HUKUM PERJANJIAN INTERNASIONAL, KONVENSI WINA 1969 DAN 1986 SERTA UU NO. 24 TAHUN 2000 TENTANG PERJANJIAN INTERNASIONAL DAMOS DUMOLI AGUSMAN Direktur Perjanjian Ekososbud, Direktorat Jenderal Hukum dan Perjanjian Internastonal, DEPLU, 2008

??????? ????????

NON-LEGAL LOGIC “PLAY BOY/DON JUAN” “AYAH DARI SEORANGANAK GADIS” Practical Oriented “Its gone a be all right” Procedure is a barrier Normative oriented “what if “? Procedure is securing

Hukum Perjanjian Internasional Basic Instruments: Vienna Convention 1969 on the Law of Treaties Vienna Convention 1986 on the Law of Treaties between States and International Organizations UU No. 24 Tahun 2000 tentang Perjanjian Internasional Vienna Convention 1978 on the Succession of States with respect to Treaties

Vienna Convention 1969 Mengatur bagaimana membuat perjanjian internasional antar negara saja: the Conclusion and Entry into force Observance, application and Interpretation Amendment And Modification Invalidity, Termination And Suspension Of The Operation Depositaries, Notifications, Corrections And Registration Kristalisasi Norma yang pada hakekatnya sudah berkembang dalam Hukum Kebiasaan Internasional Masih dalam kerangka “only states can conclude treaties”, dan legal capacity of International Organizations to conclude treaties is still questionable

Vienna Convention 1986 Mengatur pembuatan perjanjian antara negara dengan organisasi internasional dan dengan sesama organisasi internasional Mengatur: idem dengan Vienna Convention 1969, dengan beberapa klausula yang khas untuk Organisasi internasional: the legal capacity to conclude treaties Treaties concluded by international organizations and the relation to the member states States and Organizations are distinguished in using terminology: Ratification vs Act of Formal Confirmation The end of debate arising out during the negotiation of Vienna Convention 1969

UU No. 24 Tahun 2000 tentang Perjanjian Internasional Pada umumnya “copy paste” dari Konvensi Wina 1969 dan 1986 Mengatur elemen internal Indonesia: Peran Koordinasi dan Konsultasi serta fungsi Depository DEPLU Full Powers dan Pedoman Delri Pengesahan Perjanjian Internasional dengan Perpres dan UU Kristalisasi dari Praktek Hukum Indonesia dalam membuat perjanjian Internasional Penjabaran dari Pasal 11 UUD 1945

MENGATUR STATUS PERJANJIAN JIKA TERJADI SUKSESI NEGARA: Vienna Convention 1978 on the Succession of States with respect to Treaties MENGATUR STATUS PERJANJIAN JIKA TERJADI SUKSESI NEGARA: STATUS TIMOR GAP TREATY 1989 SETELAH PEMISAHAN TIMOR LESTE DARI INDONESIA INDONESIA TERIKAT PADA PERJANJIAN OLEH HINDIA BELANDA PASCA INDONESIA MERDEKA?

PERJANJIAN INTERNASIONAL WHAT IS IT? APAKAH MOU HELSINKI (RI-GAM) 2005 ADALAH PERJANJIAN INTERNASIONAL? APAKAH PRODUCTION SHARING CONTRACTS ANTARA PEMERINTAH RI DNG PERUSAHAN MINYAK ASING ADALAH PERJANJIAN INTERNASIONAL? APAKAH MOU RI-VIETNAM 2006 TENTANG IMPORT BERAS ADALAH PERJANJIAN INTERNASIONAL?

THEORETICAL PROBLEMS What Treaties Are? Art. 2 (1) (a) Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969 between States [1986 between States and OI] "treaty" means an international agreement concluded between States [international organizations] in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation; UU No. 24 Tahun 2000 tentang Perjanjian Internasional (UU PI) Pasal 1 (1) Perjanjian Internasional adalah perjanjian, dalam bentuk dan nama tertentu, yang diatur dalam hukum internasional yang dibuat secara tertulis serta menimbulkan hak dan kewajiban di bidang hukum publik. Pasal 4 (1) Pemerintah RI membuat perjanjian internasional dengan satu negara atau lebih, organisasi internasional, atau subjek hukum internasional lain

WHAT SHOULD BE THE TEST ?? an International Agreement by Subject of International Law (States, IO) Written Form “governed by international law” (UU PI: diatur dalam hukum internasional serta menimbulkan hak dan kewajiban di bidang hukum publik) whatever form, (the nomenclature have no legal weight).

