Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-fx4k7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-21T04:09:44.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Connecting the Obligation Gap: Indonesia’s Non-Refoulement Responsibility Beyond the 1951 Refugee Convention

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 August 2021

Dio Herdiawan Tobing
Dio Herdiawan Tobing*
Affiliation:
ASEAN Studies Center, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: dio.herdiawan.t@mail.ugm.ac.id
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article explains the extent to which Indonesia has international obligations to comply with the non-refoulement principle in the absence of ratification of the 1951 Refugee Convention. While Presidential Regulation No. 125 of 2016 concerning the Treatment of Refugees provides the general impression that Indonesia respects the non-refoulement principle, there is no specific text within Indonesian law and policy that regulates the matter. This article argues that Indonesia is legally bound by non-refoulement obligations under international human rights treaties to which it is a party, as well as under customary international law. It examines the extent of Indonesia’s non-refoulement obligations under the Convention Against Torture, the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and customary international law. It concludes that the Presidential Regulation was a missed opportunity for Indonesia to reinforce its non-refoulement obligations, as illustrated by the recent treatment of Rohingya asylum seekers near Aceh.

Keywords

Indonesiarefugeesnon-refoulementinternational lawhuman rights and refugee lawhumanitarianism

Information

Type
Refugees in Indonesia
Information
Asian Journal of Law and Society , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , October 2021 , pp. 521 - 535
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Asian Journal of Law and Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alunaza, Hardi, & Juani, M. Kholit (2017) “Kebijakan Pemerintah Indonesia melalui Sekuritisasi Migrasi Pengungsi Rohingya di Aceh tahun 2012–2015.” 2 Indonesian Perspective 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
AntaraNews (2019) “Indonesia Luncurkan Dialog Kemanusiaan dengan Yordania,” https://www.antaranews.com/berita/852073/indonesia-luncurkan-dialog-kemanusiaan-dengan-yordania (accessed 25 May 2019).Google Scholar
Charliene, Abrori (2017) “Challenges and Opportunities in Responding to Refugee and Asylum Seeker Entering Indonesian Territory in the Context of Implementing Presidential Regulation Number 125 Year 2016 on Handling Refugee.” LL.B thesis, Faculty of Law, Universitas Gadjah Mada.Google Scholar
Charney, Jonathan I. (1986) “The Persistent Objector Rule and the Development of Customary International Law.” 56 British Yearbook of International Law 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cnnindonesia.com (2018) “Direktur HAM: Pendekatan Indonesia adalah Kemanusiaan,” https://www.cnnindonesia.com/internasional/20180507045222–106–296137/direktur-ham-pendekatan-indonesia-adalah-kemanusiaan (accessed 25 May 2019).Google Scholar
ComAT (1994) “Balabou Mutombo v. Switzerland,” https://www.refworld.org/cases,CAT,3ae6b6784.html (accessed 25 May 2019).Google Scholar
ComAT (1997) “Gorki Ernesto Tapia Paez v. Sweden,” https://www.refworld.org/cases,CAT,3ae6b6de10.html (accessed 25 May 2019).Google Scholar
ComAT (2004) “Concluding Observations on the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,” https://undocs.org/CAT/C/CR/33/3 (accessed 25 May 2019).Google Scholar
ComAT (2006) “Concluding Observations on the United States of America,” https://undocs.org/CAT/C/USA/CO/2 (accessed 25 May 2019).Google Scholar
Costello, Cathryn, & Foster, Michelle (2015) “Non-refoulement as Custom and Jus Cogens? Putting the Prohibition to the Test.” 46 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 273–327.Google Scholar
Crawford, James (2012) Brownlie’s Principles of Public International Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CRC (2005) “General Comment No. 6 on Treatment of Unaccompanied and Separated Children Outside Their Country of Origin,” https://www.refworld.org/docid/42dd174b4.html (accessed 26 May 2019).Google Scholar
