Dialektika Interpretasi VCLT 1969 dalam Doktrin Evolutionary Interpretation dan Subsequent State Practice pada ICCPR
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38035/jim.v4i6.1661Keywords:
ICCPR, Penafsiran Evolusioner, VCLT 1969Abstract
Penelitian ini menginvestigasi ketegangan fundamental dalam hukum perjanjian internasional antara doktrin Evolutionary Interpretation yang diterapkan oleh United Nations Human Rights Treaty Bodies dan realitas Subsequent State Practice yang dijalankan oleh rezim penganut Kedaulatan Siber. Di satu sisi, United Nations Human Rights Committee melalui Komentar Umum No. 34 memosisikan Pasal 19 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) sebagai living instrument yang memperluas perlindungan HAM ke ruang digital secara ekstrateritorial. Di sisi lain, muncul pola praktik negara yang persisten dipelopori negara-negara besar, serta diadopsi secara hibrida oleh negara berkembang yang merekonstruksi makna Ketertiban Umum (Ordre Public) dan Keamanan Nasional (National Security) untuk menjustifikasi internet shutdowns dan lokalisasi data. Dengan menggunakan metode yuridis-normatif dan pendekatan interpretasi Konvensi Wina 1969 (VCLT), penelitian ini menemukan bahwa akumulasi praktik negara yang restriktif berisiko menciptakan normative contestation yang dapat memodifikasi makna kewajiban traktat secara de facto melalui mekanisme Pasal 31(3)(b) VCLT.
References
Aust, A,. 2013, Modern treaty law and practice (3rd ed.), Cambridge University Press.
Bagir, Z. A., et al, 2020, Limitations to freedom of religion or belief in Indonesia: Norms and practices, Journal of Law, Religion and State, 8(1), 44–65.
Bianchet, L., 2017, Treaty modification by subsequent practice: Analysis of the present legal framework, the expansive potential and the consequences, Örebro University, Juridicum.
Binder, C., 2024, Change and the law of treaties: The accommodation of change under general international law and in specific treaty regimes, European Society of International Law Review, 13(2), 1–20.
Bradshaw, S., 2015, The emergence of contention in global internet governance, Global Media and Communication, 11(1), 15–32.
Brownlie, I., 2012, Principles of public international law (8th ed.), Oxford University Press.
Buga, I., 2018, Subsequent practice and treaty modification: Conceptual and contextual perspectives on the modern law of treaties, Cambridge University Press.
De Gregorio, G., 2020, Internet shutdowns and the limits of law. International Journal of Communication, 14, 1–20.
Gardiner, R., 2015, Treaty interpretation (2nd ed.), Oxford University Press.
Gillespie, T., 2018, Custodians of the internet: Platforms, content moderation, and the hidden decisions that shape social media, Yale University Press.
Golia, A. J., 2023, Critique of digital constitutionalism: Deconstruction and reconstruction from a societal perspective, Global Constitutionalism, 13(3), 492–515.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966.
International Court of Justice, 2004, Legal consequences of the construction of a wall in the occupied Palestinian territory (Advisory Opinion).
International Law Commission, 2018, Draft conclusions on subsequent agreements and subsequent practice in relation to the interpretation of treaties, with commentaries.
Jones, M. L., 2016, The right to be forgotten, Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts, 39(1), 1–26.
Kaye, D., 2019, Speech police: The global struggle to govern the internet, Columbia University Press.
Krishna, L. S., 2023, Digital sovereignty and cybersecurity governance: Legal implications of state control in a fragmented internet, Innovative Research Thoughts, 9(3), 201–215.
Krishnamurthy, V., 2025, Anchoring digital sovereignty, Chicago Journal of International Law, 25(2), 420–450.
Maisley, N., 2017, The international right of rights? Article 25(a) of the ICCPR as a human right to take part in international law-making, European Journal of International Law, 28(1), 89–113.
McKune, S., et al., 2018, The contestation and shaping of cyber norms through China’s internet sovereignty agenda, International Journal of Communication, 12, 3840–3865.
Nolte, G., 2013, Treaties and subsequent practice. In D. B. Hollis (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the law of treaties (pp. 325–349). Oxford University Press.
Schaack, B. Van., 2014, The United States’ position on the extraterritorial application of human rights obligations, International Law Studies, 90, 1–55.
Shahbaz, A., et al., 2020, User privacy or cyber sovereignty. Freedom House.
Shaw, M. N., 2017, International law (8th ed.), Cambridge University Press.
Sicilianos, L.-A., 2020, Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights: Remarks on the Court’s approach, Council of Europe CAHDI Meeting Proceedings.
Sinclair, I., 1984, The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (2nd ed.), Manchester University Press.
Temperman, J., 2011, Freedom of expression and religious sensitivities in pluralist societies, Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 29(4), 749–778.
Thumfart, J., 2024, Digital rights and the state of exception: Internet shutdowns from the perspective of just securitization theory, Internet Policy Review, 9(1), 1–15.
Tuominen, H., 2025, The European Union’s challenges in human rights promotion in an illiberal world, Global Policy Journal.
United Nations Human Rights Committee, 2011, General comment No. 34: Article 19 (Freedoms of opinion and expression), CCPR/C/GC/34.
United Nations Human Rights Committee, 2014, Concluding observations on the United States, CCPR/C/USA/CO/4.
United Nations Human Rights Council, 2011, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, A/HRC/17/27.
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Nurul 'Asyiqin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share— copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt— remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution— You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions— You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
- You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
- No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rightsmay limit how you use the material.