JUDICIAL REVIEW MK 2007 TERHADAP UU NO 22/2001 TENTANG MIGAS JURISPRUDENSI INDONESIA PERTAMA TENTANG MASALAH PERJANJIAN INTERNASIONAL DI INDONESIA BEBERAPA ANGGOTA DPR MENGGUGAT BAHWA UU INI BERTENTANGAN DNG PS 11 UUD 45, KRN: PRODCUTION SHARING CONTRACTS (PSC) HANYA DIBERITAHUKAN KPD DPR PSC ADALAH PERJANJIAN INTERNASIONAL SHNG HRS MENDAPAT PERSETUJUAN DPR MK: PSC BUKAN PERJANJIAN INTERNASIONAL KRN TDK MEMENUHI DEFINISI PI MENURUT KONVENSI WINA

SO…… REMEMBER!!!!! DOCUMENTS ALBEIT CONCLUDED BY STATES ARE NOT ALWAYS TREATIES BUT… TREATIES SHOULD BE CONCLUDED BY STATES OR OTHER SUBJECTS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

NOMENCLATURE IS IT REFLECTING THE LEGAL WEIGHT? Vienna Convention 1969 clearly states “whatever form”. What is about Agreed Minutes? Agreed Minutes of the 7th Meeting of JC for Bilateral Cooperation between Indonesia-Malaysia, 18-20 February 2002: Delimitation of the EEZ in the Straits of Malacca 25. Both sides agreed that discussions would be held at the technical level involving the relevant authorities of both countries on the delimitation of the EEZ in the Straits of Malacca and on the need for the delimitation of EEZ between the two countries in other maritime areas, namely South China Sea and Sulawesi Sea. Is it a treaty creating legal obligations under international law? Malaysia claimed that “the recorded agreement as per item 25 does not constitute a treaty with binding effect” (Diplomatic note, 24 Feb 2005)

HOW INTERNATIONAL LAW EXPLAIN ABOUT AGREED MINUTES HOW INTERNATIONAL LAW EXPLAIN ABOUT AGREED MINUTES? ICJ Qatar/Bahrain Case, 1994 Minutes signed by Foreign Ministers of Bahrain, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, 1990 "The following was agreed: (1) to reaffirm what was agreed previously between the two parties; (2) to continue the good offices of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Fahd Ben Abdul Aziz, between the two countries till the month of Shawwal, 1411 H, corresponding to May of the next year 1991. After the end of this period, the parties may submit the matter to the International Court of Justice in accordance with the Bahraini formula, which has been accepted by Qatar, and the proceedings arising there from. Saudi Arabia's good offices will continue during the submission of the matter to arbitration; (3) should a brotherly solution acceptable to the two parties be reached, the case will be withdrawn from arbitration.“ Bahrain maintains that the 1990 Minutes do not constitute a legally binding instrument. It was no more than a simple record of negotiations… did not rank as an international agreement

ICJ JUDGMENT CONCERNING THE MINUTES? The ICJ in recalled Aegean Sea Continental Shelf, 1978: In order to ascertain whether an agreement of that kind has been concluded, "the Court must have regard above all to its actual terms and to the particular circumstances in which it was drawn up" . The Minutes are not a simple record of a meeting, they do not merely give an account of discussions and summarize points of agreement and disagreement. They enumerate the commitments to which the Parties have consented. They thus create rights and obligations in international law for the Parties. They constitute an international agreement. Having signed such a text, the Foreign Minister of Bahrain is not in a position subsequently to say that he intended to subscribe only to a "statement recording a political understanding", and not to an international agreement. The Court concludes that the Minutes of 25 December 1990, like the exchanges of letters of December 1987, constitute an international agreement creating rights and obligations for the Parties.

SO…… REMEMBER!!!!! IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHETHER A DOCUMENT IS A TREATY: DO NOT LOOK AT THE NOMENCLATURE BUT LOOK AT THE MERITS, DOES IT CREATE COMMITMENTS (RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS) ENFORCEABLE UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW?

