Forever Young: Legal Protection of University Students Working with Government Institutions

Written by: Arya Tidar Wirabhumi

Edited by: Imelda Jo Anastasya

---

Muhammad Athaya Helmy Nasution, an Indonesian student, passed away in Vienna, Austria, after experiencing a seizure while accompanying a closed visit involving officials from Indonesia’s House of Representatives, Financial Services Authority, and central bank. The forensic autopsy report indicated that the seizure was likely caused by heatstroke resulting from dehydration, insufficient nutrition, and exhaustion, which led to a stroke. At present, no party has been held responsible. Athaya’s passing has raised questions about the legal protections available to individuals in similar circumstances and whether existing safeguards are adequate. This article examines the laws governing the protection of Indonesian students working with government agencies abroad, and provides recommendations to prevent similar incidents in the future.

Hofburg Palace, Viena, Áustria - Beatriz Kim via Unsplash

Author's Note

Athaya passed away on the 27th of August 2025 in Vienna, he was 18 years old and on his way to achieving a bachelor's degree in Groningen. Not a day later, Affan Kurniawan was run over by Brimob in their Barracuda during a demonstration in which he was not even taking part of. Affan was 21 years old and hadn’t completed his education in SMP. He had to begin working to provide for his family in his teenage years and did not have access to any higher education. In 1998, four of my fathers friends were shot and killed during the Trisakti Tragedy. Their ages were 19, 20, 21 and 21, at the time of their deaths. It has been almost 3 decades since the Indonesian people experienced the various tragedies of 1998.

This article serves as a reminder of our shared humanity. The Indonesian people should be wary of becoming desensitized to violence. We need to allow ourselves to feel the full weight of these losses, to grieve together, and to care for one another as we pursue true justice.

Rest in power, Athaya. Rest in power, Affan. And to those whose names and bodies were never found,

---

Muhammad Athaya Helmy Nasution was an Indonesian student at Hanze University in Groningen, the Netherlands. Athaya had been appointed as a liaison for a closed visit in Vienna, Austria, held on 25 to 27 August 2025, involving public officials from Indonesia’s House of Representatives, Financial Services Authority, and central bank. Two days into his assignment, Athaya suffered what was initially reported as a seizure and passed away at only 18 years old. The forensic autopsy report, whose content was confirmed by both the Indonesian Student Association and Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ public statements, found that Athaya's seizure was likely caused by heatstroke from dehydration, lack of nutrition, and exhaustion, leading to a stroke as a result of his body going through electrolyte imbalances and hypoglycemia after 2 days worth of work as a liaison.

The Indonesian Student Association in the Netherlands issued a Press Release and Statement from the Indonesian Student Association in the Netherlands on the Passing of Muhammad Athaya Helmy Nasution on 8 September 2025. The Indonesian Student Association in the Netherlands, in its Press Release and Statement, “strongly rejects” any form of request or practice of students facilitating visits of public officials, if conducted “without an official contract, legal protection, and clear mechanisms”. The Embassy of the Republic of Indonesia in the Hague, in response, issued Letter Number 800/HOC/IX/2025 in response to the Statement of the Indonesian Students Association in the Netherlands on the Passing of Mr. Muhammad Athaya Helmy Nasution in Vienna, Austria, dated 8 September 2025. The Embassy expressed  that the protection of Indonesian citizens is “always a top priority” in the Embassy’s duties and services.

The question is: What legal protection is accorded to such citizens? This article will analyze both Indonesian and Austrian law. First, we examine Indonesia’s legislation. Under Article 19(b) of Law Number 37 of 1999 on Foreign Relations, representatives of the Republic of Indonesia are obligated to “provide guidance, protection, and legal assistance” to Indonesian citizens and legal entities abroad, in accordance with national laws and regulations, international law and practice. Additionally, Article 20 of Law Number 37 of 1999 states that in the event of a dispute between fellow Indonesian citizens or legal entities abroad, representatives of the Republic of Indonesia are obligated to assist in resolving the dispute based on the principle of deliberation or in accordance with applicable law.

