ECOCIDE CRIMES & OMNIBUS LAW: REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND ITS IMPLICATIONS ON INDONESIA LAW
TINJAUAN HUKUM INTERNASIONAL SERTA IMPLIKASINYA PADA HUKUM INDONESIA
DOI:
Abstract Views:
1600 times
PDF Downloads:
1273 times
Abstract
Abstract: Omnibus Law which seeks to simplify 79 laws and 1288 articles. The Omnibus Law, a number of articles has the potential to remove the protection of rights, obsess over the human rights of citizens, particularly in relation to civil and political, economic, social and cultural rights, and with regard to law enforcement for environmental destroyers who are weak. The research used socio-legal research methods. The results of the study are the limitations in prosecuting perpetrators of ecoside crimes only in war crimes, making it difficult to hold responsibility for crimes committed, both against individuals and multinational/transnational corporations. Omnibus Law has enormous potential to perpetuate the practice of ecocide crime systematically both in the political, legal, and socio-economic, cultural aspects. Thus, there is no reason to strengthen that the Omnibus Law is in fact favoring environmental destruction, and perpetuating the practice of impunity for perpetrators of environmental damage crimes.
Keywords: Ecoside Crimes, Law Enforcement, Omnibus Law
Abstrak: RUU Omnibus Law Cipta Kerja yang berupaya menyederhanakan 79 UU dan 1.288 Pasal. RUU Omnibus Law Cipta Kerja, sejumlah pasal berpotensi menghapus perlindungan hak, merepsesi HAM warga negara, khususnya terkait dengan hak-hak sipil dan politik dan ekonomi, sosial dan budaya. Serta berkenaan dengan penegakkan hukum bagi perusak lingkungan yang lemah. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah menggunakan metode penelitian sosio-legal. Hasil penelitian adalah Keterbatasan dalam penuntutan pelaku kejahatan ekosida hanya pada kejahatan perang membuat sulitnya meminta pertanggungjawaban atas kejahatan yang dilakukan, baik terhadap individu maupun korporasi multinasional/transnasional. RUU Omnibus Law Cipta Kerja menjadi potensi yang sangat besar untuk melanggengkan praktik kejahatan ekosida yang secara sistematis baik dalam aspek politik hukum, maupun sosial ekonomi, kebudayaan. Sehingga, tidak ada alasan yang menguatkan bahwa RUU Omnibus Law Cipta Kerja ini justru memihak pada pengrusakan lingkungan, serta melanggengkan praktik impunitas bagi pelaku kejahatan kerusakan lingkungan.
Kata kunci: Kejahatan Ekosida, Penegakkan Hukum, RUU Omnibus Law
Downloads
References
A.Winters, J., 2012. Oligarchy. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Anja Gauger, e., 2013. The Ecocide Project: Ecocide is the missing 5th Crime Against Peace, London: Human Rights Consortium: School of Advanced Study University of London.
Austin, J. E. & E.Bruch, C., 2000. The Environmental Consequences of War: Legal, Economic, and Scientific Perspectives. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridhe University Press.
Broswimmer, F., 2002. Ecocide: a Short History of the Mass Extinction of Species. 1st ed. London: Pluto Press.
Dermawan, M. K., 2006. Kejahatan Lingkungan: Suatu Tinjauan Kriminologi. Jurnal Masyarakat dan Budaya, 82(2), pp. 97-120.
Docker, J., 2004. Raphael Lemkin’s History of Genocide and Colonialism’, Contribution for United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. 1st ed. Washington DC: Center for Advanced Holocaust Studies.
Forestdigest.com, 2019. Ekosida: Kejahatan Lingkungan yang Belum Diakui, Jakarta: Forest Digest.
Leichenko, R. M. & O’Brien, K. L., 2008. Environmental Change and Globalization: Double Exposures. 2nd ed. Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press.
M. Ridha Saleh, e., 2019. Ecocide: Memutus Impunitas Korporasi. 1st ed. Jakarta: Walhi dan Yayasan TIFA.
Mongabay.com, 2020. Bisa Celakakan Lingkungan, Banyak Kalangan Protes RUU Omnibus Law, Jakarta: https://www.mongabay.co.id/2020/03/18/bisa-celakakan-lingkungan-banyak-kalangan-protes-ruu-omnibus-law/.
N.Shaw, M., 2008. International Law. 6th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Navas, G., Mingorria, S. & Aguilar González, B., 2018. Violence in environmental conflicts: the need for a multidimensional approach. Sustainability Science, 13(special issues The EJAtlas: Ecological Distribution Conflicts as Forces for Sustainability), p. 649–660 .
O.Adeola, F., 2000. Cross-National Environmental Injustice and Human Rights Issues. The American Behavioral Scientist; Jan 2000; 43, 4; Sociology Database, 43(4), p. 686.
Prakasa, S. U. W., 2017. Perdagangan Internasional Dan Ham: Relasinya Dengan Sustainable Development. Jurnal Hukum Novelty, 8(1), pp. 36-53.
Prakasa, S. U. W., 2019. Merdeka dari Asap, Surabaya: https://www.harianbhirawa.co.id/merdeka-dari-asap/.
Robert Cyrer, e., 2012. an Introduction to International Criminal Law and Procedure. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sands, P., 2003. Principles of International Environmental Law. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Short, D., 2016. Redefining Genocide: Settler Colonialism, Social Death and Ecocide. 2nd ed. London: Zed Books Ltd.
Steady, F. C., 2009. Environmental Justice in the New Millenium: Global Perspectives on Race, Ethniciity, and Human Rights. 2nd ed. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Tamanaha, B. Z., 1997. Realistic Socio-Legal Theory: Pragmatism and a Social Theory of Law. 123–127 ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press .
UN Office of The High Comission for Human Right, 2014. UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Right, New York: UN.
Wiratraman, H. P., 2020. Omnibus Law dan HAM, Surabaya: https://www.jawapos.com/opini/10/03/2020/omnibus-law-dan-ham/.
Wiratraman, H. P. & Putro, W. D., 2019. Tantangan Metode Penelitian Interdisipliner Dalam Pendidikan Hukum Indonesia. Jurnal Mimbar Hukum, 31(3), pp. 403-415.
WTO, 2015. Understanding the WTO. 1st ed. Geneva: WTO Publisher.
