---

Expert presented by the Government Maruarar Siahaan delivered his expertise at judicial review session on UU BPJS, on Monday (27/4) at Plenary Room, the Constitutional Court Building. Photo PR/Ganie.

 

 

The Government presented a law expert who also former Constitutional Justice Maruarar Siahaan at the eighth judicial review session on Act of the Healthcare and Social Security Agency (Undang-Undang BPJS Kesehatan). Maruarar delivered the provision of BPJS mandatory registration was in line with the principle of welfare state and didn’t contrary to the Constitution.

Indonesia established with the concept of welfare state under the Pancasila as its basis. The state had vital role in promoting and protecting peoples’ welfare, either social or economics welfare. Under the concept, the state was also justified to withdraw or transfer the funds collected to finance health services, education, and other social services. “It is what referred essentially on Article 34 the 1945 Constitution prior to the Amendment with the intention of empowers poor people,” said him who often called as Mr. Maru.

Maruarar assessed the concept of welfare state manifested in social and healthcare security program in form of state insurance. The program conducted by the BPJS who integrated the social security agencies established by the state.

Based on the concept of welfare state, Maruarar argued that the provision of BPJS mandatory registration on Article 15 (1) and (2); Article 16 (1) and (2); Article 19 (1), (2), and (3) UU BPJS regarded contrary to the Constitution was incorrect. It was because the provision cannot be reviewed only by the norms on the 1945 Constitution (Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 –UUD 1945), but rather it should be reviewed by nation view and state goal contained in UUD 1945.  

“In my opinion, there is no contradiction between the meanings explained above with the constitution. Because, the constitutional rights to advance in the struggle for social security is in fact based on the witness testimony. When it viewed from state purpose which is the constitution spirit or morality, it will be more opportunity for people to gain (social and) healthcare security,” explained Maruarar.

Coordination of Benefits

At the session held on Monday (27/4), the Government presented Director of PT Asuransi Jiwa Inhealth Indonesia Wahyu Handoko as the witness in this case. Handoko delivered the testimony related to coordination of benefits (COB) between the BPJS with commercial insurance companies.

As delivered by Handoko, COB based on several regulations; Government Regulation Number 12 Year 2013 of Healthcare Insurances, Government Regulation Number 111 Year 2013 of Amendment on Government Regulation Number 12 Year 2013 of Healthcare Insurances, and Technical Operations of BPJS Director Regulation (Teknis Operasional Peraturan Direktur BPJS) Number 064 Year 2014. Technical talks on COB between the BPJS with the Indonesian Life Insurance Association (Asosiasi Asuransi Jiwa Indonesia –AAJI) with the Indonesian General Insurance Association (Asosiasi Asuransi Umum Indonesia –AAUI) had also been conducted. From the talks, an agreement of contract standard between the BPJS with commercial insurance companies was formed on April 2014.  

Handoko revealed that his company had established COB partnership with the BPJS since April 23, 2014. Based on his company operation, he said that COB had provided space for people who able and willing to get health service by purchasing additional commercial insurance.

“It is proven since the agreement between us with the BPJS implemented. Recently there are 20 business entities that cooperate with Inhealth (his company, red) with total members of 1.640.694 people by the COB scheme,” revealed Handoko.

After listening to the expert and witness testimony, Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna asked several detailed questions. Palguna asked about the practice of COB to Handoko.

Answered the question, Handoko explained that the BPJS was superior to the commercial insurance companies in terms of healthcare benefits. The BPJS covered all diseases. Commercial insurance companies who cooperate with the BPJS through COB offered advantages in terms of service pace and convenience. “We provide some providers outside the healthcare insurance implementation, while in the inside, some providers only cooperate with the BPJS or inhealth, and another provider cooperates with both the BPJS and inhelath. This is the creativity that we play because in the reality, the use of health facilities via the BPJS still hampers some queue problems,” said Handoko.

Last session

Before closed the session, Arief Hidayat reminded the litigants to submit their conclusion no later than May 6, 2014 at 14.00 WIB. This session is the last session towards case filed sequentially by PT Papan Nirwana, PT. Cahaya Medika Health Care, Pt Ramamuza Bhakti Husada, PT. Abdiwaluyo Mitrasejahtera, Sarju, and Imron Sarbini. As known, Applicant I and II are insurance companies, Applicant III and IV are companies, and Applicant V and VI are workers obliged to register the BPJS.   

“Well, then, a whole series of session on Case 138 is over. The last thing to do is submitting conclusion from the Applicant, the Government, and Related Parties no later than Wednesday, May 6, 2015 at 14.00 WIB,” Arief closed the session. (Yusti Nurul Agustin/Prasetyo Adi N.)

---