cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Ria Wulansarie
Contact Email
publications@perhaki.org
Phone
-
Journal Mail Official
publications@perhaki.org
Editorial Address
COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA People’s Empowerment, Rights, Human Advocacy, and Legal Knowledge Initiative (PERHAKI) Division Editorial Office: Karanganyar 003/001, Pekutan, Mirit, Kab. Kebumen, Jawa Tengah
Location
Kab. kebumen,
Jawa tengah
INDONESIA
Indonesian Health Justice Review
Published by COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA
ISSN : -     EISSN : 31646840     DOI : https://doi.org/10.65815
Core Subject :
Indonesian Health Justice Review (e-ISSN: 3164-6840) is published by COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA, issued four times a year in March, June, September, and December, and was first published in 2024. It is a double anonymous peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary academic journal focusing on the relationship between law, health policy, and social justice in Indonesia. The journal publishes scholarly works examining health law, healthcare regulation, public health policy, health equity, access to healthcare, the right to health, medical ethics, and human rights. It welcomes studies addressing health disparities and the legal and policy challenges affecting vulnerable and marginalized populations, including low-income communities, indigenous communities, persons with disabilities, women, and rural populations. The journal encourages interdisciplinary research connecting health and law with public health, sociology, political science, economics, human rights, and related fields. It publishes original research articles, review articles, case studies, and other scholarly works relevant to its scope. The journal applies an Open Access Policy, providing free and immediate access to published articles. Copyright is retained by the authors, and articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.
Arjuna Subject : -
Articles 50 Documents
 1   2   3   4   5 
Who Is Liable When AI Misdiagnoses? Reconstructing the Legal Accountability of Physicians and AI Developers in Indonesian Healthcare Abdul Rosyid; Fikri Nur Alamsyah
Indonesian Health Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): March, 2026
Publisher : COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.65815/qcrc7058

Abstract

The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in clinical decision-making presents significant challenges for healthcare liability law. AI-assisted diagnosis may improve efficiency and diagnostic accuracy, but errors generated by algorithmic systems raise a fundamental legal question: who should be held accountable when an AI-supported diagnosis causes patient harm? This article examines the allocation of legal responsibility between physicians, healthcare institutions, and AI developers when AI contributes to diagnostic errors in Indonesia. Using a normative juridical approach, the study analyzes Indonesian health law, medical liability principles, patient protection frameworks, and emerging approaches to AI governance. The analysis demonstrates that Indonesia's existing legal framework remains predominantly human-centered and does not clearly regulate liability arising from autonomous or semi-autonomous clinical technologies. Physicians may remain responsible for clinical decisions, yet imposing liability exclusively on physicians may be problematic where errors originate from defective algorithms, inadequate training data, or undisclosed system limitations. This article proposes a distributed liability framework based on the degree of human control, foreseeability of harm, system transparency, and the respective duties of physicians, healthcare providers, and AI developers. Such a framework is necessary to ensure patient protection without discouraging responsible technological innovation in healthcare.
Electronic Medical Record Breaches and Hospital Liability: Protecting Patients' Privacy under Indonesian Health and Data Protection Law Siska Ayudevi
Indonesian Health Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): March, 2026
Publisher : COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.65815/hvzwtk22

Abstract

The digitalization of healthcare has transformed the management and exchange of patient information through electronic medical records (EMRs). While EMRs enhance continuity and efficiency of care, they also expose highly sensitive health information to cybersecurity threats and unauthorized disclosure. This article examines the legal responsibility of hospitals when electronic medical records are leaked, accessed without authorization, or otherwise compromised. The study employs normative legal research by examining Indonesian health legislation, personal data protection regulations, and principles governing the confidentiality of medical information. Particular attention is given to the relationship between hospitals' obligations as healthcare providers and their responsibilities as entities processing sensitive personal data. The analysis finds that the existing regulatory framework establishes multiple obligations concerning confidentiality, data security, and patient rights, but the distribution of responsibility between hospitals, healthcare professionals, technology providers, and other data processors remains insufficiently articulated. This fragmented framework may create uncertainty regarding remedies and accountability following a data breach. The article argues that hospital liability should be assessed through a risk-based framework emphasizing preventive security measures, organizational control, breach notification, and effective remedies for affected patients. Strengthening institutional accountability is essential to ensure that digital healthcare development remains consistent with the fundamental right to privacy and the broader principle of health justice.
Patients or Data? Protecting Patient Rights in the Use of Electronic Medical Records for Artificial Intelligence Training Ahmad Zulfikar Nuryanto
Indonesian Health Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): March, 2026
Publisher : COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.65815/0bxad926

