印度尼西亚法律中的宪法庇护权和人道主义:“外国难民”和PR 125/2016

IF 0.6 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW Asian Journal of Law and Society Pub Date : 2021-09-21 DOI:10.1017/als.2021.8
Bilal Dewansyah, Ratu Durotun Nafisah
{"title":"印度尼西亚法律中的宪法庇护权和人道主义:“外国难民”和PR 125/2016","authors":"Bilal Dewansyah, Ratu Durotun Nafisah","doi":"10.1017/als.2021.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Article 28G(2) in Indonesia’s 1945 Constitution reflects a human rights approach to asylum; it guarantees “the right to obtain political asylum from another country,” together with freedom from torture. It imposes an obligation upon the state to give access to basic rights to those to whom it offers asylum, following an appropriate determination procedure. By contrast, in Presidential Regulation No. 125 of 2016 concerning the Treatment of Refugees, the Indonesian government’s response to asylum seekers and refugees is conceptualized as “humanitarian assistance,” and through a politicized and securitized immigration-control approach. We argue that the competition between these three approaches—the human right to asylum, humanitarianism, and immigration control—constitutes a “triangulation” of asylum and refugee protection in Indonesia, in which the latter two prevail. In light of this framework, this article provides a socio-political and legal analysis of why Article 28G(2) has not been widely accepted as the basis of asylum and refugee protection in Indonesia.","PeriodicalId":54015,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Constitutional Right to Asylum and Humanitarianism in Indonesian Law: “Foreign Refugees” and PR 125/2016\",\"authors\":\"Bilal Dewansyah, Ratu Durotun Nafisah\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/als.2021.8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Article 28G(2) in Indonesia’s 1945 Constitution reflects a human rights approach to asylum; it guarantees “the right to obtain political asylum from another country,” together with freedom from torture. It imposes an obligation upon the state to give access to basic rights to those to whom it offers asylum, following an appropriate determination procedure. By contrast, in Presidential Regulation No. 125 of 2016 concerning the Treatment of Refugees, the Indonesian government’s response to asylum seekers and refugees is conceptualized as “humanitarian assistance,” and through a politicized and securitized immigration-control approach. We argue that the competition between these three approaches—the human right to asylum, humanitarianism, and immigration control—constitutes a “triangulation” of asylum and refugee protection in Indonesia, in which the latter two prevail. In light of this framework, this article provides a socio-political and legal analysis of why Article 28G(2) has not been widely accepted as the basis of asylum and refugee protection in Indonesia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54015,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Journal of Law and Society\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Journal of Law and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2021.8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Law and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2021.8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

1945年《印度尼西亚宪法》第28G(2)条反映了对庇护的人权态度;它保障“从另一个国家获得政治庇护的权利”以及免受酷刑的自由。它规定国家有义务按照适当的确定程序,向其提供庇护的人提供获得基本权利的机会。相比之下,在2016年关于难民待遇的第125号总统条例中,印度尼西亚政府对寻求庇护者和难民的反应被概念化为“人道主义援助”,并通过政治化和安全化的移民控制方法。我们认为,庇护人权、人道主义和移民控制这三种方法之间的竞争构成了印度尼西亚庇护和难民保护的“三角测量”,后两者占主导地位。根据这一框架,本文对为什么第28G(2)条没有被广泛接受为印度尼西亚庇护和难民保护的基础进行了社会政治和法律分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Constitutional Right to Asylum and Humanitarianism in Indonesian Law: “Foreign Refugees” and PR 125/2016
Article 28G(2) in Indonesia’s 1945 Constitution reflects a human rights approach to asylum; it guarantees “the right to obtain political asylum from another country,” together with freedom from torture. It imposes an obligation upon the state to give access to basic rights to those to whom it offers asylum, following an appropriate determination procedure. By contrast, in Presidential Regulation No. 125 of 2016 concerning the Treatment of Refugees, the Indonesian government’s response to asylum seekers and refugees is conceptualized as “humanitarian assistance,” and through a politicized and securitized immigration-control approach. We argue that the competition between these three approaches—the human right to asylum, humanitarianism, and immigration control—constitutes a “triangulation” of asylum and refugee protection in Indonesia, in which the latter two prevail. In light of this framework, this article provides a socio-political and legal analysis of why Article 28G(2) has not been widely accepted as the basis of asylum and refugee protection in Indonesia.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The Asian Journal of Law and Society (AJLS) adds an increasingly important Asian perspective to global law and society scholarship. This independent, peer-reviewed publication encourages empirical and multi-disciplinary research and welcomes articles on law and its relationship with society in Asia, articles bringing an Asian perspective to socio-legal issues of global concern, and articles using Asia as a starting point for a comparative exploration of law and society topics. Its coverage of Asia is broad and stretches from East Asia, South Asia and South East Asia to Central Asia. A unique combination of a base in Asia and an international editorial team creates a forum for Asian and Western scholars to exchange ideas of interest to Asian scholars and professionals, those working in or on Asia, as well as all working on law and society issues globally.
期刊最新文献
A Dynamic Theory of Prosecutorial Roles in Adversarial Trials Interrogating the Drunkards and Representing Drunkenness in the Qing Law Coexisting with Drug Addiction: Strategies Used by Hong Kong’s Older Mixed Users to Improve Their Perceived Quality of Life Liability Beyond Law: Conceptions of Fairness in Chinese Tort Cases Neocolonial Digitality: Analyzing Digital Legal Databases Using Legal Pluralism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1