Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"ABSTRAKSkripsi ini membahas perkara PMH yang terjadi di Indonesia berupa pelanggaran HAM yang dimintakan ganti kerugiannya dengan Alien Tort Statute di Pengadilan Federal Amerika Serikat. Dua perkara yang dianalisis adalah perkara Tom Beanal v. Freeport-McMoran Inc, and Freeport MrMoran Copper and Gold, Inc., Civil Action No.96-1474 section "K", United States District Court For the Eastern District Court of Lousiana dan Doe v. Exxon Mobile Corp., No. Civ.A 01-1357 (LFO), United States District Court of Columbia. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan metode penentuan hukum yang berlaku yang digunakan oleh hakim tidak memuaskan.

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis analyzes the Tort in the form of the violation of human rights occurred in Indonesia but litigated before the Federal Court of United States of America using Alien Tort Statute. The Cases discussed in this thesis are Tom Beanal v. Freeport-McMoran Inc, and Freeport MrMorran Copper and Gold, Inc., Civil Action No.96-1474 section "K", United States District Court For the Eastern District Court of Lousiana and Doe v. Exxon Mobile Corp., No. Civ.A 01-1357 (LFO), United States District Court, District Court of Columbia. The Result of this research shows that the method used by the Judge in determining applicable law is unsatisfying."

"Nota Kesepahaman 5 (lima) badan nasional independen (Komnas HAM, Ombudsman RI, KPAI, LPSK dan Komnas Perempuan pada tahun 2016 bermaksud mendorong sistem pengawasan terhadap pelaksanaan Pasal 28 (G) ayat 2 UUD NRI 1945, yakni tentang Kebebasan setiap orang dari penyiksaan atau perlakuan yang merendahkan martabat manusia. Namun sebagai badan nasional, beberapa lembaga negara tidak masuk dalam ranah kekuasaan pengawasan melainkan pelaksana (eksekutif) seperti LPSK dan Komnas Perempuan. OPCAT mensyaratkan sebuah lembaga independent wajib diatur dalam tingkat UU dan ketentuan Paris Principle mengharuskan keuangan yang mandiri dari sebuah lembaga indenpendent. Berdasarkan ini maka Komnas Perempuan belum memenuhi kriteria tersebut karena diatur pada tingkat Keppres dan mekanisme penganggaran yang tunduk pada Komnas HAM. Secara umum, mekanisme untuk memastikan setiap orang untuk bebas dari penyiksan dan pelakuan yang merendahkan martabat manusia telah dilakukan oleh kelima lembaga negara tersebut. Sejak periode 2016-2018 lima lembaga negara telah melakukan kunjungan berkala dan tanpa pemberitahuan di lapas, rutan, pusat kesehatan mental, tahanan imigrasi, dll sebagai wujud dari kekuasaan yang diberikan.

---

Memorandum of Understanding among 5 (five) independent national body (Komnas HAM, Ombudsman RI, KPAI, LPSK and Komnas Perempuan) have a purpose to encourage monitoring system of implementation of the article 28 G paragraph (2) UUD NRI 1945 namely about the freedom of everyone from torture or degrading treatment. However as a national bodies, some of them are not part of supervisory power whereas enter in realm part of executive power, such as LPSK and Komnas Perempuan. OPCAT requires that an independent body must be regulated in legislation level and fulfilled the criteria which is regulated in the Paris Principle. Generally, mechanism to ensure everybody free from torture or degrading treatment have been implemented by 5 (five) SAB in Indonesia. In period of 2016-2018. 5 (five) SAB have conducted regular and unannoucement visit in prison, detention center, mental health center, immigration detention, etc., as manifestation of their power. "

"ABSTRAKHak kebebasan beragama merupakan hak asasi manusia yang tidak boleh dibatasi dalam keadaan apapun. Hak kebebasan beragama tidak hanya mencakup kebebasan setiap manusia untuk memilih keyakinan yang menurutnya benar, namun juga termasuk hak bagi tiap-tiap manusia untuk mengekspresikan keyakinannya dan juga hak untuk menjalankan segala ajaran agama atau kepercayaan yang diyakininya. Indonesia melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 1/PNPS Tahun 1965 hanya mengakui enam agama yaitu Islam, Kristen, Protestan, Hindu, Budha, dan Khonghucu. Pengakuan negara terhadap agama tertentu memang dibolehkan dan tidak melanggar hak asasi manusia. Sayangnya pengakuan negara terhadap enam agama tersebut menimbulkan dampak terlanggarnya beberapa hak asasi manusia, khususnya para penganut aliran kepercayaan dan agama-agama selain agama resmi yang diakui negara. Dampak yang timbul dari pengakuan negara terhadap agama-agama tertentu tersebut adalah pembubaran aliran-aliran yang dianggap sesat, pencantuman agama di dalam KTP yang kemudian menjadi pintu masuk pembatasan hak-hak para penganut aliran kepercayaan dan agama yang tidak diakui negara, pendirian rumah ibadat, dan pendidikan agama di sekolah.

