Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Perkawinan paksa sebagai suatu bagian dari kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan belum diatur dalam Statuta Roma. Dalam praktiknya, Mahkamah Pidana Internasional telah memutus perkawinan paksa sebagai kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan berupa other inhumane acts dan menerapkan ketentuan-ketentuan yang terdapat dalam Statuta Roma untuk menuntut perkawinan paksa sebagai bagian dari kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan. Berdasarkan hasil yurisprudensi di berbagai pengadilan internasional yang telah menangani terkait perkawinan paksa, penuntutan atas tindakan perkawinan paksa telah dilakukan dengan menerapkan ketentuan terkait tindakan-tindakan kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan yang berbeda. Beberapa hasil putusan beranggapan bahwa perkawinan paksa lebih tepat untuk dituntut sebagai perbudakan seksual. Namun, dalam perkembangan terkini terkait penuntutan perkawinan paksa dalam kasus Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen, Mahkamah Pidana Internasional menyatakan bahwa perkawinan paksa dapat dituntut secara tersendiri di bawah Pasal 7(1)(k) terkait other inhumane acts. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini bertujuan untuk melihat perlindungan hukum yang terdapat dalam Statuta Roma untuk menghukum tindakan perkawinan paksa dan meneliti terkait alasan hukum yang mendasari penentuan elements of crime dari perkawinan paksa sebagai suatu bagian dari kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan, lalu bagaimana kasus Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen dapat menuntut perkawinan paksa secara tersendiri sebagai other inhumane acts. Hasil penelitian ini menemukan bahwa tindakan perkawinan paksa dan perbudakan seksual seringkali bersinggungan. Sebagaimana telah dinyatakan oleh majelis hakim dalam kasus Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen, perkawinan paksa pada umumnya terjadi dalam situasi yang juga mencakup perbudakan seksual. Namun, ketika pemaksaan status perkawinan mengakibatkan penderitaan yang melebihi dan berbeda dari perbudakan seksual, maka perkawinan paksa patut untuk dituntut secara tersendiri agar dapat mencakup keseluruhan tindakan, dampak yang diakibatkan, serta kepentingan yang dilindungi dari tindakan kejahatan yang dilakukan.

---

Forced marriage as a crime against humanity has not been regulated in the Rome Statute. In practice, the Court has prosecuted forced marriage as the crime against humanity of an other inhumane act and adopted the existing provisions to prosecute forced marriage as a crime against humanity. The jurisprudence from various international courts dealing with forced marriage has adopted different provisions regarding the crime against humanity to prosecute forced marriage. Some considers that forced marriage is more adequately prosecuted as sexual slavery, but recent developments regarding forced marriage in the case of the Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen shows that the Court views forced marriage as a crime that needs to be charged separately under Article 7(1)(k) of the Rome Statute as an other inhumane act. Therefore, this study aims to determine the legal protections under the Rome Statute to protect victims from forced marriage and examine the judicial reasonings in determining the elements of crime of forced marriage as a crime against humanity, particularly in prosecuting forced marriage as a separate crime against humanity in the case of the Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen. The results of this study found that the act of forced marriage and sexual slavery often intersect and are not mutually exclusive. As stated by the Trial Chamber in the case of Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen, forced marriages generally occur in situations in which women are sexually enslaved. However, when the imposition of marital status results in suffering that goes beyond sexual slavery, forced marriage should be prosecuted separately to warrant full responsibility of the perpetrator and to adequately represent the conduct, ensuing harm, and protected interests from the crime committed."

"Dalam perjalanan menuju negara tujuan untuk mendapatkan perlindungan, pencari suaka seringkali melakukan perjalanan melalui laut dengan menggunakan kapal yang tidak laik laut dan seringkali pula dilakukan dengan bantuan kelompok penyelundup migran. Perjalanan yang berbahaya ini mengakibatkan banyaknya kapal pencari suaka yang mengalami kecelakaan di laut sehingga para pencari suaka seringkali berada dalam keadaan bahaya di laut. Hukum internasional mewajibkan negara untuk melakukan SAR untuk menyelamatkan setiap orang yang berada dalam keadaan bahaya di laut, termasuk pencari suaka. Ketentuan SAR secara khusus diatur dalam International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue. Pelaksanaan upaya SAR bagi pencari suaka terkait pula penentuan place of safety, prinsip non-refoulement dan tindak pidana penyelundupan migran.

---

The journey to the destination country to seek protection, asylum-seekers frequently take the journey through sea by sea unworthy boats and they are seldom helped by migrant smugglers. This dangerous journey has caused a lot of asylum-seekers faced accident at sea and made them in distress at sea. International law obliges states to do SAR operation to save every person who is in distress at sea, including asylum-seekers. The special provisions related to SAR are consisted in International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue. SAR operation to save asylum-seekers also related to the determination of place of safety, non-refoulement principle and migrant smuggling."

"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."

"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."

""Is the neglect of economic, social and cultural abuses in international criminal law a problem of positive international law or the result of choices made by lawyers involved in mechanisms such as criminal prosecutions or truth commissions? Evelyne Schmid explores this question via an assessment of the relationship between violations of economic, social and cultural rights and international crimes. Based on a thorough examination of the elements of international crimes, she demonstrates how a situation can simultaneously be described as a violation of economic, social and cultural rights and as an international crime. Against the background of the emerging debates on selectivity in international criminal law and the role of socio-economic and cultural abuses in transitional justice, she argues that international crimes overlapping with violations of economic, social and cultural rights deserve to be taken seriously, for much the same reasons as other international crimes"--"

"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."