Local Chapter Legal Writings - ALSA LC UNUD by ALSA Indonesia

LOCAL CHAPTER LEGAL WRITINGS

alsa-indonesia.org

“ANALISIS SANKSI PIDANA YANG DIBERIKAN KEPADA PILOT DAN TEKNISI PESAWAT DALAM PENGOPERASIAN PESAWAT UDARA” (Studi Kasus: Jatuhnya Pesawat Lion Air JT-610 Type B737-Max)

I Putu Charles Wiarta Yasa, I Gusti Dwiki Arya Putera, Ida Ayu Sabda Surya Laksmi Universitas Udayana BAB I PENDAHULUAN

Latar Belakang Menilik data dari Majalah Angkasa, (Kompas cyber media, 11 April 2008), sepanjang

abad 21 lalu tercatat hampir 11000 kecelakaan pesawat udara terjadi. Berdasarkan data statistik kecelakaan pesawat, kebanyakan pesawat udara mengalami kecelakaan karena faktor manusia. Faktor kesalahan manusia (human error) umumnya sering terjadi dikarenakan beberapa hal seperti, kondisi pilot yang kurang memiliki keahlian dalam menerbangkan pesawat, pilot yang terus mendapatkan tekanan dari perusahaan penerbangan untuk terbang melebihi batas waktu yang ditentukan, kesalahan dalam pelayanan navigasi penerbangan, kesalahan dari awak kabin maupun dari penumpang itu sendiri, dan lain sebagainya. Hal tersebut umumnya terjadi dikarenakan kurangnya kesadaran berbagai pihak mulai dari penumpang pesawat udara, perusahaan maskapai penerbangan, pengelola bandara dan pihak lain yang terkait pentingnya mematuhi dan melaksanakan peraturan-peraturan teknis keselamatan penerbangan, sebab dalam kegiatan penerbangan setiap pihak harus menerapkan prinsip zero risk untuk meminimalisir terjadinya kecelakaan penerbangan. Namun, hal tersebut bukan merupakan faktor utama, sebab dapat juga kecelakaan penerbangan terjadi karena kesalahan teknis pesawat. Hal ini diindikasi dengan faktor sistem pesawat yang rusak. Technical error adalah penyebab kecelakaan pesawat udara karena faktor teknis, walaupun persentase dari kecelakaan yang diakibatkan oleh faktor ini relatif kecil, akan tetapi seringkali berakibat fatal (Gunadi,http://www.suarakarya.online.com/ news.html, 6 Juni 2008). Salah satu faktor lain adalah organization error (kesalahan pengelolaan) yaitu pemeliharaan

pesawat yang tidak sepenuhnya mengikuti aturan, guna mengurangi maintenance cost (biaya perawatan) yang sewaktu waktu juga dapat mengakibatkan terjadinya kecelakaan.

Faktor manusia yang di maksud seringkali ditujukan kepada orang yang memang mengoperasikan pesawat udara tersebut yaitu pilot atau kapten penerbang. Pilot sendiri merupakan bagian dari personel penerbangan. Secara umum, pihak-pihak yang merupakan personel penerbangan terdiri dari dua bagian, yaitu; Personel darat (ground personnel) dan personel terbang (flying personnel). Personel darat terdiri para pegawai yang tidak meninggalkan daratan atau tidak terbang yang terkait dengan persiapan, arahan serta pemantauan pesawat udara. Personel ini antara lain meliputi: personel bandar udara, meteorologi, keselamatan dan personel pelayanan darat lainnya (Vershcoor, I, H. Ph. Diederiks, an Introduction to Air Law, Deventer, Boston: Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers, 1993, hlm 29.). Personel terbang dapat dibagi menjadi beberapa kategori sebagai berikut: 1. Orang-orang yang bertugas dalam komando, orang yang menerbangkan pesawat udara, orang-orang yang bertugas untuk hal-hal teknis selama dalam penerbangan, dan 2. Orang-orang yang melakukan pelayanan pendukung, misalnya pramugari dan pramugara kabin (E. Suherman, Aneka Masalah Hukum Kedirgantaraan (Himpunan Makalah 1961-1995), Mandar Maju, Cetakan 1, 2000, hlm 80).

Pilot pesawat udara mempunyai peranan yang sangat penting dalam penerbangan, maka mereka harus mengetahui dengan benar tentang hak dan kewajiban sebagai pilot pesawat udara. Hak dan kewajiban tersebut tidak lepas dari peranan sertifikasi dan lisensi personel dalam penerbangan. Hal ini sudah diatur secara khusus di dalam Annex 1 Konvensi Chicago 1944. Definisi pilot dicantumkan di dalam pasal 1 Undang-undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang Penerbangan. Undang-undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang Penerbangan, menyebutkan bahwa pilot disebut dengan istilah kapten penerbangan. Kapten penerbangan adalah penerbang yang ditugaskan oleh perusahaan atau pemilik pesawat udara untuk memimpin penerbangan dan bertanggung jawab penuh terhadap keselamatan penerbangan selama pengoperasian pesawat udara sesuai dengan peraturan perundang-undangan.

Salah satu insiden kecalakaan pesawat yang didudga disebabkan oleh kesalahan pilot yaitu jatuhnya Lion Air JT- 610. Pada tanggal 29 Oktober 2018, pihak Air Traffic Control (ATC) menyatakan bahwa pesawat udara Lion Air type B737-Max dengan nomor penerbangan JT- 610 yang dipimpin oleh pilot bernama Bhavye Suneja, dinyatakan hilang kontak pada pukul 06.50 WIB. Pesawat tersebut membawa 178 penumpang dewasa, 1 penumpang anak-anak dan 2 bayi dengan 1 kopilot dan 5 Flight Attendant. Hilangnya kontak pesawat berada pada jarak 25 mil laut dari Tanjung Priok atau 11 mil laut dari Tanjung Kerawang di ketinggian 2.500 meter di atas permukaan laut. (https://www.cnnindonesia.com/ nasional/2018102910582 0-20-342222/kronologi-jatuhn ya-lion-air-jt-610-di-tanjungkarawang, 29 Oktober 2018). Penyebab dari jatuhnya pesawat tersebut adalah karena adanya kesalahan teknis dan kurangnya ketelitian dalam perbaikan mesin Angle of Attack (AOA) sehingga menyebabkan kerusakan pada mesin tersebut. Selain itu, pilot juga mengalami miskomunikasi dan kelalaian

terkait pengoperasian pesawat. Hal inilah yang menyebabkan pilot mengalami kesulitan dalam mengoperasikan pesawat. (Choirul,https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/news/ 2019102515 1154-4-110198/terungkap-ini-dia-kronologi-jatuhnya-boeing-lion-air-jt-610, 25 Oktober 2019). 2.

