Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search
Journal : International Journal of Health, Economics, and Social Sciences (IJHESS)

Advocate Immunity Rights in Providing Legal Services to Clients Yohanes Pande; Zakiyatun Nufus; Patawari Patawari; Rica Gusmarani; Muchamad Taufiq
International Journal of Health, Economics, and Social Sciences (IJHESS) Vol. 6 No. 3: July 2024
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Palu

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56338/ijhess.v6i3.5761

Abstract

An advocate is a person whose profession is to provide legal services, both inside and outside the court, who fulfill the requirements under the Advocate law. Advocates are law enforcers, free and independent, guaranteed by laws and regulations." In this way, it has been clearly stated that the position of advocates is equal to that of police, prosecutors and judges as law enforcers. In providing legal aid services to their clients, advocates have the right to immunity and cannot be sued either civilly or criminally, as regulated in Article 16 of Law Number 18 of 2003 concerning Advocates and strengthened by the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) which states that the right to immunity This applies both inside and outside the court. An advocate's immunity is always limited by good faith, which is defined in the Elucidation to Article 16 of the Advocate Law, namely that what is meant by good faith is carrying out professional duties for the sake of upholding justice based on the law to defend the interests of clients.
Legal and Ethical Aspects of Informed Consent in BPJS Health Emergency Services Anna Veronica Pont; Ta'adi; Muchamad Taufiq; Ady Purwoto; Mawardi
International Journal of Health, Economics, and Social Sciences (IJHESS) Vol. 7 No. 1: January 2025
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Palu

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56338/ijhess.v7i1.6818

Abstract

Informed consent is a crucial element in the healthcare system as it ensures that patients provide consent based on a sufficient understanding of the medical procedures to be performed. In the context of emergency services, where patients often present with critical conditions requiring immediate action, the implementation of informed consent becomes more complex. BPJS Kesehatan, as the provider of healthcare services for the public, holds the responsibility to ensure that medical treatments within their network respect patient rights, both legally and ethically. This article aims to explore in-depth the legal and ethical aspects of implementing informed consent in emergency healthcare services under the BPJS Kesehatan program.
Legal Implications of Minimum Education Requirements for DPR Candidates in the Perspective of the 1945 Constitution and Constitutional Court Decisions Budi Handayani; Muchamad Taufiq; Yusuf; Fatma Faisal; Mohammad Solekhan
International Journal of Health, Economics, and Social Sciences (IJHESS) Vol. 7 No. 4: October-2025
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Palu

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56338/ijhess.v7i4.8941

Abstract

The establishment of a minimum education requirement for candidates of the House of Representatives (DPR) has become a complex legal issue, sparking debates between the principles of meritocracy and the fulfillment of citizens’ constitutional rights. On one hand, educational qualifications are considered essential to ensure the intellectual capacity, rationality, and legislative competence of parliamentary members in performing their lawmaking and supervisory functions. On the other hand, such provisions may lead to discrimination against citizens who lack access to adequate formal education, thereby restricting their constitutional right to be elected as guaranteed under the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. This article aims to thoroughly examine the legal implications of establishing a minimum education requirement for DPR candidates from the perspective of the 1945 Constitution and the Constitutional Court’s jurisprudence. Using a normative juridical approach, this study analyzes the compatibility of educational restrictions with the principles of equality before the law, political rights, and constitutional democracy. The findings reveal that educational qualifications should not be perceived as discriminatory limitations but rather as instruments to ensure competence and integrity within the legislative body as part of a democratic rule-of-law system. Nevertheless, such restrictions must be formulated proportionally, clearly, and in accordance with constitutional objectives so as not to violate the principle of equality before the law or the fundamental right of citizens to participate in governance. Therefore, any regulation regarding educational requirements for DPR candidates must strike a balance between the need for legislative professionalism and the protection of citizens’ constitutional rights.