<![CDATA[Introduction. Access to health services is a constitutional right, yet geographic and demographic barriers, distance to referral hospitals, traffic congestion, and a large chronic-disease population, continue to constrain access in Bali. Government hospitals have responded with home medicine delivery services, but this innovation raises an unresolved question in Administrative Law regarding the validity of hospital authority to organize service outside the health facility. Method. This study uses normative legal research, combining statute, conceptual, and limited case approaches. Primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials were analyzed descriptively-qualitatively and prescriptively to evaluate the legal basis for medicine delivery and its implications for patient safety. Result & Analysis. Regional Public Service Agency (BLUD) hospitals hold broader flexibility for third-party cooperation than Non-BLUD hospitals, yet neither possesses explicit attributive authority to delegate medicine handover to non-medical couriers. This delegation shifts a professional pharmaceutical act into a mere factual act, bypassing mandatory Drug Information Services and compounding risks to medication quality, patient data confidentiality, and institutional accountability. Two 2026 Ministerial Regulations reorganizing hospital and health-supply governance leave this authority gap unresolved. Discussion. These findings indicate that legal certainty and patient safety in third-party medicine delivery cannot rest on institutional flexibility alone. A dedicated Ministerial Regulation of Health or Governor Regulation of Bali is needed to establish operational standards, ensuring hospital authority and patient safety advance together as this service model expands.]]>
