Legal Protection for General Practitioners Practicing Beyond Their Competence in Remote Areas: An Agroti Salus Lex Suprema Perspective

Abstract

This study analyzes the legal protection for general practitioners in remote areas who are forced to practice outside their formal competence to save patients' lives, with reference to the principle of Agroti Salus Lex Supreme, which means that patient safety is the highest law. The background of this study is the unequal distribution of specialist medical personnel in Indonesia, which causes general practitioners in underdeveloped, border, and island regions to often have to handle emergency cases that should be handled by specialist doctors. This situation creates a conflict of norms, namely the tension between the moral and professional obligation to help patients versus the limits of competence and authority stipulated in the law. Strict law enforcement can criminalize doctors who act in good faith, while reluctance to act can endanger the lives of patients. This study uses a normative juridical approach to identify the conflict of norms between Article 543 and 744 of Government Regulation Number 28 of 2024, which limits the authority of doctors, and the principle of Agroti Salus Lex Supreme as a fundamental legal norm. The results of this study indicate that harmonization of norms can be achieved through legal interpretations that are oriented towards humanity and patient protection. The theory of emergency (noodtoestand) in criminal law can be used as justification (rechtvaardigingsgrond) for actions by general practitioners that exceed their authority, provided the action is carried out under urgent circumstances, with no other alternatives, and with the sole purpose of saving lives. This harmonization is essential to provide legal certainty for physicians and guarantee citizens' constitutional rights to equitable healthcare services.