HUKUM INTERNASIONAL MADE IN GARUT? MENGKRITISI STATUS JUS COGENS ATAS PRINSIP KEHATI-HATIAN DALAM MANDALAWANGI

Rizky Banyualam Permana, Dewo Baskoro, Arie Afriansyah

Abstract


ABSTRAK
Putusan Mandalawangi merupakan putusan yang dianggap sebagai suatu terobosan hukum dalam bidang hukum lingkungan di Indonesia, karena putusan ini melakukan inkorporasi atas konsep precautionary principle dalam sistem hukum nasional Indonesia secara legal formal. Jus cogens, yakni suatu norma tidak terelakkan dalam hukum internasional merupakan perdebatan teoritis yang masih berlangsung. Putusan Mandalawangi memberikan status jus cogens atas prinsip kehati-hatian (precautionary principle) kemudian diamini dan diikuti oleh berbagai putusan maupun literatur. Dalam tulisan ini kami mencoba melakukan dekonstruksi kembali tentang status jus cogens atas prinsip kehati-hatian, dan kami meninjau bagaimana suatu norma dapat dilabeli sebagai jus cogens dalam teori, serta menelusuri ratio decidendi hakim dalam mencapai amar putusan atas jus cogens. Kami mengargumentasikan bahwa runutan pemikiran putusan tersebut mengandung suatu lompatan logika yang mengakibatkan argumentasi sirkuler. Kemudian kami berpendapat, para hakimlah yang harus mengutamakan ‘kehati-hatian’ itu sendiri dalam menerapkan konsep-konsep hukum internasional dalam putusannya.
Kata kunci: Mandalawangi; jus cogens; prinsip kehati-hatian; Mahkamah Agung.

ABSTRACT
he judgment of Mandalawangi case is considered as a legal breakthrough in the field of Indonesian environmental law, because the judgment formally incorporated the concept of precautionary principle within the Indonesian domestic legal system. Jus cogens, which is a peremptory norm of international law, is a theoretically controversial subject that is still being debated. Mandalawangi judgment provided the status of jus cogens on precautionary principle which has been followed in the later judgement and decisions. In this article, we attempt to deconstruct the jus cogens status of precautionary principle, and we see how a norm could be labeled as a jus cogens theoretically, as well as retracing the rationale of judges behind the jus cogens status. We argue that the rationale behind the judgment contains a logical jump which causes a circular argument. Following this argument, we stressed that the judges shall employ a precaution in applying the concept of international law through their verdict.
Keywords: Mandalawangi; jus cogens; precautionary principle; supreme court.


Keywords


Mandalawangi; jus cogens; prinsip kehati-hatian; Mahkamah Agung

References


Banerjee, A. and Watson, T.F. (2011) Pickard’s manual of operative dentistry. 9th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Birnie, Patricia, Alan Boyle dan Catherine Redgwell, (2009). International Law and the Environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cannizzaro, Enzo. (2015) The Present and Future of Jus Cogens. Roma: Sapienza Università Editrice.

Chen, Lung-Chu. (2015). An Introduction to Contemporary International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dupuy, P-M. (2003). L'Unité de l'ordre juridique international: cours général de droit international public. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.

Goklany, Indur M. (2001) The Precautionary Principle: a critical appraisal of environment risk assessment. Washington, D.C.: CATO Institute.

Hannikainen, Lauri Antero. (1988) Peremptory Norm (Jus Cogens) in International Law - Historical Development, Criteria, Present Status. Helsinki: Finnish Lawyers’ Publishing Co.

Hohmann, H. (1994) Precautionary Legal Duties and Principles of Modern International Environmental Law. London: Graham & Trotman.

Koskenniemi, Martti. (2011) The Politics of International Law. Oxford: Hart.

Orakhelashvili, Alexander. (2006) Peremptory Norms in International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sinclair, I. (1984). The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 2nd ed. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Sunstein, Cass S. (2005) Laws of Fear Beyond the Precautionary Principle. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Duvic-Pavoli, Leslie-Anne. (2019) Environmental Law and Public International Law, Dalam: Lees, Emma dan Vinuales Jorge E., eds., Oxford Handbook of Comparative Environmental Law. Oxford: OUP.

d’Aspremont J. (2016) Jus Cogens as a Social Construct Without Pedigree. Dalam: Heijer M. dan van der Wilt, H. N. eds. Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 2015, vol. 46. The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press.

Kotzé, Louis J. (2016) Constitutional Conversations in the Anthropocene: In Search of Environmental Jus Cogens Norms. Dalam: Heijer M., van der Wilt H. (eds) Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 2015. Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, vol 46. The Hague.: T.M.C. Asser Press.

Linderfalk, U. (2016) Understanding the Jus Cogens Debate: The Pervasive Influence of Legal Positivism and Legal Idealism. Dalam: Heijer M., van der Wilt H. (eds) Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 2015. Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, vol 46. The Hague.: T.M.C. Asser Press.

Bodansky, D. (1991). Scientific uncertainty and the Precautionary Principle. Environment 33 (1991).

