Procedural Uncertainty in Professional Disciplinary Council Recommendations for Patient Civil Claims under Indonesia’s Health Law

Abstract

Law No. 17 of 2023 on Health introduced a mandatory recommendation mechanism of the Professional Disciplinary Council (Majelis Disiplin Profesi, MDP) for civil accountability arising from medical and health services. Article 308(2) requires the recommendation, while Article 308(4) assigns the initiative to request it to the medical or health professional being sued, or that person’s authorized representative. This article examines whether that design provides sufficient procedural certainty and balanced access to adjudication for patients. Using doctrinal legal research, the study analyzes Law No. 17 of 2023, Government Regulation No. 28 of 2024, Minister of Health Regulation No. 3 of 2025, relevant Constitutional Court decisions, selected civil litigation records, and scholarly literature on legal certainty, access to justice, medical dispute resolution, and professional discipline. The analysis shows that the recommendation mechanism has a legitimate protective and epistemic function: it supplies professional assessment of compliance with professional, service, and operational standards. The Constitutional Court has also upheld the constitutionality of Article 308. Nevertheless, an operational asymmetry remains. Patients may file civil claims, but they cannot directly trigger the statutory recommendation; the regulations do not expressly prescribe a civil-law consequence when the defendant does not apply for it; and the deemed-recommendation rule for institutional silence is expressly linked to criminal investigation. This design can generate inconsistent procedural interpretations. The article therefore proposes a clarification model that preserves professional review while preventing the recommendation from functioning as a procedural veto. The contribution of this study is to distinguish constitutional validity from procedural completeness and to identify targeted reforms capable of protecting both healthcare professionals and patients without displacing the authority of civil courts.