Sentencing over Objection to Mobilization as Military Reserve: An analysis of National and International Laws

A. Madjid
{"title":"Sentencing over Objection to Mobilization as Military Reserve: An analysis of National and International Laws","authors":"A. Madjid","doi":"10.21776/ub.blj.2022.009.01.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Law Number 23 of 2019 concerning National Resource Management for State Defense does not regulate conscientious objection, which refers to the right of a person to refuse to participate in a war or military service on the grounds of religion and morality. Their absence in such services is replaced by other responsibilities such as working in public health services, providing security, and being involved in other social services. Article 77 Paragraph (1) of Law Number 23 of 2019 expressly provides for sentences that should be imposed on those who refuse to serve as a military reserve, where the rule is not in accordance with the principle of conscientious objection which gives a person the right to refuse on the basis of conscience. This research discusses the legal consequences of the enactment of two rules regarding military service and the application of different conscientious objections. This study applied normative juridical methods and approaches to examine the consistency and relevance of various statutes and government regulations that govern conscientious objection. This study also used conceptual and statutory approaches to explore why conscientious objection is considered a ground for refusal to participate in conscription according to International Human Rights Law. The findings revealed that the conception of defense and compulsory military service in Indonesia does not leave any chance to guarantee the rights of citizens to refuse to participate in military service according to the conscience and belief of every individual (conscientious objection). This is in contrast to the regulatory provisions of international human rights ratified by Indonesia under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Additionally, there is a need for clear arrangements regarding conscientious objection and the requirements that must be met by citizens who submit these principles for the rejection of military service in Indonesia.","PeriodicalId":31451,"journal":{"name":"Brawijaya Law Journal","volume":"8 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brawijaya Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.blj.2022.009.01.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Law Number 23 of 2019 concerning National Resource Management for State Defense does not regulate conscientious objection, which refers to the right of a person to refuse to participate in a war or military service on the grounds of religion and morality. Their absence in such services is replaced by other responsibilities such as working in public health services, providing security, and being involved in other social services. Article 77 Paragraph (1) of Law Number 23 of 2019 expressly provides for sentences that should be imposed on those who refuse to serve as a military reserve, where the rule is not in accordance with the principle of conscientious objection which gives a person the right to refuse on the basis of conscience. This research discusses the legal consequences of the enactment of two rules regarding military service and the application of different conscientious objections. This study applied normative juridical methods and approaches to examine the consistency and relevance of various statutes and government regulations that govern conscientious objection. This study also used conceptual and statutory approaches to explore why conscientious objection is considered a ground for refusal to participate in conscription according to International Human Rights Law. The findings revealed that the conception of defense and compulsory military service in Indonesia does not leave any chance to guarantee the rights of citizens to refuse to participate in military service according to the conscience and belief of every individual (conscientious objection). This is in contrast to the regulatory provisions of international human rights ratified by Indonesia under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Additionally, there is a need for clear arrangements regarding conscientious objection and the requirements that must be met by citizens who submit these principles for the rejection of military service in Indonesia.
反对动员为预备役的量刑:国内法与国际法的分析
关于国防国家资源管理的2019年第23号法律没有规定出于良心拒服兵役,即个人有权以宗教和道德为由拒绝参加战争或兵役。他们在这些服务中的缺席被其他职责所取代,如在公共卫生服务部门工作、提供安全保障和参与其他社会服务。2019年第23号法律第77条第(1)款明确规定,如果拒绝服军事预备役的人的规则不符合良心拒服兵役的原则,则应判处刑罚,良心拒服原则赋予一个人基于良心拒绝服兵役的权利。本研究讨论了颁布关于服兵役的两项规则以及适用不同的良心反对意见的法律后果。本研究采用了规范性的司法方法和方法来审查管辖依良心拒服兵役的各种法规和政府条例的一致性和相关性。这项研究还采用了概念和法律方法来探讨为什么根据《国际人权法》,出于良心拒服兵役被视为拒绝参加征兵的理由。调查结果表明,印度尼西亚的国防和义务兵役概念没有留下任何机会来保障公民根据每个人的良心和信仰拒绝服兵役的权利(良心拒服兵役)。这与印度尼西亚根据《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》批准的国际人权规范条款形成了鲜明对比。此外,还需要就出于良心拒服兵役作出明确安排,以及提交这些原则拒绝在印度尼西亚服兵役的公民必须满足的要求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信