Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Perjalanan Konstitusi Eropa dalam kerangka pembentukkan 'Negara FederasiEropa berada dalam persimpangan yang belum menunjukkan arah berakhirnya.Prosedur legal formal melalui referendum yang tidak mendapatkan persetujuan semuanegara anggota bukan alasan utarna tidak diterimanya Draf Konstituti Eropa tersebut.Tetapi lebih jauh lagi terhadap materi yang diatur dalam draf konstitusi tersebut.Artikel ini mencoba mempertanyakan dan menjawab tentang keberadaan DrafKonstitusi Eropa sebagai salah satu aspek signifikan dalam proses pembentukan'Negara Federasi Eropa' serta implikasinya secara politik dengan mendasari kepada3 (tiga) latarbelakang yaitu; politik, alamiah dan pembatasan yang melingkupi draftKonstitusi Eropa tersebut."

"Anak memiliki hak untuk hidup, tumbuh kembang, dan berpartisipasi sesuai dengan harkat dan martabatnya (Presiden RI, 2014). Tahun 2015, pemerintah membangun Ruang Publik Terpadu Ramah Anak untuk mewujudkan Kota Layak Anak (Keputusan Gubernur Provinsi DKI Jakarta, 2015). Sehingga perlu dilakukan penelitian apakah RPTRA sudah sesuai dengan persepsi masyarakat dalam memenuhi hak dasar anak dan bagaimana analisis hubungan antara pemanfaatannya dengan tumbuh kembang anak di RPTRA Cililitan. Penelitian menggunakan mixed method, dengan desain studi simultan/paralel. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa sebagian besar anak usia 7-11 tahun memiliki intensitas sering dalam memanfaatkan RPTRA, sedangkan usia 12-17 tahun jarang memanfaatkan RPTRA. Karena anak usia 7-11 tahun sedang memasuki tahapan yang aktif sehingga lebih memilih bemain diluar rumah. Selain itu hasil menunjukkan bahwa tidak ada hubungan antara pemanfaatan RPTRA dengan pemenuhan hak tumbuh kembang anak, seperti bermain, memperoleh pendidikan, mengembangkan kreativitas, dan ibadah. Namun pada usia 7-11 tahun sudah terpenuhi haknya dalam bermain, memperoleh pendidikan, mengembangkan kreativitas, dan beribadah dilingkungan RPTRA. Sedangkan usia 12-17 tahun sudah terpenuhi haknya dalam memperoleh pendidikan dan mengembangkan kreativitas. Sehingga disimpulkan bahwa RPTRA sudah memenuhi standar dalam pemenuhan hak anak, dan pemanfaatannya tidak memiliki hubungan yang signifikan karena terdapat faktor lain diluar sarana dan prasarana RPTRA yang mempengaruhi pemenuhan hak tumbuh kembang anak.

---

Children have rights to life, to grow and develop, and participate that suit with their degree and dignity (President of RI, 2014). In 2015, the government built Child- friendly Public Space to actualize a city that decent to child (The Decision of Governor of DKI Jakarta Province, 2015). So, there's a need to do a research about does RPTRA appropriate already to people's perception in fulfilling the children's fundamental rights and how is the correlation analysis between its benefit to children's growth and development in RPTRA Cililitan. This research is using mixed method, with simultaneous/parallel study design. The result of the research shows that largely of children aged 7-11 have frequent intensity in using RPTRA, while children aged 12-17 is rarely using RPTRA. This is because children aged 7-11 is entering the active stage so they prefer to play outside the house. Moreover, result shows that there is no correlation between the use of RPTRA with the fulfilment of children's growth and development rights, for example playing, getting educated, developing creativity, and praying. But in 7-11 years old, their rights to play, get educated, develop creativity, and pray have already fulfilled in RPTRA's environment. While children aged 12-17 have the rights already fulfilled in getting educated and developing creativity. So we can conclude that RPTRA have met the standard in fulfilling children's rights, and its benefit doesn't have a significant correlation because there are other factors outside the facilities and infrastructures of RPTRA which affect the fulfilment of children's growth and development rights."

"The spread of COVID-19 brings holistic and tough impacts to legal institutions. As the Roman proverb goes, necessity knows no law. This public health hazard has quickly developed into a state of emergency and an exception which must be admitted when discussing legal order, due to the disease’s strikingly rapid transmission and high fatality rate. To handle the lingering state of emergency caused by the pandemic in 2020, many states have either set up or altered their legal and procedural supervision mechanisms. This paper firstly examines the theoretical origins, developments, transformations and practices of the legal infrastructures with regard to state of emergency in the US and Taiwan. Based on such background, we further analyze the emergent preventive measures for COVID-19 in the two states, testing if their emergency legal systems are able to curb the pandemic while abiding by their constitutional principles. Our research shows that compared with Taiwan’s disease control model, the US federalism equips the federal and state governments with better legal frameworks to establish emergency safety nets. Despite this, the Trump administration failed to timely invoke the constitution-assigned presidential emergency order, engendering policy swings and incoordination between the federal and state authorities. The lack of coherence in the US leadership eventually led to the failure of the country’s pandemic governance. On the other hand, our comparative study indicates that in both nations’ approaches to inhibit COVID-19, the Presidential emergency power (decree) embedded in the Constitutions is replaced by the emergency legislation. The lawmaking-dependent inclination marked by the integration of laws for managing disasters and threats to public health not only highlights the decline of presidential emergency powers granted by constitutional laws, but also brings profound challenges to judicial review which aims to ensure human rights."