Rumusan Masalah

Berdasarkan latar belakang diatas rumusan masalah yang dapat ditemukan adalah: 1. Bagaimanakah sanksi pidana yang diberikan kepada pilot terhadap kelalaian/ kealpaannya dalam mengoperasikan pesawat udara ? 2. Bagaimanakah sanksi pidana yang diberikan kepada pihak teknisi pesawat apabila melakukan kelalaian/kealpaan, miskomunikasi (kesalahan komunikasi), maupun kesalahan dalam perbaikan pesawat udara ?

BAB II PEMBAHASAN 1.

Sanksi Pidana Yang Diberikan Kepada Pilot Terhadap Kelalaian/Kealpaan Dalam Mengoperasikan Pesawat Udara Sanksi pidana merupakan suatu hukuman yang ditimpakan kepada seseorang yang

bersalah melakukan perbuatan yang dilarang oleh hukum pidana, dengan adanya sanksi tersebut diharapkan orang tidak akan melakukan tindak pidana. (Mahrus Ali, “ Dasar-Dasar Hukum Pidana ”, Jakarta, 2015, hlm 194). Black’s Law Dictionary Henry Campbell Black memberikan pengertian sanksi pidana sebagai punishment attached to conviction at crimes such fines, probation and sentences (suatu pidana yang dijatuhkan untuk menghukum suatu penjahat (kejahatan) seperti dengan pidana denda, pidana pengawasan dan pidana penjara). Berdasarkan BAB XXIX A tentang Penerbangan pasal 479 g KUHP “Barang siapa karena kealpaannya menyebabkan pesawat udara celaka, hancur, tidak dapat dipakai atau rusak, dipidana: a. Dengan pidana penjara selama-lamanya lima tahun, jika karena perbuatan itu timbul bahaya bagi nyawa orang lain; b. Dengan pidana penjara selama-lamanya tujuh tahun, jika karena perbuatan itu mengakibatkan matinya orang.” Sebuah catatan teknis (technical log) penerbangan sebelumnya (dari Bali ke Jakarta) pada hari Minggu 28 oktober 2018, menunjukkan sebuah mesin tidak dapat diandalkan (unreliable) sehingga instrumen CAPT (kapten) menyerahkan kendali kepada FO (kopilot) serta NNC dari Airs kru memutuskan untuk melanjutkan penerbangan mereka dan mendarat dengan selamat di Jakarta. Namun, ternyata dalam perjalanan lanjutan ke Pangkal Pinang, pesawat tersebut akhirnya jatuh karena dugaan adanya kesalahan teknis. (Hanung,https:// www.cnbcindonesia.com/news/20181031174932-4-39986/jika-terbukti-lalai-ini-sanksi-yangbisa-menimpa-lion-air, 31 october 2018)

Sebagai permulaan, pertanggungjawaban kecelakaan pesawat sebenarnya dapat dikenakan kepada 3 pihak, yakni pengelola bandar udara, maskapai penerbangan, dan awak pesawat secara individu. Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang Penerbangan, sanksi pidana terhadap pihak yang bertanggung jawab terhadap kecelakaan sebenarnya sudah diatur pada pasal 401 - 443 dalam UU tersebut. Seperti dituliskan pada pasal 411: "Setiap orang dengan sengaja menerbangkan atau mengoperasikan pesawat udara yang membahayakan keselamatan pesawat udara, penumpang, dan/atau penduduk atau merugikan harta benda milik orang lain sebagaimana dimaksud dalam pasal 53 dipidana dengan pidana penjara paling lama 2 (dua) tahun atau denda paling banyak Rp 500.000.000”. Diatur dalam ayat (2) pasal tersebut, apabila mengakibatkan matinya manusia, maka hukuman pidananya adalah penjara selama 10 (sepuluh) tahun.” Pasal 441 menyebutkan bahwa "Tindak pidana di bidang penerbangan dianggap dilakukan oleh korporasi apabila tindak pidana tersebut dilakukan oleh orang yang bertindak untuk dan/atau atas nama korporasi atau untuk kepentingan korporasi, baik berdasarkan hubungan kerja maupun hubungan lain, bertindak dalam lingkungan korporasi tersebut, baik sendiri maupun bersama-sama." Oleh karena itu, kesalahan kapten pesawat/personel yang menyebabkan kecelakaan pesawat dan kematian, dapat dituntut pertanggungjawaban pidananya ke korporasi. Mau bagaimanapun juga, tugas dan kewenangan yang dilakukan oleh kapten/personel yang bertindak atas nama korporasi atau kepentingan finansial korporasi. Kemudian, ada juga pasal yang dapat berlaku bagi kasus Lion Air, yakni pasal 438 ayat (1): "Kapten penerbang yang sedang bertugas yang mengalami keadaan bahaya atau mengetahui adanya pesawat udara lain yang diindikasikan sedang menghadapi bahaya dalam penerbangan, tidak memberitahukan kepada unit pelayanan lalu lintas penerbangan sebagaimana dimaksud dalam pasal 354 sehingga berakibat terjadinya kecelakaan pesawat udara dan kerugian harta benda, dipidana dengan pidana penjara paling lama 8 (delapan) tahun."

Diatur dalam ayat (2) pasal tersebut, apabila mengakibatkan matinya manusia, maka hukuman pidananya adalah penjara selama 10 (sepuluh) tahun. Pada pasal 443 disebutkan "Dalam hal tindak pidana di bidang penerbangan dilakukan oleh suatu korporasi, selain pidana penjara dan denda terhadap pengurusnya, pidana yang dapat dijatuhkan terhadap korporasi berupa pidana denda dengan pemberatan 3 (tiga) kali dari pidana denda yang ditentukan dalam bab ini." Sesuai dengan pasal di atas, setidaknya korporasi juga perlu mendapatkan denda minimal tiga kali lipat dari kesalahan yang dilanggar. Seandainya yang dilanggar adalah pasal 411, maka denda yang harus ditanggung Lion Air setidaknya sebesar Rp 1,5 triliun rupiah belum termasuk menghitung sanksi penjara bagi pengurus yang bertanggung jawab. 2.

