Indonesian Forest Management: Opportunities and Challenges

Arif

, Suhaidi

, Alvi Syahrin

, Runtung

Student of Doctoral Program, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Jl. Universitas No 4 Kampus USU, Medan, Indonesia

Lecturer of Doctoral Program, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Jl. Universitas No 4 Kampus USU, Medan, Indonesia

Keywords: Forest Management, Indonesia.

Abstract: Forest management in Indonesia is in difficult position. In other words, it is failed to maintain and realize

harmony in forest functions in ecological, economic, social and juridical perspectives. There are some

evidences which shown the failure such as people living around forest areas who have not enjoyed the

benefits of forests, deforestation, and increased number of forest destruction. These situations inquire the

responsibility of the state as the important actor for the fulfillment of people's welfare. Based on descriptive

normative research on forest management in Indonesia which is part of a dissertation entitled “Tanggung

jawab Negara terhadap pengelolaan Hutan; Studi Kasus di Indonesia”, this paper focus on the challenges

and opportunities that arise in forest management. Furthermore, the study compared to the forest

management in the Philippines.

1 INTRODUCTION

Forestry resources are one of the creations of

Almighty God who has a very important role in

maintaining the natural balance in the universe. In

the forest all living things have been created both

large and small, even those that cannot be seen with

the eyes. In addition, there are also a number of

plants that become expanses, which become a

unified whole. This is a source of wealth that can be

managed well, which is used to build nations and

countries (Supriadi, 2011).

The fact is that it is different from expectations;

various problems arise related to forestry

management. One of them is the famous conflict that

occurred in North Sumatra Province. Conflict

between the people of Pandumaan Village and

Sipituhuta Village in Pollung Sub district, Humbang

Hasundutan Regency, North Sumatra was associated

with claims by the community who called their

group as indigenous people in the Kemenyan forest

or Hamijon in Batak Language in the HTI

concession area of PT Toba Pulp Lestari. Hamijon

Batak Land has been famous for thousands of years

in the international world. The issue of Hamijon is

also a matter of identity that contains very rich

historical and cultural values. Hamijon farmers have

their own culture. Departing to the spear of

Hamijon, for example, they must be holy in words

and behavior. They, usually men, live for days on

the Hamijon spear. They sing various kinds of songs

about Hamijon while on the spear. In fact they send

their children to college from the results of Hamijon.

That is why the mothers told the Government

Officials when they visited the Regent's Office

regarding the resolution of this conflict, namely

“Asa boi pe hamu singkola timbo-timbo alani

Hamijon do” which can be translated as “Maybe

you can go to high school because of Hamijon”

(Simanjuntak, 2013).

This study will figure out four issues namely,

Indonesian emergency forest intensive management,

the law on forest management in Indonesia,

devolution as an alternative to forest management in

Indonesia, and forest management obligations from

aspects of state responsibility and state liability.

2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This research used legal research which analysed

some regulations such as UUD 1945 and national

regulation concerning Forestry, environmental and

local government. Furthermore, data also supported

by field study which conducted in North Sumatera

Province and involved North Sumatera Forestry

council (Dewan kehutanan Daerah Provinsi

Sumatera Utara).

1784

Arif, ., Suhaidi, ., Syahrin, A. and Runtung, .

Indonesian Forest Management: Opportunities and Challenges.

DOI: 10.5220/0010100817841790

In Proceedings of the International Conference of Science, Technology, Engineering, Environmental and Ramiﬁcation Researches (ICOSTEERR 2018) - Research in Industry 4.0, pages

1784-1790

ISBN: 978-989-758-449-7

3 RESULT AND DISCUSS

3.1 Indonesian Emergency Forest

Intensive Management

Forest management in Indonesia can be said to fail

to maintain and realize harmony in forest functions

in ecological, economic, social and juridical

perspectives. Evidence of this failure can be seen in

several facts. First, various benefits of the forest

cannot be enjoyed by the community, especially

those who live around forest areas, such as

indigenous peoples and subsistence communities

(having dependence) on forest resources (PP No 21/

1970). Other evidence that shows the difficulty of

accessing communities around forest areas to enjoy

forest products is, at the beginning of forest

management planning some indigenous peoples'

rights to forests can be frozen in order to ensure the

running of forest management. Although

Government Regulation No. 21 of 1970 concerning

Forest Management Rights and Forest Product

Collection Rights is no longer valid, the fact that

tenure conflicts between communities around forest

areas and owners of various rights to forest

management are still ongoing (PP No 21/ 1970).

