbagai peradilanpidana internasional. dan mengalami perkembangan dengan munculnyakonsep pertanggungjawaban pimpinan dalam Peradilan Tokyo dankonsep Joint Criminal Enterprise dalam International Court for FormerYugoslavia (ICTY). Konsep pertanggungjawaban individual mengalamiperubahan ketika diterapkan dalam International Criminal Court (ICC)yang terlihat didalam putusan Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo.Dalam putusan tersebut, majelis hakim menyatakan bahwa ThomasLubanga Dyilo bersalah atas kejahatan perang dalam perekrutan tentaraanak dan bertanggung jawab secara individu atas dasar turut melakukan(co-perpetration).

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis analyzes the concept of criminal responsibility underinternational criminal law, specifically discusses the individual criminal responsibility under Rome Statute. Individual criminal responsibility was first applied during the Second World War, which was in the Nuremberg Trials. The concept punishes individual for International crimes. The concept of individual criminal responsibility was then applied in various international criminal tribunals, and has developed with the introduction of the concept of superior responsibility in International Military Tribunal for The Far East and the concept of joint criminal enterprise in International Criminal Tribunal for FormerYugoslavia. The concept of criminal responsibility has evolved in theInternational Criminal Court, as it can be seen in Prosecutor v. ThomasLubanga Dyilo Case. The trial chamber punished Thomas LubangaDyilo for the warcrime of recruiting child soldier under co-perpetration."

"This study discusses the jurisdiction of International Criminal Court, as the permanent criminal court whose jurisdiction covers international criminal acts, with regard to the conflict between Palestine and Israel in Gaza Strip. Palestine and Israel are often involved in a conflict in Gaza Strip, most notably in 2009 and 2012. The aftermath of the two conflicts suggested several indications of internatioanl criminal acts conducted by two States, however no measures have been taken thus far in response to such indications. On 1 April 2015, Palestine has officialy become the State Party of International Criminal Court. This raises the question of the possibility of International Criminal Court?s jurisdict ion over the two notable conflicts in Gaza Strip. The author concluded that International Criminal Court does not have jurisdiction over the conflict between Palestine and Israel in Gaza Strip.

---

Skripsi ini membahas mengenai yurisdiksi Mahkamah Pidana Internasional, sebagai pengadilan pidana permanen yang memiliki yurisdiksi terhadap tindak pidana internasional, atas konflik antara Palestina dan Israel di Jalur Gaza. Palestina dan Israel kerap terlibat dalam konflik bersenjata dalam wilayah Jalur Gaza, diantaranya pada tahun 2009 serta 2012. Dalam kedua periode konflik tersebut terdapat beberapa indikasi adanya tindak pidana internasional yang dilakukan oleh kedua negara, namun belum terdapat proses pengadilan apaun terkait dengan indikasi tersebut. Pada 1 April 2015, Palestina secara resmi telah menjadi negara anggota dari Mahkamah Pidana Internasional. Hal tersebut menimbulkan pertanyaan mengenai yurisdiksi Mahkamah Pidana Internasional terkait dengan konflik di Jalur Gaza yang melibatkan salah satu negara anggotanya tersebut. Penulis menyimpulkan bahwa hingga saat ini, Mahkamah Pidana Internasional belum memiliki yurisdiksi atas konflik antara Palestina dan Israel di Jalur Gaza."

"This is the authoritative introduction to the International Criminal Court, fully updated in this sixth edition. The book covers the legal framework of the Court, the cases that it has heard and that are still to come, and the political debates surrounding its operation. It is written by one of the major authorities on the subject, in language accessible to non-specialists. The sixth edition brings legal references fully up to date in light of the Court's case law. Several trials have now been completed, with four convictions and a number of controversial acquittals. The book also discusses the situations that the Court is currently investigating, including Palestine, Georgia, Ukraine, Venezuela and the UK in Iraq. It also looks into the crisis with African states and the hostility of the United States to the institution."

""This guide to the crime of aggression provisions under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) offers an exhaustive and sophisticated legal analysis of the crime's definition, as well as the jurisdictional provisions governing the ICC's exercise of jurisdiction over the crime. A range of practical issues likely to arise in prosecutions of the crime of aggression before the ICC are canvassed, as is the issue of the domestic prosecution of the crime. It also offers an insight into the geopolitical significance of the crime of aggression and the activation of the ICC's ability to exercise its jurisdiction over the crime. The author's intimate involvement in the crime's negotiations, combined with extensive scholarly reflection on the criminalisation of inter-State uses of armed force, makes this highly relevant to all academics and practitioners interested in the crime of aggression"--"

"Abstract:"The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court defines more than ninety crimes that fall within the Court's jurisdiction: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and aggression. How these crimes are interpreted contributes to findings of individual criminal liability, and moreover impacts upon the perceived legitimacy of the Court. And yet, to date, there is no agreed approach to interpreting these definitions. This book offers practitioners and scholars a guiding principle, arguments and aids necessary for the interpretation of international crimes. Leena Grover surveys the jurisprudence of the ICTY and ICTR before presenting a model of interpretive reasoning that integrates the guidance within the Rome Statute itself with articles 31-33 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties""