Davies, Sara E. (2008) Legitimising Rejection: International Refugee Law in Southeast Asia, Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
Farmer, Alice (2011) “A Commentary on the Committee on the Rights of the Child’s Definition of Non-refoulement for Children: Broad Protection for Fundamental Rights.” 80 Fordham Law Review Res Gestae 39–48.Google Scholar
Goodwin-Gill, Guy, & McAdam, Jane (2007) The Refugee in International Law, 3rd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hathaway, Oona A. et al. (2011) “Human Rights Abroad: When Do Human Rights Treaty Obligations Apply Extraterritorially?” 43 Arizona State Law Journal 389–426.Google Scholar
ICJ (1969) “North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (Judgment),” https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/51/051–19690220-JUD-01–00-EN.pdf (accessed 26 May 2019).Google Scholar
Jones, Balawyn, & Walden, Max (2020) “Why Aceh Is a Rare Place of Welcome for Rohingya Refugees,” The Conversation, 25 August, https://theconversation.com/why-aceh-is-a-rare-place-of-welcome-for-rohingya-refugees-143833 (accessed 14 October 2020).Google Scholar
Kneebone, Susan (2017) “Australia as a Powerbroker on Refugee Protection in Southeast Asia: The Relationship with Indonesia.” 33 Refuge 29–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kneebone, Susan (2020) “Is the 2016 Indonesian Presidential Regulation a Potential ‘Game-Changer’ on Rescue of Rohingya Boat Refugees?,” Kaldor Centre, https://www.kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/publication/2016-indonesian-presidential-regulation-potential-game-changer-rescue-rohingya-boat (accessed 29 September 2020).Google Scholar
Lauterpacht, S.E, & Bethlehem, Daniel (2003) “The Scope and Content of the Principle of Non-Refoulement: Opinion,” in Feller, E., Türk, V., & Nicholson, F., eds., Refugee Protection in International Law: UNHCR’s Global Consultations on International Protection, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 87–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malahayati et al. (2017) “Non-Refoulement: The Legal Basis and Applied Approach in the Handling of Rohingya Refugees in Indonesia.” 22 IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences 1–9.Google Scholar
Menendez, F. M. Marino (2015) “Recent Jurisprudence of the United Nations Committee Against Torture and the International Protection of Refugees.” 34 Refugee Survey Quarterly 61–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merdeka (2018) “Indonesia dilemma sebagai negara transit para pengungsi,” https://www.merdeka.com/dunia/dilema-indonesia-sebagai-negara-transit-para-pengungsi.html (accessed 25 May 2019).Google Scholar
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia (2019) “Humanitarian Issues,” 6 April, https://kemlu.go.id/portal/en/read/88/halaman_list_lainnya/humanitarian-issues (accessed 29 September 2020).Google Scholar
Missbach, Antje, Adiputera, Y., & Prabandari, A. (2017) “Indonesian Cities and Regencies May Be Asked to Shelter Refugees—Will They Comply?,” The Conversation, https://theconversation.com/indonesian-cities-and-regencies-may-be-asked-to-shelter-refugees-will-they-comply-82734 (accessed 26 May 2019).Google Scholar
Missbach, Antje, Adiputera, Y., & Prabandari, A. (2018) “Stalemate: Refugees in Indonesia —Presidential Regulation No 125 of 2016,” CILIS Policy Paper 14, https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/file/0006/2777667/CILIS-Paper-14_Missbach-et-al_final.pdf (accessed 9 November 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oxford University (2009) Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
PCIJ (1927) “The Case of the S.S. ‘Lotus’ (Judgement),” https://www.icj-cij.org/files/permanent-court-of-international-justice/serie_A/A_10/30_Lotus_Arret.pdf (accessed 26 May 2019).Google Scholar
Reza, Bhatara Ibnu (2013) “The Scope and Content of the Principle of Non-Refoulement: Opinion,” in Francis, A. & Rowena, M., eds., Protection of Refugees and Displaced Persons in the Asia Pacific Region, Farnham: Ashgate, 117–35.Google Scholar
Roisah, Kholis, Sesutyorini, P., & Rahayu (2017) “Kebijakan Penerapan Prinsip Non Refoulement Dalam Rangka Penanganan Pengungsi dari Luar Negeri di Indonesia.” Research Report, Faculty of Law, Universitas Diponegoro.Google Scholar
