Search

Kashmir has been a flashpoint of conflict since independence from British rule in 1947 and the partition of India into two states. These two countries, India, and Pakistan, have both claimed the land on the northern most sector of the Subcontinent the focal point of which is the Valley of Kashmir. The conflict is not a domestic dispute or a regional issue between the two protagonists but engages international law because of the human rights violations and the atrocities committed that has engaged international humanitarian law.  The occupation by India of Kashmir was controversial from the start as it went against the aspirations of the population who had close affinity and kinship with Pakistan. The United Nations Security Council mandated a referendum to decide the future of the territory divided by a Line of Control, a military boundary, but India has refused to implement the resolutions. The Indian army has cracked down on the population under the Special Powers Act 1958 and various other opaque ordinances that oppress the population. The final act in this de facto occupation was transformed into de jure control by the Indian Parliament when it revoked Article 370 and Article 35 of the Constitution and annexed Kashmir. The Valley has been placed under lockdown and the population disfranchised with all political activity banned and demographic changes underway by a government appointed by India. The pogroms committed by the Security forces and the gross abuses of human rights have been catalogued in two UN Human Rights Council reports that implicate the Indian forces. The argument of this paper is that there should be rigorous application of international law and war crimes tribunals should be invested to prosecute the Indian officials for breaches of human rights established in the conduct of non-international conflicts (NIC).

West Papua as one of the regions in Indonesia that integrates with the New York Agreement between Indonesia and the Netherlands carries the right of self-determination in an effort to separate from Indonesia. This research discusses how the regulation of the right to self-determination as part of Human Rights and examines the basis of West Papua in carrying out the right to self-determination and declaring itself as a state. This type of research is normative, with statutory (statue) and historical approaches. This research concludes that the right to self-determination is part of human rights, while West Papua’s claim as part of the Indonesian State in demanding the right to self-determination is clashed with the Uti Possidetis Juris and Territorial Integrity.             &nbsp, Papua Barat sebagai salah satu wilayah di Indonesia yang berintegrasi dengan Persetujuan New York antara Indonesia dan Belanda mengusung hak menentukan nasib sendiri dalam upaya memisahkan diri dari Indonesia. Penelitian ini membahas bagaimana pengaturan hak menentukan nasib sendiri sebagai bagian dari Hak Asasi Manusia dan mengkaji dasar Papua Barat dalam mengusung hak menentukan nasib sendiri dan mendeklarasikan diri sebagai negara. Jenis Penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif, dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statue approach) dan pendekatan sejarah (historical approach). Penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa hak menentukan nasib sendiri merupakan bagian dari hak asasi manusia dan klaim Papua Barat sebagai bagian dari Negara Indonesia dalam menuntut hak menentukan nasib sendiri terbentur dengan Uti Possidetis Juris dan Territorial Integrity

West Papua as one of the regions in Indonesia that integrates with the New York Agreement between Indonesia and the Netherlands carries the right of self-determination in an effort to separate from Indonesia. This research discusses how the regulation of the right to self-determination as part of Human Rights and examines the basis of West Papua in carrying out the right to self-determination and declaring itself as a state. This type of research is normative, with statutory (statue) and historical approaches. This research concludes that the right to self-determination is part of human rights, while West Papua’s claim as part of the Indonesian State in demanding the right to self-determination is clashed with the Uti Possidetis Juris and Territorial Integrity.             &nbsp, Papua Barat sebagai salah satu wilayah di Indonesia yang berintegrasi dengan Persetujuan New York antara Indonesia dan Belanda mengusung hak menentukan nasib sendiri dalam upaya memisahkan diri dari Indonesia. Penelitian ini membahas bagaimana pengaturan hak menentukan nasib sendiri sebagai bagian dari Hak Asasi Manusia dan mengkaji dasar Papua Barat dalam mengusung hak menentukan nasib sendiri dan mendeklarasikan diri sebagai negara. Jenis Penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif, dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statue approach) dan pendekatan sejarah (historical approach). Penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa hak menentukan nasib sendiri merupakan bagian dari hak asasi manusia dan klaim Papua Barat sebagai bagian dari Negara Indonesia dalam menuntut hak menentukan nasib sendiri terbentur dengan Uti Possidetis Juris dan Territorial Integrity

West Papua as one of the regions in Indonesia that integrates with the New York Agreement between Indonesia and the Netherlands carries the right of self-determination in an effort to separate from Indonesia. This research discusses how the regulation of the right to self-determination as part of Human Rights and examines the basis of West Papua in carrying out the right to self-determination and declaring itself as a state. This type of research is normative, with statutory (statue) and historical approaches. This research concludes that the right to self-determination is part of human rights, while West Papua’s claim as part of the Indonesian State in demanding the right to self-determination is clashed with the Uti Possidetis Juris and Territorial Integrity.             &nbsp, Papua Barat sebagai salah satu wilayah di Indonesia yang berintegrasi dengan Persetujuan New York antara Indonesia dan Belanda mengusung hak menentukan nasib sendiri dalam upaya memisahkan diri dari Indonesia. Penelitian ini membahas bagaimana pengaturan hak menentukan nasib sendiri sebagai bagian dari Hak Asasi Manusia dan mengkaji dasar Papua Barat dalam mengusung hak menentukan nasib sendiri dan mendeklarasikan diri sebagai negara. Jenis Penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif, dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statue approach) dan pendekatan sejarah (historical approach). Penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa hak menentukan nasib sendiri merupakan bagian dari hak asasi manusia dan klaim Papua Barat sebagai bagian dari Negara Indonesia dalam menuntut hak menentukan nasib sendiri terbentur dengan Uti Possidetis Juris dan Territorial Integrity

