Theory Of Sovereignty Research Articles

Analisis Kontekstual pada Strategi Keamanan Siber Mesir 2017-2021 dalam Upaya Pengamanan Siber Nasional

This study aims to understand and analyze Egypt's cybersecurity strategy in 2017-2021 related to the level of security and the role of each aspect of the cybersecurity strategy in the Egyptian state. This research was conducted because Egypt and Indonesia have several similarities, such as countries with a Muslim majority and fellow members in the Islamic Cooperation Organization, the Non-Aligned Movement, the G-20 developing countries, and the group of 8 developing countries. Qualitative methods are used to analyze the application of the concept of sovereignty theory which is exclusive or transfer, as well as aspects of cybersecurity which include infrastructure, application, and core (ideology). Meanwhile, quantitative methods are used to present the results of data analysis on Egyptian cybersecurity data relations and strategies with MAXQDA2020 and Gephi 0.9.2 applications. Based on the results of the analysis, the authors conclude that the context of Egypt's cybersecurity strategy has a tendency towards collaboration between state actors and non-state-actors based on aspects of national cybersecurity, cybersecurity awareness, cyberspace threats, international rules, laws and regulations, cyber crisis nation-wide. , cybercrime, and cyberinfrastructure. This aspect can be used in the formulation of Indonesia's national cybersecurity strategy policy in the coming year.

Three arguments relevant to the history and theory of monarchy

ABSTRACT This article states a claim about the fundamental nature of monarchy as something which in antiquity and medievality straddled the immanent and transcendent worlds but which is only half understood in a modernity where the world which is wholly immanent and so has a politics which must be theorised in wholly consistent terms. It draws on theories of antique monarchy, medieval monarchy, constitutional monarchy and popular sovereignty, and asserts three distinctive arguments: that politics is always fundamentally torn between law and power, that the philosophy of political history requires us to see that our resources for attempting to resolve the two have been narrowed in the last two hundred years, and that monarchy, theoretically considered, is best understood as something which has a transconsistent political logic.

Public Services in Election of Regional Chairman

The purpose of this article is to describe the form of implementation or public services in regional head elections. This problem is related to several related theories, such as constitutional law theory, democratic law theory, people's sovereignty law theory. This article also discusseslaw and public policies implemented in the elections in Indonesia. MethodThe research used in writing this article is a type of normative legal research. The results of the study indicate that legal theory and public policy are needed in Indonesia. This is done as a basis for implementing democratic practices. The form of implementing laws in constitutional theory is that the KPU establishes KPU Regulations and KPU Decrees in the implementation of Pilkada and provides solutions to problems of implementing law that are contrary to KPU regulations. The mechanism is if there is a PKPU which is deemed contrary to the Election Law, then the examination will be carried out at the Supreme Court in accordance with the provisions in Article 9 paragraph (2) of Act No. 12 of 2011. The implementation of the theory of democratic law in Indonesia is by holding general elections to elect leader, starting from the regional level to the national level. These activities are carried out in order to realize the government system that the people want. The implementation of the theory of popular sovereignty in the Pilkada is the determination of the victory of a candidate for regional head which is determined based on the number of valid votes based on applicable law. The theory of sovereignty also contributes to implementing a democratic system through the principles of people's sovereignty. The conclusion from this research is that the theories that play a role in the implementation of the Pilkada include the theory of democracy, the theory of the constitution, and the theory of people's sovereignty. The three theories are interrelated to support the implementation of Pilkada in accordance with democratic principles. In addition, there are three levels of public policy, namely macro, meso, and micro public policies.

The State Theory of Grotius

Abstract This article argues that Grotius has a modern theory of the state that can take its place alongside Bodin and Hobbes as one of the ways in which early modern civil philosophy sought to solve the problem of the authority and validity of political order. This is interesting because Grotius’s account of the state draws a picture of the relationship between political and legal ordering, and history, in which the interrelationship of the political and the legal allows a range of adaptive and adaptable state-forms. State authority is made possible and accountable under a system of natural legal right, even as its constitution is a historical achievement that should not readily be disturbed and in which a large range of freedom and unfreedom is lawful and should be accepted. I argue that, understood in this way, the State Theory of Grotius is not only modern, but provides in its methods and insights, a potential answer to one of the key conceptual dead ends of modern theories of sovereignty: the idea that sovereign power must be perpetually concentrated in one organ or entity if it is to retain what makes it sovereign. Along the way, I highlight the significance of state theory for contemporary discussions of international, transnational and global law.

