Pub Date : 2021-09-03DOI: 10.15742/ILREV.V11N2.691
I. G. W. Suarda, Moch. Marsa Taufiqurrohman, Zaki Priambudi
This article aims to examine what the pre-trial judges consider in determining suspects. The basis of the reason "not based on the provisions and legal procedures in force" is a pre-trial petition. Including examining whether the Notification Letter for the Commencement of Investigation has not been submitted to the Reported Party and the Reporting Party, it can be used as a basis for the judge's consideration to judge the legality of the determination of the suspect. This article uses a legal research method through a statutory, conceptual, and case approach. This article finds that after the issuance of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 21 / PUU-XII / 2014 and the Supreme Court Regulation Number 4 of 2016, the fulfillment of preliminary evidence, namely that two valid pieces of evidence constitute the absolute standard of determining the suspect. Besides, in terms of proof, pre-trial only assesses the validity of formal aspects, which incidentally do not touch the case's subject matter. An application for the cancellation of a suspect's status, for whatever reason, cannot be granted as long as the initial evidence is not fulfilled, namely the two pieces of evidence listed in Article 184 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code (KUHAP). Ultimately, this study recommends the need for affirmation in determining a suspect through the Draft Criminal Procedure Code to achieve legal certainty and fulfillment of the suspect's human rights.
{"title":"Limiting the Legality of Determining Suspects in Indonesia Pre-Trial System","authors":"I. G. W. Suarda, Moch. Marsa Taufiqurrohman, Zaki Priambudi","doi":"10.15742/ILREV.V11N2.691","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15742/ILREV.V11N2.691","url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to examine what the pre-trial judges consider in determining suspects. The basis of the reason \"not based on the provisions and legal procedures in force\" is a pre-trial petition. Including examining whether the Notification Letter for the Commencement of Investigation has not been submitted to the Reported Party and the Reporting Party, it can be used as a basis for the judge's consideration to judge the legality of the determination of the suspect. This article uses a legal research method through a statutory, conceptual, and case approach. This article finds that after the issuance of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 21 / PUU-XII / 2014 and the Supreme Court Regulation Number 4 of 2016, the fulfillment of preliminary evidence, namely that two valid pieces of evidence constitute the absolute standard of determining the suspect. Besides, in terms of proof, pre-trial only assesses the validity of formal aspects, which incidentally do not touch the case's subject matter. An application for the cancellation of a suspect's status, for whatever reason, cannot be granted as long as the initial evidence is not fulfilled, namely the two pieces of evidence listed in Article 184 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code (KUHAP). Ultimately, this study recommends the need for affirmation in determining a suspect through the Draft Criminal Procedure Code to achieve legal certainty and fulfillment of the suspect's human rights.","PeriodicalId":13484,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67345228","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-31DOI: 10.15742/ILREV.V11N2.716
A. Lahuddin
The issue of consent has received considerable critical attention in the data protection regime. The recent development of the data-driven economy, which heavily rely on data processing, have heightened the need for data protection. Furthermore, previous research has established that data processing deals with the individual’s fundamental rights where the processing would be considered as unlawful without prior individual’s consent. However, the Indonesian Government seems to not address these issues of consent in the data processing seriously, since currently there is no general data protection law. Conversely, the European Union’s (‘EU’) legislative history shows the reliance on consent as a measure for legitimising data processing. The General Data Protection Regulation (‘GDPR’) provides the most comprehensive requirements of consent as a lawful ground of data processing. Interestingly, the concept of consent is a dominant feature in Indonesia’s proposed Personal Data Protection Law (‘PDPL’) which first introduced in 2015. The present research aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of conditions of consent in the proposed PDPL, using the GDPR as the benchmark of the comparative analysis. The analysis revealed that the proposed PDPL fails to address the conditions of consent as comprehensive as the GDPR. It is argued that the substance of the proposed PDPL content was more or less a copy-paste of the concept and provisions from the GDPR without knowing the objective of such concept and provisions. This research provided a valuable opportunity to demonstrate that it is essential to include a comprehensive condition of consent within Indonesian data protection legislation.
