14 Roni Sulistyanto Luhukay The Struggle to Accept Rohingya Refugees .. a reconsideration of the 1951 Convention ratification policy. If viewed legally, Indonesia has several articles in the convention that are deemed difficult to implement. To give an example, Article 17 of the 1951 Convention requires state parties to provide jobs for refugees. On the other hand, Indonesia remains a developing country with a high unemployment rate. Then, despite the fact that poverty persists in Indonesia, Article 21 of the 1951 Convention provides for the provision of houses for refugees. Furthermore, there are areas in Indonesia that require adequate infrastructure from the central government. If various provisions are ratified by the Indonesian government at this time, it has the potential to create inequality among Indonesians.8 This means that the ratio legis of the Indonesian government has not ratified the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol due to national interests that will be difficult to achieve if the Indonesian government ratifies the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol. 3. Essentially, international law upholds the principles of nonintervention and consent (kesepakatan negara).9 This means that the Indonesian government has yet to reach an agreement with the international community, particularly the UN, on the shelter of Rohingya refugees. According to Malcolm N. Shaw, a state or international organization cannot intervene in matters that are fundamentally related to the affairs or problems of another country or state. This means that each country has the freedom to determine 8 Sultoni, Y. (2014). Alasan indonesia belum meratifikasi konvensi 1951 tentang pengungsi dan perlindungan hukum bagi pengungsi di indonesia (Doctoral dissertation, Brawijaya University). Hal. 8 9 Riyanto, S. (2012). Kedaulatan negara dalam kerangka hukum internasional kontemporer. Yustisia, 1(3). Hal. 8 10 Malcolm N. Shaw. (1991). International Law. UK: Cambridge University Press. Hal. 719 its own affairs or problems without interference from any other party, based on the principle of sovereignty.10 According to Charles Loyseau's Kriegel, the state has sovereignty, which is defined as “sovereignty is the defining moment and culmination of power, the moment when the State must come into being”... Sovereignty is the form which gives being to the state;it is inseparable from the state; without it, the state vanishes.”11 So, the sovereignty of the state is the decisive moment and the culmination of power at the time when the Indonesian State must be established. “…it is further explained that sovereignty is the form that gives life to the state; it is inextricably linked to the state; without it, the state ceases to exist.12 As a result, the supreme power that represents all people is referred to as the “leges imperii.” This sovereignty is a principle held by the Indonesian people, and no country or international organization can compel them to accept Rohingya refugees or ratify the 1951 Convention or 1967 Protocol. This is in alignment with Sefriani's opinon, which holds that there is no supranational body with the authority to create and enforce international rules under international law.13 As a result, no state has the authority to require Indonesia to ratify the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol. According to Raustiala, the state, on the other hand, holds a very important and dominant position (par excellence) within the international legal system. “Unbundling the state and reconnecting its constituent parts across national borders results in a 11 Kriegel, B. (1995). The state and the rule of law. Hal.15 12 Ibid.,hal 16 13 Sefriani, S. (2011). Ketaatan masyarakat internasional terhadap hukum internasional dalam perspekti filsafat hukum. Jurnal Fakultas Hukum UII, 18(3), 405-427. Hal. 412