Rousseau, Bodin, and the Medieval Corporatist Origins of Popular Sovereignty

This essay reconsiders Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s debt to Jean Bodin, on the basis of Daniel Lee’s recent revision of Bodin as a theorist of popular sovereignty. It argues that Rousseau took a key feature of his own theory of democratic sovereignty from Bodin—namely, the dual identity of political members as both citizens and subjects of the state. It further makes the case that this dual identity originates in medieval corporatist law, which Bodin was summarizing. Finally, it demonstrates the lasting impact of corporatist law in eighteenth-century France, highlighting Rousseau’s direct borrowings from the corporatist language and logic of contemporary commercial societies. In this regard, the article revisits and updates Otto von Gierke’s classic argument about the origins of the state in corporatist thought.

RELASI AGAMA DAN NEGARA: TELAAH PEMIKIRAN POLITIK SOEKARNO DAN FAZLUR RAHMAN


 The author in this study wanted to see the similarities and differences in the political thoughts of Soekarno and Fazlur Rahman about the relationship between religion and the state. The type of research used is library research with a descriptive-comparative method. The results showed that Soekarno and Fazlur Rahman had a different paradigm in viewing the relationship between religion and state. Soekarno has a secularistic paradigm that separates religion and state to be implemented in Indonesia, while Fazlur Rahman has an Integralistic paradigm in which religion (Islam) and the state cannot be separated (integrated). However, these two figures agree that the sovereignty of a country is in the hands of the people and do not agree with the theory of God's sovereignty because God has never acted as politically sovereign nor as a maker of laws or laws.
 Keywords: Secularistic Paradigm, Integralistic Paradigm, God's Sovereignty.

Adjacent Downstream Compensation Method of Sharing Polluted Rivers

To clean up the pollutants in cross-boundary rivers needs the collaborative actions among different agents involved. In our paper, we deal with the river pollution problem in a cooperative situation. We first introduce the adjacent downstream compensation method by considering the bargaining behavior between any two neighbour agents, which reconciles two famous doctrines in the international disputes, i.e., the Absolute Territorial Sovereignty theory and the Unlimited Territorial Integrity theory. Then we prove the coincidence of the adjacent downstream compensation method and the Shapley value of the corresponding responsibility game. By studying the concavity of the river pollution cost sharing game, we illustrate the stability of the adjacent downstream compensation method.

PARLIAMENTARISM AS A POLITICAL INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

The article examines the issues of parliamentarism, which is a special system of public administration, structurally and functionally based on the principles of separation of powers, the rule of law with the leading role of parliament in order to implement the constitutional consolidation of the sovereignty of the people. At the same time, the principle of separation of powers occupies a central place in matters of public administration. The purpose of the theory of separation of powers is to create an effective mechanism for the functioning of state bodies, to create security of citizens from arbitrariness and abuse of power, to ensure political freedoms. The purpose of the study is to analyze research materials and legal regulation of the parliament as the bearer of state power. It should be noted that the role and importance of the parliament in the constitutional mechanism for the implementation of state power, based on the theory of popular sovereignty of the majority of modern states, is reflected in the legislative basis for the functioning of these higher representative collegial bodies. The development of the legislative framework leads to the formation of parliamentary law. Thus, parliamentarism today is a complex structure of legislative power, a multifunctional subsystem and an integral part of an extensive political system. At the same time, the essence of parliamentarism, following changes in its historical functions and structure, was often expressed by isolating and emphasizing any of its individual elements. Based on the study, the author comes to the conclusion that it is quite obvious that branched, well-organized and effectively functioning representative structures, both at the federal and regional levels, are necessary for Russia today, when we have embarked on the path of building a rule-of-law state, creating a civilized and a democratic society. It is the parliament that acts as a collector and spokesman for the interests of groups and structures that form civil society, melting these interests into state will. Effective public administration in a market economy not only does not exclude, but, on the contrary, presupposes the development and improvement of parliamentarism. Only under this condition can one count on the formation at the federal and regional levels of a powerful legislative base, adequate to the new historical conditions. It goes without saying that without such a base, further reforms in the economic, financial, social, political and other areas are unthinkable. The source of such a base is parliament.