Since that time when Jeremiah Bentham, used the term of Public International Law (1789), other authors such as Francisco Victoria, Francisco Suárez, Hugo Grotius, followed indiscriminately using it to justify various theories in the field of natural law to resolve a conflict that eventually nations may arise between the time of independence. Likewise, the legal instrument that regulates relations excellence among subjects are international treaties and the general principles governing the law of Treaties: The pacta sunt servanda (treaties must be met); Bona Fide (All Treaties must be fulfilled in good faith); Ex Consensus Advenit Vinculum (Del consent becomes the obligation) Inter Res Alios Act (treaties only create obligations between the parties), other things being equal (a party fails to comply with the Treaty when obligations are a threat to its existence). This means that the Vienna Convention does not explicitly enshrines the principle of Roman law ecumenical "Uti Possidetis". Perhaps that is why some scholars believe that one of the major contributions of the American Continent Public international law has been the principle of uti possidetis, used as a way to resolve questions (Are the conflicts?) arising geographical boundaries between states or countries Latin American, and supporters of the existence of a regional law with its own physiognomy, and include this principle repeatedly between the characteristic features of American international law. The principle of uti possidetis was essential legal tool to resolve conflicts between states bordering Hispanic Americans from 1810 to the present and delve further allows the background that explains the rights acquired by the Colombian state against international claim made by the government of Nicaragua, and is a historical view to explain the reasons for asserting that the overseas territories as San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina and other keys are of Colombian and Nicaraguan jurisdiction. In short, Desde aquela época na qual Jeremias Benthan, usou o vocábulo de Direito Internacional Público (1789), o resto dos autores como Francisco Victoria, Francisco Suarez, Hugo Grocio, continuaram usando-o indiferentemente, como justificativo de diversas teorias no campo Iusnaturalista para resolver algum conflito eventual que pudesse surgir entre as Nações ao momento de sua independência. Assim como o instrumento jurídico por excelência que regula as relações entre os sujeitos internacionais são os Tratados, assim como os princípios fundamentais gerais que regem o direito dos Tratados: A Pacta Sunt Servanda (Os Tratados devem ser cumpridos); Bona Fide (Todos os Tratados devem ser cumpridos de boa fé); Ex Consenso Advenit Vinculum (Do consentimento devem a obrigação); Rebus Sic Stantibus (Uma das partes deixa de cumprir o Tratado quando as obrigações significam uma ameaça para sua existência). Isto significa que a Convenção de Viena, não consagra de maneira explicita o princípio ecumênico do direito romano “Uti Possidetis”. Talvez por esse motivo alguns tratadistas consideram que uma das contribuições importantes do continente americano ao Direito Internacional Público tem sido o princípio de Uti Possidetis, usado como fórmula para solucionar as questões (¿Os conflitos?) de limites geográficos surgidas entre os Estados o países ibero-americanos; e os partidários da existência de um direito regional com fisionomia própria, e que reiteradamente incluem este princípio entre as notas características do direito internacional americano. O princípio do Uti possidetis tem sido uma ferramenta jurídica indispensável para resolver os conflitos limítrofes entre os estados hispano-americanos desde 1810 até o presente e permite ainda adentrar-nos aos antecedentes que explicam os direitos adquiridos pelo Estado colombiano em face à reclamação internacional realizada pelo governo de Nicarágua e constitui uma visão histórica para explicar os motivos para afirmar que os territórios de ultra, Desde aquella época en que Jeremías Benthan utilizó la frase:“Derecho Internacional Público”(1789)1, los demás autores como Francisco Victoria, Francisco Suárez, Hugo Grocio, siguieron empleándola indistintamente, para justificar diversas teorías en el campoIusnaturalista, y para resolver algún conflicto eventual que pudiera surgir entre las naciones al momento de su independencia. Así mismo, el instrumento jurídico por excelencia que regula las relaciones entre los sujetos internacionales son los “Tratados”, así como los principios fundamentales generales que rigen el derecho de los Tratados: La Pacta Sunt Servanda(Los Tratados deben ser cumplidos); Bona Fide (Todos los Tratados deben ser cumplidos de buena fe);Ex Consenso Advenit Vinculum (Del consentimiento deviene la obligación); Res Inter Alios Acta (Los Tratados solo crean obligaciones entre las partes); Rebus Sic Stantibus (Una de las partes deja de cumplir el Tratado cuando las obligaciones significan una amenaza para su existencia). Esto significa que la Convención de Vienano consagra de manera explícita el principio ecuménico del derecho romano: “Uti Possidetis”. Quizá por esa razón algunos tratadistas consideran que una de las contribuciones importantes del continente americano al Derecho Internacional Público ha sido el principio del Uti possidetis, usado como fórmula para resolver las cuestiones (¿los conflictos?) de límites geográficos surgidas entre los Estados o países iberoamericanos; y los partidarios de la existencia de underecho regionalcon fisonomía propia, y que reiteradamente incluyen este principio entre las notas características del derecho internacional americano. El principio del Uti possidetis ha sido la herramienta jurídica indispensable para solucionar los conflictos limítrofes entre los Estados hispanoamericanos desde 1810 hasta el presente, y permite además adentrarnos en los antecedentes que explican los derechos adquiridos por el Estado colombiano frente a la reclamación internacion