Kepastian Hukum Rekomendasi MKDKI pada Penyidikan Perkara Dugaan Tindak Pidana oleh Tenaga Medis

Heru Iskandar; Y.A. Triana Ohoiwutun; Al Khanif

doi:10.62383/progres.v1i3.624

Authors

Heru Iskandar Universitas Jember
Y.A. Triana Ohoiwutun Universitas Jember
Al Khanif Universitas Jember

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62383/progres.v1i3.624

Keywords:

Legal certainty, criminal acts, medical personnel

Abstract

The global COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the health sector, forcing countries to transform their health. In Indonesia, the response to this crisis was the issuance of a new health law, namely Law No. 17 of 2023. One of the updates is the provision that provides legal protection for medical personnel, namely in the process of criminal investigations against medical personnel, investigators must first request a recommendation from the authorized panel in disciplinary examinations, in this case, referring to the previous law, the Indonesian Medical Discipline Honorary Council (MKDKI). The recommendation determines whether the investigation can be continued or not based on the implementation of the professional practice of medical personnel, whether or not it is in accordance with professional standards, service standards, and standard operating procedures. The request for a recommendation from the panel must be received by the investigator no later than 14 days, and if it is more than that, the panel is considered to have approved the investigation of medical personnel. This is a polemic because for crucial decisions, namely assessing whether or not there is a violation of standards, only 14 days are given, while in reality the examination takes months. Finally, the research is presented to measure the legal certainty of the complaint examination procedure within the MKDKI, the legal certainty of the panel's recommendations regarding the continuation of the investigation process, and to reformulate provisions that are not yet fair in the process.

References

Abigail Prasetyo and Dyah Hapsari Prananingrum, “Disrupsi Layanan Kesehatan Berbasis Telemedicine: Hubungan Hukum Dan Tanggung Jawab Hukum Pasien Dan Dokter: Indonesia,” Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 6, no. 2 (2022): 225–46

Berliana Suzeta, Ismansyah Ismansyah, and Yasniwati Yasniwati, Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Notaris Dalam Proses Penyidikan Perkara Pidana Terkait Akta Otentik (Studi Kasus Putusan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Tanjungpinang Nomor 13/G/2018/PTUN-TPI). UNES Law Review 6, no. 1 (2023): 3077–91

Eki Furqon, “Kedudukan Lembaga Negara Independen Berfungsi Quasi Peradilan Dalam Sistem Ketatanegaraan Indonesia,” Nurani Hukum 3, no. 1 (2020): 77–85

handy Herlian Firmansyah and Achmad Miftah Farid, “Politik Hukum Praperadilan Sebagai Lembaga Perlindungan Hak Tersangka Ditinjau Dari Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 21/PUU-XII/2014 Mengenai Penetapan Tersangka,” Jurnal Penegakan Hukum Dan Keadilan 3, no. 2 (2022): 90–103

Johny Ibrahim,Teori dan Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif, (Malang: Bayu Publlishing, 2006),

Lalu M. Guntur Payasan WP, “The Discourse of Medical Malpractice Punishment In Criminology Perspective,” SOEPRA 6, no. 2 (2020): 293–306

PDSI KOMINFO, UU Kesehatan Disahkan, Menkes: Awal Baru Membangun Sistem Kesehatan, Website Resmi Kementerian Komunikasi dan Informatika RI, accessed October 25, 2023, http:///content/detail/50129/uu-kesehatan-disahkan-menkes-awal-baru-membangun-sistem-kesehatan/0/berita

Rio Ramadhan Hutasuhut and Aryo Fadlian, “Praperadilan Atas Penetapan Tersangka Diluar Ketentuan KUHAP,” Jurnal Ilmiah Living Law 13, no. 2 (2021): 91–99

Siti Nadia, Dokter dan Nakes Tak Bisa Serta Merta Dipidana Dalam UU Kesehatan, Sehat Negeriku (blog), August 21, 2023, https://sehatnegeriku.kemkes.go.id/baca/rilis-media/20230821/0643670/dokter-dan-nakes-tak-bisa-serta-merta-dipidana-dalam-uu-kesehatan/

Titik Handayani Pantjoro, “Pandemi Covid-19, Disrupsi Bonus Demografi Dan Ketahanan Nasional,” Jurnal Lemhannas RI 9, no. 2 (2021): 83–100