Sanksi Pidana Yang Diberikan Kepada Teknisi Pesawat Terhadap Kelalaian/ Kealpaan Dalam Memperbaiki Pesawat Udara Berdasarkan Annex 1 Konvensi Chicago 1944 telah dijelaskan terkait pembagian

personel penerbangan terdiri dari dua bagian, yaitu: personel darat (ground personnel) dan personel terbang (flying personnel). Personel darat terdiri dari para pegawai yang tidak meninggalkan daratan atau tidak terbang dan berhubungan dengan persiapan dan arahan pesawat udara. Sedangkan personel terbang terdiri dari orang-orang yang bertugas dalam komando pengoperasian dan orang-orang yang memberikan pelayanan pendukung. Dalam hal ini teknisi pesawat merupakan personel penerbangan darat. AME (Aircraft Maintenance Engineer) adalah teknisi pesawat yang bertanggung jawab terhadap kelaikan pesawat untuk terbang. AME mempunyai tugas untuk memeriksa, melakukan atau mengawasi pemeliharaan, pemeliharaan preventif, dan pengubahan dalam sistem dan mekanikal dari pesawat. Jika terdapat masalah teknis pada pesawat terbang, AMElah yang bertugas untuk menyelesaikan masalah tersebut, tetapi apabila dalam melaksankan tugas AME melakukan kelalaian atau kesalahan maka berhak mendapatkan sanksi pidana. (Kompas,https://edukasi.kompas.com/read/2020/10/29/050700171/siswa-yuk-mengenal-prof esi-di-bidang-penerbangan?page=all, 29 Oktober 2020)

Pada BAB XXI pasal 359 KUHP dituliskan: “Barang siapa karena kesalahannya (kealpaannya) menyebabkan orang lain mati, diancam dengan pidana penjara paling lama lima tahun atau pidana kurungan paling lama satu tahun”. Berdasarkan BAB XXIX A KUHP pasal 479 g menyebutkan bahwa “Barang siapa karena kealpaannya menyebabkan pesawat udara celaka, hancur, tidak dapat dipakai atau rusak, dipidana: a. dengan pidana penjara selama-lamanya lima tahun, jika karena perbuatan itu timbul bahaya bagi nyawa orang lain; b. dengan pidana penjara selama-lamanya tujuh tahun, jika karena perbuatan itu mengakibatkan matinya orang.” Pasal 479 p “Barang siapa memberikan keterangan yang diketahuinya adalah palsu dan karena perbuatan itu membahayakan keamanan pesawat udara dalam penerbangan, dipidana dengan pidana penjara selama-lamanya lima belas tahun.” Dalam UU Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang Penerbangan maupun Peraturan Menteri Perhubungan tidak menjelaskan secara jelas mengenai ketentuan sanksi pidana yang dapat diberikan bagi pihak yang terindikasi melakukan kesalahan/kelalaian dalam perawatan mesin yang mengakibatkan kecelakan pesawat dan menghilangkan nyawa seseorang. Maka dari itu, sanksi pidana yang dapat menjerat teknisi mesin pesawat atau AME (Aircraft Maintenance Engineer) adalah pasal pidana KUHP sesuai dengan yang telah dipaparkan di atas tentang kelalaian yang menyebabkan hilangnya nyawa seseorang. Pasal 479 g berkaitan dengan bagaimana kronologi kasus jatuhnya pesawat JT-610, terindikasi bahwa terjadi kesalahan dalam perbaikan/perawatan mesin yang dilakukan teknisi mesin yang mengakibatkan pesawat mengalami gangguan sehingga berakibat kecelakaan yang menghilangkan nyawa seseorang. Sedangkan, pada pasal 479 p mengacu pada investigasi yang ditemukan bahwa pihak teknisi mesin pesawat memberikan hasil uji coba yang tidak sesuai dengan perbaikan yang dilakukan, sehingga mengakibatkan kerusakan pada mesin yang tidak terdeteksi. (Choirul,https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/news/

20191025151154-4110198/terungk ap-ini-dia- kronologi-jatuhnya-boeing-lion-air-jt-610, 25 Oktober 2019)

BAB III PENUTUP 1.

Kesimpulan Sanksi pidana merupakan pengenaan suatu hukuman yang ditimpakan kepada

seseorang yang dinyatakan bersalah atas tindak kejahatan atau perbuatan pidana melalui rangkaian proses peradilan oleh kekuasaan atau hukum yang secara khusus diberikan untuk hal itu. Pihak yang melakukan kesalahan/kealpaan yang mengakibatkan hilangnya nyawa seseorang tetap mendapat sanksi pidana, hal ini sesuai dengan kronologi dan penyebab jatuhnya Lion Air JT-610 sebagaimana yang tercantum dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP) BAB XXIX A pasal 479 g “Barang siapa karena kealpaannya menyebabkan pesawat udara celaka, hancur, tidak dapat dipakai atau rusak, dipidana: a. dengan pidana penjara selama-lamanya lima tahun, jika karena perbuatan itu timbul bahaya bagi nyawa orang lain; b. dengan pidana penjara selama-lamanya tujuh tahun, jika karena perbuatan itu mengakibatkan matinya orang”; dan pasal 479 p bahwa “Barang siapa memberikan keterangan yang diketahuinya adalah palsu dan karena perbuatan itu membahayakan keamanan pesawat udara dalam penerbangan, dipidana dengan pidana penjara selamalamanya lima belas tahun.”. Selanjutnya diatur dalam Undang-undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang penerbangan yaitu: Pasal 411 “Setiap orang dengan sengaja menerbangkan atau mengoperasikan pesawat udara yang membahayakan keselamatan pesawat udara, penumpang, dan/atau penduduk atau merugikan harta benda milik orang lain sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 53 dipidana dengan pidana penjara paling lama 2 (dua) tahun atau denda paling banyak Rp 500.000.000.”. Diatur dalam ayat 2 pasal tersebut, apabila mengakibatkan matinya manusia, maka hukuman pidananya adalah penjara selama 10 (sepuluh) tahun; Pasal 438 ayat 1 "Kapten penerbang yang sedang bertugas yang mengalami keadaan bahaya atau mengetahui adanya pesawat udara lain yang diindikasikan sedang menghadapi bahaya dalam penerbangan, tidak memberitahukan kepada unit pelayanan lalu lintas penerbangan sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 354 sehingga berakibat terjadinya kecelakaan pesawat udara dan kerugian harta benda, dipidana dengan pidana penjara paling lama 8 (delapan) tahun."; Pasal 441 bahwa "Tindak pidana di bidang penerbangan dianggap dilakukan oleh korporasi apabila tindak 8

pidana tersebut dilakukan oleh orang yang bertindak untuk dan/atau atas nama korporasi atau untuk kepentingan korporasi, baik berdasarkan hubungan kerja maupun hubungan lain, bertindak dalam lingkungan korporasi tersebut, baik sendiri maupun bersama-sama."; Pasal 443 disebutkan "Dalam hal tindak pidana di bidang penerbangan dilakukan oleh suatu korporasi, selain pidana penjara dan denda terhadap pengurusnya, pidana yang dapat dijatuhkan terhadap korporasi berupa pidana denda dengan pemberatan 3 (tiga) kali dari pidana denda yang ditentukan dalam bab ini.". Dengan demikian pilot dan teknisi pesawat yang telah melakukan kelalaian atau kealpaan hingga menimbulkan korban jiwa dapat dijatuhi sanksi sebagaimana yang telah dicantumkan di atas. Meskipun tidak sepenuhnya dapat memenuhi rasa keadilan yang diinginkan pihak keluarga korban, namun penjatuhan sanksi pidana dapat menjadi pelajaran penting dalam pengoperasionalan pesawat udara agar menjadi lebih baik dan mengutamakan keselamatan diatas kepentingan lainnya. Masyarakat juga dapat memahami tentang bagaimana pentingnya sebuah aturan seperti KUHP dapat menjerat siapapun yang terbukti melanggar aturan sehingga mampu meningkatkan kesadaran dan wawasan konstitusi dan hukum positif.

