Publication Search

Abstract. The right to health is an integral part of human rights guaranteed by the Constitution and further reinforced by Law Number 17 of 2023 on Health, which places the state as the party responsible for ensuring the provision of safe, high-quality, and non-discriminatory health services for all citizens. However, in practice, the fulfillment of the right to health continues to face various challenges, particularly in the delivery of health services for participants of BPJS Kesehatan. This study aims to analyze the legal protection of the right to health in Indonesia and to examine the refusal of medical services to BPJS patients that resulted in death in Papua from a human rights perspective. The research employs a normative legal research method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The findings indicate that although the national legal framework has clearly regulated the obligations of the state and health care facilities in providing emergency services, its implementation remains weak due to administrative barriers, unequal access to health services, and inconsistent law enforcement. The refusal of medical services to BPJS patients in Papua reflects a tension between hospitals’ administrative compliance and the professional obligation of medical personnel to save human lives. The implications of this study emphasize the need to strengthen supervision, ensure consistent law enforcement, and improve health service governance so that the right to health is truly protected as part of human dignity within the Indonesian rule of law. 

The right to privacy and the right to health are fundamental human rights that are closely interconnected. The protection of privacy for patients with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) constitutes a critical issue, given that HIV status is classified as highly sensitive health data and is particularly vulnerable to stigma and discrimination. In Indonesia, the legal framework governing the protection of HIV patients’ health data has been normatively strengthened through the Personal Data Protection Law and the Health Law; however, its implementation continues to face various challenges. This article aims to analyze the right to privacy of HIV patients and the obligations of the state in protecting sensitive health data, as well as to examine the limitations and exceptions to the disclosure of HIV-related data within the framework of law and human rights. This study employs a normative legal research method using statutory, conceptual, and human rights-based approaches. Legal materials are analyzed qualitatively through juridical interpretation and prescriptive analysis. The findings indicate that HIV status is legally categorized as sensitive personal data that is entitled to a high level of legal protection. The state bears tripartite obligations to respect, protect, and fulfill the privacy rights of HIV patients. Nevertheless, a gap persists between legal norms and their implementation, particularly in the management of electronic medical records. The protection of HIV patients’ privacy rights requires strengthened legal implementation, regulatory harmonization, and the adoption of a human rights-based approach to ensure that data protection does not conflict with public health interests.

Obstetricians are often confronted with medical malpractice lawsuits, even when they have acted in accordance with professional standards, medical service standards, operational procedures, and medical ethics. Medical malpractice is generally defined as negligence or deviation from professional standards that results in serious harm to patients (Fiscina, 1999). This study aims to examine the application of the concept of medical malpractice along with its legal implications and to analyze the forms of legal protection available to obstetricians under Law Number 17 of 2023 on Health, viewed from the perspective of the principle of justice. Using a normative juridical method with descriptive-analytical specifications, the research employed a literature study and qualitative deductive analysis. The results indicate that legal protection for obstetricians consists of two dimensions: preventive and repressive. Preventive protection includes the implementation of informed consent, proper medical records, and compliance with standard operating procedures. Repressive protection involves legal defense mechanisms and institutional or professional organizational support. However, this protection remains suboptimal, as the decisions of the Indonesian Medical Disciplinary Board (MKDKI) are not always taken into account by the courts (Rahman, 2022). From the perspective of Rawls’ principle of justice, protection for obstetricians should ensure a balanced recognition of both patients’ and doctors’ rights, thereby promoting fairness and equitable justice for all parties (Rawls, 1971).

