scholarly journals Kajian Terhadap Hak atas Kebebasan Beragama dan Berkeyakinan serta Hak atas Pekerjaan

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Duwi Handoko

The purpose of this study is to analyze the freedom to embrace religion and belief and fulfill the right to work in Indonesia. This type of research is normative legal research specifically discussing human rights in the field of religion and work. Regulation on the role and sanction for the government in the context of guaranteeing religious freedom, especially for Muslims, is very important. One form of legal vacuum in the regulation of religious freedom in Indonesia is in the context of the release of someone from Islam who aims to save humanity (of course also for other religions in Indonesia) and embrace other religions of his own free will. Regulations regarding the role and sanctions for the government in the context of guaranteed rights to obtain decent jobs, especially at productive age, are very important. Technically, it is clearly impossible for employers to recruit workers if there are no jobs in accordance with the capacity of the company's needs. From this, it can be said that the fulfillment of the right to work has a correlation with other types of rights so that a worker can have competence. The amount of unemployment that cannot be reduced by the Indonesian government and discriminatory treatment is a form of violation of the right to work.

Author(s):  
Nicholas Hatzis

Is the government ever justified in restricting offensive speech? This question has become particularly important in relation to communications which offend the religious sensibilities of listeners. It is often argued that insulting a person’s beliefs is tantamount to disrespecting the believer; that insults are a form of hatred or intolerance; that the right to religious freedom includes a more specific right not to be insulted in one’s beliefs; that religious minorities have a particularly strong claim to be protected from offence; and that censorship of offensive speech is necessary for the prevention of social disorder and violence. None of those arguments is convincing. Offence is an unpleasant mental state caused when our expectations of being treated in a particular way are frustrated. Drawing on law and philosophy, the book argues that there is no moral right to be protected from offence and that, while freedom of religion is an important right which grounds negative and positive obligations for the state, it is unpersuasive to interpret constitutional and human rights provisions as including a right not to be caused offence. Rather, we have good reasons to think of public discourse as a space for the expression of all viewpoints about the ethical life, including those which some listeners will find offensive, as this is necessary to sustain a society’s capacity for self-reflection and change.


Author(s):  
Putu Eva Laheri

This is a research after state responsibility for the damages suffered by tourists in relation with the violation of the right to tourism as a part of Human Rights, aims to describe and analyze about the liability of Indonesian Government to respect, protect and fulfill the right of every individual toward to enjoy his/her rights to tourism under Article 28I (4) of the Indonesian Constitution Year 1945 and Article 8 Statute Number 39 Year 1999 regarding Human Rights. Furthermore this research is willing to assess the circumstances that might create a possibility for tourists to file a claim of compensation against the Indonesian Government for the losses suffered as a result of the failure/the negligence of Indonesian Government to fulfill its responsibilities. Based on statement mentioned above, the question arises, whether in concept, tourists are able to file a claim of compensation against the Indonesian Government in relation with the recognition of the right to tourism as a part of Human Rights? And also in terms of how tourists can possibly file a claim of compensation against the Indonesian Government? The method used in this research is the method of normative legal research using the statute approach, the comparative approach as well as the conceptual approach. Based on the research that has been done, the conclusion is that in concept tourists can file a claim of compensation against the Indonesian Government, if they can prove that the damage or loss is caused by a violation of Human Rights conducted by the Indonesian Government and the result of this research further shows that the claim should be filed together with stating prove that the Indonesian Government has conducted a violation of the rights to tourism as a part of Human Rights.


2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 71
Author(s):  
Linda Evirianti