DAFTAR PUSTAKA Buku E. Saefullah Wiradipradja, Tanggung Jawab Pengangkut dalam Hukum Pengangkutan Udara Internasional dan Nasional, Yogyakarta: Penerbit Libert, 1989, hlm.58. K. Martono, Hukum Udara, Angkutan Udara dan Hukum Angkasa, Hukum Laut Internasional, Bandung: Penerbit Mandar Maju 1995, hlm.146. Vershcoor, I, H. Ph. Diederiks, an Introduction to Air Law, Deventer, Boston: Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers, 1993, hlm 29.

E. Suherman, Aneka Masalah Hukum Kedirgantaraan (Himpunan Makalah 1961-1995), Mandar Maju, Cetakan 1, 2000, hlm 80. Mahrus Ali, “Dasar-Dasar Hukum Pidana”, Jakarta, 2015, hlm 194. Peraturan Chapter 1.1.1 Annex 1 on Personnel Licensing Chicago Convention 1944. Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang Penerbangan Pasal 1 Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang Penerbangan Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang Penerbangan pasal 401 Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang Penerbangan pasal 441 Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang Penerbangan pasal 438 Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang Penerbangan pasal 411 Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2009 tentang Penerbangan pasal 443 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP) BAB XXIX A Pasal 479 g Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP) BAB XXIX A Pasal 479 p 10

Internet CNN Indonesia. 29 oktober 2018. Kronologi Jatuhnya Lion Air JT-610. Diakses dari https:// www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20181029105820-20-342222/kro nologi-jatuhnya-lion-airjt-610-di-tanjung-karawang, diakses pada tanggal 30 Januari 2020 Gunadi. 6 juni 2008. Diakses dari http://www.suarakarya.online.com/ news.html, diakses pada tanggal 29 Januari 2020 Kompas. 29 Oktober 2020. Siswa, Yuk Mengenal Profesi di Bidang Penerbangan. Diakses dari https://edukasi.kompas.com/read/2020/10/29/050700171/siswa-yuk -mengenal-profesidi-bidng-penerbangan?page=all, diakses pada tanggal 30 Januari 2020 Muhammad Choirul, CNBC Indonesia. 25 oktober 2019. Terungkap Ini Dia Kronologi Jatuhnya Boeing Lion Air JT-610. Diakses dari https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/news/ 20191025151154-4-110198/terungkap-ini-dia-kronologi-jatuhnya-boeing-lion-air-jt-610, diakses pada tanggal 29 Januari 2020 Raditya Hanung. 31 oktober 2018. Jika Terbukti Lalai, Ini Sanksi Yang Bisa Menimpa Lion Air. Diakses dari

https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/news/2018103117493 2-4-39986/jika-

terbukti-lalai-ini-sanksi-yang-bisa-menimpa-lion-air, diakses pada tanggal 29 Januari 2020

SYRIA’S WAR: FROM THE GOVERNMENT’S INHUMAN ACTS TO THE INTERNATIONALIZED ARMED CONFLICT?

Overview and Subject of the Case The present case concerns about both human rights and humanitarian law, where the peaceful protests erupted in Syria on March 2011 had resulted in many oppressions by the governmental authorities. Such situation was followed by the defections from their military; establishing a four-year-conflict between the rebel group and the government before it culminated in the military interventions from another States supporting each party. Statement of Facts 1. Following the detention and torture against 15 boys who wrote graffiti supporting Arab spring (one of them were killed), peaceful protests were brought by the people of Syria on March 2011. Responding to the protests, the Syrian government killed hundreds of demonstrators and imprisoned many more under the authority of President Bashar al-Assad. 2. A rebel group called The Free Syrian Army (“TFSA”) was announced on July 2011, followed by the “war” between TFSA and the governmental authorities. 3. A stark sectarian tension was also shown throughout the conflict, as most Syrians are Sunni Muslims while the Alawi sect (of which Assad is a member) has been dominating Syria’s security establishment. 4. The governments of majority-Shia Iran and Iraq, and Lebanon-based Hezbollah have been supporting Assad, while the anti-Assad rebels have been supported by the Sunni-majority countries including Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. 5. Since 2016, several operations have been launched by the Turkish troops against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (“ISIL”), as well as against Kurdish groups armed by the US. Furthermore, US has armed anti-Assad groups and led an international coalition bombing ISIL targets since 2014. 6. Israel carried out air raids inside Syria, reportedly targeting Hezbollah and pro-government fighters and facilities. Israeli warplane was first shot down by the Syrian air on February 2018. (Referring to the source provided: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/4/14/syrias-war-explained-from-the-beginning)

Issues Having established the aforementioned facts, three issues will be raised in this writing. First, is whether there is any justification for the response of the Assad government; second, is whether the intervention from another States is justifiable, and; third, is whether the attacks against ISIL and the attacks carried out by Israel are legitimate. Applicable Laws 1. Charter of the United Nations (1945) 2. The Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (1949) 3. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1976) 4. United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1987) 5. United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1990) 6. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) 7. United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/2625 (1970) 8. Constitution of Syria (2012) Analysis I.