Abstract

The development of artificial intelligence in healthcare increasingly depends on access to large volumes of clinical data, including electronic medical records. Although such data can support medical research and technological innovation, their secondary use for AI training raises fundamental questions concerning patient autonomy, privacy, consent, and control over health information. This article examines whether and under what circumstances electronic medical records may lawfully be used to train AI systems in Indonesia. Employing a normative juridical methodology, the study analyzes the legal status of health data, patient consent requirements, confidentiality obligations, and the principles governing secondary use of personal data. The study identifies a regulatory tension between the collective interest in advancing healthcare innovation and the individual patient's right to control sensitive health information. De-identification may reduce privacy risks but does not necessarily eliminate all legal and ethical concerns associated with data reuse. The article argues that the legitimacy of AI training using medical records should not depend solely on anonymization but should incorporate purpose limitation, proportionality, transparency, data governance, and appropriate forms of patient participation. A rights-based framework is therefore proposed to reconcile technological innovation with patient autonomy and health justice in Indonesia.
Informed Consent for AI-Assisted Diagnosis: Do Patients Have the Right to Refuse Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Decision-Making? Satrio Agung Bagaskara
Indonesian Health Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): March, 2026
Publisher : COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.65815/38p7x443

Abstract

Artificial intelligence is increasingly incorporated into diagnostic and clinical decision-making processes, creating new challenges for the traditional doctrine of informed consent. Conventional informed consent generally focuses on the proposed medical intervention, its risks, benefits, and alternatives. However, the use of AI introduces an additional dimension: whether patients should be informed that AI is involved in their diagnosis and whether they should have the right to refuse such involvement. This article examines the legal foundations of informed consent in AI-assisted healthcare in Indonesia and evaluates whether existing patient rights adequately address algorithmic decision-making. Using normative legal research, the study analyzes health law, medical ethics, patient autonomy, and emerging principles of responsible AI governance. The analysis indicates that meaningful informed consent requires more than disclosure of medical risks; it should also encompass material information regarding the use and limitations of AI where such information may affect a patient's decision to undergo treatment. The article proposes a contextual disclosure standard based on the significance of AI in clinical decision-making, the potential consequences of algorithmic error, and the availability of reasonable alternatives. Recognizing patient autonomy in AI-assisted healthcare would strengthen transparency, accountability, and trust while promoting a more patient-centered model of digital health governance.
Malpractice or System Failure? Reconstructing Medical Liability for AI-Assisted Diagnostic Errors in Indonesia Putri Fahima
Indonesian Health Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): March, 2026
Publisher : COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.65815/r46feh64