{"title":"Understanding the Role of Consent in Data Protection Regime: How Indonesia Can Learn From the GDPR","authors":"A. Lahuddin","doi":"10.15742/ILREV.V11N2.716","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15742/ILREV.V11N2.716","url":null,"abstract":"The issue of consent has received considerable critical attention in the data protection regime. The recent development of the data-driven economy, which heavily rely on data processing, have heightened the need for data protection. Furthermore, previous research has established that data processing deals with the individual’s fundamental rights where the processing would be considered as unlawful without prior individual’s consent. However, the Indonesian Government seems to not address these issues of consent in the data processing seriously, since currently there is no general data protection law. Conversely, the European Union’s (‘EU’) legislative history shows the reliance on consent as a measure for legitimising data processing. The General Data Protection Regulation (‘GDPR’) provides the most comprehensive requirements of consent as a lawful ground of data processing. Interestingly, the concept of consent is a dominant feature in Indonesia’s proposed Personal Data Protection Law (‘PDPL’) which first introduced in 2015. The present research aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of conditions of consent in the proposed PDPL, using the GDPR as the benchmark of the comparative analysis. The analysis revealed that the proposed PDPL fails to address the conditions of consent as comprehensive as the GDPR. It is argued that the substance of the proposed PDPL content was more or less a copy-paste of the concept and provisions from the GDPR without knowing the objective of such concept and provisions. This research provided a valuable opportunity to demonstrate that it is essential to include a comprehensive condition of consent within Indonesian data protection legislation.","PeriodicalId":13484,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43571321","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-31DOI: 10.15742/ILREV.V11N2.622
T. Santoso, F. M. Nelson
This article discusses whether simple, speedy and low cost principles have been implemented in the criminal justice in Indonesia and the obstacles faced by the Indonesian criminal justice system, especially in terms of returning state losses due to corruption cases. The findings indicate that such principles are yet to be effectively implemented in the criminal justice system in Indonesia. Some obvious issues have emerged as an area for attention; first, that law enforcement in corruption cases takes a long time, remains complicated, and is also high-priced. Second, there are a number of obstacles confronted by the Indonesian criminal justice system, especially in terms of returning state losses due to corruption that should be able to follow the concept of justice in a simple, speedy manner and at low cost.
{"title":"Simple, Speedy, and Low Cost Trial : A Panacea For Corruption in Indonesia?","authors":"T. Santoso, F. M. Nelson","doi":"10.15742/ILREV.V11N2.622","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15742/ILREV.V11N2.622","url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses whether simple, speedy and low cost principles have been implemented in the criminal justice in Indonesia and the obstacles faced by the Indonesian criminal justice system, especially in terms of returning state losses due to corruption cases. The findings indicate that such principles are yet to be effectively implemented in the criminal justice system in Indonesia. Some obvious issues have emerged as an area for attention; first, that law enforcement in corruption cases takes a long time, remains complicated, and is also high-priced. Second, there are a number of obstacles confronted by the Indonesian criminal justice system, especially in terms of returning state losses due to corruption that should be able to follow the concept of justice in a simple, speedy manner and at low cost.","PeriodicalId":13484,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45118388","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-30DOI: 10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.647
Nathalina Naibaho, H. Harkrisnowo, Suhariyono Ar, M. Wibisana
The borderlines between core criminal law and administrative law developed in such a way that it became increasingly difficult to draw a clear and a firm category while dividing line between those. The category of a measure as administrative or criminal is far from being theoretical as it preconditions the applicable legal regime and especially the level of procedural safeguards benefiting to those sanctioned. This paper is questioning the gray area belonging to something in between criminal and administrative law and discussing the rule and the role of criminal law and administrative law in action when the later comprehend punitive administrative sanctions. Several circumstances need to be considered in order to determine the appropriate sanction to fill the gap. This article also suggests the use of “una via principle” as an approach to unpack the gray area in the role of criminal and administrative law, specifically in tax law case.
