President’s experts taking oath before the Panel of Justices during continued judicial review hearing of Law Number 17 of 2023 on Health, Thursday (10/10) at the Plenary Courtroom. Photo by MKRI/Ifa.
Jakarta, MKRI – The Constitutional Court held a continued judicial review hearing of Article 212 paragraph (2) of Law Number 17 od 2023 on Health (Health Law) on Thursday, October 10, 2024. A combined hearing of Case Number 49/PUU-XXII/2024 and Case Number 50/PUU-XXII/2024 was led by Chief Justice Suhartoyo.
The hearing agenda was to hear three testimonies from experts brought by the President (government): Budi Sampurna, Prahara Yuri, and Syarief Hudaya. Budi Sampura, who is a Professor of the Department of Forensic Medicine and Medicolegal Studies at the Faculty of Medicine of the Universitas Indonesia, and dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Central Hospital explained that the definition of health workers as stipulated in the provision of Article 1 point 7 of Law Number 17 of 2023 has been effective since the enactment of Law Number 36 of 2009 on Health. It is intended to ensure the competence of health workers, which is required to provide health service according to standards, quality, and safety. The definition of health workers in Article 1 point 6 of Law Number 17 of 2023 is intended for similar concerns.
According to him, the Petitioner’s petition regarding the amendment of phrase of Article 1 point 6 and point 7 of Law Number 17 of 2023 will result in the guarantee of quality high service with standards, quality, and safety not achievable. As a result, it will contradict Article 28J of the 1945 Constitution, which is to enforce human rights to work has been neglecting other’s human rights due to providing health services that do not meet standards, quality, and safety.
In addition, the Petitioner’s petition to amend the phrase of Article 210 of Law Number 17 of 2023 will also result in unachievable standard, quality, and safe health service, with similar arguments. “Traditional health workers graduate of traditional medicine study program in higher education, or traditional healers and traditional medicine practitioners who acquire their skill through generations are still acknowledged as long as they practice in the field of traditional medicine in accordance with the provisions in the laws and regulations,” he asserted.
Circumcision by expert
On the same occasion, Prahara Yuri, a Urology specialist from the Department of Surgery of the Faculty of Medicine, Public Health, and Nursing of Universitas Gadjah Mada and Dr. Sardjito Central Hospital, explained that circumcision is a surgical procedure performed based on medical or non-medical indications, and a contraindication is not found after a complete physical examination by a competent medical worker.
“Circumcision is a surgical procedure that still has risks, so it should be carried out in accordance with medical professional standards, including aspects of tool and material equipment, sterility, and carried out by general practitioners or specialists who have a registration certificate/license to practice as regulated by the Indonesian Medical Council in order to maintain the standards, and quality of health services in the community,” he explained.
Yuri mentioned that the circumcision procedure practiced by circumcision experts does not meet the rules and regulations of a good circumcision procedure legally as well as medical standards in Indonesia. It is because they do not have the competence, standardized education, and practice license. Therefore, according to him, all the circumcision procedures that are carried out do not meet the medical procedure rules and regulations and have the potential to cause danger/complication for the communities.
Health System
The government also presented Syarief Hudaya, the Chairman of the Ethno Wellness Indonesia Health Association (PERKEWINDO). Syarief emphasized that the government has accommodated and given opportunities for traditional medicine by referring to aspects of benefits, safety, prevailing norms, and the existence of legal certainty related to the modality of competence and traditional medicine, practitioners (traditional healers), and the service point.
Dr. Syarief explained that circumcision with medical procedures was a traditional procedure equivalent to the definition of circumcision performed by the Petitioner. With the development of science, the discovery of anesthetic drugs, wound suturing techniques, anti-bleeding, and antibiotics to prevent infection to provide more aspects of comfort and safety, then the means and methods become different even though they still have the same essence, namely the intention (child/person) who is circumcised traditionally as a religious or customary obligation and the concept of circumcision technique is to cut the skin according to the understanding of the Petitioner.
“So, medical workers are essentially also carrying out their religious obligations for circumcisions that are performed at this time. Traditional circumcision is still performed in traditional rituals. Some examples of traditional circumcision traditions are Sundanese, Aceh, Lampung, Tengger circumcision tradition, Betawi circumcision tradition, Basunat tradition in Banjar, South Kalimantan, Javanese circumcision tradition, South Sulawesi Sunna traditional circumcision. Currently, some have begun to switch to conventional circumcision, although the rituals and customs are still maintained,” explained Syarief.
Syarief said a traditional circumcision expert or other designation according to the region is a traditional circumcision expert whose skills are obtained from generation to generation and consistently unchanged until now because it is part of a ritual/tradition that is believed and only carried out according to origin, and not necessarily accepted and used in other regions with different customs and rituals. A traditional circumcision expert who uses medical methods (tools, methods, medicines) cannot be called a traditional healer, nor can he be declared a medical professional, so it is necessary to be consistent with the traditional/empirical values of the circumcision expert in order to be part of traditional health.
According to him, to provide safety protection and legal certainty to the public, circumcision experts must be registered, certified, and meet administrative requirements in organizing their services, forming associations and other forms of organization so that the government can provide guidance and supervision of traditional values and the development of their modalities. At the end of his statement, he hoped that circumcision experts would become part of the health care system to be given the rights and obligations like other health workers.
Also read:
Requirements for NMP Registration Certificate Challenged
Petitioners Reveal Constitutional Losses Due to Certificate Requirement
Government and DPR Request Postponement of Health Worker Registration Hearing
Government Argues Professional Certification under the Health Law In Line with Dikti Law
Cannot Apply for STR, Nutrition Graduates Unable to Find Jobs
House and Expert Testimonies on the Healthcare Workers’ Competence Exam
Witnesses Explain Requirement to Obtain STR for Health Workers
Kurnia Nurfitrah as the Petitioners' legal counsel in Case No. 49/PUU-XXII/2024 said that the Petitioners suffered a loss because the amendment to Article 212 paragraph (2) of the Health Law prevented health worker undergraduate students from obtaining a Registration Certificate (STR) directly after graduating from the undergraduate program. In fact, during the education period of the undergraduate program, students have chosen a concentration in a study program that suits their interests and expertise with the aim of getting the appropriate job.
The Petitioners feel harmed by the sudden enactment of Article 212 paragraph (2) of the Health Law without transitional provisions. Therefore, in their petition, the Petitioners request the Court to exclude the provisions of Article 212 paragraph (2) of the Health Law for students who are registered as undergraduate health worker program students before the enactment of the article a quo (8 August 2023).
Testimony of Circumcision Expert
The Petitioner of case No. 50/PUU-XXII/2024, Iwan Hari Rusawan, argued that Article 212 paragraph (2) of the Health Law only accommodates professional education and higher education. This resulted in the Petitioner, who works as a circumciser, not having the opportunity to prove and register his ability in the competence examination, so he could not apply for an STR, so the Petitioner was not recognized as a health worker. As a result of not being able to have an STR, the Petitioner cannot apply for a license to practice, which is needed to carry out religion-based beliefs for a living, for example, opening a circumcision clinic.
In his petitum, Iwan asked the court that the provisions of Article 210 paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of the Health Law exclude medical personnel and health workers based on culture, local wisdom, and religion that have gained recognition from the Indonesian people since before the existence of universities in Indonesia.
Author: Utami Argawati.
Editor: N. Rosi.
PR: Fauzan F.
Translator: Rizky Kurnia Chaesario (NL)
Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.
Thursday, October 10, 2024 | 13:03 WIB 59