This study aims to find out and analyze legal protection for patients in health services in Sabu Raijua Regency. This research is an empirical  research supported by  an empirical legal approach using primary data in the form of interviews with related parties and secondary data in the form of literature books, research journals, laws and regulations, the internet, dictionaries of articles or newspapers. which was obtained using interview methods and document studies and processed and analyzed in several stages, namely editing, data systematization, verification and interpretation and analyzed in a qualitative descriptive manner. The results of the study show that (1) Legal protection for patients in health services in Sabu Raijua Regency is contained in Law Number 17 of 2023 concerning Health, Law Number 73 of 1958 concerning Criminal Law Regulations for All Regions of the Republic of Indonesia and Amending the Criminal Code (KUHP), Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code (KUHP),  Burgelijk wetboek voor innesie (Civil Code). (2) Implementation of Legal Protection for Patients in Health Services in Sabu Raijua Regency Although it has been protected, in reality there are still shortcomings, namely it has not been implemented.

The purpose of this study is to analyze the imposition of penalties under the minimum criminal threat against perpetrators of corruption extortion by civil servants (PNS) at the Class III port of Larantuka, East Nusa Tenggara (Case study: Kupang District Court Decision Number 17/Pid.Sus-Tpk/2017/Pn.Kpg). This research is a normative juridical research which means that the author does not use samples and data collection is carried out by the library method, with the object of study. After the data is obtained, the author will analyze juridically normative data obtained on the object of study. The corruption case of I Wayan Adisucipto SN was proven to have violated Article 12 letter e Jo Article 12 A of Law No. 31 of 1999 jo Law No. 20 of 2001 concerning Eradication of Corruption, which states a maximum of 20 years in prison or life imprisonment and a minimum of 4 years, but in reality the judge imposed a prison sentence of only 5 months, the decision imposed by the judge that is not considered according to / based on the law will be null and void. The imposition of a 5-month sentence for the defendant by the judge in Number: 17/Pid.Sus-Tpk/2017/Pn.Kpg is not in accordance with the punishment system. From this research, the author can conclude that the Judge's consideration is not based on the provisions of the legislation, namely Article 12 letter e jo Article 12 A Paragraph (2) of Law No. 31 of 1999 Jo Law No. 20 of 2001 concerning Eradication of Corruption which is a minimum imprisonment of at least 4 (four) years and a maximum of 20 (twenty) years so that it is contrary to the applicable law.