核心刑法和行政法之间的边界线是这样发展的，以至于在划分这些法律的同时，越来越难以划出一个明确而坚定的类别。行政措施或刑事措施的类别远不是理论上的，因为它是适用法律制度的先决条件，尤其是有利于被制裁者的程序保障水平。本文对刑法与行政法之间的灰色地带提出了质疑，并探讨了刑法和行政法在事后理解惩罚性行政处罚时的规则和作用。为了确定填补空白的适当制裁措施，需要考虑几种情况。本文还建议使用“una via principle”来打开刑法和行政法作用的灰色地带，特别是在税法案件中。
{"title":"CRIMINISTRATIVE LAW: DEVELOPMENTS AND CHALLENGES IN INDONESIA","authors":"Nathalina Naibaho, H. Harkrisnowo, Suhariyono Ar, M. Wibisana","doi":"10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.647","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.647","url":null,"abstract":"The borderlines between core criminal law and administrative law developed in such a way that it became increasingly difficult to draw a clear and a firm category while dividing line between those. The category of a measure as administrative or criminal is far from being theoretical as it preconditions the applicable legal regime and especially the level of procedural safeguards benefiting to those sanctioned. This paper is questioning the gray area belonging to something in between criminal and administrative law and discussing the rule and the role of criminal law and administrative law in action when the later comprehend punitive administrative sanctions. Several circumstances need to be considered in order to determine the appropriate sanction to fill the gap. This article also suggests the use of “una via principle” as an approach to unpack the gray area in the role of criminal and administrative law, specifically in tax law case.","PeriodicalId":13484,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44734450","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-30DOI: 10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.662
A. Muhammad
Space capabilities utilization, specifically Earth observation capabilities is not just limited to environmental protection and disaster mitigation, as was shown in the UN Principles on Remote Sensing. It is also can be used to support law enforcement and legal proceedings in court. However, the technology of Earth observation is very complex and the process from primary earth observation data to analyzed information requires a degree of manipulation to create a comprehensive data. Because of this, there is an issue of admissibility of Earth observation data in court. This paper would like to answer the fundamental question on how can this data be admissible, beginning with the procedure to obtain it, and to ensure the authenticity of the data, and finds that there are methods of Data Imaging and Digital Audit that may ensure its authenticity. It will also find that to obtain these data for evidence requires a process of special agreement that needs to be looked more in the future.
{"title":"THE ADMISSIBILITY OF EARTH OBSERVATION DATA IN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS: A CLOSER LOOK TOWARDS DATA IMAGING","authors":"A. Muhammad","doi":"10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.662","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.662","url":null,"abstract":"Space capabilities utilization, specifically Earth observation capabilities is not just limited to environmental protection and disaster mitigation, as was shown in the UN Principles on Remote Sensing. It is also can be used to support law enforcement and legal proceedings in court. However, the technology of Earth observation is very complex and the process from primary earth observation data to analyzed information requires a degree of manipulation to create a comprehensive data. Because of this, there is an issue of admissibility of Earth observation data in court. This paper would like to answer the fundamental question on how can this data be admissible, beginning with the procedure to obtain it, and to ensure the authenticity of the data, and finds that there are methods of Data Imaging and Digital Audit that may ensure its authenticity. It will also find that to obtain these data for evidence requires a process of special agreement that needs to be looked more in the future.","PeriodicalId":13484,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43592591","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-30DOI: 10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.694
H. Lim
The 4th industrial revolution and its attendant technologies has given rise to many discussions around the impact of technology on justice and the rule of law. The working assumption here that an effective state is necessary to establish the rule of law, thus it is necessary to understand the impact of such technology on the state itself to fully appreciate the impact of such technology on the rule of law. In doing so, it is important to recognise and consider that not all states are the same and it is necessary to consider the differences between states. Moreover, such topics are generally discussed from the perspective of developed and industrialized states, where such technology is most extensively developed and deployed. But the impact of the 4th industrial revolution is not limited to the developed world, and communities in developing states constantly engage with such technology, particularly with social media, even if such technology and platforms are developed elsewhere. This paper seeks to position the discussion within the context of developing countries in Southeast Asia to demonstrate the necessity of developing technologically relevant institutions. In doing so, the past experiences of post-colonial developing states, who are on their own journey in establishing effective institutions relevant to their communities, would be invaluable in this process.
