• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.16
• /
• pp.197-223
• /
• 2002

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.3
• /
• pp.191-206
• /
• 1991

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.3
• /
• pp.113-141
• /
• 1991

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.8
• /
• pp.255-260
• /
• 1996

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.33-52
• /
• 2017

This article tried to describe the laws concerning the enforcement of foreign arbitration awards in Indonesia. This issue is relevant in the light of frequent curiosity of foreign commentators, business communities, practicing lawyers, concerning the arbitration in Indonesia, in particular its enforcement of foreign arbitration awards. The main laws on arbitration analyzed were, firstly, the Indonesian law on arbitration, namely Law No 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution and the Presidential Regulation No 34 of 1981 concerning the Ratification of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958. The provisions of Law of 1999 analyzed were confined to its international provisions on arbitration, in particular the requirements for the enforcement of foreign arbitration awards and also the requirement that the awards do not violate Indonesian public policy. The problem with the Indonesian arbitration law (and the courts' practice) were that no provisions which provided guidance or meaning with regard to public policy. The absence or lack of guidance or definition on public policy had some times confused lawyers or the parties in dispute fearing that their arbitration awards would not be enforced due to the violation of public policy. Secondly was the different opinion of two Indonesian arbitration experts, Prof. Sudargo Gautama and Prof. Priyatna Abdurrasyid. Both scholars had rather different opinions with regard to the meaning of public policy in Indonesia. Thirdly was a recent case law, Astro Nusantara Bv et.al., vs PT Ayunda Primamitra Case (2010) decided by the Indonesian Supreme Court with regard to the enforcement of foreign arbitration awards. This article concluded that the Indonesian court, in particular the Central of Jakarta Court, so far have given its support that the execution of foreign awards was duly enforced.

• Health Policy and Management
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.188-195
• /
• 2013

Background: The separation of pharmaceutical prescription and dispensing law was implemented in July 1st of 2000. This law was initiated by government without a through consensus among related stakeholders in the process of policy decision, eventually raising contention about decision making process rather than the performance of the policy. Methods: Therefore, this study tries to identify the accomplishment of the policy goals; based on the last decade's research we assessed inhibition of unnecessary prescription, drug misuse and overuse prevention, prevention of drug-related sentinel events, reducing unnecessary drug utilization, and reducing nation's medical cost. Results: Assessment results represent that government-suggested goal of the policy lacks sufficient evidence to evaluate accomplishment. Conclusion: Unlike other studies that evaluate problems regarding drug dispensing policy in the policy decision process, this study is meaningful in that it evaluated the policy goal based on the last ten years of related study results.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.14
• /
• pp.87-110
• /
• 2001

This Article examines a structure of two Conventions of Space Station, compares 1988 Convention and 1998 Convention, and tries to apply "model" to it. The structure of 1988 Convention shows us three phases: the Convention as a framework, the bilateral memorandum of understanding and the legislation by domestic process of United States. There were many advantageous provisions for United States. In 1998 Convention, however, those provisions are dampened and provisions become impartial, for example, the criminal jurisdiction, the right of intellectual property and the codes of conducts in Space Station. On the other hand, we sets the "model" up, that is "input of national benefits and ideas ${\Rightarrow}$ process of law-making ${\Rightarrow}$ output of common benefits, universal ideas and wastes." In the case of applying this "model" to 1988 and 1998 Conventions, we are convinced of enough possibility to understand and explain the legal system of Space Station by this "model." This result awakes us that study of legal system of Space Station according to the "model" influences the fundamental theory of International Law Study: the relation between international law and domestic law. This "model" has possibility to change the theory of relation between from "international law and domestic law" to "domestic law and domestic law through international legal system." In the end, we should reconsider on "policy-oriented jurisprudence" by professor McDougal to use his key words for explanation of concepts in the "model," because his theory contains important suggestions to the study of law-making process and legal system for outer space activities in the near future.

• Ocean and Polar Research
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.119-128
• /
• 2008

Japan's new Basic Ocean Law took effect in 20 July 2007. This law contains that 1) calls for the consolidation of eight government offices that previously worked separately on maritime issues; 2) establishes a basic plan for maritime matters, and; 3) creates a comprehensive maritime policy headquarters, run by the Prime Minister. The result is a structure for the integrated promotion of maritime policy. The Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport has been appointed to the newly established position of maritime minister. Japan has been in conflict with Korea and China over EEZ and territory, which has caused the country to turn to ocean. If Japan puts more emphasis on sea, it will be on a collision course with neighboring countries such as Korea, China, Russia, and Taiwan. Japan has been at odds with these countries; with Korea over Dokdo islets, with China over the Senkaku Islands and the East China Sea, where gas fields lie, with Taiwan over fishery rights in the East China Sea, with Russia over the Kuril Islands. Korea's position about the establishment of Japan's new Basic Ocean Law is followed: 1) expression of Korea's position in maritime resourcces of east china sea, 2) understand of strategy for maritime resources development and maritime delimitation in China and Japan, 3) a caution for extention of EEZ and maritime activities, 4)effective and comprehensive policy establishment, and strength in R&D, 5) construction of active and responsive system for maritime issues in neighbor country.

• Ocean and Polar Research
• /
• v.45 no.1
• /
• pp.23-31
• /
• 2023

The core of the foreign policy of the Yoon Suk-yeol government is the promotion of active economic and security diplomacy as indicated in Policy Tasks No. 98. To this end, economic consultative bodies such as Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement(RCEP), Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), and Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) are taking the initiative to respond to the formation of supply chain, human rights, environment, and digital-related norms, and actively support Korean companies' overseas expansion. Due to the nature of the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries (MOF) as an organization established centered on the space of the ocean, the MOF faces difficulties in bringing the functions of other ministries into the space of the ocean. Considering the vision, objectives, and detailed plans of the MOF, the contribution of the MOF in the field of active economic security, one of the main foreign policies of the Yoon Suk-yeol government, is perhaps too obvious. However, since the re-launch of the MOF, the ODA budget for the oceans and fisheries sector is too small compared to other ministries, so even if new policy demands are discovered, there are many difficulties in implementing these policies in practice. Recognizing these problems, this paper examines the background and contents of foreign policies that have been promoted for the efficient promotion of RCEP, CPTPP and IPEF and introduces the areas of cooperation in the oceans and fisheries sector in these foreign policies.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.235-270
• /
• 2009

This Article examines what is contemplated by the term "accident," what is meant by "bodily injury," and what damages are recoverable under Article 17 of both the Warsaw Convention of 1929 and the Montreal Convention of 1999. It examines differences in the jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court, the UK House of Lords, and the Australian High Court in interpreting these terms, and the problems posed by these different interpretations in achieving the uniformity of international aviation liability law contemplated by the Warsaw and Montreal Conventions.