This journal examines the legal uncertainty surrounding emergency assistance in Indonesia, particularly the absence of legal protection for individuals who voluntarily help others in dangerous situations. The authors argue that Indonesia鈥檚 legal system does not yet recognize a proper Good Samaritan Doctrine, creating fear among citizens who may hesitate to provide aid because of potential civil liability.
The study highlights how the lack of legal immunity can negatively affect social solidarity and humanitarian values. In emergency situations, people may prioritize avoiding legal risks over helping victims in need.
Legal Vacuum in Indonesia
One of the central arguments of the journal is that Indonesia currently has no explicit regulation protecting 鈥淕ood Samaritans.鈥 Although Article 1354 of the Indonesian Civil Code discusses voluntary actions performed on behalf of others, it does not specifically provide immunity for emergency assistance.
As a result, individuals who attempt to help accident victims or people in critical conditions may still face legal claims if the outcome is unfavorable. This legal uncertainty discourages public participation in emergency response situations.
Comparative Perspective: Canada
The journal explains that Canada has implemented Good Samaritan laws in several provinces to protect people who provide emergency aid voluntarily and in good faith. Under these laws, helpers are generally immune from civil liability unless they act with gross negligence or intentional misconduct.
According to the authors, Canada鈥檚 approach successfully balances two important principles: (1) protecting victims from reckless actions, and; (2) encouraging society to assist others during emergencies.
This framework creates a safer legal environment for voluntary rescuers.
Comparative Perspective: China
The study also discusses China鈥檚 legal reforms through the Civil Code, which recognizes legal protection for individuals who assist others in emergencies. This development emerged partly because of public concern over cases in which helpers were unfairly accused or sued after providing aid.
China鈥檚 model demonstrates how legal protection can restore public trust and encourage humanitarian behavior. However, the journal notes that liability may still arise in cases involving serious negligence.
Relevance to International Law
The journal connects the Good Samaritan Doctrine to broader international legal principles concerning the protection of human life and social responsibility. The authors argue that states should create legal systems that encourage citizens to act in emergencies rather than punish them for attempting to help.
From an international perspective, legal immunity for emergency assistance reflects the principles of humanity, solidarity, and public welfare.
Conclusion
The journal concludes that implementing a Good Samaritan Doctrine in Indonesia is both necessary and urgent. Comparative experiences from Canada and China show that legal protection for voluntary emergency assistance can strengthen humanitarian values and increase public willingness to help others.
By adopting a clearer legal framework, Indonesia could reduce hesitation in emergency situations, promote social responsibility, and align its legal system with international developments regarding the protection of human life.
Author: Faizal Kurniawan
Details about the article: Kurniawan, F., Nugraha, X., Milano, A., Soeprapto, B. O., & Nieuwenburg, L. (2026). Legal immunity and liability in emergency assistance: Rethinking the Good Samaritan Doctrine in Indonesia through comparative and international perspectives.聽Jurnal Hukum Novelty,听17(1), 23鈥47. https://doi.org/10.26555/jhn.v17i1.30232