{"title":"THE TECHNOLOGICAL LIMITS OF THE RULE OF LAW, AND THE PERSPECTIVE OF DEVELOPING STATES","authors":"H. Lim","doi":"10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.694","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.694","url":null,"abstract":"The 4th industrial revolution and its attendant technologies has given rise to many discussions around the impact of technology on justice and the rule of law. The working assumption here that an effective state is necessary to establish the rule of law, thus it is necessary to understand the impact of such technology on the state itself to fully appreciate the impact of such technology on the rule of law. In doing so, it is important to recognise and consider that not all states are the same and it is necessary to consider the differences between states. Moreover, such topics are generally discussed from the perspective of developed and industrialized states, where such technology is most extensively developed and deployed. But the impact of the 4th industrial revolution is not limited to the developed world, and communities in developing states constantly engage with such technology, particularly with social media, even if such technology and platforms are developed elsewhere. This paper seeks to position the discussion within the context of developing countries in Southeast Asia to demonstrate the necessity of developing technologically relevant institutions. In doing so, the past experiences of post-colonial developing states, who are on their own journey in establishing effective institutions relevant to their communities, would be invaluable in this process.","PeriodicalId":13484,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47614423","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-30DOI: 10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.692
I. Prihandono, N. Hosen, Keely Boom
Indonesia’s forest fires have caused a serious haze problem nationally and in the Southeast Asian region, which has caused harm to the human rights to life, health and a healthy environment, work, education, and many others. The forest fires largely stem from harmful slash-and-burn methods of land clearing, done at large scales by corporations. Judicial mechanisms have proven ineffective to deter violating corporations and bring justice to victims. From a legal standpoint, Komnas HAM’s quasi-jurisdictional powers allow it to act as a non-judicial grievance mechanism for victims in the haze crisis and against violating corporations. However, issues with the non-binding nature of its reports and mediation, inability to compel violating corporations to participate in its investigation and mediation, as well as declining trust in Komnas HAM’s integrity may prove to be significant barriers to the effective exercise of jurisdiction and the provision of effective remedies to victims. Komnas HAM and ELSAM’s national human rights plan, issued in 2017, is a step in the right direction. However, further steps are required from a legislative standpoint to broaden Komnas HAM’s mandate for it to effectively perform its functions, in the haze crisis and beyond.
