Article Sidebar

Submitted
October 7, 2019
Accepted
October 7, 2019
Published
October 7, 2019
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 953 Download : 5231

Main Article Content

Abstract

The problem in this research is whether the SPS Agreement actually becomes a barrier in trade? And what is the impact of the SPS Agreement on trade in Indonesia? The research method used is Normative Juridical. The results of the study concluded, first, the existence of the SPS Agreement can be a barrier to trade, but it is an obstacle that is excluded as long as it is done in accordance with the provisions contained in the SPS Agreement. Second, the existence of the SPS Agreement allows Indonesia to implement regulations that better protect its citizens from health risks that may arise from the import of certain products, especially food. These rules must still be in line with the SPS Agreement.

Keywords

Trade barrier SPS agreement WTO

Article Details

How to Cite
Fairuzzaman, F. (2019). Dampak Penerapan Agreement On The Application Of Sanitary And Phytosanitary Measures Terhadap Perdagangan Di Indonesia. Lex Renaissance, 3(2), 321–342. https://doi.org/10.20885/JLR.vol3.iss2.art5
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Buku
  2. Fajar, Mukti dan Yulianto Achmad, Dualisme Penelitian Hukum: Normatif & Empiris, Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta, 2010.
  3. Ibrahim, Johnny, Teori dan Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif, Bayumedia Publishing, Malang, 2008.
  4. Kartadjoemena, H.S., GATT, WTO dan Hasil Uruguay Round, UI Press, Jakarta, 2007.
  5. van den Bossche, Peter, Daniar Natakusumah dan Joseph Wira Koesnaidi., Pengantar Hukum WTO (World Trade Organization), Yayasan Obor Indonesia, Jakarta, 2010.
  6. van den Bossche, Peter dan Werner Zdouc, The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization: Text, Cases and Material, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2017.
  7. Jurnal
  8. Kennedy, Kevin C., “Resolving International Sanitary and Phytosanitary Disputes in The WTO: Lessons and Future Directions”, Food and Drug Law Journal, Vol. 55, 2000.
  9. Laidlaw, Anais Kedgley, “Is it Better to be Safe than Sorry? The Cartagena Protocol versus The World Trade Organisation”, Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 2005.
  10. Risnain, Muh., “Politik Hukum Perlindungan Industri dalam Negeri Indonesia dalam Menghadapi Perdagangan Bebas”, Fiat Justisia Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Vol. 5 No. 3, 2011.
  11. Sudradjat, Eko Prilianto, “Penerapan WTO-Agreement on The Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures: Analisis Tentang Penerapan Public Health Security And Bioterrorism Preparedness And Response Act Of 2002 oleh Amerika Serikat”, Jendela Informasi Hukum Bidang Perdagangan, 2012
  12. Wartini, Sri, “Implementasi Prinsip Kehati-hatian dalam Sanitary and Phythosanitary Agreemant, Studi Kasus: Keputusan Appellate Body WTO Dalam Kasus Hormone Beef Antara Uni Eropa Dengan Amerika Serikat”, Jurnal Hukum, Vol. 14 No. 2, 2007.
  13. Peraturan Perundang-Undangan, Dokumen, dan Perjanjian Internasional
  14. Agreement on The Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Dokumen Permohonan Konsultasi WTO No. WT/DS484/1
  15. Dokumen Permohonan Pembentukan Panel WTO oleh Brazil No. WT/DS484/8 Dokumen Permohonan Konsultasi WTO No. WT/DS506/1
  16. Internet
  17. Departemen Pertanian, Perikanan, dan Kehutanan Australia, “Kesepakatan Organisasi Perdagangan Dunia (WTO) tentang Sanitari dan Fitosanitari”, http://www.agriculture.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/languages/indonesian/piaph/sp s_booklet_bahasa.pdf
  18. Ika, Aprillia, “Brasil Gugat Indonesia Terkait Syarat Importasi Daging dan Produk Ayam yang Halal”, http://ekonomi.kompas.com/read/2016/10/15/ 100000826/brasil.gugat.indonesia.terkait.syarat.importasi.daging.dan.produk.ayam.yang.halal.
  19. World Trade Organization, “DS484 : Indonesia¬ – Measures Concerning the Importation of Chicken Meat and Chicken Products”, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds484_e.htm