Introduction
The Dominican Republic is the second-largest nation in the Caribbean, with just over 10 million population. It offers one of the most seemingly simplistic but unique justice systems in the world. The system represents a mix between the French and U.S. court systems, similarly very judge-centric but simplified greatly. Unfortunately, the criminal justice system has shown weaknesses in terms of efficiency, management models, and corruption that has not earned public trust. The Dominican Republic criminal justice model is fitting for the country’s social patterns and available resources but has demonstrated the need for much improvement to meet the standards of developed nations.
Criminal Justice Model
The Public Prosecutor is an agency, a derivative of the executive branch, aimed at investigating and prosecuting any criminal actions or activity and protecting state interests. It includes the Attorney General, general prosecutors, attorneys for the state, and public attorneys, each appearing before the various types of courts (discussed below). In the 1966 Constitution, the country provides several fundamental legal rights to all citizens, including due process, public trial, habeas corpus protection, double jeopardy, and self-incrimination. Upon the arrest of any individual, law enforcement has 48 hours to provide evidence to a judge justifying the arrest and proof of a crime, at which point the arrest can be extended and the suspect’s property searched, if necessary, only with a written order from a judge.
The judicial system in the Dominican Republic consists of four courts: the Supreme Court of Justice, Court of Appeals, Courts of First Instance, and the Justices of Peace. There are also more specialized courts such as Juvenile Courts, Labor Courts, Land Courts, Tax Court, Central Electoral Board, Police Court, and Military Court, which take on specific cases as indicated by the names. The Justices of Peace is similar to a small claims court, hearing petty disputes, small police and labor matters. Each municipality has at least one of these overseen by one judge. Courts of First Instance are divided into criminal and civil/commercial chambers. Based on the district’s size, the courts are subdivided into halls (salas). For example, a district can have 3 Civil and 6 Criminal Halls. Cases are distributed through a random allocation system (Steven J. Green School of International & Public Affairs, n.d.). As evident by the names, these courts explore civic and criminal matters of a more severe nature.
There are 11 Courts of Appeals, one for each district. Five judges oversee each individual court. Courts of Appeals serve as the primary appellate body, reviewing decisions issued by lower courts. In cases of accusations against judges or governors, Courts of Appeals have the first jurisdiction. Similar to the lower courts, they are subdivided into criminal and civil chambers. The Supreme Court of Justice is the main court of the country. It consists of 16 magistrates elected by the National Judiciary Committee, with one being chosen as the President. The Supreme Court of Justice carries original jurisdiction in any case involving the President, cabinet members, or elected public officials. However, the court’s primary purpose is to hear appeals from the Courts of Appeals and any federal matters regarding the constitutionality of laws. The Supreme Court of Justice has significant power, designating personnel of all courts and having disciplinary authority over any member of the judiciary (Steven J. Green School of International & Public Affairs, n.d.).
The Dominican criminal justice system is based on Napoleonic Code, establishing concepts such as legal equality for all citizens. On paper, the system is meant to be a due process model which exacts justice between equal parties. The Constitutional articles establish every step of the process, each court type, and its purpose. However, the reality is more of a bureaucratic model where crime and criminals are sought to be controlled, including through potentially illegal means of arbitrary detention and human rights abuses (Frosini & Pegoraro, 2008).
Similarities and Differences with the U.S.
The Dominican Republic’s criminal justice is similar to the U.S. in that it also has multiple levels of courts, from local to the Supreme Court. The U.S. similarly has state trial courts, then the intermediary appellate courts, then the state supreme courts, and then the U.S. Supreme court. However, unlike the Dominican Republic, the U.S. has a dual court system for state and federal trials. The national court system consists of U.S. District Courts and the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, leading to the Supreme Court. Another key similarity is the judge-centric judicial system for both countries. Although the U.S. does have trial by jury, in most cases the judge decides the charge and sentencing. Similarly, in the Dominican Republic, where judges hold some power both legally and influence in the community (White, 2019). Furthermore, in both countries, court proceedings are open to the public for the majority of cases. Constitutionally, due process with equality is an important aspect for both countries.
