The ruling hearing on the judicial review of Law No. 17 of 2023 on Health for case No. 161/PUU-XXIII/2025, Thursday (10/16/2025). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) decided to dismiss the material judicial review of Law No. 17 of 2023 on Health at a ruling hearing on Thursday, October 16, 2025 in the plenary courtroom. The petition was filed by Eliadi Hulu and Alehandro Rafael Antonio H.

In the Court’s legal considerations, read out by Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra, it stated that the Petitioners had complied with the panel’s advice for improvement by strengthening their claim of constitutional rights impairment in their capacity as prospective patients. In this regard, a second Petitioner was added—an individual Indonesian citizen who is also a university student.

“However, there was no change in the description of the alleged impairment of the Petitioners’ constitutional rights that explains their future position as patients, which still rationally requires further speculation to assess whether or not the Petitioners’ constitutional rights have actually been impaired,” explained the deputy chief justice.

Therefore, based on these facts, the Court was not convinced that there was a causal relationship between the alleged specific impairment of the Petitioners’ constitutional rights and the enforcement of the norm being challenged, within reasonable limit of reasoning. Consequently, it cannot be ascertained that such impairment would directly occur upon the enforcement of the contested provision.

“[Verdict: The Court has] adjudicated [to] declare the Petitioners’ petition inadmissible,” said Chief Justice Suhartoyo delivering the verdict a quo.

Also read:

Medical Council’s Recommendation in Civil Lawsuit Called into Question

Petitioner Makes Proposal for Disciplinary Council’s Recommendations in Civil Lawsuits

At the preliminary hearing on Thursday, September 18, through counsel Agustine Pentrantoni Penau, the Petitioner contended that these provisions conflict with Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. As a patient who receives care from medical personnel and/or health personnel, the Petitioner may be exposed to actions that deviate from procedure and/or to malpractice that could cause losses for which civil liability may be sought.

If the Petitioner pursued his rights in civil court by suing the relevant medical personnel and/or health personnel, that suit cannot be immediately examined and adjudicated by a judge. The court must first await a recommendation from the Professional Disciplinary Council (MDP) as stipulated in Article 308 paragraphs (2) and (4) of Law No. 13 of 2023.

If the Petitioner intended to file a civil claim against medical and/or health personnel, the MDP recommendation becomes a mandatory in pursuing his civil legal rights. Yet such a recommendation would only be obtained if the defendant medical/health personnel themselves took the initiative to request it from the MDP by submitting a written application in response to the suit brought by the patient, the patient’s family, or an authorized representative.

The norms in Article 308 paragraphs (2), (4), (6) and (7) of Law No. 13 of 2023, the Petitioner argued, deny procedural justice to patients—including the Petitioner—because the continuation of a civil action depends entirely on the willingness of the medical/health personnel defendant to apply for the MDP recommendation. 

On that basis, the Petitioner asked the Court to declare that Article 308 paragraphs (2), (4) and (6) of Law No. 17 of 2023 on Health (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia 2023 No. 105, Supplement No. 6887) is inconsistent with the 1945 Constitution and therefore have no binding legal force. Alternatively, the he requested that Article 308 paragraph (4) of Law No. 17 of 2023 be declared unconstitutional insofar as it is not read to mean: “The recommendation of the council as referred to in paragraph (2) shall be issued after the court has submitted a written request regarding the suit filed by the Patient, the Patient’s family, or a person authorized by the Patient or the Patient’s family.”

The Petitioner also asked the Court to declare Article 308 paragraph (7) of Law No. 17 of 2023 unconstitutional insofar as it is not interpreted to read: “The recommendation referred to in paragraph (5) shall be issued no later than 14 (fourteen) workdays from the date the request is received.”

Author       : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : N. Rosi
PR            : Fauzan Febriyan
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (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.

---