Цифровой суверенитет в условиях глобализации: философский и правовой аспекты

The article features the problem of consolidating and understanding the digital sovereignty of the State and the individual. The author addresses the challenge of establishing a correlation between the idea of digital sovereignty and the global socio-political change. The paper focuses on the effect of modern trends of social development, i.e. accelerated social informatization and globalization, on the development of doctrine of digital sovereignty and its legal design. The author believes that the idea of digital sovereignty is a reaction to the transformation of the global social order, which resulted in new doctrinal provisions and legal norms. They give citizens the right to determine the process of formation, storage, and management of digital data, as well as to ensure their inviolability. The legal formalization of digital sovereignty can indicate either the protection of statehood and personality or, on the contrary, their absorption by structures of the global order. As a result, such categories as "sovereignty, "statehood, or "personality" may eventually lose their actual meaning and real content. The conceptualization of the phenomenon of neurosovereignty and its implementation programs might be the future of the theory and practice of sovereignty.

الموازنة بين النظام الإسلامي والنظام الدولي في تقرير السيادة كوسيلة لنظام الحكم

Islamic law stipulated the principles which regulate the relations between Individuals within their countries and externally with the other countries. These principles include the principles of human rights and sovereignty. This study tackles the idea of establishing the balance between the Islamic system and international law by identifying their similarities and differences within the framework of the principles of both the human rights and the sovereignty. The study aimed to identify the rich Islamic rules in the field of international relations, clarify the concept of human rights and the theory of sovereignty in the Islamic system and international law, highlight the rules of the Islamic system in this area, and prove the complementarities and convergence, as well as difference and similarity with international law. The researcher adopted the descriptive analytical method to give a full description of the two principles of human rights and sovereignty in the Islamic system and international law. He concluded with the most important results that the Islamic system has the lead in the adoption of these principles and abidance by them, before the international law. The Islamic system is similar to international law in the context of human rights and the need to protect them and also the implications of rights in general international law, both at the levels of political, economic, social or cultural rights. The only difference lies in the fact that the Islamic system emanates from the rules of Islamic sharia’s teachings and values whereas the international law considers the society the source of rights. As to sovereignty, the study confirmed that the theory of sovereignty is well known in the Islamic system, and that this principle represents one of the basic rules organizing relations between individuals and states equally, but the difference lies in the frame of reference of the Islamic system and the International law. In the Islamic system, the organizing rules refer to the Islamic Shariah whereas in the International law, there is relation between religion with those rules.

Consorting with Stone

AbstractThis essay places Marie de France’s lai “Yonec” (ca. 1150–1200) and the anonymous Middle English romance King Horn (ca. 1250–1300) in conversation with critical Indigenous theories of relational, land-based sovereignty and resurgence. At first, “Yonec” and King Horn appear to reinscribe a Western form of sovereignty based on exclusive territorial control. Both works offer alternative models of sovereignty and self-determination, however, in their depictions of cooperative, lithic alliance between stone and female consorts. Adopting the term lithic sovereignty to describe the works’ relation-based sovereign imaginaries, this essay first follows the King Horn narrator’s depiction of Godhild’s hermetic retreat into stone when Saracens conquer her husband’s realm. Then it turns to the nameless lady of “Yonec” and her implausible escape from her jealous husband’s tower, facilitated by the very stone that had seemed to entrap her. Drawing on critical Indigenous studies, legal studies, and ecomaterialism, this essay concludes that both King Horn and “Yonec” offer a medieval British imaginary of lithic relational sovereignty that runs counter to teleological, naturalizing narratives of Euro-Western origins.

