---

Witness for the Petitioners, Professor of the Medical Faculty of the University of Indonesia (FK UI) Wahyuning Ramelan giving his statement in the judicial review of the Medical Practice Law, Wednesday (5/12) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

The petition for the judicial review of Article 1 number 12 of Law Number 29 of 2004 on Medical Practice limits IDI from the advances of science and technology. In addition, it bound IDI\'s independence as a professional organization to advance the medical practice. This was conveyed by Muhammad Joni as attorney of PB-IDI (Relevant Parties) in the third judicial review hearing of the Medical Practice Law on Wednesday (5/12) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. The hearing registered as No. 80/PUU-XVI/2018 was requested by 36 individual citizens consisting of lecturers, retired lecturers, and professors in the field of medicine. The Petitioners claimed that Article 1 numbers 12 and 13 as well as the Elucidation to Article 1, Article 29 paragraph (3) letter d, and Article 28 paragraph (1) of the Medical Practice Law could potentially harm the constitutional rights of the Petitioners. 

Joni further explained that IDI welcomed the development and advancement of medical practice, assumed the role of agent of change and development, and guaranteed that doctors\' competence keep up with the latest standards of development in medicine. 

"If the petition in the a quo case is granted, this will limit the role of IDI as an agent of reform and development, contrary to the Constitutional Court Decision Number 10/PUU-XV/2017," Joni said before the hearing chaired by Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Anwar Usman, in the presence of the eight other constitutional justices. 

Four Domains 

Joni added that, in relation to the arguments of the Petitioners, the claim that MKKI was a subordinate to IDI was incorrect. Based on the provisions of the leadership structure regulated in Article 14 paragraph (1) of the IDI\'s Articles of Association, the leadership structure of IDI at the central level consists of the Executive Board of the Indonesian Doctors Association (PB-IDI), the Indonesian Academy of Medicine (MKKI), the Professional Services Development Council (MPPK), and the Medical Ethics Honorary Council (MKEK. Therefore, there are four top domains within the IDI leadership system," Joni explained. 

Joni further said that the petition\'s request that Article 1 number 12 of the Medical Practice Law be interpreted by adding phrases "with the leadership structure consisting of PB-IDI, MKKI, MKEK, MPPK, each having the authority and responsibility in accordance with their duties" limits and undermines the independence of IDI as a professional organization in developing professional organizations, because it limits the development of IDI. Then, on the authority to organize medical education and training, according to the Relevant Party it was wrong and inappropriate that the Petitioners requested Government oversight, which was not a competency-based organ or KKI supervisor. "KKI is an independent, non-structural autonomous body," Joni explained. 

Certificate of Competence

The Petitioner presented Professor of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Indonesia (FK UI) Wahyuning Ramelan as a witness. Since 1964 he has served as a permanent lecturer in FK UI. In his testimony, Ramelan explained that before the enactment of the Medical Practice Law, the diplomas of medical graduates had included competence as a doctor, so they were able to practice. There had been no such thing as certificate of competence. The Medical Practice Law then explicitly separates certificate of competence from diplomas, so the certificate is given by the collegiate councils. 

"So the collegiate councils are part of a professional structure that specifically deals with matters related to education. IDI covers a very wide range of things so the aspects related to the development of science and education are managed by the collegiate councils," said Ramelan. 

The Petitioners had previously said that Article 1 number 12 of the law on the definition of the phrase "Indonesian Doctors Association" was interpreted narrowly solely as the Executive Board of the Indonesian Doctors Association (PB-IDI) at the national level. Whereas, according to the Petitioners, within IDI there are several autonomous organizations, such as the Medical Ethics Honorary Council (MKEK), the Professional Services Development Council (MPPK), and the Indonesian Academy of Medicine (MKKI). They considered the definition of IDI in the a quo article had placed those organizations as subordinates of the PB-IDI, especially the MKKI, resulting in PB-IDI\'s authority intervening the academic/medical field. If the a quo articles are not corrected, PB-IDI will seize control of the medical field from upstream to downstream due to the lack of checks and balances mechanism among institutions within IDI, as practiced by IDI seniors in the 2000s. Therefore, the Petitioners requested that the Constitutional Court justices declare the articles being reviewed conditionally constitutional. (Sri Pujianti/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)

 

---