Suchergebnisse

Paradigms or perspectives on immigration issues are not limited to population movements between countries which are only seen from the element of movement but also include all aspects that accompany them both regionally and globally. A holistic understanding of the immigration paradigm and its changes causes the arrangement of immigration law to be carried out in a direct manner which is a political elaboration of national immigration law and becomes more appropriate. The political development of immigration law in Indonesia is divided into two parts, namely (1) Politics of the National Immigration Law which consists of: Legal Politics in the Field of Immigration during the Dutch East Indies (1913-1949), Legal Politics in Immigration in 1950-1992, Politics Law on Immigration in 1992-2011, Legal Policy in Immigration in 2011 - Now. With the issuance of Law No. 6 of 2011 concerning Immigration which was promulgated on May 5, 2011, then based on Chapter XV Article 142, Law No. 9 of 1992 concerning Immigration and its related provisions are declared null and void. When compared, the material of Law No. 6 of 2011 concerning Immigration, basically does not substantially change the politics of immigration law in principle which is contained in the previous immigration law. (2) Politics of International Immigration Law. The development of legal politics in the field of immigration globally has undergone many changes, which if we look at the post-World War II period, in order to accommodate and accommodate the problems that arise as a result of large-scale exodus (exodus), especially the state- countries directly involved in World War II. Problems faced globally at that time both concerning the country of origin, transit country and destination country have different problems that can be categorized in several ways, such as poverty, income level per capita, quality of education, age, culture, race, religion, and several other problems. ; Paradigma atau cara pandang terhadap masalah imigrasi bukan sebatas pada perpindahan penduduk antar negara yang hanya dilihat dari unsur pergerakan tetapi juga meliputi segala aspek yang menyertainya baik secara regional maupun global. Pemahaman yang holistik mengenai paradigma imigrasi dan perubahannya menyebabkan penataan hukum keimigrasian harus dilakukan secara terarah yang merupakan penjabaran politik hukum keimigrasian nasional dan menjadi lebih tepat. Perkembangan politik hukum keimigrasian di Indonesia dibagi dalam dua bagian, yaitu (1) Politik Hukum Keimigrasian Nasional yang terdiri dari: Politik Hukum di Bidang Keimigrasian pada Masa Hindia Belanda (1913-1949), Politik Hukum di Bidang Keimigrasian pada Tahun 1950-1992, Politik Hukum di Bidang Keimigrasian pada Tahun 1992-2011, Politik Hukum di Bidang Keimigrasian pada Tahun 2011- Sekarang. Dengan diterbitkan Undang-Undang Nomor 6 Tahun 2011 tentang Keimigrasian yang telah diundangkan pada tanggal 05 Mei 2011, maka berdasarkan Bab XV Pasal 142, Undang-Undang No 9 Tahun 1992 tentang Keimigrasian dan ketentuan-ketentuan yang berkaitan dengannya dinyatakan tidak berlaku lagi. Bila dibandingkan, maka materi Undang-Undang No 6 Tahun 2011 tentang Keimigrasian, pada dasarnya secara prinsip tidak banyak mengubah politik hukum keimigrasian dimana termuat di dalam undang-undang keimigrasian yag terdahulu. (2) Politik Hukum Keimigrasian Internasional. Perkembangan politik hukum di bidang keimigrasian secara global telah banyak mengalami perubahan-perubahan, yang apabila kita melihat pada periode pasca Perang Dunia ke II, guna menampung serta mengakomodaksikan masalah-masalah yang timbul akibat pengungsian yang dilakukan secara besar-besaran (eksodus) terutama negara-negara yang terlibat langsung Perang Dunia II. Masalah yang dihadapi secara global saat itu baik yang menyangkut negara asal, negara transit maupun negara tujuan memiliki persoalan yang berbeda dapat dikategorikan dalam beberapa hal, seperti kemiskinan, tingkat income perkapita, kualitas edukasi, usia, kultur, ras, agama, dan beberapa masalah lainnya.

The expulsion of refugees, either by the state party or by the non-state party to the 1951 Refugee Convention or countries has protracted the refugees' suffering. Some countries which are the parties to the 1951 Convention even drive out the refugees to outside their national territory for reasons that the refugees were threatening national security or disturbing public order in the country. In the discussion, it is found that firstly, the principle of non-refoulement is a jus cogen and has become customary international law. The non-refoulement principle has legal binding power to both the State party and the non-State party to the 1951 Refugee Convention. Secondly, according to Article 32 paragraph 1 of the 1951 Convention, the implementation of the principle of non-refouelement is not absolute. Exceptions can only be made if the refugees concerned become a threat to national security and disturb public. Thirdly, Indonesia has not yet the State Party to the Refugee Convention of 1951 but Indonesia is subject to the principle of non-refouelement. This is because (i) Indonesia has ratified the Convention against Torture, the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Person in Time of War and the ICCPR/International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (set on the principle of non-refoulement), (ii) the obligation of the state to rule of customary international law (based on the moral and ethical aspects of the enforcement of international law), and (iii) there is legal instrument issued by the government related to the principle of the principle of non-refouelement; Fourth, there is no written sanctions imposed on Indonesia if violations of international law are with regard to the refugee problems.

The Indonesian government is experiencing difficulties in dealing with the refugee problem. This is because the number of refugees in the waiting period is increasing and the destination country limits the acceptance quota. Currently, the refugee problem in Indonesia is regulated in Presidential Regulation No. 125/2016. However, its implementation has not been optimal, as it is hampered by coordination and legal compliance factors. The implementation of the Presidential Regulation creates inconsistencies in legal norms with other regulations. Then, some local governments have begun to reject the presence of refugees. They are not willing to prepare shelters for refugees, because it burdens the budget. Currently, the government does not have a long-term solution that can be used to solve the refugee problem in Indonesia. This paper will discuss Indonesia's role in solving the refugee problem by formulating strategic policies from a humanitarian perspective. This article uses socio-legal research with a qualitative approach. Although not a state party to the 1951 Convention, Indonesia has adopted various international laws that protect the human rights of refugees. However, its legal legitimacy is still disputed from the perspective of state security and sovereignty. Indonesia continues to be encouraged to ratify the convention to strengthen the promotion and defense of refugee rights. In fact, ratification can be a quick way to bridge the gap between international and domestic legal frameworks in addressing refugee issues in Indonesia. However, the government cannot wait to resolve this issue until the convention is ratified. There are several long-term solutions that can be practiced to address the refugee issue, including: pushing for human rights instruments to implement the basic rights of refugees; re-establishing the refugee issue as part of the National Human Rights Action Plan; revising Presidential Regulation No. 125/2016; and formulating a new policy with Indonesia, UNHCR, and giving greater authority to IOM to empower refugees while they wait to enter the destination country.