{"title":"KOMNAS HAM'S HUMAN RIGHTS JURISDICTION OVER BUSINESSES INVOLVED IN THE HAZE CRISIS","authors":"I. Prihandono, N. Hosen, Keely Boom","doi":"10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.692","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.692","url":null,"abstract":"Indonesia’s forest fires have caused a serious haze problem nationally and in the Southeast Asian region, which has caused harm to the human rights to life, health and a healthy environment, work, education, and many others. The forest fires largely stem from harmful slash-and-burn methods of land clearing, done at large scales by corporations. Judicial mechanisms have proven ineffective to deter violating corporations and bring justice to victims. From a legal standpoint, Komnas HAM’s quasi-jurisdictional powers allow it to act as a non-judicial grievance mechanism for victims in the haze crisis and against violating corporations. However, issues with the non-binding nature of its reports and mediation, inability to compel violating corporations to participate in its investigation and mediation, as well as declining trust in Komnas HAM’s integrity may prove to be significant barriers to the effective exercise of jurisdiction and the provision of effective remedies to victims. Komnas HAM and ELSAM’s national human rights plan, issued in 2017, is a step in the right direction. However, further steps are required from a legislative standpoint to broaden Komnas HAM’s mandate for it to effectively perform its functions, in the haze crisis and beyond.","PeriodicalId":13484,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45083373","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-30DOI: 10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.693
Laras Susanti
This article explores the existence of asas hakim pasif (passivity of judge principle) in cases involving children in civil cases in Indonesia. As one of the basic principles in civil procedure, judges must be bound by the scope of case and evidence brought by parties. The principle is not absolute, showing that pursuant to Law on Judicial Power: judges are obliged to uphold justice by exploring law and social values more than often. A study case in marriage dispensation shows that judges are facing the pluralism orders. Therefore, judges’ value and understanding of children rights is a determinant factor. Recently, the Law on Marriage Number 1 of 1974 was amended along with the enactment of Supreme Court Regulation Number 5 of 2019 on Guidance of Marriage Dispensation Examination, which provides better protection for children from child marriage, both substantive and procedural rights. This article then recommends judges to be more active in deciding child marriage by upholding the spirit of child protection and encourages the Supreme Court (Mahkamah Agung) to increase activities to mainstreaming child protection issues.
{"title":"WHEN CHILDREN’S RIGHTS ARE AT STAKE, SHALL COURT REMAIN SILENT? ANALYSIS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PASSIVITY OF JUDGE PRINCIPLE IN CHILD MARRIAGE DISPENSATION IN INDONESIA","authors":"Laras Susanti","doi":"10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.693","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.693","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the existence of asas hakim pasif (passivity of judge principle) in cases involving children in civil cases in Indonesia. As one of the basic principles in civil procedure, judges must be bound by the scope of case and evidence brought by parties. The principle is not absolute, showing that pursuant to Law on Judicial Power: judges are obliged to uphold justice by exploring law and social values more than often. A study case in marriage dispensation shows that judges are facing the pluralism orders. Therefore, judges’ value and understanding of children rights is a determinant factor. Recently, the Law on Marriage Number 1 of 1974 was amended along with the enactment of Supreme Court Regulation Number 5 of 2019 on Guidance of Marriage Dispensation Examination, which provides better protection for children from child marriage, both substantive and procedural rights. This article then recommends judges to be more active in deciding child marriage by upholding the spirit of child protection and encourages the Supreme Court (Mahkamah Agung) to increase activities to mainstreaming child protection issues.","PeriodicalId":13484,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47711558","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In any Host States, the process of Refugee Status Determination (RSD) conducted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is critical in facilitating asylum-seekers to seek necessary protections. UNHCR ensures that asylum-seekers will not be returned involuntarily to the State of Origin where they could face persecution. As a long-term solution, UNHCR helps refugees to find appropriate and permanent solutions to their plights, either by repatriating them voluntarily to their homeland or assisting them to integrate into the States of Asylum or helping them to resettle in third States. In the absence of domestic legal protection in dealing with the refugees and asylum-seekers in Malaysia, a variety of operations are carried out by UNHCR, including the admission, registration, documentation and status determination of asylum seekers and refugees. In order to prevent the deportation of individual qualified for international protection, UNHCR should reassess its RSD process in Malaysia, and consider alternative means that would be less burdensome and less risky for people who are fleeing violence and human rights violations. Primarily aimed at reassessing the RSD process in Malaysia using a doctrinal and comparative approach, the analysis is presented in four parts in this article. The first part provides for the definition and current statistics of refugee and asylum-seekers in Malaysia; the second part examines the mechanism of RSD conducted by UNCHR under international law; the third part focuses on how RSD operates in Malaysia; and the last part reviews the mechanism of RSD in Indonesia and Brazil.