INDONESIAN PRACTICES? Before UU No. 24/2000 All instruments are presumed to be treaties as long as they are concluded by the Government. There is no clear cut legal distinction between which are treaties and which is not (agreements, Declarations, MOUs, agreed minutes, joint statement, exchange of notes etc are perjanjian internasional for the purpose of UU PI, no matter what the subject-matters are). Instruments concluded by Government with NGO could also be a treaty (eg. 1981 MOU between RI-Malaysia-Singapore and The Malacca Straits Council (NG Association) establishing Revolving Fund . Agreement between Pertamina and PT Caltex, PT Stanvac and PT Shell is also “Perjanjian Internasional” and ratified through UU no. 1/1963 The legal weight of Perjanjian Internasional is shown by the nomenclature (Treaty is higher than agreement or MOU; arrangements is lesser than MOU; agreements could be subject to ratification but for MOU ). Loan Agreement governed by a system of a national law is also a treaty

THE WAY FORWARD THE BASKETS OF DOCUMENTS IN THE TREATY ROOM DEPLU TREATIES AS REFERRED TO VIENNA CONVENTION AND UU PI CONVENTION, TREATIES AGREEMENTS MOUs DOCUMENTs HAVING INTERNATIONAL CHARACTERS BUT OTHER THAN TREATIES LOAN AGREEMENTS/ CONTRACTS DOCUMENTs WITHOUT LEGAL WEIGHTS AGREED MINUTES, RECORD OF DISCUSSION JOINT STATEENT JOINT COMMUNIQUE

SO…WHAT THEN? DALAM RANGKA BENAH DIRI DEPLU DAN “UPDATED” WITH THE PROGRESIVE DYNAMIC OF TREATIES MATTERS , DIPERLUKAN TREATY MANAGEMENT YANG PROFESIONAL, YANG MENCAKUP: TO VERIFY AND DETERMINE WHAT THE TREATIES ARE TO KEEP AND MAINTAIN TREATIES IN FORCE ANd TAKE NECESSARY PROCEDURE WHEN REQUIRED TO STANDARIZE FORMATS RELATING TO TREATIES

MOU’S (MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDINGS) WHAT IS IT? ISTILAH MOU SUDAH MENJADI POPULAR BAIK PADA HUBUNGAN INTERNASIONAL MAUPUN HUBUNGAN PERDATA/BISNIS PADA TATARAN HUKUM NASIONAL, MOU SERING MENGGANTIKAN ISTILAH “PERJANJIAN” DAN “KONTRAK”, MOU DIPILIH GUNA MENGHINDARI “KESAKRALAN” ISTILAH KONTRAK/ PERJANJIAN MOU JUGA TELAH DIJADIKAN ISTILAH BAKU DALAM KERJASAMA OTONOMI DAERAH, YAITU DOKUMEN AWAL YANG TIDAK MENGIKAT YANG KEMUDIAN DILANJUTKAN DENGAN “PERJANJIAN KERJASAMA”

MOU DALAM PERSPEKTIF HUKUM PERJANJIAN INTERNASIONAL TITLE WAS CHOSEN FOR POLITICAL RATHER THAN LEGAL REASONS : The use of MOU is now so widespread. Many States may see the MOU as the more usual form, a treaty/agreement being used only when it cannot be avoided. The very word “treaty/agreement” may come up with fearsome of formalities. The MOU is less formal, easy to terminate, to amend and to withdraw. The use of MOU to avoid complicating ratification requirement, Common Law system considers MOU’s as non-legal binding documents INDONESIA’S PRACTICES ON MOU’S: No significant differences to an Agreement in term of its legal binding MOU’s and Agreements might be interchangeably used for the same subject matters. MOU’s are not subject to ratification simply because they are MOU?. Documents that less formal than MOU’s are exchange of notes, agreed minutes of the Meeting

SO…WHAT ..GITU LHO!!! ISSUE ON TREATIES BECOME MORE COMPLICATED. IT FOLLOWS THE DYNAMIC OF INTERNATIONAL LAW HANDLING TREATIES REQUIRES TECHNICAL, LEGAL AND PRACTICAL EXPERTISE THEORETICAL KNOWLEDGE ON TREATIES IS INEVITABLE.

THE END