Juridical Analysis The Provisions Of Article 69 Paragraph (4) Of Law Number 45 Of 2009 Concerning Amendments To Law Number 31 Of 2004 Concerning Fisheries In Terms Of Sinking Ships Without A Court Decision

by ADMIN 206 views

Juridical Analysis The Provisions of Article 69 Paragraph (4) of Law Number 45 of 2009 Concerning Amendments to Law Number 31 of 2004 Concerning Fisheries in Terms of Sinking Ships without a Court Decision

Introduction

The provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) of Law Number 45 of 2009 concerning Amendments to Law Number 31 of 2004 concerning Fisheries have been a subject of controversy in the field of law enforcement. This provision grants authority to fisheries investigators to sink foreign vessels suspected of violating fisheries law without the need to wait for the court's decision. The aim of this provision is to accelerate law enforcement against illegal fishing actions that are increasingly troubling. However, there is a disharmony in the legislation produced, especially related to other provisions in the same law.

The provision of Article 69 paragraph (4) states that investigators can sink foreign ships based on sufficient preliminary evidence. However, on the other hand, Article 76A and Article 76C in the same Act require an approval from the Chairperson of the District Court before the evidence or tools used in fisheries crimes can be confiscated or destroyed. This discrepancy creates legal uncertainty, especially in the implementation of law enforcement against fisheries crime.

Legal Implications and Law Enforcement

The sinking of the ship without a court decision can be seen as an action that gives special authority to fisheries investigators. This has the potential to create controversial legal precedents. While this action aims to maintain fisheries resources and prevent greater losses for the state, procedural clarity and protection of human rights remain an unpredictable issue.

It is essential to understand that good law enforcement requires a balance between speed in handling cases and legal certainty. In the context of sinking ships, this action should not ignore the procedures and rights of the crew. Before the ship was submerged, officers must ensure the safety of the crew in accordance with the 1982 UNCLOS provisions that protect maritime rights.

The provision of Article 69 paragraph (4) has been criticized for its potential to infringe on human rights. The sinking of a ship without a court decision can be seen as a violation of the right to a fair trial and the right to life. The provision also raises concerns about the potential for abuse of power by fisheries investigators.

Objective and Subjective Criteria

To emphasize the legality of the ship sinking acts, investigators need to meet objective and subjective criteria stipulated in Director Regulation Number 11 of 2014. These criteria include sufficient evidence and careful consideration before taking extreme actions. Activities drowning the ship need to be done carefully and with careful consideration so as not to increase legal conflict in the future.

The objective criteria include the presence of sufficient evidence to support the sinking of the ship. This evidence must be based on credible sources and must be sufficient to establish the guilt of the ship's crew. The subjective criteria include careful consideration by the investigators before taking extreme actions. This consideration must take into account the potential consequences of the action and the potential impact on the crew and the ship.

The Role of the Court

The court plays a crucial role in ensuring that the provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) are implemented in a fair and just manner. The court must ensure that the investigators have met the objective and subjective criteria before taking extreme actions. The court must also ensure that the rights of the crew are protected and that the procedures followed are in accordance with the law.

Conclusion

Based on the above analysis, the provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) of Law Number 45 of 2009 concerning Sinking Ships without a court decision must be seen more carefully. Although providing speed in law enforcement to fishery violations, these provisions must be accompanied by implementation that adheres to clear legal procedures and respect the rights of individuals involved. By ensuring compliance with legal norms and protection of human rights, Indonesia can strengthen law enforcement in the fisheries sector while creating better legal certainty for all parties involved.

Recommendations

Based on the analysis, the following recommendations are made:

  1. The government should review the provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) to ensure that they are in line with international human rights standards.
  2. The government should establish clear guidelines for the implementation of the provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) to ensure that they are implemented in a fair and just manner.
  3. The government should ensure that the rights of the crew are protected and that the procedures followed are in accordance with the law.
  4. The government should establish a system for monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) to ensure that they are effective and efficient.

Future Research Directions

Future research directions include:

  1. Conducting a comprehensive analysis of the provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) to identify the potential implications for human rights.
  2. Conducting a study on the implementation of the provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) to identify the challenges and opportunities for effective law enforcement.
  3. Conducting a study on the impact of the provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) on the fisheries sector and the economy.
  4. Conducting a study on the potential for abuse of power by fisheries investigators and the measures that can be taken to prevent it.

References

  1. Law Number 45 of 2009 concerning Amendments to Law Number 31 of 2004 concerning Fisheries.
  2. Director Regulation Number 11 of 2014.
  3. 1982 UNCLOS.
  4. International human rights standards.

Appendices

  1. List of abbreviations used in the thesis.
  2. List of acronyms used in the thesis.
  3. List of references cited in the thesis.
  4. List of appendices included in the thesis.
    Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about the Provisions of Article 69 Paragraph (4) of Law Number 45 of 2009 Concerning Sinking Ships without a Court Decision

Q: What is the purpose of Article 69 paragraph (4) of Law Number 45 of 2009?

A: The purpose of Article 69 paragraph (4) is to grant authority to fisheries investigators to sink foreign vessels suspected of violating fisheries law without the need to wait for the court's decision.

Q: What are the criteria for sinking a ship under Article 69 paragraph (4)?

A: The criteria for sinking a ship under Article 69 paragraph (4) include sufficient evidence and careful consideration by the investigators before taking extreme actions.

Q: What is the role of the court in ensuring that the provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) are implemented in a fair and just manner?

A: The court plays a crucial role in ensuring that the provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) are implemented in a fair and just manner. The court must ensure that the investigators have met the objective and subjective criteria before taking extreme actions.

Q: What are the potential implications of Article 69 paragraph (4) for human rights?

A: The sinking of a ship without a court decision can be seen as a violation of the right to a fair trial and the right to life. The provision also raises concerns about the potential for abuse of power by fisheries investigators.

Q: What are the potential consequences of the sinking of a ship under Article 69 paragraph (4)?

A: The potential consequences of the sinking of a ship under Article 69 paragraph (4) include the loss of life, damage to the environment, and economic losses.

Q: What are the measures that can be taken to prevent the abuse of power by fisheries investigators?

A: The measures that can be taken to prevent the abuse of power by fisheries investigators include establishing clear guidelines for the implementation of Article 69 paragraph (4), ensuring that the rights of the crew are protected, and establishing a system for monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the provision.

Q: What is the impact of Article 69 paragraph (4) on the fisheries sector and the economy?

A: The impact of Article 69 paragraph (4) on the fisheries sector and the economy is still unclear and requires further research.

Q: What are the future research directions related to Article 69 paragraph (4)?

A: The future research directions related to Article 69 paragraph (4) include conducting a comprehensive analysis of the provision, conducting a study on the implementation of the provision, and conducting a study on the impact of the provision on the fisheries sector and the economy.

Q: What are the recommendations for the government to ensure that the provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) are implemented in a fair and just manner?

A: The recommendations for the government include reviewing the provision to ensure that it is in line with international human rights standards, establishing clear guidelines for the implementation of the provision, and ensuring that the rights of the crew are protected.

Q: What are the appendices included in this article?

A: The appendices included in this article are the list of abbreviations used in the article, the list of acronyms used in the article, the list of references cited in the article, and the list of appendices included in the article.

Q: What is the purpose of this article?

A: The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the provisions of Article 69 paragraph (4) of Law Number 45 of 2009 concerning Sinking Ships without a Court Decision and to provide recommendations for the government to ensure that the provisions are implemented in a fair and just manner.