Everyone has the right of religious freedom or belief which becomes one of important parts of Human Rights (HAM/Hak Asasi Manusia). Thus, no one can be subjected to coercion that can interfere his freedom to adopt or embrace a religion or belief of his choice. The main characteristic of modern constitutional state is the guarantee of human rights in its constitution. In the Constitution NKRI 1945 has set human rights and the rights of citizens in the form of guarantees freedom for each citizen to embrace religion and worship according to their religion or belief. A state guarantees the freedom of each citizen to adopt a religion or belief, but the state (the government) must regulate the freedom in implementing and practicing a religion or belief so that the government can respect, protect, enforce and promote Human Right (HAM) and conserving security, order, health or public morals. Speaking of human rights in Islam is not an historical product arising from human ideology, a concept that has a theological dimension and will be accountable to God. Freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief is part of the most important human rights, even have status as a right that should not be reduced and violated under any circumstances. On the other hand, religious freedom protects the phenomenon that can be controversial and dangerous for human existence, because religion and systems of ideological belief can be misused to trigger intolerance, discrimination, prejudice, hatred, and violence.[Setiap orang berhak atas kebebasan beragama atau kepercayaan yang menjadi salah satu bagian penting Hak Asasi Manusia. Dengan demikian, tidak ada yang bisa terkena paksaan yang bisa mengganggu kebebasannya untuk mengadopsi atau menganut agama atau kepercayaan pilihannya. Karakteristik utama negara konstitusional modern adalah jaminan hak asasi manusia dalam konstitusinya. Dalam Konstitusi NKRI 1945 telah menetapkan hak asasi manusia dan hak warga negara dalam bentuk jaminan kebebasan bagi setiap warga negara untuk merangkul agama dan ibadah sesuai agama atau kepercayaan mereka. Sebuah negara menjamin kebebasan setiap warga negara untuk mengadopsi agama atau kepercayaan, namun negara (pemerintah) harus mengatur kebebasan dalam melaksanakan dan mempraktikkan agama atau kepercayaan sehingga pemerintah dapat menghormati, melindungi, menerapkan dan mempromosikan Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM). Dan melestarikan keamanan, ketertiban, kesehatan atau moral publik. Berbicara tentang hak asasi manusia dalam Islam bukanlah produk historis yang muncul dari ideologi manusia, sebuah konsep yang memiliki dimensi teologis dan akan bertanggung jawab kepada Tuhan. Kebebasan berpikir, hati nurani, agama dan kepercayaan adalah bagian dari hak asasi manusia yang paling penting, bahkan memiliki status sebagai hak yang tidak boleh dikurangi dan dilanggar dalam kondisi apapun. Di sisi lain, kebebasan beragama melindungi fenomena yang bisa kontroversial dan berbahaya bagi eksistensi manusia, karena agama dan sistem kepercayaan ideologis dapat disalahgunakan untuk memicu intoleransi, diskriminasi, prasangka, kebencian, dan kekerasan.]


INICIO LEGIS ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 164-182
Author(s):  
Halim Dimas Ferdiansyah ◽  
Syamsul Fatoni

ABSTRAKDasar pertimbangan dikeluarkannya Peraturan Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia Nomor 10 Tahun 2020 tentang Persyaratan Pemberian Hak Asimilasi dan Integrasi bagi Narapidana dan Anak dalam rangka pencegahan dan penanggulangan penyebaran COVID-19. dengan banyaknya tingkat hunian di penjara, hal ini telah menimbulkan kekhawatiran bagi pemerintah. Namun, terpidana yang dibebaskan mengulangi kejahatannya lagi dan menimbulkan kecemasan publik. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui perbedaan antara Permenkumham Nomor 3 Tahun 2018 dengan Permenkumham Nomor 20 Tahun 2020 dan kesesuaian prinsip pembinaan dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 1995 tentang pemasyarakatan. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah penelitian hukum normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatan konseptual. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa perbedaan pemberian hak asimilasi dan integrasi narapidana dalam Permenkumham Nomor 3 Tahun 2018 diberikan sesuai dengan persyaratan substantif dan administratif secara lengkap. Namun dalam Permenkuham Nomor 10 Tahun 2020 terdapat beberapa perbedaan dalam hal pemberian hak asimilasi dan integrasi, baik persyaratan substantif maupun administratif, sehingga Permenkumham Nomor 10 Tahun 2020 memudahkan narapidana mendapatkan hak asimilasi dan integrasi. serta pelaksanaan ketentuan pemberian asimilasi dan integrasi dalam Permenkumham Nomor 10 Tahun 2020 tidak sesuai dengan prinsip pembinaan dalam undang-undang pemasyarakatan. Ketidaksesuaian tersebut dikarenakan adanya narapidana yang kembali melakukan tindak pidana, hal ini menunjukkan kegagalan dalam melakukan pembinaan terhadap narapidana. Pasalnya, program pembebasan hanya berfokus pada pencegahan penularan COVID-19 di lapas Kata kunci: asimilasi, integrasi, narapidana, perbedaan dan kesesuaian Permenkumham ABSTRACTThe basis for the consideration of the issuance of Regulation of the Minister of Law and Human Rights Number 10 of 2020 concerning the Requirements for Granting Assimilation and Integration Rights for Prisoners and Children in the context of preventing and overcoming the spread of COVID-19. with many occupancy rates in prisons, it caused a concern of the government. However, the convict who was released repeated the crime again and caused public anxiety. The purpose of this research was to find out the difference between Permenkumham (Regulation of the minister of Law and human righs) Number 3 of 2018 and Permenkumham Number 20 of 2020 and the suitability of the principles of development with Law Number 12 of 1995 concerning correctionalism. The method used in this research was a type of normative legal research using a statutory approach, a conceptual approach. The results of this study indicated that the differences in the provision of assimilation rights and integration of prisoners in Permenkumham No.3 of 2018 were given in accordance with the complete substantive and administrative requirements. However, in Permenkuham No.10 of 2020 there are several differences in terms of granting assimilation and integration rights, both substantive and administrative requirements, so that Permenkumham No.10 of 2020 made it easier for inmates to get the right of assimilation and integration. and the implementation of the provisions for assimilation and integration in Permenkumham No.10 of 2020 is not in accordance with the principles of guidance in the correctional law. This mismatch was due to the presence of prisoners who had returned to committing criminal acts, this indicated a failure to provide guidance to prisoners. This was because the release program only focuses on preventing transmisfsion of COVID-19 in prisons. Keywords: Assimilation, Integration, Prisoners, Differences and suitability of Permenkumham