Abstract

AI-assisted diagnostic technologies challenge conventional concepts of medical malpractice because patient harm may result from interactions between human judgment and algorithmic systems. When a physician relies on an incorrect AI-generated recommendation, determining whether the resulting harm constitutes medical negligence, technological failure, or both becomes legally complex. This article investigates the appropriate legal characterization and allocation of liability for AI-assisted diagnostic errors in Indonesia. Through normative legal analysis, the study examines the standards of professional medical care, negligence, institutional responsibility, product-related liability, and emerging principles of AI accountability. The research finds that applying conventional malpractice doctrines exclusively to physicians may inadequately address errors caused by defective algorithms, biased training datasets, inadequate validation, or insufficient warnings from technology providers. Conversely, imposing strict liability on developers for every clinical error may undermine innovation and fail to recognize the physician's independent professional judgment. The article proposes a layered accountability model distinguishing clinical negligence, technological defects, inadequate system governance, and shared causation. Liability should correspond to each actor's ability to prevent, identify, and mitigate the relevant risk. This approach would provide more equitable remedies for patients while establishing clearer responsibilities for physicians, hospitals, and AI developers in Indonesia's emerging digital healthcare ecosystem.
Legal Accountability of Telemedicine Platforms for Medication Errors in Online Healthcare Services Ajeng Kumala Sari
Indonesian Health Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): June, 2026
Publisher : COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.65815/qg62zj22

Abstract

The rapid expansion of telemedicine has changed the way patients obtain medical consultations and prescriptions. However, medication errors occurring through online healthcare services may involve multiple actors, including physicians, pharmacies, technology platforms, and third-party service providers. This fragmented structure creates uncertainty regarding legal accountability when patients suffer harm from incorrect medication information or prescription-related errors. This article examines the legal responsibility of telemedicine platforms for medication errors arising within digital healthcare services in Indonesia. Using a normative juridical approach, the study analyzes healthcare regulation, professional medical responsibility, consumer protection principles, and platform governance. The analysis demonstrates that existing liability frameworks tend to focus primarily on healthcare professionals while providing less clarity concerning the responsibilities of digital platforms that facilitate, structure, or influence the delivery of healthcare services. The article argues that a platform's responsibility should depend on its functional role rather than merely its formal classification as a technology intermediary. Platforms exercising substantial control over clinical workflows, prescription processes, medication information, or patient communication should bear corresponding duties of safety, transparency, and risk management. A functional accountability model is proposed to strengthen patient protection while maintaining appropriate distinctions between professional medical liability and digital platform responsibility.
Unauthorized Recording of Online Medical Consultations: A Patient's Right to Privacy in Telemedicine Muhammad Agung
Indonesian Health Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): June, 2026
Publisher : COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.65815/t7bk0w82

Abstract

Telemedicine consultations frequently involve the transmission and storage of highly sensitive medical information through digital communication systems. The ability to record consultations creates significant risks when recordings are made, stored, or shared without the patient's knowledge or consent. This article examines the legal protection available to patients against unauthorized recording and secondary use of online medical consultations in Indonesia. The research employs a normative juridical method by analyzing patient confidentiality, privacy rights, personal data protection, informed consent, and healthcare provider obligations. The study finds that the legal characterization of consultation recordings may involve overlapping categories of medical information, personal data, and confidential communications, resulting in a complex regulatory environment. Existing rules may provide general protection but do not sufficiently establish specific standards governing the recording, retention, access, and secondary use of telemedicine consultations. This article proposes a consent-centered governance model requiring explicit disclosure of recording practices, defined purposes, limited retention periods, restricted access, and effective mechanisms for patients to exercise control over their information. Such measures are necessary to prevent digital healthcare from weakening established standards of medical confidentiality. Protecting privacy in telemedicine should be regarded not merely as a data protection issue but as an essential component of patient autonomy and health justice.
Electronic Medical Records as Evidence in Medical Malpractice Litigation: Challenges to Patient Access and Evidentiary Equality Retno Widyowati
Indonesian Health Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): June, 2026
Publisher : COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.65815/ytan8642

