Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Kebebasan beragama/berkeyakinan pada dasarnya merupakan hak asasi manusia yang tidak dapat dikurangi dalam keadaan apapun (non derogable rights). Dalam hukum Indonesia pemenuhan hak atas kebebasan beragama tiap warga negara secara langsung dijamin oleh konstitusi. Meskipun telah mendapat jaminan langsung dari konstitusi, pada prakteknya pelanggaran terhadap kebebasan beragama masih kerap terjadi. Keberadaan Undang-Undang No. 1/PNPS/1965 tentang Pencegahan Penyalahgunaan dan/atau Penodaan Agama ditengarai sebagai salah satu faktor yang mendorong terjadinya berbagai pelanggaran kebebasan beragama di Indonesia. Secara substasnsi, Undang-Undang tersebut memberikan pengakuan tehadap enam agama sebagai agama resmi. Tulisan ini dibuat dengan pendekatan normatif yang dimaksudkan untuk menelaah keseuaian norma dalam Undang-Undang No. 1/PNPS/1965 tentang Pencegahan Penyalahgunaan dan/atau Penodaan Agama dengan doktrin serta prinsip-prinsip HAM tekait kebebasan beragama. Selain itu, studi empiris dengan juga dilakukan untuk memperlihatkan dampak riil dari pengaturan dalam Undang-Undang tersebut. Dengan pendekatan demikian, dapat dilihat bahwa Undang-Undang No. 1/PNPS/1965 memuat ketentuan pengaturan yang secara substansial bertentangan dengan prinsip-prinsip HAM terkait kebebasan beragama. Selain itu, ditemukan bahwa dalam prakteknya ketentuan dalam Undang-Undang No. 1/PNPS/1965 serta peraturan atau kebijakan turunannya memicu berbagai tindakan diskriminatif dan pelanggaran terhadap hak atas kebebasan beragama terutama bagi para pemeluk agama/kepercayaan yang tidak diakui oleh negara.

---

Religious freedom is one of the right that can not be reduced under any circumstances (non-derogable rights). Under Indonesian law, the fulfilment of religious freedom rights of every citizen are guaranteed by the constitution. Despite enjoying direct guarantee from the constitution, in practice, violations of religious freedom still occur frequently. The existence of the Act No. 1/PNPS/1965 on the Prevention of Abuse of Religion and/or Blasphemy is considered as one of the factors that led to religious freedom violations in Indonesia. Substantially, this Act provides recognition to six religions as official religion. This paper is written in a normative approach to look over the suitability of the norms in the Act No. 1/PNPS/1965 on the the Prevention of Abuse of Religion and/or Blasphemy by the doctrine of human rights and the principles of religious freedom. Moreover, empirical studies are also conducted to show the real impact of regulation in the Act. Thus, it can be seen that the regulation on Act No. 1/PNPS/1965 contains provisions that are substantially opposed to the human rights principles related to freedom of religion. Furthermore, it was found that in practice the provision on the Act No. 1/PNPS/1965 and its derivative regulations and policies caused various discriminative actions and violations to the right of religious freedom, especially for the disciples of the religion/beliefs who are not recognized by the state."

"ABSTRAKKeserasian antara kebebasan dan ketertiban sebagai suatu antinomi atau pasangan nilai dibutuhkan untuk mencapai kedamaian sebagai salah satu tujuan hukum. Harmoni kedua nilai tersebut di alam demokrasi negara hukum Indonesia dapat diupayakan oleh Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat sebagai lembaga yang berwenang membentuk hukum, yang di antaranya mengatur kemerdekaan pers sebagai elemen penting demokrasi. Dalam rangka memperoleh keserasian yang dimaksud, adakalanya kemerdekaan pers harus dibatasi untuk mencegah ekses kebebasan. Kemerdekaan pers sebagai wujud hak asasi manusia mensyaratkan pembatasan hukum yang sesuai dengan kaidah hak asasi manusia dan konstitusi, di antaranya dibutuhkan untuk memenuhi tujuan-tujuan absah tertentu necessary for a legitimate aim, seperti untuk melindungi hak dan kebebasan orang lain, dan tanpa merusak esensi hak. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian, pengaturan kemerdekaan pers di Indonesia oleh hukum positif yang berlaku telah cukup menyelaraskan nilai-nilai kebebasan dan ketertiban dalam aspek pembatasan peliputan, aksesibilitas informasi publik, independensi lembaga regulasi pers, keleluasaan partisipasi pers oleh swasta, dan kebebasan aktivitas jurnalistik. Sedangkan porsi nilai kebebasan masih belum dapat bersanding secara ideal dengan nilai ketertiban dalam aspek jaminan konstitusional kemerdekaan pers dan kemerdekaan berekspresi dan konsekuensi atas pencemaran nama baik pejabat atau negara. Untuk mengusahakan keselarasan nilai-nilai kebebasan dan ketertiban yang lebih menyeluruh dalam menegakkan kemerdekaan pers, diajukan saran untuk melakukan reformasi legislasi demi meminimalisasi kriminalisasi pers dan mempertegas rumusan jaminan konstitusional bagi kemerdekaan pers untuk mencegah penyelewengan terhadapnya.