Author(s):  
Nicholas Hatzis

This chapter discusses whether there is a non-religious justification for limiting religiously offensive speech. The most commonly used argument is that the right to freedom of religion includes a more specific right to be protected from offence to one’s religious sensibilities. If this is correct, it provides a non-religious reason for censorship: even those who are hostile to religion can accept that religious freedom is an important right and that the government is justified in giving effect to rights. The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly upheld restrictions on expression which insults religious feelings, reasoning that religious freedom, as guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights, protects the religious sensibilities of believers from offence. I suggest that this interpretation is mistaken. After exploring how rights give rise to claims, I argue that there is no right-based claim to be protected from the unpleasant feelings caused by religious insults. Therefore, it is unpersuasive to describe cases of religious offence as involving the conflict of two fundamental rights—speech and religion—which require a balancing exercise to decide which one will prevail each time.


Media Iuris ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 289
Author(s):  
Adam Muhshi ◽  
Radian Salman

AbstractThis paper will examine the restrictions imposed by the Indonesian government on religious activities carried out together in places of worship during the covid-19 pandemic. These restrictions in recent times have even reached the level of closing places of worship. This restriction was carried out by the government with the aim of preventing the spread of the corona virus. However, in practice, the level of citizen compliance with these restrictions is still relatively low. The question that then arises is whether restrictions on religious activities carried out together in places of worship during a pandemic (health emergency) can be justified juridically. Departing from this problem, this article will try to analyze whether or not restrictions on religious activities are correct from the point of view of human rights and Islam. The answer to this question shows that the limitation of religious activities carried out jointly in places of worship in a health emergency finds its justification both in the perspective of human rights and in the perspective of Islamic law.Keywords: Restrictions on Religious Freedom; Corona Virus; health emergency; Human rights; Islam.AbstrakPaper ini akan mengkaji pembatasan yang dilakukan pemerintah Indonesia terhadap kegiatan keagamaan yang dilaksanakan secara bersama-sama di tempat ibadah pada masa pandemi covid-19. Pembatasan tersebut dalam beberapa waktu terakhir bahkan sampai pada level penutupan tempat ibadah. Pembatasan tersebut dilakukan oleh Pemerintah dengan tujuan untuk mencegah semakin meluasnya penularan virus korona. Namun dalam prakteknya, tingkat kepatuhan warga terhadap pembatasan tersebut masih relatif rendah. Pertanyaan yang kemudian muncul adalah apakah pembatasan terhadap kegiatan kegamaan yang dilakukan secara bersama-sama di tempat ibadah pada masa pandemi (darurat kesehatan) dapat dibenarkan secara yuridis. Berangkat dari persoalan tersebut, artikel ini akan mencoba untuk menganalisis tentang benar tidaknya pembatasan terhadap kegiatan keagamaan dalam sudut pandang HAM dan Islam. Jawaban terhadap persoalan tersebut menunjukkan bahwa pembatasan kegiatan kegamaan yang dilakukan secara bersama-sama di tempat ibadah dalam kondisi darurat kesehatan menemukan justifikasinya baik dalam perspektif HAM maupun dalam perspektif hukum Islam.Kata Kunci: Pembatasan Kebebasan Beragama; Virus Korona; Darurat Kesehatan; HAM; Islam.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 401-416
Author(s):  
I Wayan Wiryawan

Tourism sector is the largest source of income for Bali province of Indonesia. Unfortunately, the Covid-19 pandemic forced the closure of tourism. Therefore, Bali’s economic growth is experiencing decrease to -10.98%. To accelerate the reopening of tourism, the government has launched the national vaccine movement that also covers tourism business actors. Unfortunately, some parties resist the vaccination because the vaccine is not believed yet to be safe. By using doctrinal legal research, this study examined two problems: the right to health in the context of tourism and the construction of government policies against vaccine resistance by tourism business actors. It examined legal principles and synchronization of laws on human rights related to vaccination. The state is responsible to provide vaccination for the citizens in fulfilling the right to life and health. Each local government produces policy to deal with vaccine refusal. Jakarta and West Java are two provinces that impose fines for residents who refuse vaccines. On the other hand, Bali province does not impose sanctions on such residents. To ensure safety after the reopening of tourism, any local government can propose the record of vaccination as a requirement for every person who will return to work in the tourism sector.


