Selamat Datang di Website Dosen

Abstract. Since 1981, marked by the enactment of law number 8 of 1981 on criminal procedure law, it has become a consensus to abandon the Cartesian paradigm embodied in the inquisitoire principle. The inquisitoire principle sees any person drawn into a criminal justice struggle as an object. The Criminal Procedure Code through the philosophical foundation of Pancasila, commands to adopt the accusatoire principle, in honor of the withdrawn party as a person entirely. However, the KUHAP formers forget the institutional legal culture of the thrown (gowerfen-sein) criminal justice system in the myth of modernity that is the objectification of human being. So that the law enforcement officers (investigators, public prosecutors, judges) always ignore Pancasila as the philosophical foundation of thought in carrying out the law.

Sovereign state basically can not be sued in the courts of Foreign Affairs, HAL Husband In accordance with the principle of State Sovereignty (Sovereignty), as intetended Posted article 436 Rv, so that EVERY Court Decision Foreign reffered only CAN be used AS tool Proof of the Case Examination of new hearts in Indonesia. However WTH ICSID Convention has been ratified, ie convention ABOUT BETWEEN Settlement of Investment Foreign investors against the Government, then Indonesia AS MAY sovereign State is now being sued by The ICSID Arbitration based in Paris. AS an example CAN we know that Indonesia NEVER sued through the courts Foreign because they have committed one of the international, hearts Case OPEC Against Pilots Association, and hearts Case Tobacco Bremen, And The Very populer Dispute Resolution Foreign Investment, Joint Venture Amco Cs, against the Governmentof The Republic of Indonesia qq Investment Coordinating Board (BKPM), through ICSID Arbitration.

Keywords: Investemet Disputes, arbitration, foreign investors 

Hukum merupakan serangkaian kata-kata yang terjalin secara sistematis dalam sebuah teks yang bersifat otorisasi, menurut Gustav Radbruch, hendaknya memuat 3 (tiga) unsur, yaitu keadilan, kepastian, dan kemanfaatan. Penerapan terhadap teks yang bersifat otorisasi tersebut dalam kehidupan sosial, merupakan kewenangan absolut dari seorang hakim dalam menyelesaiakan suatu perkara keperdataan. Hakim, dalam memeriksa-mengadili-memutus suatu perkara, bukan hanya bertugas mengembalikan kepada keadaan semula (restitutio in integrum) sebelum munculnya sengketa, namun terdapat usaha semaksimal mungkin untuk tidak memunculkan sengketa baru ataupun sengketa turunan dari perkara pokok yang diperiksanya. Menjadi sangat penting peranan paradigma bagi seorang Hakim dalam memutus perkara guna terpenuhinya rasa keadilan. Saat ini, dalam konteks Hukum Acara Perdata, pemaknaan "keadilan" hanya sebatas otoritas kekuasaan para pihak yang diikat dengan asas konsensualisme dan asas kebebasan berkontrak. Berdasarkan Paradigma (Filsafat) Hukum Pancasila, Hakim sebagai interpreter, dalam memaknai dan menerapkan hukum, harus memiliki kemampuan ilmu hukum yang dapat mendekonstruksi dan merekonstruksi suatu teks otoritatif berdasarkan paradigma yang dianut oleh suatu bangsa.