Peaceful Protests and the Response from the Assad Government It is a common sense that torture and inhuman treatment have no place to be justified. As

a clear benchmark for the universal human rights standards, 1 the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR”) explicitly enshrined in Article 5 that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Moreover, no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile,2 and the freedom of opinion and expression is entitled to every person.3 The Peaceful protests brought by the Syrian people after the detention and torture of 15 boys were the acts justifiable as the Assad government had violated the State’s duty towards their own people. It is already to be acknowledged that the victims were all children who are

Amnesty International, “WHAT WE DO: Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, URL: https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/universal-declaration-of-humanrights/#:~:text=The%20UDHR%20is%2C%20as%20its,constitutions%20and%20domestic%20legal%20framew orks (Accessed November 20th, 2020). 2 UDHR, Article 9. 3 UDHR, Article 19. 1

entitled to substantial protections under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (“CRC”), or at the very least, the 13-year-old killed were so.4 The convention clearly set out in Article 2(2) that all State parties, therefore Syria, shall take all appropriate measures to ensure the child’s protection against any discrimination or punishment, inter alia, on the basis of their activities and expressed opinions. Crucially, Syria is also obliged to recognize the right to life entitled to every child and to maximally ensure their survival, to take the appropriate measures to protect them from all forms of violence, as well as to ensure the absence of the child being subject to torture or other cruel treatment or punishment.5 On the child’s side, the victims were entitled to the right to freely express themself in all forms including art,6 thus the examination of whether writing graffiti allegedly supporting Arab spring constitutes a sufficient restriction ground to protect the national security or public order7 shall require further investigation. Albeit it is proven that they had infringed the penal law, they shall remain to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of their sense of dignity and worth.8 Having their heart moved by such emergencies, the Syrian people who brought protests that is in the nature peaceful were seeking justice to the governmental authorities, yet the Assad government took such immediate and violent handling inconsistent with the human rights law, especially that not only Syria is an original members of the United Nations (“UN”), 9 but also a State party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”) and the United Nations Convention against Torture (“UNCT”). So what is ‘torture’? This term covers any act by which severe physical or mental pain or suffering is intentionally inflicted, inter alia, to punish that person, and that such act is done with the consent of public official.10 Does then a peaceful protest, by any legal view, constitute a criminal offence? It is rather a violation to prohibit such protest as the concrete form of ‘freedom of expression’ protected by Article 19 of both UDHR and ICCPR.11

Pursuant to the CRC, Article 1. CRC, Article 6, 19(1), 37(a). 6 CRC, Article 13(1). 7 Pursuant to the CRC, Article 13(2)(b). 8 CRC, Article 40. 9 United Nations, “Growth in United Nations membership, 1945-present”, URL: https://www.un.org/en/sections/member-states/growth-united-nations-membership-1945-present/index.html (Accessed November 23rd, 2020). 10 UNCT, Article 1. 11 UDHR, Article 19; ICCPR, Article 19. 5

Carrying UDHR principles, ICCPR and UNCT set forth to the large degree the provisions that condemn the government’s act. It is clear, again, that no person shall be arbitrarily deprived of his/her life, or to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.12 Syria has indeed a duty to take effective measures to prevent acts of torture, as no exceptional circumstances, not even a state of war or a public authority; can be invoked as a justification of torture.13 Article 9 of ICCPR further set the provisions against arbitrary arrest and detention, including the importance of valid reasons and charges being informed to the arrested, the right to take proceedings before a court, and most importantly, that the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation. As the list goes long, it is rather coherent that the act of Assad government has violated the State’s very own constitution. It could not be stated clearer in the Constitution of Syria,14 that: “Society in the Syrian Arab Republic shall be based on the basis of solidarity, symbiosis and respect for the principles of social justice, freedom, equality and maintenance of human dignity of every individual”. The Constitution also condemns the act of torture,15 recognizes the freedom as a sacred right and obligates the State to guarantee the personal freedom of citizens and to preserve their dignity and security. 16 Not to question nor neglect that, substantially, to assemble and to peacefully demonstrate is a right of the citizens,17 thus no punishment shall be subjected to them.18 Should it be necessary, investigation and arrest of a person shall only be issued by the competent judicial authority,19 and the arrested must again be informed of the reasons for such arrest and of his/her rights.20 Having all the legal basis explicit and consistent, it might only be one thing assumptive, that Article 117 of the Constitution grants the President of the Republic, therefore Assad, an immune from the responsibility for the acts he does in carrying out his duties. However it shall be beyond doubt that, referring to both international and national laws, no duties shall allow a President to justify the commission of violence being contrary to the State’s principles, as Article 96 also obliged Assad to insure respect for the Constitution. Notwithstanding any needs

ICCPR, Article 6&7. UNCT, Article 2. 14 Constitution of Syria, Article 19. 15 Constitution of Syria, Article 53(2); as obliged in Article 4 of the UNCT to ensure all acts of torture are offences under each State Party’s criminal law. 16 Constitution of Syria, Article 33(1). 17 Constitution of Syria, Article 44. 18 Constitution of Syria, Article 51(1); ICCPR, Article 15. 19 Constitution of Syria, Article 53(1). 20 Constitution of Syria, Article 53(3). 13

for further investigation, the acts carried out under Assad’s authority; killing hundreds of his people and imprisoning many more, are indeed sufficiently alarming to be constituted as high treason. Taking into account all the controversial and inhuman acts committed by the Assad government, there exists no justification to the present issue; not even the immunity entitled to Assad as the President under the Constitution of Syria. II.

Intervention from Another States Moving on to the next issue emerging from the continuance of Syria’s internal conflict,

the analysis will generally focus on the legality of the States’ intervention and examine whether such act happening often in the field can be justified. To start the analysis, what does this term ‘intervention’ refer to? It may refer to many things, including interference in domestic affairs or foreign affairs; specific forms of action; foreign penetration with unworthy motives; coercion; and any act of influence among sovereign state.21 In a particular context, military intervention can be defined as the beginning of blatant acts of military force in another country. 22 Such intervention, indeed, can be found mainly in IHL field theory; as for example is regarding the internationalized character of an armed conflict, where IHL cases like Prlić,23 Tadić,24 and Čelebići25 explicitly ruled that the existence of intervention from another States in a conflict through its troops renders an internal armed conflict to an international one. It is said that in the past, States brooked no interference in the way they dealt with their domestic affairs including internal conflict, as the principle to refrain from intervening was widely accepted. 26 Such principle is set forth in the Charter of the United Nations (“UN Charter”), as first and foremost, it is stated in Article 2(1) of the Charter that the UN is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all States. Moreover, it is substantially stated in Article 2(4) that: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or

Tillema, H. K., & Wingen, J. R. V. (1982). Law and Power in Military Intervention: Major States after World War II. International Studies Quarterly, 26(2), 223. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2600650. 22 Ibid. 23 International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Jadranko Prlić, Case No. IT-04-74-T, para. 85. (“Prlić Case”) 24 International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-A, para. 84. 25 International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, The Prosecutor v. Mucic et al. (“Čelebići”), Case No. IT-96-21-T, para. 208. 26 International Committee of the Red Cross. (2002). “(Lesson 10) The Law of Armed Conflict: Non-international armed conflict”, p. 3. (Retrieved from: https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/law10_final.pdf)

