PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN PIDANA INDIVIDU DALAM HUKUM PIDANA INTERNASIONAL

Danel Aditia Situngkir (1)
(1) Sekolah Tinggi Bahasa Asing Prayoga , Indonesia
https://doi.org/10.23969/litigasi.v19i1.834

Article Sidebar

Issue
Vol. 19 No. 1 (2018)
Submitted
28 March 2018
Published
20 December 2019
PDF

Abstract

The debate about the whereabouts of individuals as the subject of international law over time seems to get an answer. This is because after the first and second world wars, the international community's attention to human rights is increasing. The desire to bring the responsible perpetrators into account before the criminal court is increasing. Efforts to eliminate immunity against perpetrators for crimes committed encourage the establishment of international criminal tribunals ranging from the ad hoc nature to the permanent criminal court. Encouraging individuals as the holders of rights and obligations in international criminal law is getting stronger. It becomes more interesting because the individuals held accountable are citizens who actually have the sovereignty to enforce the law to their citizens. This paper will discuss the existence of individuals as subjects of international law and the effort to hold individuals accountable through international court mechanisms. Based on legal theory, legal principles, sources of international law and international treaties, the existence of individuals in international law can be seen from the granting of rights and obligations in international treaties. The Adhoc and Permanent International Criminal Court is established to demand the accountability of serious crimes against humanity. The existence of individuals as subjects of international law in the future will remain a polemic in its application.
Keywords: Responsibility, Individual, International Criminal Law.

Full Article

Generated from XML file

References

Chris Wigwe Esq, C. I. and M. E. (2015). Criminal Responsibility Under International Law : When Can An Individual Be Held Criminally Responsible Under Inter ...., (April).

Danel Aditia Situngkir. (2013). Yurisdiksi Mahkamah Pidana Internasional (International Criminal Court) Terhadap Negara Bukan Peserta Statuta Roma. Andalas.

Eddy OS Hiariej. (2010). Pengadilan atas Beberapa Kejahatan Serius Terhadap HAM. Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga.

Hamdan. (2012). Alasan Penghapus Pidana. Bandung: PT. Refika Aditama.

Ian Browlie. (1979). Principles of Public International Law. London: Oxford University Press.

ICTY. (2007). Judgement summary. Trial, (December), 1–4.

International, O. (1949). International military tribunal for the far east. International Organization, 3(1), 184–186. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300014399.

International Committee of the Red Cross. (1949). The Geneva Conventions of 12 august 1949.

Jawahir Thontowi, P. I. (2006). Hukum Internasional Kontemporer. Bandung: PT. Refika Aditama.

Kusniati, & Retno. (2011). Sejarah Perlindungan Hak Hak Asasi Manusia dalam Kaitannya dengan Konsepsi Negara Hukum. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 4(5), 81–92. Diambil dari http://online-journal.unja.ac.id/index.php/jimih/article/view/536

Parthiana, I. W. (2006). Hukum Pidana Internasional (I). Bandung: CV. Yrama Widya.

Peter Mahmud Marzuki. (2005). Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Prenada Media Grup.

Sefriani. (2009). Hukum Internasional. Jakarta: PT. RajaGrafindo Persada.

Shaw, M. N. (2003). International Law. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139051903.

Sujatmoko, A. (2005). Tanggung Jawab Negara Atas Pelanggaran Berat HAM: Indonesia, Timor Leste dan Lainnya. Jakarta: Grasindo.

United Nations General Assembly. (1949). The Charter and Judgment of the Nürnberg Tribunal – History and Analysis: Memorandum submitted by the Secretary-General (Document A/CN.4/5), 1–100.

Versailles. (1919). Treaty of Peace with Germany (Treaty of Versailles). Paris Peace Conference 1919 (Vol. 59). Diambil dari https://www.loc.gov/law/help/us-treaties/bevans/m-ust000002-0043.pdf.

Zappalà, S. (2001). Do Heads of State in Office Enjoy Immunity from Jurisdiction for International Crimes? The Ghaddafi Case Before the French Cour de Cassation. Ejil, 12(1995), 595. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/12.3.595.

Authors

Danel Aditia Situngkir
Sekolah Tinggi Bahasa Asing Prayoga
danel@stba-prayoga.ac.id (Primary Contact)

Copyright (c) 2023 JURNAL LITIGASI (e-Journal)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Article Details