skip to main content

Analisis Yuridis Putusan Arbitrase Terkait Fitur-Fitur Maritim Di Laut China Selatan

*Riyan Fitriatmoko  -  Kementerian Agraria dan Perencanaan Khusus Kompleks Gubernur, Kabupaten Manokwari Provinsi Papua Barat, Indonesia
Edith Ratna M.S.  -  Kantor Notaris & PPAT Dr. Edith Ratna M.S. S.H. Kota Semarang Provinsi Jawa Tengah, Indonesia

Citation Format:
Abstract

Abtract

China refuses settle the South China Sea dispute with Phipippines even though has been lawsuit Arbitration Tribunal. This paper examines status maritime features after Tribunal’s decision and its implications for Indonesia. The method uses normative juridicial approach. Analytical using descriptive analytical based on dispute resolution 1982 Law of Sea Convention. Data used secondary data obtained from results literature study. The collected legal materails were analyzed with qualitative studies and conclusions were drawn using deductive method. Result the study, it is known that none of the disputed maritime features in the South China Sea are island and entitled to maritime zone in the form of exclusive economic zone, implications Tribunal’s arbitration decision for Indonesia can be used basis for resolving maritime boundary negotiations with neigboring countries.

Keywords: arbitration; maritime; south china sea.

Abstrak

 

Tiongkok menolak penyelesaian sengketa Laut Tiongkok Selatan dengan Filipina meskipun telah ada gugatan ke Arbitrase Tribunal. Penulisan ini meneliti bagaimanakah status fitur maritim setelah adanya putusan Tribunal dan implikasinya bagi Indonesia. Metode penulisan menggunakan pendekatan yuridis normatif. Metode analisis menggunakan deskritif analitis didasarkan pada penyelesaian sengketa dalam Konvensi Hukum Laut 1982. Data yang digunakan adalah data sekunder yang diperoleh dari hasil studi kepustakaan. Bahan hukum yang terkumpul dianalisis dengan kajian yang bersifat kualitiatif dan diambil kesimpulan dengan metode deduktif. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian diketahui bahwa tidak ada satupun fitur maritim yang dipersengketakan di Laut Tiongkok Selatan berstatus sebagai pulau dan berhak atas zona maritim berupa zona ekonomi eksklusif, implikasi putusan arbitrase Tribunal terhadap Indonesia dapat dijadikan sebagai dasar penyelesaian perundingan batas maritim dengan negara tetangga.

Kata kunci: arbitrase; maritim; laut tiongkok selatan

Note: This article has supplementary file(s).

Fulltext View|Download |  Research Instrument
Chinses Sovereignty and Joint Development: A Pragmatic Solution to the Spratly Island Dispute
Subject International Arbitration, Permanent Court of Arbitrarion, Law of The Sea
Type Research Instrument
  Download (1MB)    Indexing metadata
Keywords: arbitration; maritime; south china sea.

Article Metrics:

  1. Aaron C. (2016, December). Indonesia In The South China Sea Going It Alone. Lowy Institute, 1
  2. Adolf, H. (2016). Putusan Arbitrase Laut Tiongkok Selatan, Indonesia Arbitration Quately
  3. Agoes, E.R. (2004). Praktik Negara-Negara Atas Konsepsi Negara Kepulauan. Jurnal Hukum Internasional, Vol. 1, (No. 3)
  4. Agusman, D.D. (2016). Laut Tiongkok Selatan: A Legal Brief, Jurnal Hukum dan Perjanjian Opinio Juris. Jurnal Hukum Dan Perjanjian Internasional Opinio Juris, Vol. 2, (No. 6)
  5. Almaududy, Ahmad., & Amri. (2016). Putusan Arbitral Tribunal Mengenai Fitur Maritim Di Laut China Selatan. Jurnal Hukum Dan Perjanjian Internasional Opinio Juris, Vol. 2, (No. 12)
  6. Charles, L. (1996). A Pragmatic Solution to The Spratly Island Dispute Loyola of Los Angles International Comporative Law Review. Chines Soveregnty and Joint Development, Vol. 18
  7. Dhiana, P. (2017). Hukum Laut Internasional. Jakarta: Kencana
  8. EIA. (2021, September 5). South Tiongkok Sea US Energy and Administration
  9. Fietta, Stephen., & Cleverly, Robin. (2016). A Practitioner Guide To Maritme Boundary Delimitation. Oxford United Kingdom: Oxford University Press
  10. Jemadu, A. (2008). Politik Globa: Dalam Politik dan Praktik. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu
  11. Kurniaty, & Ikaningtyas. (2018). Analysis on Traditional Fishing Grounds in Indonesia’s Natuna Waters Under International Law. Analysis on Traditional Fishing Grounds in Indonesia, Vol. 1, (No. 1)
  12. Leo, S. (2016). Did The Natuna Incident Shake Indonesia-China Relation. ISEAS Edu (Yusof Ishak Institue). Retrieved from https://www.iseas.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ISEAS_Perspective_2016_19.pdf
  13. Muhammad, A. (2004). Hukum Dan Penelitian Hukum. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti
  14. PCA Press Release. (2016). The South Tiongkok Sea Arbitration (The Republic of Philippine v The People’s of Republic of Tiongkok Retrieved from https://www.pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/1782
  15. Permanent Court of Arbitration. (2014). The Philippine Memorial, Arbitration Under Annex VII og The United Nations Conventions on The Law of The Sea
  16. Permanent Court of Arbitration. (2015). Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility
  17. Permanent Court of Arbitration. (2016). Arbitral Tribunal Award in The Matter og The South China Sea Arbitration
  18. PCA-CPA. (2021). The Philipines Memorial, Republic of Philipine v. People Republic of Tiongkok
  19. Sodik, D.M. (2014). Hukum Laut Internasional. Bandung: PT. Refka Aditama
  20. Syah, M.I. (2016). Penyelesaian Sengketa Di Luar Pengadilan Via Arbitrase. Yogyakarta: Calpulis
  21. Soekanto, Soerjono., & Mamudji, Sri. (2001). Penelitian Hukum Normatif (Suatu Tinjauan Singkat). Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada
  22. Suwardi, S.S. (2006). Penyelesaikaan Sengketa Internasional. Jakarta: UI-Press
  23. Wayan, P.I. (2016). Hukum Laut Internasional dan Hukum Laut Indonesia. Bandung: Yrama Widya
  24. Wiranto, S. (2016). Resolusi Konflik Menghadapi Sengketa Laut China Selatan. Bandung: Cakrawala
  25. FLorene, U. (2016). Indonesia Tuntut Penjelasan Tiongkok Yang Melanggar Perairan Natuna. Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/world/indonesia/127023-indonesia-tuntut-penjelasan-tiongkok-perairan-natuna/
  26. Usmawadi, & Syahmin Ak. (2012). Hukum Penyelesaian Sengketa Internasional. Palembang: Unsri Press

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2024-07-16 19:26:12

No citation recorded.