---

ABSTRACTThe right to freedom of religion is a human right that should not be restricted in any circumstances. Right to freedom of religion not only includes the freedom of every human being to choose beliefs which he said is true, but it also includes a right for every human being to express his convictions and also right to perform any religious doctrine or belief that he believes. Indonesia through Law No. 1/PNPS of 1965 only recognizes six religions: Islam, Christianity, Protestantism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism. State recognition of a particular religion is permissible and does not violate human rights. Unfortunately the state recognition of the six religious impact some human rights violations, especially the adherents of religions, beliefs and religions other than official religions recognized by the state. Impacts arising from the state recognition of certain religions is the dissolution of streams that are considered heretical, the inclusion of religion on identity cards which later became the entrance to the restrictions of the rights of followers of religions, beliefs and religions that are not recognized by the state, the establishment of the synagogue, and religious education in schools."

"Summary:Elgar Advanced Introductions are stimulating and thoughtful introductions to major fields in the social sciences and law, expertly written by the world's leading scholars."

"Human rights violations become on interesting topic in this 21st century along with emerging respects for civil rights for every violent action. Every person has freedom from persecution and violence either by militia or military force. This can be seen from the establishment of the international Criminal Court (ICC) to prosecute war crimes and crimes against humanity. These efforts are aimed to those who are violating human rights especially by the military force which they can be brought before the ICC for their actions."

"Skripsi ini membahas tentang kewenangan Dewan Keamanan PBB dalam menjatuhkan sanksi terhadap individu berdasarkan Bab VII Piagam PBB dan prinsip pertanggungjawaban individu yang diakui oleh hukum internasional. Kemudian, dalam perkembangannya, penerapan sanksi tersebut telah berdampak pada hak-hak individu yang dijamin dalam berbagai instrumen hukum internasional mengenai HAM. Sanksi larangan perjalanan dan pembekuan aset yang diterapkan terhadap individu-individu oleh negara-negara anggota PBB berdasarkan mandat Dewan Keamanan PBB dalam Piagam PBB telah menimbulkan kekhawatiran atas ketiadaan jaminan bahwa hak-hak individu yang dimiliki oleh individu yang dijatuhkan sanksi tersebut tidak dilanggar oleh Dewan Keamanan PBB. Contoh kasus adalah sanksi terhadap Qadhafi.

---

This thesis emphasize the authority of UN Security Council on sanctioning individuals in regards to Chapter VII UN Charter and the individual responsibility principle that was recognized by international law. Hence, the application of individual sanctions has affected to individual rights which is guaranteed by international law instrument regarding human rights. Travel ban and asset freeze that is applied towards individuals by UN members in regards to UN Security Council mandate on the UN Charter has caused the absence of warranties that the individual rights has not been violated by the UN Security Council. Case in point, sanctioning to Qadhafi."

"Even though the concept of human rights mainstreaming is not new to publicinternational law, it has recently gained increased recognition as a practicalapproach for recognizing the linkages between human rights and other socialjustice issues such as environmental protection. A plenitude of literature havebeen generated on the need to recognize and enforce human rights standardsand norms in a wide range of issues including environment, health, gender,poverty, food, water and refugee protection to mention but a few. Despitethe rapid ascendancy of the human rights mainstreaming concept, muchattention have not been given to the scope of human rights mainstreamingand the practical aspects of human rights mainstreaming, particularlywhether institutions consisting of ?outsiders? to the human rights epistemiccommunity can interpret and enforce human rights obligation. Put simply, doenvironmentalists, scientists and outsiders to human rights have the capacityto mainstream human rights? This paper examines the scope and tenetsof human rights mainstreaming, it then discusses the practical aspects ofmainstreaming human rights into policy making, particularly how epistemicconcerns on human rights mainstreaming can be addressed in national andinternational policy design and implementation.There is virtually no aspect of our work that does not have a human rightsdimension. Whether we are talking about peace and security, development,humanitarian action, the struggle against terrorism, climate change, none ofthese challenges can be addressed in isolation from human rights."

""Restorative Justice" is a model approach which emerged in the 1960s in an effort to solve criminal cases. Unlike the approach used in conventional criminal justice system, this approach focuses on the direct participation of perpetrators, victims and society in the settlement process. This theory of the approach is still debated, but the view is in fact growing and it exercises a lot of influence on legal policies and practices in several countries. The UN through its basic principles considers the approach of restorative justice as the approach which could be used in the rational criminal justice system. Restorative justice is a concept of thinking that supports the development of the criminal justice system with emphasis on the required involvement of the community. It is also involving the casualties who with the current criminal justice system are excluded. In several countries, restorative justice has been translated into a variety of formulations to accommodate a variety of values, philosophical basis, terms, strategies, mechanisms, and programs. Good consultation with the perpetrators and the victims themselves may provide the public with a different mindset in preventing emerging problems. This process can involve the police, prosecutorial institution or the traditional institutions. Therefore, without excluding the work in the formal legal system, the institutional mechanism for resolution through consultation was working in the community. In the various principles and models of the restorative justice approach, the process of dialogue between the perpetrator and the victim is a fundamental and the also the most important part of the application of the restorative justice. The direct dialogue between the perpetrator and the victim gave the victim the opportunity to express what he/she felt, hope for human rights and the desire to reach a criminal settlement."