Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Permasalahan selalu mengundang perbedaan pendapat, dan Internasional hukum dari perbedaan ini , akan di hasilkan hal-hal baru yang bermanfaat bagi perkembangan ilmu hukum. Demikian pula dengan masalah hukum yang pernah terjadi beberapa dasawarsa yang lalu setelah usainya perang dunia kedua, yaitu dengan dibentuknya Mahkamah Militer Internasional, untuk mengadili para penjahat perang dunia kedua. Fihak Sekutu sebagai pemenang perang berfikiran bahwa dai am perang dunia kedua ini kejahatan perang sudah dalam batas menghawatirkan peradaban manusia. Oleh sebab itu sanksi atas pelanggaran hukum perang harus ditegakan. Atas dasar hal itu maka didirikanlah Mahkamah Militer Internasional. Disisi lain fihak Jerman dan Jepang sebagai fihak yang kalah dalam perang tidak bisa menerima cara tersebut, karena selain mereka adalah fihak terdakwa, mereka juga beranggapan bahwa didirikannya mahkamah tersebut oleh Sekutu dan dilaksanakannya proses peradilanya oleh ahli-ahli hukum negara Sekutu, adalah merupakan balas dendam yang terselubung» Selain itu dalam pelaksanaannya, terdapat tatacara yang tidak lazim menurut tatanan hukum yang telah ada. Dalam kenyataanya, mahkamah tersebut tetap dilaksanakan dan mempunyai dampak positif bagi perkembangan hukum internasional.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Skripsi ini membahas mengenai konsep pertanggungjawaban pidana dalam hukum pidana internasional dan secara spesifik membahas konsep pertanggungjawaban individual yang diatur dalam Statuta Roma. Konsep pertanggungjawaban individual mulai dikenal dalam hukum internasional moderen pada masa Perang Dunia II tepatnya dalam Peradilan Nuremberg, dengan menghukum individu atas kejahatan internasional. Konsep ini selanjutnya diterapkan di berbagai peradilan pidana internasional. dan mengalami perkembangan dengan munculnya konsep pertanggungjawaban pimpinan dalam Peradilan Tokyo dan konsep Joint Criminal Enterprise dalam International Court for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Konsep pertanggungjawaban individual mengalami perubahan ketika diterapkan dalam International Criminal Court (ICC) yang terlihat didalam putusan Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo. Dalam putusan tersebut, majelis hakim menyatakan bahwa Thomas Lubanga Dyilo bersalah atas kejahatan perang dalam perekrutan tentara anak dan bertanggung jawab secara individu atas dasar turut melakukan (co-perpetration).

---

ABSTRACT
This thesis analyzes the concept of criminal responsibility under international 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 Former Yugoslavia. The concept of criminal responsibility has evolved in the International Criminal Court, as it can be seen in Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo Case. The trial chamber punished Thomas Lubanga Dyilo for the warcrime of recruiting child soldier under co-perpetration.

Abstrak :
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.

Abstrak :
As first step to discuss "element of crimes" of Crimes Against Humaninty, the writer explain the concept of gross violation on human rights. This article focus on the normative and conceptual development of Crimes against Humanity:., its element of crime and its application. Furthrmore the discussion is focus on sexual crime, as mention in article 7 (g) the Rome statute of the International Criminal Court: rape, sexuality slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization or any other form of sexuality violence of comparable gravity or as mention in article 9 (g) UU no. 26/2000 about Human Rights Courts. The lack of attention toward gender based violence issue in the Indonesia law literature is one of the reason why the writer is writing about this issue

Abstrak :
Since the concept of command responsibility in new in Indonesia, there are various misperception and misinterpretation on this matter. This article is dedicated to the millitary officers, judiciares, and lawyers in order to help them to understood the concept of command responsibility in international humanitarian law and also in human rights law and to avoid the misperception and misinterpretation. Several important element is discussed by the writer such as the concepts of command responsibility and superiors command, type of violation in international humanitarian law and human rights law, and the application of command responsibility

Abstrak :
Application of Universal jurisdiction basically is an effort to avoid impunity. nevertheless in the reality its application often has been connected with state sovereignity. Recently we heard a strong reaction from Indonesia. Government about the indictment of General Wiranto and seven other military officers and also abilio Soares by special panel for serious crime unit in Dili Court, Timor Leste. This article explains several important aspects of human rights cases in order to be applicable with universal jurisdiction, such as: the type of crimes and the requirements based on international law

Abstrak :
The Human Rights Court established in Indonesia is the first in its kind. Various opinion emerge regarding the exixtence of court. In one hand, Indonesia is considered against the international desire to bring the perpetrator to eliminate the assumption that Indonesia is unable and unwilling to bring the perpetrator who convicted breach gross violation on human rights. This article based on the writer personal explain the legal and non-legal difficult in the Indonesia HUman Rights Court.

Abstrak :
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.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Skripsi ini membahas mengenai penerapan prinsip komplementaritas sebagai salah satu prinsip esensial dalam Statuta Roma oleh Mahkamah Pidana Internasional dalam dua perkara di Libya yaitu perkara Saif al-Islam Gaddafi dan Abdullah al- Senussi. Kedua perkara ini ditangani oleh negara yang sama yaitu Libya, namun pada putusan akhirnya keduanya mendapatkan putusan yang berbeda. Libya dinyatakan tidak mampu dalam perkara Saif al-Islam Gaddafi sedangkan dalam perkara Abdullah al-Senussi, Libya dinyatakan mampu untuk mengadili perkara sehingga perkara tersebut dinyatakan tidak admissible. Hal ini menimbulkan pertanyaan mengapa sistem hukum yang sama dapat dianalisa menjadi dua kondisi yang berbeda dalam dua perkara tersebut. Untuk menjawab persoalan ini, Penulis menggunakan studi pustaka terhadap berbagai jenis data sekunder, Penulis menyimpulkan bahwa Mahkamah Pidana Internasional tidak konsisten dalam melakukan penilaian terhadap penerapan prinsip komplementaritas dalam dua perkara tersebut. Hal tersebut bersumber dari penilaian mengenai ketidakmampuan Libya berdasarkan Pasal 17 3 Statuta Roma.

---

ABSTRACT
This study discusses the implementation of the complementarity principle as one of the most essential principle established in the Rome Statute by the International Criminal Court in two cases in Libya, which are the case of Saif al Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah al Senussi. These cases were investigated by the same State which was Libya. However, on the final Decision the Court has rendered two substantially different rulings. Libya was declared unable to investigate the case of Saif al Gaddafi, whereas in the case of Abdullah al Senussi, Libya was declared able to investigate the case, rendering the case inadmissible before the Court. This condition raises the question of why the same national legal system can be analysed and described into two different conditions. The author concluded that the International Criminal Court has been inconsistent in analyzing the implementation of the complementarity principle in these cases. Such inconsistencies can be found in the Court rsquo s analysis regarding the inability of Libya to investigate or carry out a proceeding pursuant to Article 17 3 of the Rome Statute.