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai pengaruh dari Policy Paper on Sexual and Gender-Based Crimes 2014 terhadap penuntutan kejahatan seksual yang diadili di Mahkamah Pidana Internasional. Dalam penelitian ini juga akan dibahas secara kronologis terkait pengaturan dan penuntutan kejahatan seksual di pengadilan- pengadilan sebelum Mahkamah Pidana Internasional untuk melihat signifikansi dari setiap pengadilan dalam penuntutan kejahatan seksual. Kejahatan seksual pada International Military Tribunal of Nuremberg and Tokyo (IMT dan IMTFE) pada masa Perang Dunia II belum dianggap sebagai kejahatan yang terpisah dan hanya sebagai bagian dari “mass atrocities”. Perkembangan dan pengaturan juga kejahatan seksual dapat dilihat pada pengadilan pidana internasional yang dibentuk oleh Dewan Keamanan PBB yaitu ICTY, ICTR dan SCSL. Dengan berkembangnya pengaturan kejahatan seksual dalam pengadilan-pengadilan ini maka keberhasilan Penuntut Umum dalam membuktikan kejahatan seksual telah menghasilkan landmark cases seperti putusan Prosecutor v. Tadic yang merupakan keberhasilan pertama oleh Penuntut Umum dalam membuktikan kejahatan seksual. Namun, tidak ada kejahatan seksual yang berhasil dituntut di Mahkamah Pidana Internasional sebelum diterbitkannya Policy Paper on Sexual and Gender-Based Crimes 2014. Kasus pertama yang berhasil membuktikan kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan berupa kejahatan seksual adalah kasus Prosecutor v. Bemba setelah diterbitkan Policy Paper on Sexual and Gender Based Crimes 2014. Maka dari itu, penulis bertujuan untuk menjelaskan faktor- faktor dari ketidakberhasilan penuntutan kejahatan seksual di Mahkamah Pidana Internasional melalui kasus-kasus dan pengaruh Policy Paper on Sexual and Gender Based Crimes 2014 sebagai pedoman Penuntut Umum terhadap penuntutan kejahatan seksual di Mahkamah Pidana Internasional.

---

This thesis discusses the implementation of the Policy Paper on Sexual and Gender-Based Crimes 2014 on the prosecution of sexual crimes tried at the International Criminal Court. This study will also discuss chronologically regarding the regulation and prosecution of sexual crimes in courts before the International Criminal Court to see the significance of each court in prosecuting sexual crimes. Sexual crimes at the International Military Tribunal of Nuremberg and Tokyo (IMT and IMTFE) during World War II were not considered separate crimes and only as part of "mass atrocities". The development and regulation of sexual crimes can be seen in the international criminal courts established by the UN Security Council, namely ICTY, ICTR and SCSL. With the development of the regulation of sexual crimes in these courts, the success of the Public Prosecutor in proving sexual crimes has resulted in landmark cases such as the decision of Prosecutor v. Tadic which is the first success by the Public Prosecutor in proving a sexual crime. However, no sexual crimes were successfully prosecuted in the International Criminal Court prior to the publication of the 2014 Policy Paper on Sexual and Gender-Based Crimes. The first case that succeeded in proving crimes against humanity in the form of sexual crimes was the case of Prosecutor v. Bemba after the publication of the Policy Paper on Sexual and Gender Based Crimes 2014. Therefore, the author aims to explain the factors of the unsuccessful prosecution of sexual crimes at the International Criminal Court through cases and the influence of the 2014 Policy Paper on Sexual and Gender Based Crimes as the Public Prosecutor guide for the prosecution of sexual crimes at the International Criminal Court."

"Membandingkan Konvesi Roma mengenai ICC (International Criminal Court) dengan UU No. 26/2000 tentang Pengadilan Hak Asasi Manusia merupakan sualu langkah awal yang harm dilakukan apabila ada niat pemerintah unluk meratifikasi Kovensi Roma. Sebagai syarat utama meratifikasi Konvensi Roma adalah menghindari adanya sualu ketidaksesuaian antara hukum nasional yang berlaku dengan Kovensi Roma Negara mempunyai tanggung jawab untuk melakukan penuntutan dan menyelaraskan hukum pidana dan hukum acara pidananya sesuai dengan konvensi. Konvensi Roma menyatakan "No reservations may be made to this Statute". Namun dalam UU No. 26/2000 penyelasaran yang dilakukan secara parsial telah menimbulkan suatu permasalahan dalam praktiknya, Komunilas hukum di Indonesia sangat mengerti kosekuensi dan meratifikasi Konvesi Roma seperti melakukan kerjasama dengan ICC dalam hal penyelidikan, penangkapan, dan pemindahan tersangka. Akan tetapi harusjuga dipikirkan foktor lain seperti dimungkinkannya ekstradiksi terhadap warga negara sendiri, menjamin berlakunya yurisdiksi universal. Dengan demikian beberapa hal yang perlu dipertimbangkan sebelum melakukan ratifikasi terhadap Konvesi Roma, agar tidak terjadi kesalahan dalam mengabil kebijakan."