درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

This research focuses on analyzing the extent of Muhammadiyah's role in translating the human rights narrative and its relationship with Sharia principles, which are the guidelines in its movement to protect vulnerable groups of victims of human rights violations in Indonesia. Through Al-Ma'un theology, Muhammadiyah has transformed the discourse of human rights within religious contexts but also in practical efforts to protect vulnerable groups of victims of structural human rights violations and victims of national strategic projects, such as in the Wadas andesite mining case, the Rempang Eco-city case, the Pakel agrarian conflict case, the Trenggalek gold mining case, and various other cases. This research seeks to answer the following questions: (1) To what extent does Muhammadiyah play a role in disseminating human rights discourse in Indonesia? (2) How can the model of protecting vulnerable communities affected by human rights violations by Muhammadiyah be a best practice for the protection of human rights and also for the movement of civil society in the Eastern States? This research employs a socio-legal approach to identify struggles in defending the rights of vulnerable groups in Indonesia. Through an examination of its organizational pronouncements, advocacy initiatives, and grassroots activities, this paper explores the extent to which Muhammadiyah actively contributes to the protection and promotion of human rights for vulnerable populations in Indonesia, highlighting both its potential and its limitations in navigating the intricate landscape of human rights within a predominantly Muslim nation. Ultimately, this research contributes to a nuanced understanding of the role of Islamic civil society organizations in shaping and implementing human rights agendas in Indonesia and beyond.

When parties to a dispute select arbitration as their means of resolving the conflict, they relyon evidentiary materials to present claims or defenses. In this context, the likelihood of oneparty engaging in fraudulent practices in the presentation of evidence and utilizing fraudulentmaterials to influence the arbitration process is significant. According to the arbitration practicesof the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), it has been established that an arbitratorlacks independent and direct authority to uncover such fraudulent evidence. However, whenthe opposing party challenges the evidence as fraudulent and raises allegations of fraud in thearbitration, the arbitrator is obliged to address this objection and examine the validity of eachpiece of evidence according to its nature. Failure by the arbitrator to consider such evidence canundermine the credibility and value of the arbitral award. When the award issued by the arbitrationauthority is tainted by falsehood and fraud, it loses its enforceability. Therefore, delineating thescope of the arbitrator’s authority in the face of fraudulent evidence is of paramount importance.Analyzing arbitration practices and the conduct of arbitrators, particularly within the frameworkof the ICC when confronted with fraudulent evidence, will ultimately contribute to theestablishment of a unified procedure. This article employs a descriptive-analytical methodology,utilizing library resources to address the question of what the scope of the arbitrator’s jurisdictionis in uncovering fraudulent evidence.