Sublimitas Supra-Dogma Hukum Adat dalam Hierarkhi Kaidah-kaidah Hukum Internasional

Herman Bakir

Abstract


This descriptive research is specifically prepared to explore the dogma of Jus Cogens regarding its status as the highest legal source of International Customary Law, registering moments that the way this doctrine is institutionalized is such status; explore the ways in which Jus Cogens is applied to solving international disputes. The approach used to approach the object under study is a juridical-dogmatic approach, an approach commonly used in Legal Dogmatic studies in general. Meanwhile, the research method used in the overall context of this research is the normative-doctrinal legal research method. This is the name for the system that will teach this research to map core issues; collect data; and, information, conduct analysis, and then draw a set of conclusions. The Results: (a) Jus Cogens is a dogma that was born and developed from International Customs Law; (b) Jus Cogens has been accepted/adopted as the Highest Norm in the tradition of International Law; and, (c) Jus Cogens has been applied for the first time in resolving disputes between Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Montenegro Serbia.

Keywords


Legal Dogmatic, Customary Law, International Law

Full Text:

PDF

References


Buku

Brownlie, Ian. 1998. Principles of Public International Law. Ed. 5. New York: Clarendon

Press

Crawford, James. 1979. The Creation of States in International Law. Ed. 2. Oxford: Oxford

University Press

Danilenko, Gennady M. International Jus Cogens: Issues of Law-Making. Jurnal. Dalam:

European Journal of International Law. Tanggal: 21 Januari 1991

Fard, Shahrad Nasrolahi. 2016. Routledge Research in International Law, Reciprocity in

International Law: Its Impact and Function. London-New York: Routledge Publisher

Kolb, Robert. 2015. Peremptory International Law—Jus Cogens: A General Inventory.

Oxford, dan Portland, Oregon Hart Publishing

Lauterpacht, Elihu; & C. J. Greenwood. 1996. The Research Centre of International Law

University of Cambridge: International Law Reports. Vol. 103. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

________________., et al. 2005. Lauterpacht Research Center for International Law

University of Cambridge: International Law Reports. Vol. 117. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Le Sueur, Andrew; Maurice Sunkin; &, Jo Murkens. 2013. Public Law: Text, Cases, and

Materials 2e. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Lepard, Brian D. 2010. Customary International Law: A New Theory with Practical

Applications. Cet. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

McCormack, Wayne. 2007. Understanding the Law of Terrorism. Binghamton, NY:

LexisNexis Matthew Bender

Ntoubandi, Faustin Z. 2007. Amnesty for Crimes Against Humanity Under International Law.

Leiden-Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers

Pattaro, Enrico. 2005. A Treatise of Legal Philosophy and General Jurisprudence: The Law

and The Right. Vol. 1. Dordrecht: Springer Publisher

Rehman, Javaid. 2000. The Weakness in the International Law Protection of Minority Rights.

The Hague-London-Boston: Kluwer Law International

Van Hoof, G. J. H. 1983. Rethinking the Sources of International Law. Deventer: Kluwer

Law and Taxation Publisher

Wallace, Rebecca & Olga Martin-Ortega. 2009. International Law. Ed. 6. London. Sweet &

Maxwell Publisher

Weissbrodt, David S. 2008. The Human Rights of Non-citizens. New York: Oxford

University Press

Jurnal

Bassiouni, M. Cherif. 1996. “International Crimes: ‘Jus Cogens’ and ‘Obligatio Erga

Omnes’.” Jurnal. Law and Contemporary Problems. Vol. 59. No. 4.

Byers, Michael. 1997. “Conceptualising the Relationship between Jus Cogens and Erga

Omnes Rules”. Jurnal. Nordic Journal of International Law. Vol. 66. Tanggal: 01/01/1997




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30652/ml.v2i2.6349

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.