Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Analysis of the political law of centralization of state authority in law number 17 of 2023 on health: A normative legal study Wibawa, Ida Bagus Gede Adiguna; Ropii, Imam
Journal of Law Science Vol. 8 No. 1 (2026): January: Law Science
Publisher : Institute Of computer Science (IOCS)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35335/jls.v8i1.6995

Abstract

This article examines the political law underlying the centralization of state authority in Law Number 17 of 2023 on Health. The enactment of this law marks a significant shift in Indonesia’s health legal framework, particularly through the strengthening of the central government’s role in regulating, supervising, and controlling the national health system. The objective of this article is to analyze the legal policy orientation behind this centralization and to assess its implications for health governance, professional autonomy, and adherence to rule-of-law principles. This study employs a normative legal research method using statutory, conceptual, and historical approaches. Primary legal materials consist of Law Number 17 of 2023 and related regulations, while secondary materials include scholarly books and journal articles on political law and health law. The findings indicate that centralization in the Health Law reflects the state’s policy to improve regulatory effectiveness, policy coherence, and equitable health service delivery. However, this legal policy also raises normative and operational challenges, particularly regarding the distribution of power, the independence of health professionals, and institutional accountability. Operational accountability indicators identified include transparency requirements, objection mechanisms, policy audits, and judicial oversight, which are essential to ensure that centralization does not compromise the rule of law or professional autonomy. Finally, the study identifies priority research agendas to strengthen understanding of centralized health governance, such as analyzing conflicts between regulatory norms, reviewing Constitutional Court or Supreme Court decisions on health authority, and conducting comparative studies with other countries. The article concludes that while Law Number 17 of 2023 strengthens national health governance, balanced and conditional centralization supported by legal safeguards is necessary to achieve both effectiveness and normative compliance.
Resolving medical malpractice disputes through customary institutions: Between statutory law and local wisdom Afsari, Novi; Sari, Avy Permata; Adhimutiahara, Fatmasari Diahpermata Djajaputri; Wibawa, Ida Bagus Gede Adiguna; Kuntardjo, Carolina
Science Midwifery Vol 14 No 1 (2026): April: Health Sciences and related fields
Publisher : Institute of Computer Science (IOCS)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35335/midwifery.v14i1.2340

Abstract

The transformation of medical dispute resolution in Indonesia reveals a critical paradox: while Law No. 17 of 2023 on Health mandates non-litigation mechanisms, the existing framework remains entrapped within a state-centric legal paradigm that systematically marginalizes customary institutions which have long served as accessible, socially legitimate, and restoratively-oriented dispute forums across diverse Indonesian communities. A fundamental research gap persists in the prevailing legal monism approach, which creates a normative vacuum by failing to recognize customary institutions operationally within health law, thereby forcing communities to choose between legally certain but inaccessible formal mechanisms and socially accepted but legally uncertain customary processes — a justice gap that disproportionately burdens economically vulnerable populations. This study employs a normative-prescriptive legal methodology integrating legislative, conceptual, and comparative approaches to reconstruct the positional framework of customary institutions within medical dispute resolution. The findings reveal that customary institutions hold strong constitutional legitimacy under Article 18B(2) of the 1945 Constitution yet operate within a normative vacuum in the medical domain, and introduce a Two-Tier Integrative Model positioning customary institutions as relational mediation forums at the first tier and MKDKI as technical verifier at the second tier, connected through a court homologation mechanism. This study provides a strategic normative blueprint recommending explicit revision of Law No. 17 of 2023 to accommodate customary institutions within the national medical dispute resolution system.