Boon, Foo Kim. (1992) The Rio Declaration and its Influence on International Environmental Law. Singapore Journal of Legal Studies December. Hlm. 347-364.

Boutillon, Sonia. (2002) The Precautionary Principle: Development of an International Standard. Michigan Journal of International Law 23 (2). Hlm. 430-469.

Cameron, J. dan Abouchar, J. (1991). The Precautionary Principle: A Fundamental Principle of Law and Policy for the Protection of Global Environment. Boston College International and Comparative Law Review 14.

Colombo, Esmeralda. (2017) Enforcing International Climate Change Law in Domestic Courts: A New Trend of Cases for Boosting Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration? UCLA Journal of Environmental Law and Policy, 35 (1). Hlm. 98-144.

Cross, Frank B. (1995) Paradoxical Perils of the Precautionary Principle. Washington and Lee Law Review 53, no. 3. Hlm. 851-928.

Francioni, Francesco. (2016) From Rio to Paris: What is Left of the 1992 Declaration on Environment and Development?. Intercultural Human Rights Law Review 15 (11). Hlm. 16-32.

Hardjaloka, Loura. (2012) Ketepatan Hakim dalam Penerapan Precautionary Principle sebagai “Ius Cogen” dalam Kasus Gunung Mandalawangi. Jurnal Yudisial 5, no. 2 Hlm. 134-153.

Helmi, et. al. (2019) Documenting Land-combustion and Progressive Law Enforcement in Indonesia. Library Philosophy and Practice. Hlm. 1-10.

Imamulhadi. (2013) Perkembangan Prinsip Strict Liability dan Precautionary dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Lingkungan Hidup di Pengadilan. Mimbar Hukum 25 (3). Hlm. 416-432.

Koskenniemi, Martti. (1997) Hierarchy in International Law: A Sketch, European Journal of International Law. Hlm. 556-582.

Luhulima, H. V. (2018) Identifikasi dan Validitas Norma-norma Jus Cogens dalam Hukum Internasional. Justitia et Pax 34 (1). Hlm. 69-98.

Mclntyre, Owen dan Mosedale, Thomas. (1997) Precautionary Principle as Customary International Law. Journal of Environmental Law 9(2). Hlm. 221-241.

Orellana, Marcos. (2016) Governance and the Sustainable Development Goals: The Increasing Relevance of Access Rights in Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration. RECIEL 25 (1), hlm. 50-58.

Prevost, Denise. (2005) What Role for the Precautionary Principle in WTO Law after Japan-Apples?. EcoLomic Policy and Law: Journal of Trade & Environmental Studies 2(4). Hlm. 1-14.

Sandin, P. (1999). Dimensions of the Precautionary Principle, Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal 5. Hlm. 889-907.

Saul, Matthew. (2011) The Normative Status of Self-determination in International Law: A Formula for Uncertainty in the Scope and Content of the Right? Human Rights Review.

Shelton, Dinah. (2006) Normative Hierarchy in International Law. American Journal of International Law 100. Hlm. 291-323.

Singleton-Cambage, K. (1996). International Legal Sources And Global Environmental Crises: The Inadequacy of Principles, Treaties, and Custom. ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law 2. Hlm. 171-187.

Sirinskiene, Agne. (2009) The Status of Precautionary Principle: Moving towards a Rule of Customary International Law. Jurisprudencija ,2009.

Tladi, Dire. (2019) Codification, Progressive Development, New Law, Doctrine, and the Work of the International Law Commission on Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens): Personal Reflections of the Special Rapporteur. FIU Law Review 13. Hlm. 1137-1150.

Triatmodjo, Marsudi. (1999) Penerapan Precautionary Principle: Pergeseran Paradigma Hukum Lingkungan Internasional, Mimbar Hukum 6. Hlm. 21-33.

Trouwborst, A. (2007). The Precautionary Principle in General International Law: Combating the Babylonian Confusion. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law 16. Hlm. 185-195.

Trouwborst, A. (2009). Prevention, Precaution, Logic and Law: The Relationship between the Precautionary Principle and the Preventative Principle in International Law and Associated Questions. Erasmus Law Review 2.

Verdross, A. (1966) Jus Dispositivum and Jus Cogens in International Law. American Journal of International Law 55.

Verdross, A. (1937) Forbidden Treaties in International Law: Comments on Professor Garner’s Report on the ‘Law of Treaties.’ American Journal of International Law 31. hlm. 572.

Wibisana, Andri. (2011) The Development of the Precautionary Principle in International and in Indonesian Environmental Law. Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental Law 14 (1&2). Hlm. 1-24.

Wiener, Jonathan B. & Rogers, Michael D. (2002) Comparing Precaution in the United States and Europe. Journal of Risk Research 5. Hlm. 317-349.

Wirth, David A. (1995) The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development: Two Steps Forward and One Back, or Vice Versa. Georgia Law Review 29. Hlm. 599-653.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24970/bhl.v5i1.156

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


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



Jurnal Bina Hukum Lingkungan telah terindeks pada:

                                                          

 

Journal Accreditation:



Plagiarism Check:

BHL is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution

  Redaksi Jurnal Bina Hukum Lingkungan © 2016