Septiari, Dian (2020) “Indonesia, Australia Explore Solution to Rohingya Refugee Crisis under Bali Process,” Jakarta Post, https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2020/05/17/indonesia-australia-explore-solution-to-rohingya-refugee-crisis-under-bali-process.html (accessed 30 September 2020).Google Scholar
Syahrin, Alvi (2018) “Pembatasan Prinsip Non Refoulement.” 1 Bhumiputera 12–6.Google Scholar
Tahjuddin, Hidayatullah (2020) “Indonesian Fishermen Rescue Nearly 100 Rohingya Refugees in Aceh,” Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-indonesia-rohingya/indonesian-fishermen-rescue-nearly-100-rohingya-refugees-in-aceh-idUSKBN23X0TG (accessed 29 September 2020).Google Scholar
Tan, Nikolas Feith (2016) “The Status of Asylum Seekers and Refugees in Indonesia.” 28 International Journal of Refugee Law 365–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tobing, D. H. (2018) “A Year of Jokowi’s Refugee Decree: What Has Changed?,” Jakarta Post, http://www.thejakartapost.com/academia/2018/01/12/a-year-of-jokowis-refugee-decree-what-has-changed.html (accessed 29 May 2019).Google Scholar
UNHCR (1979) Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status and Guidelines on International Protection under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, reissued Geneva February 2019: UNHCR, https://www.unhcr.org/en-au/publications/legal/5ddfcdc47/handbook-procedures-criteria-determining-refugee-status-under-1951-convention.html (accessed 20 October 2020).Google Scholar
UNHCR (1996) “General Conclusion on International Protection No. 79 (XLVII),” https://www.unhcr.org/excom/exconc/3ae68c430/general-conclusion-international-protection.html (accessed 30 September 2020).Google Scholar
UNHCR (2007) “Advisory Opinion on the Extraterritorial Application of Non-Refoulement Obligations under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and Its 1967 Protocol,” www.unhcr.org/4d9486929.pdf (accessed 25 May 2019).Google Scholar
UNHCR (2018) “Report of the Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,” https://undocs.org/A/HRC/37/50 (accessed 25 May 2019).Google Scholar
UNHCR (2020) “Pengungsi di Indonesia (April 2020),” https://www.unhcr.org/id/ (accessed 29 September 2020).Google Scholar
UNHRComm (1992) “General Comment 20 of Article 7 on the Prohibition of Torture, or Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,” https://undocs.org/en/HRI/GEN/1/Rev.7 (accessed 25 May 2019).Google Scholar
UNHRComm (1993) “Kindler v. Canada,” https://undocs.org/CCPR/C/48/D/470/1991 (accessed 26 May 2019).Google Scholar
UNHRComm (2001a) “General Comment 29 on Article 4: Derogation during a State of Emergency,” https://www.refworld.org/docid/453883fd1f.html (accessed 26 May 2019).Google Scholar
UNHRComm (2001b) “General Comment 29 on State of Emergency (Article 4),” https://www.refworld.org/docid/453883fd1f.html (accessed 29 September 2020).Google Scholar
UNHRComm (2004) “General Comment 31 on the Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant,” https://undocs.org/CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13 (accessed 25 May 2019).Google Scholar
UNHRComm (2006) “Concluding Observations on Canada,” https://www.refworld.org/docid/453777a50.html (accessed 26 May 2019).Google Scholar
Wardah, Fathiya (2017) “Indonesia Berkomitmen Urus Pengungsi Asing,” VOA Indonesia, https://www.voaindonesia.com/a/indonesia-komitmen-urus-pengungsi-asing-/3956863.html (accessed 14 October 2020).Google Scholar
Weissbrodt, David, & Hortreiter, Isabel (1999) “The Principle of Non-Refoulement: Article 3 of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in Comparison with the Non-Refoulement Provisions of Other International Human Rights Treaties.” 5 Buffalo Human Rights Law Review 1–73.Google Scholar
White, Nigel D. (2002) The United Nations System: Towards International Justice, Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Wood, Michael (2015) “Third Report on Identification of Customary International Law,” http://legal.un.org/docs/?symbol=A/CN.4/682 (accessed 14 October 2020) (accessed 9 November 2020).Google Scholar
Wouters, Kees (2009) International Legal Standards for the Protection from Refoulement, Cambridge: Intersentia.Google Scholar