Various studies and studies have indicated that the

problem of tenure conflicts that occurred in

Indonesia originated from the legacy of Colonial

policy in the Dutch East Indies period which then

continued to the latest national policies. This

suspicion stems from the belief that the concept of

ownership policy or state ownership in the period of

the Dutch East Indies continued until now and

changes to the policy in the independence period

have not gone well.

Secondly, since massive exploitation was carried

out at the beginning of the New Order Government

to date, Indonesia's forests continue to experience

large amounts of deforestation. A lot of data shows

the rate of forest destruction in Indonesia. Based on

FAO estimates in 1990, Indonesia's natural forest

area was around 107.5 million ha. This figure

continued to shrink to 103.8 million ha in 1995.

Subsequently in 2000 this forest area decreased to

96.6 million ha. It is estimated that by 2030 the size

of Indonesia's natural forests will be around 84

million ha or only 40% (forty percent) of the entire

land area of Indonesia (Galudra, 2006). The Ministry

of Forestry as the official forestry data provider

agency said that governance weaknesses have

caused forest cover in Indonesia to continue to

decline.

Thirdly, with such a high rate of forest

destruction, it turns out that the contribution of the

forestry sector to national economic growth does not

show a positive significance, especially after the

exploitation of forestry resources was carried out in

the last 4 (four) decades. It was recognized that

when the Law Number 5 Year 1967 concerning the

Principal Provisions of Forestry was first

implemented, in the beginning of the New Order

Government, the forestry sector had a significant

influence in the movement of the national economic

growth. Almost four decades of forestry has grown

and developed by making important contributions to

the national development process which is reflected

in the contribution to national growth. The role and

contribution of Indonesia's forestry sector are among

others in the form of foreign exchange contributions.

Every year before the 1997 economic crisis, foreign

exchange contributed from the forestry sector

reached US $ 7-8 billion (Kemenhut & FAO, 1991).

3.2 The Law on Forest Management in

Indonesia

The State's responsibility in forest management in

Indonesia cannot be separated from the philosophy

of the state's right to control forests and natural

resources as referred to in Article 33 paragraph (3)

of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of

Indonesia. Through Law Number 41 of 1999

concerning Forestry, consistency of "state control

rights" stated in Article 4, the state ensure that the

greatest prosperity is for the people in managing all

forests in Indonesian territory and sovereignty to: (a)

regulate and manage everything related to forests,

forest areas and forest products; (b) determine the

status of certain areas as forest areas or forest areas

as non-forest areas; and (c) regulating and

establishing relationships between people and

forests, and regulating legal actions concerning

forestry.

The control of forests by the state continues to

show the rights of indigenous peoples, as long as

they are still in existence and acknowledged by their

existence, and do not conflict with national interests.

In its journey, the existence of Law Number 41 of

1999 was tested several times to the Constitutional

Court to assess several provisions in the article - the

article in Law Number 41 of 1999 concerning the

1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. The

test is for example related to the definition of forest

area in Article 1 number 3 and the examination of

customary forest as state forest in Article 4

paragraph (3) and Article 67. Furthermore, to

Indonesian Forest Management: Opportunities and Challenges

1785

complete regulation in the forestry sector, Law

Number 18 Year 2013 concerning Prevention and

Eradication of Forest Destruction is also established.

Forest damage such as illegal logging is a form

of crime on forest resources that must be stopped

based on Law Number 18 of 2013 concerning

Prevention and Eradication of Forest Crime Acts.

This law reflects the continuity of ecology, social

functions of forests, unlicensed mining, and

plantations without permits have caused state losses,

damage to socio-cultural and environmental life, and

increased global warming which has become a

national, regional and international issue. This is

related to the characteristics of forest destruction

which has become a crime that has extraordinary,

organized, and transnational impacts carried out with

a sophisticated modus operandi, which threatens the

survival of people's lives.

Seeing the threat of forest destruction that has

continued since the issuance of the forest

management policy by Law Number 5 of 1967

concerning Principal Provisions of Forestry up to the

birth of Law Number 41 of 1999 concerning

Forestry, amid strong efforts made by the

government to protect forest resources, a

management system is needed that can answer the

three basic characteristics of the State's

responsibility, namely the management of forest

resources for the greatest prosperity of the people,

forest management is guaranteed by the state, the

people have the right to a clean and healthy

environment, and the state prevents damage or

pollution of forest resources.

One of the problems that arose as a result of the

failure of the principle of state responsibility to be

applied was the birth of the community's need for

the true meaning of the phrase "controlled by the

state" over natural resources, including forests. The

Constitutional Court, through Decision Number 001-

021-022 / PUU-I / 2003, provides an interpretation

of the phrase "controlled by the state" in Article 33

of the 1945 Constitution:

The words" controlled by the state "must be

interpreted to encompass the meaning of state

control in the broadest sense which originates and

comes from the concept of the sovereignty of the

Indonesian people over all sources of wealth" earth

and water and the natural wealth contained in the

world ", including the meaning of public ownership.

By the collectivity of the people on the sources of

wealth in question. The people collectively

constructed by the 1945 Constitution give the state

the mandate to carry out policies (belied) and

management actions (bestuursdaad), regulations

(regelendaad), management (beheersdaad) and

supervision (toezichthoudensdaad) for the greatest

prosperity of the people.

The interpretation of the Constitutional Court

with this understanding was also given by the

Constitutional Court in the Constitutional Court

Decision Number 3 / PUU-VIII / 2010 concerning

the testing of Law Number 27 of 2007 concerning

Management of Coastal Areas and Small Islands. In

its ruling, the Constitutional Court concluded that

the granting of Coastal Water Concession Rights

(HP3) contradicted the right to control the state as

referred to in Article 33 paragraph (3) of the 1945

Constitution which stated that supervision for the

greatest prosperity of the people.

The decision of the Constitutional Court provides

guidance on how to implement the concept of state

control over natural resources. The state in control

over natural resources has a function to make

policies, management, regulation, management and

supervision. Based on the consideration of the

Constitutional Court in interpreting the meaning of

"control by the state" of natural resources, obtained

information that the 1945 Constitution of the

Republic of Indonesia adheres to the understanding

that "control by the state" is a collective decision of

the Indonesian people to hand over the management

of natural resources to the state as a consequence of

the existence of a country that in the course of the

history of the Indonesian nation has replaced similar

state entities such as kingdoms, unions, villages and

indigenous groups that have a long history of

descending on natural resources.

The idea of rationalism, which developed in the

17th century, tried to explain the origin of the

coming of state life. Starting from this understanding

of rationalism, the 'social contract' is a construction

in the realm of thought, with its function as a

rationale, reason of existence about the existence of

state life, and not as a description of an event in

history.

On the principle, 'social contract' is a fiction, the

result of theorizing in the realm of thought, that the

formation of a state of life organization, along with

its governmental institutions, comes from the

rational willingness of the people to release some of

their basic natural rights of freedom, for the sake of

living jointly orderly. This social contract theory

implies the existence of a moral basis for

justification that the power of the state officials

originates not from any source except from the

consent of the people. The people's attachment to all

forms of rules that are enforced by the officials of

state power, thus, will be interpreted as an

ICOSTEERR 2018 - International Conference of Science, Technology, Engineering, Environmental and Ramiﬁcation Researches

1786

attachment on the basis of their own sovereignty and

agreement; here the concept of the limited freedom

of the people by a force that is nothing more than the

freedom of the people itself is freedom. They are for

social contract, which is defined as freedom to

reduce freedom to a certain extent

(Wignisoebroto, 2013).

Departing from this reality, the Right to Control

the State which subsequently raises the

responsibility of the State to carry out natural

resource management comes from the willingness of

the community which in the historical perspective

has existed before the State in its formal form exists

as a construction of a public legal entity that carries

out various state duties. Therefore, the

implementation of the responsibility of the State

should not overlook the existence of subsistence

relations between indigenous peoples and

communities in the vicinity of the forest with

various forest resources.

It has been known by students of Indonesian forestry

agrarian history that what is referred to as state

forest was originally formed from claims of

ownership by the colonial government over the areas

designated as forests, including indigenous

territories. People's access to indigenous territories

whose origin is regulated by customary law is

denied by forestry agencies formed by the colonial

government. The people who opposed the ruling

protested the inclusion of the country's forests and

continued their access to their customary territories,

then were criminalized (Wignisoebroto, 2013).

The co modification of forests and other natural

resources at the global level, which works under a

capitalistic market economy system, encourages the

development of forestry capitalism in Indonesia.

Close cooperation between state administrators and

timber market players, from the colonial period to

the present, is made possible by the procurement of

large-scale forested land by government agencies

through the provision of forestry concessions to

large companies. State control of forests allows

government agencies, from the Dutch Forestry

Service to the Ministry of Forestry at present, to

provide large-scale forested land

(Rachman & Siscawati, 2014).

3.3 Devolution as an Alternative to Forest

Management in Indonesia

The description of forest management in Indonesia

in alternating national leadership, especially after the

Reformation does not bring significant change. As a

comparison, this paper can see what goes on in

forest management in the Philippines. The

Philippines implements the devolution method in

managing its forest resources. This is done in

various forms; First, the devolution program of

forest management from the central government to

the local government, the Integrated Social Forestry

Program (ISFP). The program began in 1982 based

on Presidential Letter of Instruction 1260. ISFP

consolidated three previous people oriented forestry

programs, the Family Approach to Reforestation

(FAR), the Forest Occupancy Management (FOM)

Program, and the Communal Tree Farming (CFP)

Program held at 1973-1979. ISFP provides tenure

security for people who occupy the forest occupants

for 25 years. The provision of tenure security allows

farmers who occupy state forest areas (government-

owned forestlands) to be able to farm and enjoy the

results without fear of being evicted, and encourage

them to protect and promote sustainable agriculture

and agro forestry. Second, devolution programs that

provides protected area management (protected

areas) to local communities with a term of 25 years.

Local people have the right to use non-timber forest

products (NTFP) such as rattan, bamboo. Third, the

devolution program "Indigenous People's Right Act

(IPRA)". Of the three programs, only the ISFP

program, specifically the FOM and the second

program, can be found relative to its equivalent in

Indonesia, namely the establishment of a special

purpose area (KDTK) given to farmers in Lampung's

eye-cat resin (repong) garden by the Minister of

Forestry Jamaludin. The IPRA program is relatively

similar to the HA (customary forest) program in

Indonesia that has not been implemented. Rights-

giving programs through FAR, FOM, CFP, IPRA

and KDTK, in recognition of the strength or power

of the community to seize access. Fourth, CBFM

(Community Based Forest Management) program.

CBFM began in 1995 based on Executive Order 263

replacing people-oriented forestry.

Through this program the government

(Department of Natural Resources and Environment)

transfers its rights and responsibilities to local

communities. The community gains access (on) and

benefits (from) forest resources through the granting

of tenure rights over forest land to the community

for 25 years and can be extended for 25 years. The

community is obliged to carry out rehabilitation,

protection and conservation. Of the 0 ha area for

CBFM in the 1980s and less than 1.0 million

hectares in 1995, it currently covers more than 5.97

million hectares spread over 5,503 locations, and

covers 690,691 households and 2,877 people's

organizations.

Indonesian Forest Management: Opportunities and Challenges

1787

Out of the total CBFM area, 4.90 million

hectares under various forms of land tenure

instruments, which are around 2.50 million ha (51%)

under the CADC (Certificate of Ancestral Domain

Claim), 1.57 million ha (32%) under CBFMA

(Community-Based Forest Management

Agreements), 0.63 million ha (13%) under CSC

(Certificate of Stewardship Contract), and the

remaining 0.196 million ha under CFMA

(Community Forest Management Agreement),

CFSA (Community Forest Stewardship Agreement),

and others. The increase in area for CBFM was

followed by a reduction in the area for large-scale

forestry companies (TLA) from more than 10

million hectares held by 422 companies in 1973 to

584,000 hectares held by 15 companies

(BAPPENAS, 2014). The four types of devolution

are initiated by the government (state-initiated

devolution). The main objective of devolution of

CBFM state forest resource management in the

Philippines is to improve or improve socio-

economic welfare, social justice, and equitable

access to forest resources, realize sustainable forest

management, and promote healthy environment for

the population. Its implementation has not produced

satisfactory results, among others, namely: the local

community continues to feel the insecurity of its

CBFM, more than 1,000 CBFM permits are

canceled by the government, CBFMAs have

increased government control through restrictions on

devolution to the submission of forest development

and protection responsibilities to local communities ,

the quality of the forest has not improved, the

community does not feel that it has gained income,

the recipient of the program is not classified as a

poor family, so the positive impact on community

development has not yet occurred

(Pulhin, Inoue & Enters, 2007).

In addition, there is no information yet on

whether there is CBFM which is only on paper and

not carried out in the field. However, the

achievement of devolution programs in the

management of state forest resources in the

Philippines is better than in Indonesia. In the

Philippines, the CBFM area reaches 20% of the total

state forest area. The increase in the area for CBFM

was followed by a decrease in the area for large-

scale forestry companies. Timber license agreement

(TLA) from over 10 million ha held by 422 TLA

holding companies in 1973 to 584,000 hectares held

by 15 companies (Pulhin & Dressler, 2009).

Whereas in Indonesia until mid-2010 after almost 15

years, the implementation of the HKM program was

only implemented in an area of around 400,000

hectares spread across NTB, Lampung, D.I.

Yogyakarta, Bali, Bengkulu, Southeast Sulawesi and

NTT. The area of HKM is very small compared to

the area of production forest cultivated by large-

scale companies (IUPHHK natural forests and

plantation forests) covering an area of approximately

35 million ha. Most are limited to recognition or

forced to recognize forest village community

initiatives that open forests, in recognition of the

power or power of the community to seize access.

3.4 Forest Management Obligations

from Aspects of State

Responsibility and State

Liability

Indonesia is a sovereign country that carries out

legal politics on the mastery of resources based on

the principles of State Based Management for all

potential natural resources as stated in Article 33 of

the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia,

which mentions the branches of production that

affect the lives of many people controlled by the

State. The Indonesian State makes this State

Responsibility Principle a measure of how

management of these resources is carried out.

Responsibility in English is referred to as

responsibility which is defined as: The state of being

answerable for an obligation, and includes judgment,

skill, ability and capacity (Pulhin & Dressler, 2009).

This definition can freely be interpreted as a

statement of the ability to answer from the existence

of an obligation which includes decisions, skills,

abilities and capacities. Just like the definition of

responsibility in English, even in Indonesian the

word "responsibility" has to do with the word

"answer." Being responsible means being able to

answer if asked about the actions done. The person

responsible can be asked for an explanation of his

behavior and not only can he answer - if he wants to,

but he must also answer. Responsibility means that a

person cannot avoid being asked for an explanation

of what he is doing (Black’s Law Dictionar, 1990).

Besides the meaning of responsibility as

described above, in the treasury of international law,

State responsibility is a terminology that is

always

related to the ownership of sovereignty by a country.

Furthermore, the obligation to replace the damage

and loss of other parties is a character that indicates

the existence of State Responsibility, as said by

Malcolm N. Shaw. Similarly, if an international

violation occurs, the State must take responsibility.

ICOSTEERR 2018 - International Conference of Science, Technology, Engineering, Environmental and Ramiﬁcation Researches

1788

Besides the meaning of responsibility as

described above, in the treasury of international law,

State responsibility is a terminology that is always

related to the ownership of sovereignty by a country.

Furthermore, according to Malcolm N. Shaw who

stated that State responsibility is a fundamental

principle of international law, arising out of the

nature of the international legal system and the

doctrines of state sovereignty and equality of states.

It provides that whenever one state commits an

internationally unlawful act against another state,

international responsibility is established between

the two. A breach of an international obligation

gives rises to a requirement for reparation

(Bertens, 2004).

In this paper, the term State responsibility is

distinguished from the term State liability. This

difference is in line with the changing meaning of

state responsibility over time. Furthermore, the

existence of differences in terminology between

State Responsibility and State Liability has the

consequence of the categorization of the settings in

the draft submitted by ILC on the principle of state

responsibility to two parts, namely Primary norm

and Secondary norm (Shaw, 1997). In its 1973

report, ILC distinguished this problem by placing

the Primary norm as a norm of effectiveness, while

Secondary norm as the application of sanction

(Combacau & Alland, 1986).

The existence of differences in terminology

between State Responsibility and State Liability can

be seen further in various provisions of international

law including those contained in Principle 21 and

Principle 22 of the Stockholm 1972 Convention. In

Principle 21 all activities carried out within the

territory are under controlled of the state. Therefore,

all natural resources in the territory are the

responsibility of the state in accordance with the

politics of the management of natural resources

owned by the State.

The word responsibility in Principle 21 is a

standard of behavior that must be met and obeyed by

countries. Therefore, Principle 21 is more depicting

the existence of the principle of State Responsibility,

in other words, in Principle 21; this is what is meant

by The Primary Norm. To realize the responsibility

of the state, the state must develop cooperation to

ensure the rights of victims of environmental

damage carried out by the state which results in

communities that are outside national jurisdiction,

according to principle 22.

In Principle 22, the term liability is contained

which a manifestation of responsibility is born as a

result of failure in meeting the standards of behavior

that have been established and should be obeyed by

the state. This embodiment is in the form of

compensation and recovery or improvement of

circumstances as a result of the occurrence of

environmental damage by the state within its

jurisdiction but having an impact on the environment

of other countries. Principle 22 is an arrangement for

implementing sanctions or containing what is

referred to as The Secondary Norm.

Based on the description above, it can be concluded

that the responsibility of the state is the

responsibility of the state in terms of State

Responsibility, which reflects a number of

obligations undertaken by the Government of

Indonesia in meeting various international standards,

both legally binding and non-binding. In relation to

environmental management and forest management,

Indonesia, in its capacity as a member of the

International Community, is a very active country,

and in many instances is an initiator in efforts to

save the global environment from the effects of

damage and pollution, most recently related to

global warming and climate change.

4 CONCLUSIONS

Forest management is a challenge for every country

including Indonesia. At present, forest management

in Indonesia can be said to fail to maintain and

realize the harmony of forest functions based on

various conflicts that arise between the Indonesian

government and society. This forest management

conflict was confirmed by the emergence of a legal

polemic regarding forest management in Indonesia.

In connection with this situation, state responsibility

is an important factor to be studied in order to solve

these forest management problems. Furthermore, the

Philippines, a country in Southeast Asia that

implements the devolution method in managing its

forest resources is taken as learning material in

forest management.

REFERENCES

Supriadi, 2011, Hukum Kehutanan dan Hukum

Perkebunan di Indonesia, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.

Simanjuntak, Bungaran Antonius, 2013, Dampak Otonomi

Daerah Di Indonesia, Merangkai Sejarah Politik dan

Pemerintahan Indonesia, Pustaka Obor Indonesia,

Jakarta.

Peratuan Pemerintah Nomor 21 Tahun 1970 tentang Hak

Pengelolaan Hutan dan Hak Pemungutan Hasil Hutan.

Gamma Galudra, 2006, Memahami Konflik Tenurial

melalui Pendekatan Sejarah: Studi Kasus di Lebak,

Banten, WARTA TENUR, Vol 2.

Indonesian Forest Management: Opportunities and Challenges

1789

Directorate General of Forest Utilization Ministry of

Forestry Governemnet of Republic of Indonesia –

Food and Agriculture Organization of The United

Nation, 1991, An Agenda for Forestry Sector

Development in Indonesia, GOI-FAO, Jakarta.

Wignisoebroto, Soetandyo, 2013, Pergeseran Paradigma

dalam Kajian Sosial dan Hukum, Setara Press,

Malang.

Rachman, Noer Fauzi & Siscawati, Mia, 2014,

Masyarakat Adat Adalah Penyandang Hak, Subjek

Hukum, dan Pemilik Wilayah Adatnya, INSISTPress,

Yogyakarta.

BAPPENAS, 2014, Makalah pada Focus Group

Discussion, Pengkajian Peran Sektor Kehutanan

Dalam Pembangunan Nasional.

Pulhin JM, Inoue M & Enters T, 2007, Three decades of

community-based forest management in the

Philippines: Emerging lessons for sustainable and

equitable forest management. International Forestry

Review 9 (4).

Pulhin JM & Dressler WH. 2009. People, power, and

timber: The politics of community-based forest

management. Journal of Environmental Management

91(1).

Black’s Law Dictionary, 1990, St. Paul, Minn, West

Publishing Co.

Bertens, K, 2004, Etika, PT. Gramedia Pusaka Utama,

Jakarta.

Malcolm N. Shaw, 1997, International Law, Cambridge

University Press, Cambridge.

Combacau, J & Alland, D, 1986, “Primary” and

“Secondary” Rules in the Law of State Responsibiliy :

Categorizing International Obligation, Netherlands

Yearbook, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

ICOSTEERR 2018 - International Conference of Science, Technology, Engineering, Environmental and Ramiﬁcation Researches

1790