Constitutional Court Rules Chronic Illness Now Classified as Disability
The Constitutional Court (MK) has made a significant legal breakthrough by partially granting a judicial review petition for Law No. 8 of 2016 on Persons with Disabilities. In its ruling, the MK has declared that sufferers of chronic illnesses can now be categorised as persons with disabilities, provided they undergo medical assessment and voluntarily choose to claim this status.
The court’s decision was delivered during a plenary session at the Constitutional Court Building on Monday, 2 March, in response to a petition filed by two individuals with chronic illnesses, Raissa Fatikha and Deanda Dewindaru. Both argued that their constitutional rights had been violated due to the absence of explicit recognition of chronic illnesses as a form of disability in the legislation.
Constitutional Court Chief Justice Suhartoyo announced the decision, stating “We grant the petitioners’ request in part” when delivering Decision No. 130/PUU-XXIII/2025.
In its ruling, the MK declared that the explanation of Article 4, paragraph (1), letter (a) of the Disability Law conflicts with the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and lacks binding legal force, provided that persons with physical disabilities are understood to include “persons or sufferers of other chronic illnesses following assessment by medical personnel, which constitutes a voluntary choice of the person with or sufferer of chronic illness.”
Justice Enny Urbaningsih clarified that determining whether someone is a person with disability must still proceed through assessment by medical personnel or other professionals with appropriate competence.
In its legal reasoning, the MK emphasised that law does not restrict disability to conditions visibly manifesting as movement disorders. Various health conditions that objectively cause long-term limitations to bodily function can also be recognised as disabilities.
The Court noted that in practice, many illnesses initially regarded as ordinary health disorders can develop into conditions affecting a person’s ability to work, move, conduct independent activities, and participate in social life.
“Therefore, a just legal approach cannot exclude the possibility that such conditions at certain points can satisfy the criterion of limitation in physical movement function,” the Court reasoned.
The MK also stressed that the mechanism of medical assessment represents an important instrument for maintaining balance between protection of rights and legal certainty. Such assessment is intended to ensure that recognition of disability status is based on objective professional evaluation, rather than subjective claims alone.
Furthermore, the assessment mechanism is not intended to restrict access to legal protection, but rather to evaluate the level of bodily function limitation, support needs, and the impact of the condition on daily activities.
The Court affirmed that recognition of chronic illness as disability aims to guarantee substantive equality, so that individuals with certain obstacles obtain adequate access to participate fully and effectively in society.
However, such disability status must not be imposed on every individual meeting medical criteria.
“This status must be positioned as a right that can be claimed, not as a status that must be accepted,” the Court stressed.
With this ruling, individuals with chronic illnesses experiencing long-term functional limitations can obtain legal protection as persons with disabilities, provided they have undergone professional assessment and consciously chosen to claim this status.
The state, according to the MK, must provide objective assessment mechanisms and guarantee access to rights and protection from discrimination.