---

ABSTRACTThe consonance of freedom and order as an antinomy or a pair of values is imperative to achieve peace as one of the objectives of law. The harmony between the two values in the realm of democracy that is occupied by Indonesia as a state that abides to the rule of law can be acquired by the Peoples Consultative Assembly through its legislative capacity, which governs, among others, press freedom as a crucial element to democracy. To obtain said consonance, press freedom may sometimes need to be limited in order to prevent an excess of freedom. Inasmuch as press freedom is a manifestation of human rights, legal restrictions upon it must be imposed according to the conditions prescribed by human rights principles and the constitution, namely a justified necessity to accomplish a legitimate aim, such as to protect the rights and freedoms of others, and the exclusion of restrictions jeopardizing the essence of the right concerned. This research finds that the legal regulation of press freedom in Indonesia has rather succeeded in harmonizing the two aforementioned values in the aspects of reporting restrictions, public information accessibility, independence of the press regulatory body, press participation of private parties, and freedom of journalism activities. On the other side, order is more dominant than freedom in the aspects of existing constitutional guarantee for press freedom and freedom of expression and penalties for libelling officials or the state. Finally, a reassessment of the current constitutional guarantee for press freedom and a legislative reform aimed at minimizing press criminalization may prove to be effective in facilitating a more holistic coherence between freedom and order in the preservation of press freedom."

"[;This book examines the crucial issues affecting human rights education in contexts of culture, religious and societal diversity. This book considers a variety of connected content and methodological issues in three major sections : philosophical and policy perspectives, gender discourses, and discourses on narratives as safe spaces. The focus of the various chapters succeeds in establishing both a foundation and platform for dialogue surrounding human rights and human rights education in modern policy and governance. Aptly named “Safe spaces”, the edition offers in-depth and credible (“safe”) nuances (“spaces”), in terms of the somewhat reified concept of human rights, at a time when human rights remains a highly topical and contested international issue. ;This book examines the crucial issues affecting human rights education in contexts of culture, religious and societal diversity. This book considers a variety of connected content and methodological issues in three major sections : philosophical and policy perspectives, gender discourses, and discourses on narratives as safe spaces. The focus of the various chapters succeeds in establishing both a foundation and platform for dialogue surrounding human rights and human rights education in modern policy and governance. Aptly named “Safe spaces”, the edition offers in-depth and credible (“safe”) nuances (“spaces”), in terms of the somewhat reified concept of human rights, at a time when human rights remains a highly topical and contested international issue. , This book examines the crucial issues affecting human rights education in contexts of culture, religious and societal diversity. This book considers a variety of connected content and methodological issues in three major sections : philosophical and policy perspectives, gender discourses, and discourses on narratives as safe spaces. The focus of the various chapters succeeds in establishing both a foundation and platform for dialogue surrounding human rights and human rights education in modern policy and governance. Aptly named “Safe spaces”, the edition offers in-depth and credible (“safe”) nuances (“spaces”), in terms of the somewhat reified concept of human rights, at a time when human rights remains a highly topical and contested international issue. ]"

"This book analyzes, first part describes the soft threats to human rights, derived from the devaluation of the politics and the productive economy with regard to the finance. It entails the concealment of the reality in the shape of exploitation as the tax havens and in the shape of marginalization of the persons with different abilities. The second part include a study of hard threats to human rights and examines two cases of failed states, Afghanistan and Somalia, in which the violence has supplanted the politics and the economy. In view of these situations it is necessary to rethink the force of classic ius gentium and the humanitarian right. The third part presents the European Union as a legal and political space in which conditions of a worthy life are better defended by means of the primacy of practical reason and social state of law, and by the requirement of peace as the main rule of international relations. "