2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 385
Author(s):  
La Sina

The 1945 Constitution of Indonesia provides for rights to life and to remain free from torture that are fundamental human rights that shall not be curtailed under any circumstance. Since 1945, Indonesia does not regulate the protection of the right of life to the citizens. Until 1946, enacted Law No. 1 of 1946 concerning the Indonesian Criminal Code which in several provisions concerning the death penalty. Death sentences and executions in Indonesia is always debatable. However, it is still implemented and can not be avoided, unless the change of its legal provisions. This study was a normative research or doctrinal research. The results of the study shows that the provisions of death penalty in Indonesia is still enforced because have been regulated in the Criminal Code and several organic laws such as the law of terrorism, narcotics, corruption, and human rights justice. The death penalty is contrary to Article 28I of the 1945 Constitution. It has set the rights to life, so that no one may violate human rights, including the government and the country is not granted the right to revoke rights for every citizen. The Indonesian government should not impose the death penalty contained in the draft new Code, and abolish the death penalty in its organic law that had been imposed on the offenders. Preferably, the death penalty may be replaced by alternative punishment with life imprisonment, a prison within a specified time or according to the judge’s decision.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 1675
Author(s):  
Trechsna Ali Ramadhani

AbstractCitizenship is fundamental in human life. A person who has the right to citizenship will be guaranteed in the constitution and this requires the state's responsibility to protect. However, there are actually some people who are stateless due to the state's withdrawal to their citizenship. This happened to Indonesian citizens who joined the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) after the Indonesian Government issued a statement that excluded its responsibility for Indonesian citizens who joined the ISIS organization. The Indonesian government statement also affects children who follow their parents to join the ISIS organization. Due to stateless parents, it is difficult for the child rights to be protected by the state, because the child's legal status is unknown. This legal research aims to unravel the legal status of ex-ISIS Indonesian citizen children and the responsibility of the Indonesian government to ex-ISIS Indonesian citizens.Keywords: State Responsibility; Legal Status; Human Rights;AbstrakKewarganegaraan merupakan hal yang sangat penting dalam kehidupan manusia. Seseorang dengan memiliki suatu kewarganegaraan terhadap suatu negara maka orang tersebut akan mendapatkan hak-hak asasi yang dijamin dalam konstitusi negara tersebut dan hal ini menimbulkan tanggung jawab negara tersebut untuk melindungi hal tersebut. Namun, pada faktanya terdapat beberapa orang yang berstatus tanpa kewarganegaraan akibat negara melepas kewarganegaraannya. Hal ini terjadi pada Warga Negara Indonesia yang bergabung dengan organisasi di Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) setelah Pemerintah Indonesia mengeluarkan pernyataan melepas tanggung jawab terhadap Warga Negara Indonesia yang tergabung dengan organisasi ISIS tersebut. Pernyataan Pemerintah Indonesia tersebut juga berdampak pada anak dibawah umur yang mengikuti orangtua mereka untuk bergabung dengan organisasi ISIS. Dengan orangtua mereka berstatus tanpa kewarganegaraan maka hak asasi anak tersebut sulit untuk dilindungi oleh negara, dikarenakan status hukum anak tersebut tidak diketahui. Penelitian hukum ini bertujuan untuk menegaskan status hukum Anak Warga Negara Indonesia eks ISIS serta tanggung jawab Pemerintah Indonesia terhadap Anak Warga Negara Indonesia eks ISIS.Kata Kunci: Tanggung Jawab Negara; Status Hukum; Hak Asasi Manusia.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gagah Yaumiyya Riyoprakoso ◽  
AM Hasan Ali ◽  
Fitriyani Zein

This study is based on the legal responsibility of the assessment of public appraisal reports they make in land procurement activities for development in the public interest. Public assessment is obliged to always be accountable for their assessment. The type of research found in this thesis is a type of normative legal research with the right-hand of the statue approach and case approach. Normative legal research is a study that provides systematic explanation of rules governing a certain legal category, analyzing the relationship between regulations explaining areas of difficulty and possibly predicting future development. . After conducting research, researchers found that one of the causes that made the dispute was a lack of communication conducted between the Government and the landlord. In deliberation which should be the place where the parties find the meeting point between the parties on the magnitude of the damages that will be given, in the field is often used only for the delivery of the assessment of the compensation that has been done.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document