Archiwa martwego bliźniego. Żydzi, muzułmanie i dwa ciała wroga

The article analyses recent works by Giorgio Agamben and Eric Santner, who have interpreted Carl Schmitt’s ideas in the context of left-wing political theology. The article traces how the figure of the undead Muslim recurs in the various philosophers and theologians referred to by these two authors. In this way, it shows how contemporary messianic thinkers unknowingly mourned their ‘dead neighbours’, traumatic irritants from which a messianic pearl was born. In order for this pearl to glow with a miraculous light (as Agamben and Santner would wish it to), modern thinking must engage in an act of neighbour-love, whereby it embraces the untimely, undead excarnations (disembodiments) of a history of typological damage. Otherwise, these traumatised and traumatising neighbours remain undead, driven by critical theories of sovereignty.

Pure Politics and Religion and the Potentiality Not-To-Be

ABSTRACT The religious dimension is increasingly at the centre of political claims from individual citizens and collective actors and puts pressure on liberal democracies asserting the separation of politics and religion. The liberal principle of neutrality allows tracing ontological and normative differences between what is and ought to be properly political and religious. Politics would have the potentiality not-to-be religious and keep itself in a space of indifference to what religious. Better understanding the implications of such political theory in which the political man is called to actuate a (pure) politics raises ontological questions. Mainly, does (pure) politics provide a neutral third position in respect to religion where politics is not subject to any exclusive-inclusive logic such as in the exception? This question is addressed through the notion of potentiality as respectively treated by Agamben and Derrida and placed in the context of the political decision in Schmitt’s theory of sovereignty.

Political Theology and Historical Materialism: Reading Benjamin against Agamben

Giorgio Agamben’s work on the power of sovereignty has been greatly influential in recent political thought. However, it has also overshadowed the independently original contributions of his two primary theoretical sources, Carl Schmitt and Walter Benjamin. In this article, I argue that Agamben’s political defeatism can be traced back to a double misconception in his reception of these two authors: first a formalistic reduction of Schmitt, and second a Schmittian reduction of Benjamin. Through this reduction to juridical formalism, the radicality of Benjamin’s historical materialist critique is replaced by a messianic nihilism, leading to the colonization of society by the logic of the concentration camp. Though Agamben’s theory of sovereignty and its implications for a positive political project have been contested, this origin of the decline of radical philosophy has not previously undergone a systematic critique.

Against Bidimensional Supremacy in EU Constitutionalism

Scholarly consensus sees EU supremacy as “necessarily bidimensional”: the supranational dimension necessarily stands alongside the national dimension, which rejects the absolute and unconditional supremacy of EU law. I argue that this view of bidimensional supremacy is conceptually flawed and descriptively inaccurate. On the conceptual side, I identify the fallacy of symmetry (the idea that national and supranational perspectives on supremacy are similar in nature and equally reductionist), the fallacy of selection (the view that bidimensionalism alone can overcome what it perceives as an inevitable subjective bias in the choice between national and supranational supremacy claims), and the fallacy of construction (an originally shared popular sovereignty theory, which turns out to be riddled with biases that disrupt the equilibrium within the internally divided sovereign). On the interpretative side, I suggest that the empirical evidence in support of bidimensional supremacy is weaker than it is generally assumed. I then offer an interpretation of the PSPP judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court, which holds a judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union to be ultra vires, unlawful and thus non-binding. PSPP presents a problem of German origins and cast, rather than one stemming from the inner structure of EU constitutionalism. At most, PSPP represents a contingent, rather than necessary, and thus unexceptional instance of bidimensional supremacy.

Peran Teori Keadulatan Tuhan pada Perang Kediri dan Tumapel pada Pembentukan Hukum di Indonesia

The sovereignty of God in the state administration of the Kingdom of Indonesia can be seen from the words of Ken Arok attacking the kingdom of Kediri, "O Pastors who adhere to Shiva and Buddhism. Please bless me to have the title Bhatara Guru ”. The study of God's sovereignty can be clearly seen from the history of Ken Arok, who was the king of Tumapel, who succeeded in using God's sovereignty to gain power over Kediri. So the question is the extent to which the existence of the struggle for God's sovereignty in Indonesia which underlies divine values. Ken Arok as the ruler of Tumapel who is a subordinate of Kediri has committed an offense of royal state order. What was done by Ken Arok in terms of International Law as "belligerent". Ken Arok's movement to gain power by committing offenses on the state administration of the kingdom, legalized by the laws of the royal state at that time, as well as international law today. In addition to evidence of the theory of God's sovereignty which was applied by Ken Arok to strengthen his power, in modern times too, the theory of God's sovereignty was practiced by Soekarno during the Old Order. As proof of the theory of God's Sovereignty during the Soekarno era came from the minister of religion of the Republic of Indonesia who at that time was held by Wahid Hasyim, who considered it important to build a magnificent mosque as gratitude for Indonesia's independence in the struggle against the invaders.Keywords: sovereignty, God, struggle, kingdom