Abstract

Electronic medical records have become essential sources of evidence in disputes concerning the quality and legality of medical treatment. In medical malpractice litigation, however, patients may face significant difficulties obtaining, interpreting, and presenting electronic medical records that are primarily controlled by healthcare institutions. This article examines the evidentiary position of electronic medical records in Indonesian medical malpractice disputes, with particular emphasis on patient access and equality of arms between patients and healthcare providers. Using normative legal research, the study analyzes evidentiary principles, medical record regulations, patient rights, and procedural aspects of medical dispute resolution. The analysis indicates that electronic records possess substantial evidentiary value because they document clinical decisions, treatment chronology, prescriptions, and professional interactions. Nevertheless, unequal access to records, uncertainty regarding their authenticity and integrity, and patients' limited technical understanding may create structural disadvantages. The article argues that evidentiary fairness requires stronger mechanisms for patient access, preservation, authentication, and disclosure of electronic medical records. It proposes procedural safeguards that would enable patients to obtain relevant records without compromising legitimate confidentiality interests. Strengthening the evidentiary status and accessibility of electronic medical records would contribute to more balanced medical dispute resolution and enhance accountability within Indonesia's healthcare system.
Medical Treatment Without Consent: Hospital Liability for Non-Emergency Interventions in Indonesia Sigar Situmorang
Indonesian Health Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): June, 2026
Publisher : COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.65815/bf8z9f21

Abstract

Patient autonomy constitutes a fundamental principle of modern healthcare law, requiring medical interventions to be preceded by adequate information and voluntary consent. Nevertheless, disputes may arise when healthcare providers perform medical procedures without obtaining valid consent, particularly in circumstances that do not qualify as genuine medical emergencies. This article examines hospital liability for non-emergency medical interventions conducted without informed consent in Indonesia. The study applies a normative juridical method, analyzing the legal foundations of patient autonomy, informed consent, professional medical duties, and institutional responsibility. The analysis distinguishes between emergency circumstances in which immediate intervention may be legally justified and non-emergency situations in which treatment without consent may constitute a violation of patient rights. The article argues that hospitals should not avoid institutional responsibility merely by attributing the conduct to individual physicians, particularly where inadequate consent procedures, supervision, or institutional policies contributed to the violation. A dual accountability framework is proposed, distinguishing individual professional responsibility from institutional failures in informed-consent governance. The framework emphasizes documentation, disclosure, patient capacity, alternative treatments, and institutional oversight. Strengthening these safeguards would enhance respect for patient autonomy and establish clearer legal remedies for violations occurring within Indonesian healthcare institutions.
The Right to Second Medical Opinion in Indonesia: Reconstructing Patient Autonomy in Hospital Decision-Making Lia Helga Sasmito
Indonesian Health Justice Review Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): June, 2026
Publisher : COLLEGIUM JUSTICIA INDONESIA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.65815/1nnra474

Abstract

The ability to seek a second medical opinion is an important mechanism for patients to participate meaningfully in decisions concerning diagnosis and treatment. Despite its relevance to patient autonomy, the practical exercise of this right may be constrained by institutional practices, physician attitudes, costs, and difficulties accessing medical records. This article examines the legal status of the patient's right to obtain a second medical opinion in Indonesia and evaluates the responsibilities of hospitals in facilitating its exercise. Using normative legal research, the study analyzes patient autonomy, informed consent, professional duties, medical records, and healthcare institutional obligations. The analysis reveals that the right to a second opinion should be understood not merely as an administrative option but as an integral component of meaningful patient autonomy. Hospitals should therefore facilitate access to relevant medical information and should not impose unnecessary barriers that discourage patients from seeking alternative professional assessments. The article proposes a patient-centered framework requiring accessible medical records, transparent referral procedures, non-retaliation guarantees, and clear information regarding potential costs and treatment alternatives. Recognizing and operationalizing the right to a second opinion can reduce information asymmetry between healthcare professionals and patients while strengthening informed decision-making, accountability, and fairness in Indonesian healthcare.

Page 5 of 5 | Total Record : 50

 1   2   3   4   5 

Filter by Year

2024 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): June, 2026 Vol. 3 No. 1 (2026): March, 2026 Vol. 2 No. 4 (2025): December, 2025 Vol. 2 No. 3 (2025): September, 2025 Vol. 2 No. 2 (2025): June, 2025 Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): March, 2025 Vol. 1 No. 4 (2024): December, 2024 Vol. 1 No. 3 (2024): September, 2024 Vol. 1 No. 2 (2024): June, 2024 Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): March, 2024