An expert presented by the relevant party Reno Refly to deliver her expertise in the judicial review hearing of Medical Practice Law, on Wednesday (27/9) in the Plenary Hall of the Constitutional Court Building. Photo by PR/Ganie.
A follow-up hearing of the material review of Law No. 29/2004 on Medical Practice and Law No. 20/2003 on Medical Education was held again by the Constitutional Court (MK) on Wednesday (27/9). The hearing of case No. 10/PUU-XV/2017 was to listen to the information of experts and witnesses presented by the Relevant Party, the Indonesian Doctors Association (IDI).
In the 12th session, Organizational Behavior expert Reno Rafly delivered her views on IDI organizational issues from the point of view of organization, system, and human resources. Reno stated that Indonesian doctors were part of Indonesian citizens who needed to be protected and given a safe space to develop their knowledge and profession to serve the community and advance the nation. To that end, doctors also needed to trust the government and the system, that they were provided with adequate security, facilities, and infrastructure in assisting patients.
Reno also explained based on the goals in its bylaws, IDI as an organization must develop by understanding the needs of its members and providing a safe atmosphere to express ideas and opinions in advancing the profession to continue serving the public interest. She stressed the importance of having one professional physician organization such as IDI.
"IDI is an adequate medium as an entity that protects society and its members from internal threats such as finding solutions to prevent illnesses and external threats in the form of foreign doctors who do not necessarily have the nation’s interests at heart,” said Reno in front of the Panel of Justices led by the Chairman of the Constitutional Court Arief Hidayat.
Reno also added that the existence of more than one professional organization for private industry could be justified because market competition was required. However, in case of professional organizations such as medicine, it would be dangerous because there was potential ambiguity in professional standards and competences, no single source of truth, and no clear accountability. "These three potential effects can lead patients to distrust doctors and it can become a snowball that could then threaten the nation’s health and resilience," said Reno.
No Intervention
Another expert presented by IDI was Chairman of the Indonesian Teaching Hospitals Association (ARSPI) Anwar Santoso. In his elaboration, Anwar observed the Petitioners’ constitutional damage in relation to the interpretation of “professional organization" that considered Article 1 point12 and Article 38 paragraph (1) letter c of the Medical Practice Law limiting one’s freedom of association, assembly, and opinion. According to him, the Petitioners\' interpretation of Article 1 point 12 and Article 38 paragraph (1) letter c of the Medical Practice Law was incorrect.
Anwar stated that IDI never complicated the recommendation for a practice license as long as the person in question was not involved in criminal cases or heavy violations of medical ethics. In addition, IDI still granted [doctors] the right to conduct their academic and professional activities within the organization of specialist doctors without any intervention, in terms of both general and technical policies.
"In fact, IDI does not interfere with the collegium’s authority in formulating the standard of professional education in medicine and dentistry. The Indonesian Medical Association (MKKI) can still freely carry out its duties and authority in fostering medical profession education based on IDI bylaws Year 2015," said Anwar.
DLP Program
On the same occasion, the Respondent also presented two witnesses, namely Chairman of the Indonesian Medical Council 2014-2019 Period Bambang Supriyatno and Lecturer at the Medical Faculty of Hasanuddin University, Makassar Abdul Razak Thaha.
In his testimony, Bambang gave a statement that KKI did not reject the Primary Healthcare Physicians (DLP) program. According to him, DLP is a new study program that is a continuation of a medical program equivalent to specialist. Bambang acknowledged that until now KKI did not have the educational standards for that program.
"KKI is still in the process of waiting for the submission of the standards to be legalized by KKI. Thus, we can confirm that KKI has never rejected the establishment of the DLP program," said Bambang.
Similarly, Razak also gave a testimony regarding the commitment and consistency of IDI in guarding the DLP norm. According to him, as a doctor who had been active in the IDI organization since 1980, he delivered a certificate of competence issued by the Indonesian Medical Collegium signed by the Chairman of KDI and DLP Collegium that included DLP. Furthermore, IDI is also actively involved in the preparation of SKDI that places the norm of primary healthcare physicians as the competence of Indonesian doctors.
"It is clear that IDI\'s attitudes and policies are consistent in safeguarding and complying with DLP norms in the Medical Education Law. The disparities that occur in the preparation of government regulation draft (RPP) on DLP is only on the implementation and not the norm," Razak explained.
Several medical educators and practitioners were registered as Petitioners for material judicial review of the Medical Practice Law and the Medical Education Law. In their petition, the Petitioners mentioned that their constitutional rights were violated by the enactment of Article 1 points 4, 12, and 13, Article 14 paragraph (1) letter a, and Article 38 paragraph (1) letter c of the Medical Practice Law. In addition, the Petitioners felt disadvantaged by the commencement of Article 24 paragraph (1), Article 36 paragraphs (2) and (3), and Article 39 paragraph (2) of the Medical Education Law.
The Petitioners considered that the norms being reviewed by the Petitioners were claimed to make IDI a super-body and superpower that could act arbitrarily and disregard laws and regulations. This was exacerbated by the absence of an effective internal control/supervisory mechanism for the organization. One of them was related to the certificate of competence issued by the Indonesian Physicians Collegium (KDI). According to the Petitioners, every graduate of the Faculty of Medicine who had passed the competence test in accordance with Article 36 paragraph (3) of the Medical Education Law and received a professional certificate (a doctor\'s diploma). Therefore, there was no need for a competency certificate from KDI, which was established by the Indonesian Doctors Association (IDI).
(Sri Pujianti/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)
Thursday, September 28, 2017 | 08:35 WIB 375