Miranda, Chintya (2024) Yurisdiksi Mahkamah Pidana Internasional Dalam Upaya Kasis Kejahatan Perang. S1 thesis, Universitas Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa.
![[img]](https://eprints.untirta.ac.id/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text
Chintya Miranda_1111200308_CP.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (1MB) | Request a copy |
|
Text
Chintya Miranda_1111200308_02.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (359kB) | Request a copy |
|
Text
Chintya Miranda_1111200308_03.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (397kB) | Request a copy |
|
Text
Chintya Miranda_1111200308_04.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (387kB) | Request a copy |
|
Text
Chintya Miranda_1111200308_05.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (244kB) | Request a copy |
|
Text
Chintya Miranda_1111200308_Ref.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (291kB) | Request a copy |
|
Text
Chintya Miranda_1111200308_Fulltext.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (2MB) | Request a copy |
|
Text
Chintya Miranda_1111200308_01.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (1MB) | Request a copy |
Abstract
The jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in addressing cases of war crimes, particularly in the context of the Israel-Palestine conflict, highlights serious allegations of violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, especially in attacks affecting civilian populations. The ICC has the authority to prosecute individuals involved in serious crimes such as genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and aggression. Conversely, the ICJ serves as a court for inter-state disputes, adjudicating legal conflicts between states based on the United Nations Charter. The theoretical framework utilized includes the theory of propriety and the theory of human rights. The research methodology applied is normative juridical, with the study classified as qualitative research. The data sources are secondary data, further categorized into three components: primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and tertiary legal materials. Data collection is conducted through literature review. The findings of the research reveal distinctions in the jurisdiction of the ICC and the ICJ in resolving war crimes cases. The ICC focuses on prosecuting individuals implicated in international crimes, especially in the Palestinian territory, whereas the ICJ addresses disputes between states. The obstacles faced by the ICC and the ICJ in resolving war crimes cases in the Israel-Palestine context include limitations in jurisdiction, challenges in evidence collection, and significant political pressure for the ICC. Meanwhile, the ICJ faces constraints such as limited jurisdiction, lack of enforcement mechanisms, lengthy judicial processes, and Israel’s rejection of international jurisdiction. The study recommends enhancing perspectives on effective international criminal law mechanisms to address war crimes and human rights violations in armed conflict situations
| Item Type: | Thesis (S1) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contributors: |
|
|||||||||
| Additional Information: | Yurisdiksi Mahkamah Pidana Internasional (International Criminal Court atau ICC) dan Mahkamah Internasional (International Court of Justice atau ICJ) dalam menangani kasus kejahatan perang, khususnya dalam konteks konflik IsraelPalestina, menyoroti dugaan pelanggaran serius terhadap Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) dan hukum humaniter internasional, terutama dalam serangan yang berdampak pada populasi sipil. ICC memiliki wewenang untuk mengadili individu yang terlibat dalam kejahatan berat seperti genosida, kejahatan perang, kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan, dan agresi. Sebaliknya, ICJ berfungsi sebagai pengadilan antarnegara yang menangani sengketa hukum antarnegara berdasarkan Piagam Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa. Teori yang digunakan meliputi teori kepatutan dan teori HAM. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini yaitu yuridis normatif. Spesifikasi penelitian yang digunakan adalah jenis penelitian kualitatif. Sumber data yang digunakan adalah sumber data sekunder yang didalamnya dibagi lagi menjadi tiga bagian, yaitu bahan hukum primer, bahan hukum sekunder dan bahan hukum tersier, dengan teknik pengumpulan data berupa studi pustaka. Hasil penelitian yang didapat yaitu perbedaan yurisdiksi Mahmakah Pidana Internasional dan Mahkamah Internasional dalam penyelesaian kasus kejahatan perang ICC berfokus pada penuntutan individu yang terlibat dalam kejahatan internasional terutama di wilayah Palestina sementara itu ICJ menangani sengketa antarnegara. Faktor penghambat ICC dan ICJ dalam upaya penyelesaian kasus kejahatan perang pada kasus Palestina dan Israel, hambatan ICC meliputi keterbatasan yurisdiksi, kesulitan dalam pengumpulan bukti, serta banyaknya tekanan politik. Di sisi lain ICJ menghadapi yurisdiksi yang terbatas, kurangnya mekanisme penegakan, prpses peradilan yang lama, serta penolakan Israel terhadap yurisdiksi internasional. Saran peneliti adanya peningkatan perspektif mengenai mekanisme hukum Pidana internasional yang efektif dalam menangani kejahatan perang dan pelanggaran HAM dalam situasi konflik bersenjata. | |||||||||
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | ICC, ICJ, War Crimes. Kejahatan Perang, ICC, ICJ. | |||||||||
| Subjects: | K Law > K Law (General) | |||||||||
| Divisions: | 01-Fakultas Hukum 01-Fakultas Hukum > 74201-Program Studi Ilmu Hukum |
|||||||||
| Depositing User: | Chintya Miranda | |||||||||
| Date Deposited: | 08 Jan 2025 15:04 | |||||||||
| Last Modified: | 08 Jan 2025 15:04 | |||||||||
| URI: | http://eprints.untirta.ac.id/id/eprint/45079 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |