Hostis humani generis

Hostis humani generis (bahasa Latin yang berarti "musuh umat manusia") adalah istilah hukum yang berasal dari hukum kelautan. Sebelum diadopsi dalam hukum internasional, bajak laut dan perbudakan telah dianggap berada di luar perlindungan hukum sehingga dapat ditangani oleh negara mana pun, bahkan negara yang tidak diserang secara langsung sekalipun.

Konsep ini dapat diperbandingkan dengan "writ of outlawry" dalam tradisi hukum common law, yang menyatakan bahwa seseorang yang berada di luar yurisdiksi hukum raja, tunduk pada hukum kekerasan dan eksekusi oleh siapa pun. Konsep hukum sipil Romawi kuno tentang pelarangan, dan status homo sacer yang dilarang juga merupakan konsep yang mempunyai kesamaan.^[1]

Latar belakang

Salah satu ketentuan hukum kelautan yang tertua adalah larangan pembajakan karena bahaya yang ditimbulkan oleh bajak laut dapat menimpa kapal dan pelaut dari semua negara. Dengan demikian, pembajakan merupakan kejahatan terhadap semua bangsa. Sejak zaman klasik, bajak laut dianggap sebagai individu atau sekelompok orang yang mengobarkan perang, melakukan kampanye perampokan dan penjarahan. Tindakan-tindakan ini dianggap tidak hanya dilakukan terhadap korban mereka, tetapi juga terhadap semua bangsa. Oleh karena itu, bajak laut memiliki status khusus yang dianggap sebagai hostis humani generis, musuh umat manusia. Karena pembajakan adalah bahaya bagi setiap pelaut dan kapal di mana pun, maka tindakan ini dianggap berkaitan hak universal dan kewajiban universal semua negara, terlepas dari apakah kapal mereka telah diserang oleh kelompok perompak tertentu yang bersangkutan. Negara-negara dapat menangkap dan mengadili perkara pembajakan laut dalam pengadilan militer atau pengadilan laksamana yang dibentuk (dalam keadaan ekstrim, perkara diadili dalam pengadilan militer pertempuran yang diselenggarakan oleh perwira kapal penangkap). Jika terbukti bersalah, bajak laut dapat dieksekusi dengan cara digantung di kapal, yang dulunya menjadi kebiasaan otoritatif laut.^[2]

Penggunaan istilah

Dalam perkembangannya, kejahatan-kejahatan seperti perompakan, bandit, pembajakan pesawat, terorisme, penyiksaan, kejahatan terhadap orang-orang yang dilindungi secara internasional (seperti diplomat perwakilan negara asing)^[3] dan pendanaan terorisme tunduk pada prinsip aut dedere aut judicare (artinya menuntut atau mengekstradisi). Dalam iklim global terorisme internasional, beberapa komentator telah menyerukan agar orang yang melakukan kejahatan terorisme diperlakukan sebagai hostis humani generis.^[4]

Aplikasi konsep

Satu-satunya aplikasi aktual dari konsep hostis humani generis yang telah diperluas adalah penggunaannya dalam pengadilan terhadap orang yang melakukan penyiksaan. Hal ini telah dilakukan dalam putusan pengadilan Amerika Serikat dan pengadilan internasional. Dalam perkara yang diadili di Amerika Serikat pada tahun 1980, Filártiga v.Peña-Irala, 630 F.2d 876, Pengadilan Tinggi Federal Amerika Serikat memutuskan bahwa pengadilan ini mempunyai yurisdiksi terhadap kejahatan agen Pemerintah Paraguay^[5] yang dinyatakan telah melakukan kejahatan penyiksaan terhadap warga negara Paraguay. Pengadilan menyatakan mempunyai kewenangan hukum untuk mengadili perkara ini atas dasar Klausul Pelanggaran^[6] Konstitusi Amerika Serikat, Undang-Undang Klaim Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Warga Asing, dan hukum kebiasaan internasional. Dalam memutuskan perkara ini, Pengadilan menyatakan bahwa "Memang, untuk tujuan pertanggungjawaban perdata, penyiksa telah menjadi seperti bajak laut dan pedagang budak di hadapannya: hostis humani generis, musuh seluruh umat manusia." Penggunaan istilah hostis humani generis ini telah diperkuat oleh putusan Pengadilan Kriminal Internasional untuk Bekas Yugoslavia dalam perkara yang melibatkan seorang penyiksa dalam Prosecutor v. Furundija.^[7]^[8]

Dalam persidangan Eichmann tahun 1961, Pengadilan Distrik Yerusalem tidak secara eksplisit menganggap Adolf Eichmann sebagai hostis humani generis. Namun Jaksa Penuntut menggunakan standar yang sebelumnya telah dikutip dalam putusan yang mengacu pada kejahatan perompakan.^[9]^[10]

Lihat juga

Referensi

^ Jonsson, Stefan (2008). A Brief History of the Masses: (Three Revolutions). ISBN 9780231145268.
^ Ward, Graham, ed. (2006-02-21). "Under The Brave Black Flag: Pirates and Mutineers". Submission to the HMAS Sydney II Commission of Inquiry (PDF). Australia: Ministry of Defense. hlm. 6th pg. in excerpt. Diakses tanggal 2009-05-10.
^ The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents(also referred to as the “Protection of Diplomats Convention”) was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 14 December 1973.
^ Hostis Humani Generi: Piracy, Terrorism and a New International Law
^ Under the legal principles of the United States, the government of a nation, as a legal body, cannot be held liable for willful or intentional acts against its constitution, the law of nations, or its internal laws. This is because a government is a creature created by action of positive law, and therefore, as a creature of law, cannot act in a matter inimical to the very thing that gives it meaning. However, this poses a problem: what if a government does act unlawfully? How can this conduct be punished? Over the years, the courts have created a legal fiction so as to give relief to victims of unlawful governmental acts. This fiction supposes that these unlawful acts are not engaged, conspired, or otherwise directed by the government in question, but by the individual officers of a government who carried out the unlawful acts. Therefore, even though a government may not be held liable for acts committed in its name, individual government agents who commit acts against the Constitution or the law of nations can be held personally liable. (Indeed, their liability is heightened, as they acted under color of law, gravely aggravating the magnitude of the offense; see Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), as well as Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).) This provides an incentive to government agents not to "just follow orders" when those "orders" are criminal.
^ Article 1, Section 8, Clause 10 of the Constitution of the United States, which provides that the Congress is granted the power to "[t]o define and punish Piracies and Felonies on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations"; this clause both expressly provides that the Congress may codify customary international law into federal law, and implicitly recognizes this law, or, as it has been known, since time immemorial, as the Law of Nations, as a source of law outside of the Constitution, like the common law is.
^ "Decision of ICTY in Prosecutor v. Furundžija". 1998-12-10. Diarsipkan dari versi asli tanggal 2008-03-13. Diakses tanggal 2008-09-10.
^ Janis, M. and Noyes, J. "International Law: Cases and Commentary (3rd ed.)", Page 148 (2006)
^ Arendt, Hannah (2006). Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. New York: Penguin Books. hlm. 260. ISBN 0143039881.
^ Luban, David (2018). "The Enemy of All Humanity". Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy. 47 (2): 123–124. doi:10.5553/NJLP/221307132018047002002.

[1] Jonsson, Stefan (2008). A Brief History of the Masses: (Three Revolutions). ISBN 9780231145268.

[PunishmentOfPirates-2] Ward, Graham, ed. (2006-02-21). "Under The Brave Black Flag: Pirates and Mutineers". Submission to the HMAS Sydney II Commission of Inquiry (PDF). Australia: Ministry of Defense. hlm. 6th pg. in excerpt. Diakses tanggal 2009-05-10.

[3] The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents(also referred to as the “Protection of Diplomats Convention”) was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 14 December 1973.

[4] Hostis Humani Generi: Piracy, Terrorism and a New International Law

[5] Under the legal principles of the United States, the government of a nation, as a legal body, cannot be held liable for willful or intentional acts against its constitution, the law of nations, or its internal laws. This is because a government is a creature created by action of positive law, and therefore, as a creature of law, cannot act in a matter inimical to the very thing that gives it meaning. However, this poses a problem: what if a government does act unlawfully? How can this conduct be punished? Over the years, the courts have created a legal fiction so as to give relief to victims of unlawful governmental acts. This fiction supposes that these unlawful acts are not engaged, conspired, or otherwise directed by the government in question, but by the individual officers of a government who carried out the unlawful acts. Therefore, even though a government may not be held liable for acts committed in its name, individual government agents who commit acts against the Constitution or the law of nations can be held personally liable. (Indeed, their liability is heightened, as they acted under color of law, gravely aggravating the magnitude of the offense; see Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), as well as Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).) This provides an incentive to government agents not to "just follow orders" when those "orders" are criminal.

[6] Article 1, Section 8, Clause 10 of the Constitution of the United States, which provides that the Congress is granted the power to "[t]o define and punish Piracies and Felonies on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations"; this clause both expressly provides that the Congress may codify customary international law into federal law, and implicitly recognizes this law, or, as it has been known, since time immemorial, as the Law of Nations, as a source of law outside of the Constitution, like the common law is.

[7] "Decision of ICTY in Prosecutor v. Furundžija". 1998-12-10. Diarsipkan dari versi asli tanggal 2008-03-13. Diakses tanggal 2008-09-10.

[8] Janis, M. and Noyes, J. "International Law: Cases and Commentary (3rd ed.)", Page 148 (2006)

[9] Arendt, Hannah (2006). Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. New York: Penguin Books. hlm. 260. ISBN 0143039881.

[10] Luban, David (2018). "The Enemy of All Humanity". Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy. 47 (2): 123–124. doi:10.5553/NJLP/221307132018047002002.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]