use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” Given these principles, it is clear that the idea of intervention particularly involving the use of force contradicts the fundamental respect towards the States sovereignty, and thus no members shall orientate to do so, not even the UN itself. 27 The principle of non-intervention is also declared in the UN General Assembly Resolution of 24 October 1970.28 In attribution to that, it is explicitly ruled in Nicaragua Case29 that the principle of nonintervention forbids al1 States to directly or indirectly intervene in the internal or external affairs of other States; particularly in which such intervention is achieved through the use of force, either directly (through military action) or indirectly (through support for subversive or terrorist armed activities). It is also emphasized that no such “general right of intervention, in support of an opposition within another State” exists in international law. 30 The explicit provision of non-intervention in humanitarian law is set forth in Article 3 of Protocol Additional II to The Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, of which, however, Syria is not a State party.31 On the other hand, there is also an intervention that is by the nature called “humanitarian”, although the doctrine of “humanitarian intervention” itself remains a controversial subject until today.32 As no generally accepted definition exists on such intervention, one possible definition runs as follows: “the theory of intervention on the ground of humanity (...) recognizes the right of one State to exercise international control over the acts of another in regard to its internal sovereignty when contrary to the laws of humanity”.33 In short, it aims to prevent or stop a gross violation of human rights in a State, where it is either incapable or unwilling to protect its own people or is actively persecuting them.34 However, as it is said from the viewpoint of humanitarian law, “humanitarian intervention” which subsequently refers to armed intervention often carried out with a political agenda contradicts the essence of the term 27

UN Charter, Article 2(7). UN General Assembly, Resolution A/RES/2625 (XXV) of 24 October 1970 on “The Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States”. 29 International Court of Justice Reports, 1986, pp. 14, 108. (“Nicaragua Case”) 30 Nicaragua Case, 109. 31 International Committee of the Red Cross, “Treaties, States Parties and Commentaries: Syrian Arab Republic”, URL: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/vwTreatiesByCountrySelected.xsp?xp_countrySelected=SY (Accessed November 22nd, 2020). 32 Ryniker, A. (2001). The ICRC’s position on “humanitarian intervention”. International Review of the Red Cross, 83(842), 527. DOI: 10.1017/S1560775500105826. 33 Ibid, p. 528. 34 Kirthi Jayakumar, 2012, “Humanitarian Intervention: A Legal Analysis”, URL: https://www.eir.info/2012/02/06/humanitarian-intervention-a-legal-analysis/#_ftn13 (Accessed November 24th, 2020). 28

“humanitarian” which describes action intended to alleviate the suffering of the victims. 35 Moreover, there remains no place for “humanitarian intervention” in the system established by the UN, and legal doctrine rejects the legitimacy of “humanitarian intervention” in both very general and restricted sense.36 In this case, the intervention both supporting the Assad government and the anti-Assad TFSA has clearly been involving the use of force as Turkey have launched several operations since 2016, not to mention the US who led an international coalition using such force since 2014 and Israel who carried out air raids inside Syria. Given these circumstances, no grounds can be raised to justify such interventions; even if the “humanitarian” ground may seem to meet the internal situations in Syria, it is based on the facts provided that other States were mainly attacking their opponents without aiming to provide humanitarian assistance. It can also be underlined that such interventions were most likely based on the existing “sectarian divisions” between Sunni Muslims and the Alawi sect, which may suffice to prove that they were not based on a neutral aim to strive for peace. III. The Legality of the Attacks against ISIL and the Attacks Carried out by Israel Having established the analysis for the second issue, this last issue shall not raise a harder question but may allow another perspective to be opened. As the idea of the interventions in Syria’s war is unjustified by law, it is to be based on further facts of whether the operations and bombings against ISIL may in any view become legitimate. One of the possible perspectives is that, embracing the fact that the interventions subsequently existed (although the States were obliged not to), their interference may determine the legitimate parties to the ongoing conflict. Referring back to the IHL cases, State’s intervention is the ground which establishes the escalation of an armed conflict. In assessing such intervention taking form in the indirect participation, it is necessary to pay attention to the “overall control” test being set in Lubanga Case,37 that such State must have a role in organizing, coordinating or planning the military actions of the military group, in addition to financing, training and equipping or providing operational support to that group. These thresholds, along with further facts, can be used to assess the interference of the States who indirectly support the parties in Syria’s war. However, given the facts where Turkey and the US (along with its coalition) launched operations against 35

Op.cit., p. 529. Yves Sandoz, 1992, “"Droit" or "devoir d'ingérence" and the right to assistance: the issues involved”, URL: https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/article/other/57jmaq.htm (Accessed November 24th, 2020). 37 International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/06, para. 38. 36

ISIL, as well as Israel who carried out air raids inside Syria; it can be acknowledged that they were directly participating to the conflict. Thus, through such direct participations in Syria’s internal conflict, it is sufficient to say that the conflict had indeed escalated to the international one. This finding is pursuant to Common Article 2 to the Geneva Conventions which defined the international armed conflict as the one arising between two or more States, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. Moreover in Prlić Case,38 a conflict which pits two or more States against one another indisputably possess an international character. By possessing such character, there is a possibility that the attacks against ISIL and those carried out by Israel became legitimate as the conflicting parties have also became legitimate, and so long as their use of force is consistent with the existing IHL provisions. Conclusion Having elaborated the aforementioned analysis, three points can be concluded in this writing: 1. The response of the Assad government against the peaceful protesters is unjustifiable by all means, and no immunity shall relieve Assad from his responsibility on the commission of such inhuman acts under his authority. 2. Notwithstanding its frequent practices, no grounds may justify the idea of intervention, not even if the “humanitarian” ground. Given also the limited facts regarding the present case, it can be concluded that the interventions in Syria were not based on a neutral aim to provide humanitarian assistance. 3. As the idea of intervention is unjustifiable, the attacks against ISIL and the attacks carried out by Israel may only become justifiable if the involving States are proven to be the legitimate parties to the conflict, and if such attacks were carried out in the manner consistent with IHL provisions. References Publication Anne Ryniker. (2001). The ICRC’s position on “humanitarian intervention”. International Review of the Red Cross, 83(842), 527-532.

Prlić Case, para. 85.

Herbert K. Tillema & John R. Van Wingen. (1982). Law and Power in Military Intervention: Major States after World War II. International Studies Quarterly, 26(2), 220-250. International Committee of the Red Cross. (2002). (Lesson 10) The Law of Armed Conflict: Non-international armed conflict.

World Wide Web Amnesty International. “WHAT WE DO: Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, URL: https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/universal-declaration-of-humanrights/#:~:text=The%20UDHR%20is%2C%20as%20its,constitutions%20and%20do mestic%20legal%20frameworks (Accessed November 20th, 2020). United Nations.

