Antara Hukum dan Geopolitik: Peran Amerika Serikat dan Independensi Mahkamah Internasional pada Sengketa Essequibo

Diva Islami Putri Ansor

doi:10.28932/di.v17i2.12163

Penulis

Diva Islami Putri Ansor Universitas Gadjah Mada

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.28932/di.v17i2.12163

Kata Kunci:

Territorial Dispute, Judicial Independence, Geopolitics

Abstrak

Sengketa teritorial Guyana–Venezuela atas Essequibo kembali mengemuka pasca penemuan cadangan minyak lepas pantai pada 2015 dan meningkatnya keterlibatan Amerika Serikat (AS) melalui dukungan diplomatik serta kerja sama militer. Penelitian ini bertujuan menelaah batas hukum keterlibatan negara ketiga berdasarkan asas non-intervensi dan mekanisme intervensi dalam Mahkamah Internasional (International Court of Justice; ICJ), sekaligus menilai dampak dukungan AS terhadap persepsi imparsialitas dan independensi Mahkamah Internasional. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan yuridis normatif dengan metode deskriptif-analitis. Data dikumpulkan melalui penelitian kepustakaan yang meliputi instrumen hukum primer, yurisprudensi relevan, serta literatur akademik dan dokumen resmi. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa meskipun independensi Mahkamah Internasional tetap terjaga, namun keterlibatan AS dalam proses peradilan di Mahkamah Internasional berpotensi menimbulkan tekanan eksternal terhadap penyelesaian sengketa. Oleh karenanya, para pihak perlu mematuhi provisional measures, sedangkan negara ketiga perlu membatasi dukungan pada bentuk non-koersif.

Unduhan

Data unduhan belum tersedia.

Referensi

Books

Craven, Matthew, Sundhya Pahuja, and Gerry Simpson, eds. International Law and the Cold War. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2019.

Crawford, James. Brownlie’s Principles of Public International Law. 9th ed., Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2019.

Muhammadin, Fajri Matahati, editor. Hukum Internasional: Edisi Ekspansi. Sleman, CV Buku Belaka Maju Jaya, 2025.

Grossman, Nienke, et al., eds. Legitimacy and International Courts. Cambridge University Press, 2018.

Roscini, Marco. International Law and the Principle of Non-Intervention: History, Theory, and Interactions with Other Principles. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2024.

Salles, Luiz Eduardo. “Article 62.” The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary. 3rd ed., Andreas Zimmermann et al., eds., Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2019, pp. 1686–1740.

Shaw, Malcolm N. International Law. 9th ed., Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2021.

Thirlway, H. W. A. The International Court of Justice. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016.

Journals

Alexianu, M. “Effectiveness beyond Compliance: Examining the Goal-Based Impact of the International Court of Justice’s Provisional Measures.” Hague Yearbook of International Law, vol. 38, 2024 (forthcoming), https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5089147.

Allioui, S. “Legitimacy and International Courts.” International Journal for Court Administration, vol. 11, no. 1, 2020, article 8, https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.288.

Ariotti, M., S. Dietrich, and J. Wright. “Foreign Aid and Judicial Autonomy.” The Review of International Organizations, vol. 17, 2022, pp. 691–715, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-021-09439-9.

Donovan, Thomas W. “Challenges to the Territorial Integrity of Guyana: A Legal Analysis.” Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, vol. 32, 2004, pp. 661–723, https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/gjicl/vol32/iss3/7/.

Harris, C. “Arbitral Award of Oct. 3, 1899 (Guy. v. Venez.) (Provisional Measures) (I.C.J.).” International Legal Materials, vol. 63, no. 6, 2024, pp. 967–997, https://doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2024.20.

Helal, Mohammed S. “Intervention, Force & Coercion: An Historical Inquiry on the Evolution of the Prohibition on Intervention.” International Law Studies, 2024 (advance online publication), https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4884428,