<![CDATA[Health development is an integral component of the state's mandate to realize public welfare and guarantee human rights, encompassing equitable access to high-quality healthcare services for all societal levels. However, its implementation frequently engenders disputes between medical practitioners and patients, often stemming from communicative misunderstandings or allegations of medical malpractice. While such medical disputes can be resolved through either litigation or non-litigation channels, the litigation process tends to precipitate structural issues, including evidentiary complexities, the public nature of court proceedings, and the irreversible rupture of the therapeutic relationship. Consequently, non-litigation dispute resolution via arbitration is deemed more efficient and humane, as it ensures confidentiality, accommodates arbitrators with specific medical expertise, and promotes restorative justice. Grounded in this context, the present study addresses two primary legal issues: (1) What are the procedural stages of medical dispute resolution through arbitration within the Indonesian positive legal system? and (2) What is the legal standing of arbitration as a medical dispute resolution mechanism under Indonesian positive law? This study aims to elucidate the procedural framework of medical arbitration and to analyze its legal position and relevance within the Indonesian legal architecture. Utilizing a normative juridical method with statutory and conceptual approaches, this research draws upon primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The analysis is conducted through a comprehensive literature study to resolve the identified legal issues and formulate conclusions based on relevant doctrines and regulations.]]>