This study aims to analyze the application of the doctrine of vicarious liability in the liability of hospitals for medical malpractice lawsuits in Indonesia. The increasing number of medical disputes raises questions regarding the extent to which hospitals can be held responsible for the negligence of medical personnel working under their authority. This research employs a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, by examining the Indonesian Civil Code, Law No. 44 of 2009 on Hospitals, Law No. 17 of 2023 on Health, and relevant court decisions. The findings reveal that, normatively, hospitals can be held accountable under Article 1367 of the Civil Code, which aligns with the doctrine of vicarious liability (Black, 2019). However, judicial practice in Indonesia remains inconsistent: in some cases judges place liability on hospitals, while in others they hold individual doctors fully responsible (Budiman, Absori & Rizka, 2023; Vitrianingsih, Miarsa & Yahya, 2025). This inconsistency demonstrates a gap between normative regulation and juridical implementation. The novelty of this study lies in emphasizing the importance of the principle of justice in applying vicarious liability. Legal protection should not be limited to written norms but must also be substantive by balancing patients’ rights to safe and quality healthcare with the rights of medical personnel and hospitals to legal certainty. This is in line with Rawls’ (1971) concept of justice as fairness and Radbruch’s (2006) idea of balancing justice, legal certainty, and expediency.

Hospitals, as healthcare institutions, bear the responsibility of delivering safe, high-quality, and patient-centered services. Hospital accreditation serves as a crucial mechanism to ensure service quality and legal protection for patients, particularly in medical dispute cases. This study aims to analyze the impact of accreditation on patient legal protection, both preventively and repressively. The research employs a normative legal method with statutory and conceptual approaches, utilizing primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. Data were analyzed through document studies covering Law Number 17 of 2023 on Health, government regulations, presidential regulations, and technical regulations from the Ministry of Health regarding accreditation standards and procedures. The findings indicate that accreditation functions as a continuous evaluation mechanism to ensure medical services comply with safety standards and clinical governance, strengthens patients’ rights to information, informed consent, and quality care, and reduces the risk of medical disputes. However, implementation challenges exist, including limited resources, compliance performed as formalities, and inconsistent supervision. Therefore, accreditation is not merely an administrative symbol but a strategic legal instrument that enhances patient safety culture and hospital accountability, ensuring that healthcare delivery meets professional, ethical, and legal standards.

This research explores the legal protection of domestic doctors in Indonesia in response to the increasing utilization of foreign doctors (FDs) within the framework of knowledge transfer aimed at improving healthcare services. With the enactment of Law No. 17 of 2023 on Health, the Indonesian government provides space for foreign doctors to practice with simplified licensing procedures, raising legal concerns regarding legal certainty, professional equality, and the rights of patients to clear and honest communication. This study uses normative juridical methods with statutory and conceptual approaches to analyze the legal framework surrounding this issue. The findings show that the implementation of simplified requirements for foreign doctors potentially threatens the professional standing of local doctors and risks violating patient rights. Recommendations include strengthening legal instruments and monitoring mechanisms to ensure that knowledge transfer objectives are met without compromising legal protection and healthcare quality. The legal framework provided by Law No. 17 of 2023 allows foreign doctors to practice with more straightforward licensing processes, but it raises concerns regarding the adequacy of regulatory oversight. Local doctors fear that the simplified procedures for foreign doctors may not guarantee the same level of competency, accountability, and ethical standards. Furthermore, the presence of foreign doctors could lead to a disparity in professional treatment and recognition, undermining the integrity of the medical profession in Indonesia. This study explores how these legal issues intersect with the broader goals of patient protection, ensuring that all medical practitioners, regardless of nationality, adhere to the highest standards of care and ethical conduct. The role of patient rights in this context is critical, as patients must receive clear and honest communication about the qualifications of the doctors treating them, ensuring their right to informed consent is upheld.

The health services that will be provided must go through stages of approval from the patient verbally or in writing, so as not to violate the patient's rights as consumers of services and is one of the obligations of the health worker himself. This research aims to determine the implementation of informed consent in health services provided by physiotherapy students during field work practice in health institutions. This research also uses a sociological juridical method, which is the result of drawing conclusions as a result of connecting cause and effect variables in accordance with social science design. From the results of this research, it was found that physiotherapy students at Widya Husada University, Semarang, during field work practice in health institutions, always gave informed consent to patients before providing health services, either verbally or in writing. Students cannot yet be called full-fledged health workers, but when students practice field work in health institutions and provide health services to patients, they are required to provide informed consent to the patient first as a form of approval for the patient's actions.