Albert Wirya from Community Legal Aid Institute (LBH Masyarakat or LBHM) was one of the speakers in a Disability Lawyers Club discussion organized by Sigab Indonesia on the proper accommodation for people with disability facing legal issues. He said that LBHM conducted a research in 2018-2020, and found that there were innovation in four areas: objective of application, investigation process, selection of judges, and annulment report.

I the enactment process was partial in nature – there was limit to authority - "Does this person need guardianship?" Was this an economic case, a political case or whether the person needed to be sent to a care centre. With regards to fulfilment of human rights, and monitoring of it, Albert said that the draft Supreme Court Regulation was very good. But in the process of draft Supreme Court regulation, one needed to look at a number of aspects relating to investigation process, there was a more accurate point that the court had to ask information from people with disability and gave people with disability a space to speak, hence making them subjects of the law. LBHM suggestion was help with the application.

This related to the selection of judges. LBHM observation suggested that most application for guardianship were accepted. Hence, it was important to limit it. The second related to the how of legal enactment. There were views that guardianship was enacted as absolute, with fixed authority and no time limit.
Many practices only relied on how easy it was to get guardianship based on a patient’s history and Albert saw it too. The guardianship did not need statement from the person being guarded. This necessitated serious attention.

What is an Ideal Supported Decision-Making

M.Syafi'i, from the Legal Study Centre of UII (Indonesian Islam University) said that there is already an extensive research on disability vis-à-vis the law, whether criminal law, civil law and administrative law when he was asked about what Supported Decision really mean. There was also critical reading of Indonesian regulation, for example the context of criminal law, whether people with disability are not responsible in a criminal law when they did something illegal. Article 33 of the Criminal Law re. Guardianship.

The other issue was the marriage law that articulated that disability is one requirement for a divorce. This also appears in the draft supreme court regulation. The draft supreme court regulation has a number of areas, criminal, civil, religion, military, State Administrative Court. There is therefore long debate about guardianship, and divorce. This is not so much an issue in the criminal law, but with regards to guardianship in the law it remains valid.

Syafi'I is involved in the judicial revier submission into the Constitutional Court."The key is that we do not agree with regard to the law on guardianship because it is a substitute system in decision-making, where people with disability is substituted by a guardian thus people with disability do not have a legal capacity. He said that the Constitutional Court only made a decision re. Article 12 of CRPD. (Ast)