Member of Commission III of the House of Representatives, Sarifuddin Suding, delivering testimony during the resumed hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 65 of 2024 on Patent, Tuesday (27/01). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

Jakarta (MKRI) - Member of Commission III of the House of Representatives, Sarifuddin Suding, stated that if the discovery of a new use of a previously known pharmaceutical product for a different medical indication cannot be registered, it may create obstacles to the development of innovation in the local industry—particularly the domestic pharmaceutical sector, which generally still relies on known raw materials. This provision has implications for the limited scope of innovation available to national inventors or business actors seeking to develop new uses.

Suding conveyed this on behalf of the House of Representatives (DPR) during the evidentiary hearing on the judicial review of Article 4 and the phrase “interested party” in Article 70 paragraph (1) of Law No. 65 of 2024 on Patents (Patent Law), held on Tuesday, 27 January 2026, in the Plenary Courtroom.

The petition, registered as Case No. 255/PUU-XXIII/2025, was filed by a number of civil society organizations and patient communities, grouped under the Coalition for Patient Rights Advocacy for Access to Medicines. The petitioners comprise the Indonesian Dialysis Patient Community Association (as Petitioner I), the Indonesian Drug Abuse Victims Association (PKNI) (as Petitioner II), the Indonesian Pulmonary Hypertension Foundation (YHPI) (as Petitioner III), the Indonesian Care Foundation (as Petitioner IV), the Indonesian Positive Women's Association (IPPI) (as Petitioner V), the Indonesian Association for Global Justice (as Petitioner VI), Patrick Johanes Laurens Nangka (as Petitioner VII), Irwandy Widjaja (as Petitioner VIII), Lusiana Aprilawati (as Petitioner IX), and Paran Sarimita Winarni (as Petitioner X).

Sudding further stated that, in essence, a patent is a form of legal protection granted by the state to an inventor over his or her invention in the field of technology for a certain period of time, enabling the inventor to implement the invention independently or to grant another party permission to implement it.

“Patent protection is not solely intended to safeguard the individual interests of inventors but also serves broader social and economic functions, namely encouraging innovation, technological development, and the improvement of public welfare,” Suding said.

He added that patent regulation is a legal policy that must be aligned with each country's level of industrial development, research capacity, and public health needs. “Patent rights are granted to the person or entity that first files a patent application,” he noted.

With the application of this principle, and as long as Article 4 letter f of the Patent Law remains in force, any person who discovers a new use of a previously known pharmaceutical product or a different medical indication cannot register such discovery as a patentable invention.

Also read:

Coalition for Patient Rights Advocacy for Access to Medicines Challenges Patent Law

Petitioners Revise Petition to Challenge Patent Law Concerning Access to Medicines

During the preliminary hearing on Wednesday, December 17, 2025, the Petitioners argued that the removal of Article 4 letter f of Law No. 13 of 2016 on Patents through the Patent Law had eliminated legal protection for the public. The deleted provision previously excluded new uses of existing products and new forms of old compounds that did not provide a meaningful improvement in the properties of patentable objects.

According to the Petitioners, this change contradicts Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, which guarantees fair legal certainty, and Article 28H paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, which guarantees the right to health. They further argued that Article 4, letter f, of the Patent Law protects the public and provides legal certainty by preventing low-quality patent applications that are intended solely to secure monopolies for a handful of large corporations. Low-quality patent applications certainly have the potential to violate the constitutional rights of the public, including the Petitioners, to guaranteed protection and legal certainty regarding the requirements for inventions that can be patented, particularly in the field of pharmaceuticals/medicines. (*)

Author: Utami Argawati
Editor: Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR: Raisa Ayuditha Marsaulina

Translator: Rizky Kurnia Chaesario

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.

---