| dc.description.abstract | The thesis is study about the hierarchy between Resolution 1267 and human
rights treaties (Article 12 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
and Article 17 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights), Resolution 1267 and
Indonesian Constitutional law; and the implication toward Indonesian legal order.
These are purposes to analyze and deeply discover the normative hierarchy between
Resolution 1267 and human rights treaties, Resolution 1267 and Indonesian
Constitutional law; and the implication of Resolution 1267 toward Indonesian legal
order. The author is using the methodology of qualitative data to analyze the
normative value hierarchy and the recognition of the Security Council resolutions
under Indonesian legal order. The normative value of Resolution 1267 is inferior
than human rights treaties following the impact of violation the right of fair trial.
On the other hand, the normative value of Resolution 1267 also inferior than
Indonesian Constitutional law following the government system is rule of law based
that uphold the supremacy of law. This reaffirmed under Indonesian statutory law
that the Constitution is the highest law. The implication of Resolution 1267 to have
domestic legal effect require Indonesia to incorporate the resolution accordingly
domestic legal order through statutory law (undang-undang). Therefore, when the
two norms, either the same or different legal system, comes into a normative
conflict, and thus determining the normative value is a good way to justify which
norm should be prioritized. | en_US |
