Coordinating Minister Yusril: Constitutional Court Decision Guides Medical Profession Reform
Indonesia’s Coordinating Minister for Law, Human Rights, Immigration, and Corrections Yusril Ihza Mahendra has stated that two Constitutional Court decisions regarding the Health Law must serve as a directive for constitutional corrections in the governance of the medical profession in Indonesia.
He explained that the two Constitutional Court decisions—Number 111/PUU-XXII/2024 and Number 182/PUU-XXII/2024—provide important direction for the future of medical education and the management of the medical profession. The statement was made by Yusril at a National Consultation forum organised by the Professional Discipline Assembly Watch.
“Constitutional Court decisions are not merely judicial decisions that resolve normative disputes. They constitute constitutional interpretation that is binding and becomes a guideline for state policymakers,” Yusril stated in an official statement on Friday, 13 March 2026.
Constitutional Court Decision Number 111/PUU-XXII/2024 essentially affirms the independence of the collegium within the organisational structure of the medical and health professions. Constitutional Court Decision Number 182/PUU-XXII/2024 strengthens the collegium’s independent position whilst emphasising the role of professional organisations in Indonesia’s healthcare ecosystem.
According to him, the decisions do not merely resolve normative disputes but also provide guidance for policymakers to maintain a balance between the state’s role and professional independence.
Yusril noted that the dynamics of healthcare professional regulation have demonstrated a tug-of-war between professional organisations and government regarding authority. In the previous period, professional organisations held a dominant role in determining educational standards, competence requirements, and professional discipline mechanisms.
Through Law Number 17 of 2023 concerning Health, the government has sought to strengthen the state’s role in regulating the healthcare system. However, Yusril believes the Constitutional Court recognised that this correction effort could potentially create a new imbalance if state authority becomes too dominant.
“The Court essentially wanted to affirm that correcting the dominance of professional organisations must not be replaced by state dominance. What is needed is a new balance in institutional governance,” he said.
In its decision, the Constitutional Court also emphasised three important aspects in the medical profession system: the collegium’s status as a scientific body safeguarding competence standards, ethics and discipline mechanisms based on professional community peer review, and regulations that do not open space for administrative intervention in the independence of scientific knowledge.