Purpose The Covid-19 pandemic has persisted for almost three years. States have since then enforced laws, policies and measures believed to be the most effective to handle the global pandemic. Along this line, the Indonesian Government opted to implement mandatory vaccination and refusal of which entails monetary penalties. Hence, this study aims to analyze two legal issues that touch upon the realm of International Human Rights Law: first, whether state has the authority to implement the said mandatory vaccine program to those who refuse to be vaccinated, and second, how is the more appropriate legal policy to obligate vaccination but without coercive sanction. Design/methodology/approach This is a normative legal research that uses a qualitative method with case studies, conceptual, historical and comparative approaches. A descriptive-analytical deduction process was used in analyzing the issue. Findings The results present, as part of state’s right to regulate, it has the authority to enact mandatory vaccination with monetary penalties to fulfil its obligation to protect public health in times of emergency; this is legal and constitutional but only if it satisfies the requirements under the International Human Rights Law: public health necessity, reasonableness, proportionality and harm avoidance. Alternatively, herd immunity is achievable without deploying unnecessary coercive sanctions, such as improving public channels of communication and information, adopting legal policies that incentivize people’s compliance like exclusion from public services, subsidies revocation, employment restrictions, higher health insurance premiums, etc. Research limitations/implications This study analyzes in depth the following issues: of whether the government has the authority to apply mandatory vaccination laws enforced through monetary penalties for those who refused to be vaccinated and how does the government implement the appropriate legal policy to enforce mandatory vaccination without imposing penalties for non-compliance while maintaining a balance between the interests of protecting public health and the human rights of individuals to choose medical treatment for themselves, including whether they are willing to be vaccinated. Hence, the political affairs, economic matters and other non-legal related issues are excluded from this study. Originality/value This paper hence offers a suggestive insight for state in formulating a policy relating to the mandatory vaccination program. Although the monetary penalties do not directly violate the rule of law, a more non-coercive approach to the society would be more favorable.
Deep under the waters, HMS Challenger discovered the polymetallic nodules during its scientific expeditions in the Kara Sea part of the Arctic Ocean in 1868. Whilst in the vastness of the skies above, the Clementine and Lunar Prospector indicated the existence of water ice at the lunar poles during the period of 1994 to 1999. In 2003, the SMART-1 lunar orbiter of the European Space Agency discovered the key chemical elements of the Moon. Going even further back, in 1988, NASA published a work on Helium-3 blown away by the solar wind onto the Moon, and the possibilities of harvesting it as an alternative energy source for the continuation and advancement of human race. The deep seabed and the outer space, along with their resources, are both internationally governed under the same underlying principle: the Common Heritage of Humankind. Yet, while the former has begun to take shape, the latter still has very little progress. Various factors ranging from laws to politics to economics and undeniably the advances in science and technology have hindered the development of the principle of Common Heritage of Humankind in the outer space regime. Hence, this paper is to argue on how best to reform the principle, and consequently, determining which of its elements that might be spared in order for it to eventually work in balancing the contrasting interests from diverse stake-holders: the developed and the developing countries; the sovereign and the corporations – with their respective weapons of laws or of technology.
Among the ASEAN members, compared to other members, Indonesia is relatively more liberal in opening up international trade in financial services, especially in banking sector. Through its submission of CIO to the WTO in 2005, Indonesia to some degree offered certain liberalization of banking sector, together with some other services governed under the GATS. On the other hand, other members of ASEAN show their carefulness in liberalizing their banking sectors. As consequence, on one hand foreign banks have occupied nearly 50% of the Indonesian banking industry, and there are only a few units from Indonesia’s domestic banks that present in its ASEAN neighbours, on the other hand. Using normative method, this research elaborates on how Indonesia should strike a balanced stand between its over-liberalized banking sector and the reluctance of other members, while maintaining the GATS principle of “progressive development.” The authors concludes that one of the ways for Indonesia to flip the odds to be in its favour is by urging the implementation of the reciprocity principle in banking services in ASEAN, which additionally, will also stimulate the liberalisation schedule of the latter.
Today, the question on the legal instruments of international organisations that impose direct sanctions on individuals and legal entities have surfaced, such as the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions. States are obliged to implement the UNSC Resolutions but would face difficulties in this course. The UNSC's coercive approach rubs international security against democratic legitimacy, especially when the Resolutions violate due process of law, principle of legality and human rights. To date, Indonesia's stance on international law (including UNSC Resolutions) under its legal system remains unclear. This study analyses the implementation of the UNSC Resolutions in Indonesia, which has no uniformity without a UN Act. The case of North Korean vessel, MV Wise Honest, highlights the growing confusion in Indonesia because violation of the UNSC Resolutions has not been governed. Conclusively, Indonesia needs to enact a UN Act to provide legal certainty in the implementation of the UNSC Resolutions.
Indonesia began its BITs termination movement in early 2014 by calling off the Netherlands-Indonesia BIT 1992. As of today, 29/55 of the country's BITs that are in force have been terminated. By adopting the normative research method and utilising statutory and conceptual approaches, this paper examines two issues: first, mapping the landscape of international investment law in Indonesia in the epilogue of its long-standing BITs regime hence the probable government's deliberations behind the action; and second, in what way would the BITs termination movement truly serve Indonesia's national interests and benefit its economic development while promoting and protecting foreign investments -particularly on the core element of the investors' direct right to investment arbitration. At last, the paper concludes its discussion by offering two answers: first, two lifeboats are reserved for the protection of the country's present foreign investment, the implementation of "Sunset Cause" contained within Indonesia's BITs as well as protectionism provisions under the country's national investment law and other relevant regulations; and for the second, two diverged roads are laid out to choose for the protection of future foreign investments in Indonesia, the country's Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs) containing investment provisions or its newly born model BIT which, needless to say, at least the latter must be formulated with delicate manner if the goal is to prevail Indonesia's interests.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.