Human Rights and the Investor-State Dispute Settlement Mechanisms

2021 ◽  
Vol 62 ◽  
pp. 23-47
Author(s):  
Seungnam Shin ◽  
Hanrim Suh
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanisms

The South China Sea Arbitration: Bindingness, Finality, and Compliance with UNCLOS Dispute Settlement Decisions

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-50
Author(s):  
Hao Duy PHAN ◽  
Lan Ngoc NGUYEN
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
South China ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
The South ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
State Compliance ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanisms

AbstractOn 12 July 2016, the Tribunal in theSouth China Seaarbitration issued its final award. China rejected the ruling as “null and void”. The Philippines dismissed it as “a piece of paper” after initially hailing the ruling a “milestone decision”. The reactions of the parties concerned raise important questions about the bindingness, finality, and state compliance with UNCLOS dispute settlement decisions. This paper addresses these questions by dissecting China’s arguments that the award “has no binding force” and by examining the options available for promoting compliance with the award. The paper also considers the broader question of how states generally comply with UNCLOS dispute settlement decisions and evaluates the significance of UNCLOS dispute settlement mechanisms, including theSouth China Seaarbitration, in the absence of external enforcement.

scholarly journals PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP PEKERJA ATAS HAK UPAH MINIMUM YANG BELUM SEPENUHNYA DIBAYAR (STUDI TERHADAP PUTUSAN NOMOR 58/K/PDT.SUS-PHI/2015)

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 389
Author(s):  
Safira Khairani ◽  
Andari Yurikosari
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Minimum Wage ◽  
Industrial Relation ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
District Court ◽  
Wage Policy ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
Human Labour ◽  
The Will ◽  
The Republic

Work and fair and proper remuniration are human rights of every person as stipulated on Article 28 D (2) The 1945 Constitution of The Republic Indonesia. Indonesia Law Number 13 Of 2003 regulates the rights and duties among entrepeneur and workers. Wage shall be received by worker/labourer as remuniration from entrepeneur. Labour Law provides the protection to wage as worker/labour’s right, stipulating that Government establishes a wage policy that protects the rights of worker/labourer such as Minimum Wage in order to fulfill every worker/labourer’s right to earn an income that meets livelihood that is decent for human. Labour Law also stipulates the wage will not be paid if worker/labourer do not perform work unless the worker/labourer has the will to do the job as promised but the entrepeneur does not employ them. The main issue in this research is the workers/labourers of PT. Srirejeki Perdana Steel claimed that they did not received full wage on November 2013 causing the amount of some of their wages lower than the amount of Minimum Wage set under valid statutory legislation. PT. Srirejeki Perdana Steel, postulated the reduction of the wage happened due to an illegal strike performed by the workers/labourers. The verdict on Industrial Relation Dispute Settlement of Bandung District Court and Indonesia Supreme Court did not grant the workers/labourers demand to get the fulfillment of their reducted wage. This research aims to acknowledge whether the protection towards workers/labors’s wage as verdicted by court followed the ruling as stipulated in Labourer Law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document