Turning to the domestic law of where Athaya worked, a case could be filed in an Austrian court as the lex loci actus principle allows Austrian criminal law to apply to crimes committed within its territory, regardless of the nationality of the perpetrator or the victim. Under § 222 of the Austrian Penal Code, anyone who “causes the death of a person through negligence” is punishable by imprisonment for up to 5 years or a fine. The accused would need to have knowledge sufficient to make him aware that the conditions that Athaya experienced could lead to his death. Presently, the Indonesian embassy in Vienna has already coordinated with local authorities regarding Athaya’s passing. Pursuing criminal liability would be very unlikely as the local authorities already have access to information regarding his passing in the form of the forensic autopsy report and have decided not to pursue a criminal case.

Additionally, Austrian labor law could also be applied. However, to be accorded such protection, Athaya would have to be considered an ‘employee’ under Austrian law, which is defined as those persons employed in a company, under § 36 of the Labour Constitution Act. Here, Athaya could be considered an ‘employee’ as the Austrian General Civil Code states that a contract between employer and employee would not be limited to a formal written contract. Proof of a contract may be provided by documents, by witnesses, by entry in public books, by confession, by oath, and by circumstances. The principle of freedom of form or what is referred to as “Formfreiheit”, in Austrian law holds that the form of a contract does not affect its validity and accordingly, subject to § 861 of the Austrian General Civil Code, such contract would hold equal legal substantive value. Written form contracts are required only for certain types of contracts, such as guarantee contracts, condominium contracts, and some consumer credit agreements.

Under Austrian law, since the form of a contract doesn’t alter its substantive value, courts will assess the factual relationship between the alleged employer and employee to determine whether or not a legal relationship exists. This is what is called as the principle of Persönliche Abhängigkeit, or “personally dependant”. In assessing this principle there are several factors that courts consider, which are in part codified in § 4 of the Labour Constitution Act, which are the degree of control the employer has over the employee i.e when, where and how the work is done, whether the employee is integrated into the employers organization, the economic dependence of the employee towards the employer i.e. payment and whether or not the employee has obligations typical of employment.

Athaya as an individual working under the event organizers with specific designation to the official visit done by Indonesian public officials, being the manifestation of the relationship between himself and his employer, has been indicated to be made aware to certain representatives. The Director of Protection for Indonesian Citizens of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Judha Nugraha, has stated that, “The person concerned was on duty accompanying the Indonesian delegation in a series of meetings with Austrian authorities. Meanwhile, the assignments of those in the committee who were students, were managed entirely by the event organizers." Furthermore, an Indonesian Students Association member claims that Athaya was supposed to be paid for his work. However, such payment would be given unofficially. In their exact words “Most students are paid under the table as tour guides." All the sources regarding the incident have established that Athaya did have obligations arising from his relationship with the event organizers, being that of a liaison for the official visit.

If, indeed, Athaya can be considered an ‘employee’ under the Austrian General Civil Code, he would be accorded protection under various Austrian laws. The Austrian Working Time Act would regulate his working hours, rest time, and oblige his employers to record his hours in a verifiable format. Additionally, the Employee Protection Act would also apply. § 3 of the act stipulates that employers have a strict duty to protect the life and health of the employee. Which include providing a safe work environment, preventing overwork and exhaustion, and providing aid and assistance in case of illness or accident. If his death were to be considered an accident resulting from severe fatigue, it could serve as a basis for a civil claim under § 1295 of the Austrian General Civil Code.

However, any legal action against the employer would depend on whether they were negligent in a way that resulted in Athaya’s death. Since negligent homicide falls within the scope of the Austrian Penal Code, it would then be within the jurisdiction of Austrian authorities to determine whether a criminal case exists. As of the writing of this article, there has been no news on whether Austrian authorities will further investigate the possibility of a criminal case. The only source regarding their decision-making lies in Mr. Judha Nugraha’s statement, which makes no mention of possible negligence but affirms that coordination does indeed exist between the Indonesian embassy in Vienna and the local authorities.

Referring back to Law Number 37 of 1999 on Foreign Relations, the law itself is silent on any explicit degree of obligated cooperation between Indonesian representatives and local authorities in enacting domestic law in accordance with international law and standards, in cases where murder between Indonesian is a possibility. However, Article 19 acting as a more general rule, states that representatives are obligated to fostering unity and harmony among fellow Indonesian citizens abroad and provide guidance, protection, and legal assistance to Indonesian citizens. Article 19 applies to all Indonesian citizens, irrespective of status, but does not explicitly speak on the obligations of representatives with respect to the legal relationship between an Indonesian and the legal entity to which it is an employee of.

