KPK Recommends Six Points for Specialist Doctor Governance
Jakarta (ANTARA) - The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) recommends six points for the governance of specialist doctors in Indonesia, as stated in the Appendix to the 2025 Annual Report of the KPK’s Monitoring Directorate in Jakarta on Friday.
First, the KPK recommends strict enforcement of practice licence (SIP) regulations and the integration of a national SIP information system for direct verification of doctors’ practices, as well as strengthening the hospital information system to dynamically monitor doctors’ practice schedules and ensure targeted payment of medical services.
The second recommendation is to instruct the managers of the Satu Sehat Human Resources for Health (SDMK) system to add automatic validation features to ensure the uniqueness of registration certificates (STR), limit the number of active SIPs, and connect the system to the database of the Investment and Integrated One-Stop Service Agency (DPMPTSP) and the Indonesian Medical Council (KKI).
Third, strengthening the governance of the specialist doctor education programme (PPDS) by having the Ministry of Health, together with the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, and Technology, adjust PPDS lecturer provisions to be more responsive to regional needs. This could include, for example, schemes for recognition of prior learning (RPL) as teaching qualifications, phased fulfilment of lecturer requirements, and formulating regulations for inter-institutional consultant borrowing.
Furthermore, strengthening the PPDS programme can be achieved by establishing clear boundaries between specialisation fields and sub-specialisations through national inventory, guidelines for dividing scientific domains between colleges, and a needs-based approach to public services in opening new programmes.
Strengthening the PPDS programme can also be done by enhancing collaboration between medical faculties, educational hospitals, and local governments, including the establishment of affiliated network hospitals and satellites to ensure sufficient quantity and variety of cases for the education programme.
The fourth recommendation is for the Ministry of Health to encourage the fulfilment of preconditions for placing specialist doctors, such as health facilities and infrastructure, income incentives, and an adequate social ecosystem, by involving local governments in providing basic facilities, local incentives, and support for doctors’ families.
Fifth, the need to establish national credential standards and mandate that the recruitment of specialist doctors be conducted openly and based on competence to prevent alumni bias and ensure equal opportunities.
The final recommendation is for the Ministry of Health to encourage adjustments to PPDS financing to ensure a more balanced contribution relative to the educational services provided by educational hospitals, through increased cooperation between universities, educational hospitals, and local governments. It also involves conducting periodic evaluations of the performance and educational services of educational hospitals to ensure that costs incurred by universities are commensurate with the benefits received.
The KPK recommends these six points after identifying several issues, such as unreliable governance of SIP and the Satu Sehat SDMK system, marked by the replacement of specialist doctors’ practice schedules without SIP, medical service payments not directly to practising doctors, duplicate entries, unlisted STRs, SIPs exceeding limits, and the absence of automatic validation.
The KPK also found challenges in opening PPDS programmes, including difficulties in fulfilling sub-specialist lecturers, high costs, and unclear regulations, as well as overlaps between specialisation and sub-specialisation fields, and insufficient case variety in educational hospitals.
In addition, the KPK found poor distribution of specialist doctors due to unfulfilled preconditions such as limited health facilities and infrastructure, income incentives, and social ecosystems in the regions, as well as distribution barriers from senior colleagues that could lead to discrimination based on alumni networks.