“Growth in United Nations membership, 1945-present”, URL:

https://www.un.org/en/sections/member-states/growth-united-nations-membership1945-present/index.html (Accessed November 23rd, 2020). Kirthi Jayakumar. (2012). “Humanitarian Intervention: A Legal Analysis”, URL: https://www.e-ir.info/2012/02/06/humanitarian-intervention-a-legal-analysis/#_ftn13 (Accessed November 24th, 2020). Yves Sandoz. (1992). “"Droit" or "devoir d'ingérence" and the right to assistance: the issues URL:

involved”,

https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/article/other/57jmaq.htm (Accessed November 24th, 2020). International Committee of the Red Cross. “Treaties, States Parties and Commentaries: Syrian Arab

Republic”,

URL:

https://ihl-

databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/vwTreatiesByCountrySelected.xsp?xp_countrySel ected=SY (Accessed November 22nd, 2020).

Case Law International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Jadranko Prlić, Case No. IT-04-74-T. International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Case No. ICC-01/0401/06. International Court of Justice, Nicaragua v. United States of America, Merits, Judgment. 1986, p. 14. International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-A.

International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Prosecutor v. Mucic et al. (“Čelebići”), Case No. IT-96-21-T.

ARAB SPRING MOVEMENT : FROM AN INTERNAL POLITICAL AND HUMANITARIAN CRISIS TO AN INTERNATIONAL ARMED CONFLICT

Facts 1. Chronological order ● 2011 : Arab spring toppled Tunisia’s and Egypt’s presidents and the Arab Spring gave hope to Syrian pro-democracy activists. a. In March, peaceful protests erupted in Syria as well, after 15 boys were detained and tortured for writing graffiti in support of the Arab Spring. One of the boys, a 13 year old, was killed after having been brutally tortured. The Syrian government, led by President Bashar al-Assad, responded to the protests by killing hundreds of demonstrators and imprisoning many more. b. In July 2011, defectors from the military announced the formation of the Free Syrian Army, a rebel group aiming to overthrow the government, and Syria began to slide into war. While the protests in 2011 were mostly non-sectarian, the armed conflict surfaced starker sectarian divisions. Most Syrians are Sunni Muslims, but Syria’s security establishment has long been dominated by members of the Alawi sect, of which Assad is a member.

2. International Involvement ● Regional Actors: The governments of majority-Shia Iran and Iraq, and Lebanon-based Hezbollah, have supported Assad, while Sunni-majority countries, including Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia supported anti-Assad rebels. Since 2016, Turkish troops have launched several operations against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS) near its borders, as well as against Kurdish groups armed by the United States. ● Anti-ISIL Coalition: The US has armed anti-Assad rebel groups and led an international coalition bombing ISIL targets since 2014. Israel carried out air raids inside Syria, reportedly targeting Hezbollah and pro-government fighters and facilities. The first time Syrian air defences shot down an Israeli warplane was in February 2018.

Issues Based on the chronological story about the Arab Spring movement that have been explained above, These are issues that will be disscused in this argument : 1. What is the Arab Spring and its role in the case? 2. How about political and humanitarian crisis from legal perspective? 3. Is Arab Spring movement successful enough in the context of “finding solution”? 4. How do international actors play a role in the conflict?

Rules Before stepping into the analysis, here are some legal basis that used to answer the issues and convince the arguments : 1. Constitution of Syrian Arab Republic 2012 a. Article 33 no 1 stated : “Freedom shall be a sacred right and the state shall guarantee the personal freedom of citizens and preserve their dignity and security.” b. Article 42 no 2 stated : “Every citizen shall have the right to freely and openly express his views whether in writing or orally or by all other means of expression.” c. Article 53 no 2 stated : “No one may be tortured or treated in a humiliating manner, and the law shall define the punishment for those who do so.”

2. The Universal Declaration of Human Right (UDHR) a. Article 3 stated : “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.” b. Article 5 stated : “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” c. Article 9 stated : “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.” d. Article 19 stated : “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

3. Geneva Convention 1949 Article 2 Of the Common Articles stated : “In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace time, the present Convention shall applv to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.....”

4. Additional Protocol I of 1977 Article 1 paragraph 3 stated : “This Protocol, which supplements the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 for the protection of war victims, shall apply in the situations referred to in Article 2 common to those Conventions.”

Analysis Arab Spring is a series of pro-democracy and uprisings that took place in various countries in North America and Middle East beginning in 2010 and 2011. The first demonstrations took place in Central Tunisia in December 2010 catalyzed by the selfimmolation of Mohamed Boazizi, a 26 year old street vendor protesting his treatment by local officials, then another demonstrations also occured in Egypt as massive protests broke out late January 2011, only days after Ben Ali’s ouster in Tunisia. The successful of Arab Spring in toppling two regimes that time came as a big hope for Syrian activists since they experienced the similar injustice committed by the President Bashar al-Assad. The peaceful protests erupted after 15 boys were detained and tortured after writing graffiti “Ash-sha 'byurid isqat an-nizam” means “the people want to bring down the regime" in support of Arab Spring, but Bashar alAssad instead responded the protestors by killing hundreds of demonstrators and imprisoning even more.

Bassically factors that cause the Phenomenon of Arab Spring include: a. The Middle East has the same cultural culture that is the Arab nation. Muslims dominated and once triumphed but were later divided in several countries. b. People's freedoms are limited by authoritarian systems of government and dictatorial rule. c. Some countries in the Middle East are still experiencing poverty and high eviction problems. d. The enactment of emergency laws by the ruling government. The existence of an emergency law gives government officials the flexibility to imprison and detain civilians without judicial process against any actions that could threaten national security.

And the Arab Spring phenomenon that occurred in Syria was a people's encouragement inspired by other countries such as Egypt and Tunisia.

The root of the Syrian conflict generally was due to dissatisfaction with the authoritarian regime that ruled at the time. The authoritarianism system allows the government to commit arbitrary actions against the Syrian people. The government's arbitrary actions have made government officials and intelligence agencies an instrument to suppress the Syrian people, which led to violence that has raised the greatest fear to the Syrian people. There are also executions that make people even more afraid of the government.1

As known that Syria is a Republican State where President as a head of state has a role in regulating the government. With that role, President as a leader should be expected as a figure who can maintain and protect the unity of the state, especially its people. But reflecting from the facts and cases happened in Syria, it seemed contradict from the main essence of a President itself. Based on the facts and cases in Syria, it is undeniable that the Syrian government led by Bashar al-Assad has largely deviated from the prevailing laws, such as : Constitution of Syrian Arab Republic 2012 Articles 33 no 1, stated “Freedom shall be a sacred right and the state shall guarantee the personal freedom of citizens and preserve their dignity and security”, It says that people deserve freedom and the state guarantees their security. In other words, the country in this context can be described as a home for the people. Country plays a role as a shelter and a sense of security, while in those conditions instead of giving people a sense of security, the government at that time probably has created terror of fears for the community.