Against Bidimensional Supremacy in EU Constitutionalism

AbstractScholarly consensus sees EU supremacy as “necessarily bidimensional”: the supranational dimension necessarily stands alongside the national dimension, which rejects the absolute and unconditional supremacy of EU law. I argue that this view of bidimensional supremacy is conceptually flawed and descriptively inaccurate. On the conceptual side, I identify the fallacy of symmetry (the idea that national and supranational perspectives on supremacy are similar in nature and equally reductionist), the fallacy of selection (the view that bidimensionalism alone can overcome what it perceives as an inevitable subjective bias in the choice between national and supranational supremacy claims), and the fallacy of construction (an originally shared popular sovereignty theory, which turns out to be riddled with biases that disrupt the equilibrium within the internally divided sovereign). On the interpretative side, I suggest that the empirical evidence in support of bidimensional supremacy is weaker than it is generally assumed. I then offer an interpretation of the PSPP judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court, which holds a judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union to be ultra vires, unlawful and thus non-binding. PSPP presents a problem of German origins and cast, rather than one stemming from the inner structure of EU constitutionalism. At most, PSPP represents a contingent, rather than necessary, and thus unexceptional instance of bidimensional supremacy.

Besieged sovereignty: The pandemic and the triple relation between state, international organizations and integral society

The theory of sovereignty has been challenged by the limits established by the international field and tensions, a likely subordination of the internal right to the global community that is governed by rules and principles and not simply by the exercise of power. The pandemic from COVID-19 has provided an opening in the theoretical field of fragmentation of the theory regarding state sovereignty. A new way to materialize sovereignty that, when put into practice, can assume the functions of global governance exercised by an international organization. This ability of exercising state sovereignty, named besieged sovereignty in this document, has the initial goal of justifying the use of this new concept that emerged from a state of global exception, in addition to presenting, briefly, the approach to the validity of legal norms. Two hypotheses will be presented for the field of this research: can there be unilateral and/or plurilateral intervention in state sovereignty in case there is a declaration of a state of emergency, of exception, in the global field? Can there be an authorization of the United Nations Charter for direct intervention on behalf of individual or collective self-defense, in the case of an armed attack upon the nation that represents imminent risk of transmission and spread of the pandemic? We will argue that besieged sovereignty represents a serious risk to state sovereignty and that the international community needs to be actively engaged in ensuring that governments observe the standards and quickly return to normal so that there is no “legitimate use of force ”and unilateral or plurilateral interventions, since the sovereign will be the one who is capable, over the abnormality, in order to suspend the legal order in whole or in part and with the purpose of restoring normality.

민주와 공화 사이에서 – 보댕 및 루소의 주권론과 혼합정체론의 조화

민주와 공화 사이에서 – 보댕 및 루소의 주권론과 혼합정체론의 조화

After (post) hegemony

Hegemony is one of the most widely diffused concepts in the contemporary social sciences and humanities internationally, interpreted in a variety of ways in different disciplinary and national contexts. However, its contemporary relevance and conceptual coherence has recently been challenged by various theories of ‘posthegemony’. This article offers a critical assessment of this theoretical initiative. In the first part of the article, I distinguish between three main versions of posthegemony – temporal, foundational and expansive – characterized by different understandings of the temporal and logical implications of hegemony. I then offer a critical assessment of the shared presuppositions of these theories, including their ‘pre-Gramscianism’, their indebtedness to Laclau and Mouffe’s formulation of hegemony, and their characterization of hegemony in terms compatible with modern theories of sovereignty. I conclude by arguing that the contradictions and oversights of the debate on posthegemony encourage us to undertake a reassessment of the real historical complexity of hegemonic politics and its different traditions of conceptualization.