{"title":"INEFFECTIVE REFUGEE STATUS DETERMINATION PROCESS: HINDRANCE TO DURABLE SOLUTION FOR REFUGEES RIGHTS AND PROTECTION","authors":"Rohaida Nordin, Norilyani Hj Md Nor, Rosmainie Rofiee","doi":"10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.687","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15742/ILREV.V11N1.687","url":null,"abstract":"In any Host States, the process of Refugee Status Determination (RSD) conducted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is critical in facilitating asylum-seekers to seek necessary protections. UNHCR ensures that asylum-seekers will not be returned involuntarily to the State of Origin where they could face persecution. As a long-term solution, UNHCR helps refugees to find appropriate and permanent solutions to their plights, either by repatriating them voluntarily to their homeland or assisting them to integrate into the States of Asylum or helping them to resettle in third States. In the absence of domestic legal protection in dealing with the refugees and asylum-seekers in Malaysia, a variety of operations are carried out by UNHCR, including the admission, registration, documentation and status determination of asylum seekers and refugees. In order to prevent the deportation of individual qualified for international protection, UNHCR should reassess its RSD process in Malaysia, and consider alternative means that would be less burdensome and less risky for people who are fleeing violence and human rights violations. Primarily aimed at reassessing the RSD process in Malaysia using a doctrinal and comparative approach, the analysis is presented in four parts in this article. The first part provides for the definition and current statistics of refugee and asylum-seekers in Malaysia; the second part examines the mechanism of RSD conducted by UNCHR under international law; the third part focuses on how RSD operates in Malaysia; and the last part reviews the mechanism of RSD in Indonesia and Brazil.","PeriodicalId":13484,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46378475","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-31DOI: 10.15742/ILREV.V10N2.653
Ranggalawe Suryasaladin Sugiri
This work attempts to analyze the implementation of the GI law and regulations in the traditional handicraft industry in Indonesia. We particularly focus on the natural and human factors that are assessed when stakeholders apply for GI registration for their traditional handicraft products. This work also analyzes the books of requirements of five handicrafts with registered GIs in Indonesia. Indonesia’s GI regulations and policies, especially with regard to handicrafts, are compared with those of India and Thailand. The article comprises four chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the topic of this work. Chapter 2 explores the protection of traditional handicrafts through GI systems. Chapter 3 details the GI law and regulations in Indonesia and the traditional handicrafts protected by GI. Chapter 4 analyzes the issue of GI registration for traditional handicrafts in Indonesia, especially the issue of the assessment of natural and human factors. The chapter also covers the comparative analysis of the GI systems implemented in Indonesia, India, and Thailand to protect traditional handicrafts. Chapter 5 summarizes our conclusions and recommendations.
{"title":"Utilization of Geographical Indication Protection System for Traditional Handicrafts in Indonesia","authors":"Ranggalawe Suryasaladin Sugiri","doi":"10.15742/ILREV.V10N2.653","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15742/ILREV.V10N2.653","url":null,"abstract":"This work attempts to analyze the implementation of the GI law and regulations in the traditional handicraft industry in Indonesia. We particularly focus on the natural and human factors that are assessed when stakeholders apply for GI registration for their traditional handicraft products. This work also analyzes the books of requirements of five handicrafts with registered GIs in Indonesia. Indonesia’s GI regulations and policies, especially with regard to handicrafts, are compared with those of India and Thailand. The article comprises four chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the topic of this work. Chapter 2 explores the protection of traditional handicrafts through GI systems. Chapter 3 details the GI law and regulations in Indonesia and the traditional handicrafts protected by GI. Chapter 4 analyzes the issue of GI registration for traditional handicrafts in Indonesia, especially the issue of the assessment of natural and human factors. The chapter also covers the comparative analysis of the GI systems implemented in Indonesia, India, and Thailand to protect traditional handicrafts. Chapter 5 summarizes our conclusions and recommendations.","PeriodicalId":13484,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46556889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：