Moreover, the detention and torture case happened to 15 boys which even reported that one of the boys, a 13 year old, was killed after being brutally tortured, certainly, it broke the law. Constitution of Syrian Arab Republic 2012 Article 42 no 2 stated “Every citizen shall have the right to freely and openly express his views whether in writing or orally or by all other means of expression”. It is clearly stating about freedom of speech in any way or any media. There are few words that could point out in the Article; “freely”, “openly”, “writing or orally or by all other” which means freedom of speech is quite specifically contained in the regulation.

Primoz Manfreda, Top 10 Reasons for the Uprising in Syria, https://www.thoughtco.com/top-10-reasons-forthe-uprising-in-syria-2353571 accessed on November 21st

So by then, didn’t the graffiti writing done by those 15 boys was just their kind of way expressing opinion?

In addition, reviewed from more general perspective, the similar articles can also be found in the Universal Declaration of Human Right Article 3 stated “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”, and Article 19 stated “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” Then for the detention and torture case, it spesifically set forth in Article 5 stated “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” and Article 9 stated “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.” Based on those Articles, it is clear that the actions taken by the government have violated the laws. It is unlawful to tortured people and caused them death, for to life is a fundamental rights every human has born with. Those repressive actions and authoritarianism system were en evidence of the political and humanitarian crysis in Syria which triggered people’s anger and evoked the demonstrations.

But, Is Arab Spring movement successful enough in dealing with the turmoil in Syria and came as a solution? Based on the chronological order, it could probably ranked no relating the fact that the authoritarianism of the Assad regime still continued even though massive waves of demonstrations ignited in many places. Some of regulations made by Bashar al-Assad considered as justification and an excuse to imprison civilians, also all his efforts in dampening people’s anger had not worked. Bashar al-Assad even considered the demonstrators as rebels in guise of maintaining the legitimacy of the state. Meanwhile the repressive actions still remained even denounced by many humanitarian organizations.

Humanitarian Law classified armed conflict into 3 forms; international armed conflict, non-international armed conflict/armed conflict not of an international character, and internationalized internal armed conflict. Tracing from participation of international actors in that situation, the Syrian conflict is indirectly more complex from just a national problem. For in fact, the Syrian conflict qualified as an internationalized internal armed conflict. The Syrian conflict according to a juridical assessment included in the international qualifications due to the intervention of other countries and supporting armed conflicts in the form of weapons supplies, military training, and finances to a certain number of fractions.

Furthermore, about the role of international actors in the Syrian conflict, it was stated that the group, led by the Syrian Free Army (FSA) admitted they had received a number of weapons, which would be used to overthrow the Assad regime's rule. The Saudis and Qatar are at the forefront of defending armed groups in Syria. A Persian Gulf coastal Arab States have also provided $100 million in funding to warring fractions to overthrow Bashar Al Assad's government also Riyadh and Doha in cooperation with Washington and its allies. 2 On the other hand, Bashar al-Assad regime is also supported by a number of regional allies such as Iran, Russia and Hezbollah. Iran and Hezbollah are also reported to have not only provided weapons support and military training but also deployed their soldiers to fight alongside government forces against Bashar al-Assad's anti-regime rebel group.3 The parties’s emergence in intervened the Syrian armed conflict, as well for political reasons of

the parties’s involvment has completely changed the definition and the

identification of the Syrian armed conflict, began from only qualified as internal armed conflict then turned into an international armed conflict. According to Pietro Verri stated: "A noninternational conflict (or internal conflict), may be considered (to be) an international armed conflict if the following conditions have been fulfilled: 1. If a country that is fighting against rebel forces within its territory has recognized the rebels as belligerent; 2. If there is one or more foreign countries providing assistance to either party in an internal conflict, by sending their official Armed Forces in the conflict concerned; and 3. If there are two foreign countries, with the Armed Forces each intervening in a country engaged in internal conflict, in which each of these armed forces assists the opposing side.4 Therefore, referring to the description of the armed conflict and considering the Geneva Convention 1949 Article 2 of Common Articles stated : “In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace time, the present Convention shall applv to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.....” and Additional Protocol I of 1977 Article 1 Paragraph 3 stated : “This Protocol, which supplements

http://indonesian.ws.irib.ir/international/timur-tengah/item/45250-Saudi_dan_Qatar_ Tingkatkan_Bantuan_Kepada_Pemberontak_Suriah , accessed on November 22nd 3 http://www.dw.de/konferensi-damai-suriah-tanpa-perdamaian/a-17380238, accessed on November 22nd 4 Pietro Verri, Dictionary of the International Law of Armed Conflict, ICRC, Geneva, 1992, page. 35.

the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 for the protection of war victims, shall apply in the situations referred to in Article 2 common to those Conventions.”, it all means that the conflict occured in Syria is not only classified and considered as an internal conflict.

The armed conflict is undeniably detrimental to the community. Due to that conflict, a lot of people had to lose their lives as an impact of the war and not only that, millions people had to leave their homes and evacuated to safer places. This is definitely a major issue of concern. Also it is totally heartbreaking seeing that number of victims affected by the conflict. They should have gotten the security and protection as a citizen as what stated in the rules above, but instead, they lived in fear which means that their rights were deprived and obviously it violated the law.

Conclusion On a final note, based on the analysis and arguments above, it can be conclude that: 1. The situation and cases that happened in Syria have broken the law. The government has violated many regulations such as Constitution of Syrian Arab Republic 2012 Article 33 no 1, Article 42 no 2, Article 53 no 2; The Universal Declaration of Human Right (UDHR) Article 3, Article 5, Article 9, Article 19; Geneva Convention 1949 Article 2 Of the Common Articles, and Additional Protocol I of 1977 Article 1 paragraph 3. 2. The government has deprived people’s right and undermine the main essence of a President as the head of state who regulates government and protects the citizens. 3. The protracted conflicts involving international actors has increased the fears and harming society. 4. The government must take an action to resolve the conflict and provide justice to the community.

Refferences https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/4/14/syrias-war-explained-from-the-beginning, accessed on November 21st Primoz Manfreda, Top 10 Reasons for the Uprising in Syria, https://www.thoughtco.com/top10-reasons-for-the-uprising-in-syria-2353571 accessed on November 21st http://indonesian.ws.irib.ir/international/timur-tengah/item/45250-Saudi_dan_Qatar_ Tingkatkan_Bantuan_Kepada_Pemberontak_Suriah , accessed on November 22nd

http://www.dw.de/konferensi-damai-suriah-tanpa-perdamaian/a-17380238,

accessed

November 22nd Constitution of the Syrian Arab Republic - 2012 (ilo.org) , accessed on November 21st Universal Declaration of Human Rights | United Nations , accessed on November 21st Identifikasi Jenis Konflik Bersenjata Suriah Menurut Ketentuan Hukum Humaniter Internasional | Mahfud | Kanun Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (unsyiah.ac.id), accessed on November 22nd The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols - ICRC, accessed on November 22nd