Law Number 18 of 2017 on Protection of Indonesian Migrant Workers provides a clearer degree of the obligations of Indonesian representatives towards its citizens. Article 1 (2) of the law states that Indonesian migrant workers are those Indonesian citizens who either will, are current, or have done work for payment, outside of Indonesia. The protection of the persons within the meaning of article 1 (2) is enumerated in paragraph 5 of the same article, which states that the protection of Indonesian migrant workers is all efforts to protect the interests of prospective Indonesian Migrant Workers and/or Indonesian migrant workers and their families by ensuring the fulfillment of their rights in all activities before, during, and after work, including legal, economic, and social aspects. However, for such protection to be accorded, a person must have an existing written contract with their, which contrasts the requirements for protection like in Austrian labour laws.

Given that a written contract never existed between Athaya and the Event Organizers, Law Number 18 of 2017 would not apply to this case. Nevertheless, according to Article 27, in a situation where an Indonesian migrant worker died during their work, the obligations would be on the employer to inform their family, cover the cost of returning their body to Indonesia and the burial process to be conducted. The role of Indonesian representatives in that situation is to receive the information itself rather than the obligations as enumerated within the article.

Considering that Law Number 18 of 2017 could not protect Athaya, and that Law Number 37 does not provide for an exact degree of legal assistance towards Indonesian citizens. We can refer to another source of Indonesian Law, that of Ministerial Regulations. Specifically, the Regulation of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia Number 5 of 2018 concerning the Protection of Indonesian Citizens Abroad. The regulation reaffirms that legal protection and assistance falls within the protections that the Indonesian state, its central government through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, its representatives and its institutions in coordination with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are to provide. However, Article 2 (b) states that such protection would be provided in a manner that those obligated to provide the protection would not take responsibility in criminal cases and/or civil disputes.

Delving further into the degree of legal assistance that is to be provided to Indonesian citizens as according to the Ministerial regulation. Although the government will not take responsibility from a party within a criminal case and/or civil dispute, according to Article 8 (e) protection does include that an Indonesian will be represented by a representative before courts and other institutions in the local country based on the practices and procedures applicable in the local country. Additionally, Article 8 (k) further extends the protection to providing assistance, mediation, advocacy, and legal assistance in the form of an Advocates services. However, representatives are not obligated to pursue any legal action on behalf of the Indonesian citizens concerned.

It is in the opinion of the writer that there exists a legal void that should, in its place, govern the protection of Athaya and others in similar circumstances. The laws concerning the protection of Indonesian citizens abroad under Chapter V on Protection of Indonesian Citizens of Law Number 37 of 1999 and Law Number 18 of 2017 on Protection of Indonesian Migrant Workers are not specific enough to address legal issues arising from work undertaken by students without written contract. This is evident in the absence of legal ramifications for any party involved in Athaya’s death.

As long as there is no lex specialis requiring employers to create written contracts that stipulate the specific rights and obligations of employees and what specific law would govern or that an employer-employee relationship need not be established through written contract like in Austrian Law, Indonesian students will remain at risk when accepting these kinds of work opportunities. Ensuring that Indonesian based companies are in compliance with the applicable law, would allow labour laws like Austria’s to protect Indonesian students while working abroad for an Indonesian company.

Therefore, Indonesian legislators must give careful consideration to formulating a bill that specifically governs the protection of Indonesian national students working abroad. In view of the event which surrounds the tragic passing of Athaya, the bill would have to fill the legal void either through requiring that Indonesian companies have a written agreement when employing an Indonesian student or expanding the definition of who an Indonesian migrant worker is to include those employees without written contracts akin to the definition of an employee such as in Austrian labour law. Alternatively, the protection accorded to Indonesian students could be expanded upon from the existing law and ministerial regulations to provide a kind of protection that is more appropriate to the unique circumstances of students taking work without written contract. For example, closer ministerial oversight through its representatives abroad, especially in circumstances where the parties involved include, besides Indonesian students, other government bodies such as members of the House of Representatives.