The countries differ at the fundamental level of executing justice. Dominican Republic’s criminal justice system is corrupt, with political influence or money or fame can influence decisions (White, 2019). In the U.S., corruption at such scale would not be practical or possible. There are checks and balances in place within the criminal justice system. Although rare cases may arise, it is not the norm. The government is also more heavily involved in judiciary than in the U.S. where the judiciary strives to be independent at all levels. Meanwhile, in the Dominican Republic, the Senate appoints the Supreme Court justices, which in turn appoint judges in lower courts.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Some strengths of the system can be attributed to its structure and criminal trial process. It is thorough consisting of preparatory procedure (evidence gathering), preliminary hearings, trial, deliberation and judgment. Trial is held publicly and with the continued presence of judges and all involved parties. There are multiple fair opportunities for devices of review for decisions as well as appeals. The multi-tiered court system similar to that of the U.S. ensures that cases are examined by higher qualified judges and issues of Constitutionality are considered. For civil cases, the system also offers alternate dispute resolution availability (Granados, 2012). Despite its many flaws described below, the criminal justice system has improved in prosecuting crimes that protect certain social groups such as women or ethnic and religious minorities. It is also actively attempting to prevent youth crime and avoid people entering the criminal justice system at a juvenile age.
However, there exists a profound distance between the ideals of the laws and the justice system as practiced. In the Dominican Republic, one appears before the courts as the accused, not simply a suspect, there is an evident violation of the principle of the presumption of innocence. There are procedural breakdowns throughout the process. This ranges from recently arrested not receiving a phone call or access to a lawyer (including public defenders) all the way to chronic delays and unjustified deprivation of freedom. There is consistent misuse of Habeas corpus, taken advantage of by people with money and influence, including drug traffickers. On the other hand, there are also instances of release under Habeas corpus not being enforced by police. ‘Presos desacatados’ is the term for prisoners held under arrest despite being absolved of liability (Brotherton & Barrios, 1997). Overall, the criminal justice system is faced with a critical shortage of resources which not only impacts working conditions, record keeping, and safety but threaten everyday function at times.
Improvements
For decades, the Dominican Republic maintained an inquisitorial justice system with minimal due process and significant prosecution. However, since the early 2000s, the country began gradual reforms to an adversarial justice system, meant to provide reconciliation and opportunities for reintegration into communities. However, the number of people incarcerated in the country is high and continues to grow, with approximately 60% being held in so-called pretrial detention, sometimes for years due to the inefficiencies of the system. Pretrial detention is legally supposed to be used for the most serious cases, looking for alternative measures, when possible, but remains practically the most common measure. As a result of significant pretrial detentions, due process is inherently compromised for many inmates (Peirce, 2019). The country’s system to more actively transition to other means of tracking those that have not been indicted. This includes community justice houses, reconciliation, and mediation services.
One issue that the Dominican Republic’s criminal justice system suffers from is efficiency. This is due to both the structure of its courts and available resources. The system has thousands of backed up cases across all courts. With the help of USAID, efforts have been made to reform the system and improve efficiency. One example is the promotion of inter-institutional coordination across the justice sector, creating effective case management models and processes. Furthermore, if efforts are undertaken to resolve the issue above, the prosecutor and court caseloads will also be lower, enabling prosecutors to focus on more violent crimes (Chemonics, n.d.).
Basis for Other Systems
Unfortunately, one would not recommend the Dominican Republic criminal justice system as the basis to any one nation’s adoption. First, the system is too complex and requires significant resources, which most small countries cannot afford. Meanwhile larger countries may actually find the system too simplistic and unfitting with independent practice of the judiciary. The system has now shown adequate effectiveness or the ability to fulfill its primary role of enforcing the law or crime prevention to the full extent. Institutional ineffectiveness creates perceptions of impunity and despite theoretical transparency and due process, those are far from reality.
Conclusion
The Dominican Republic criminal justice system is a Constitutional, due process, multi-tiered court system. Theoretically, it is meant to provide opportunity for fair arrest, indictment, trial, and judgment. However, the reality of the situation is that the system is flawed, corrupt, and inefficient. The system is too complex for such a small country and due to lack of resources, has not been effectively addressing criminal cases and appeals. That is combined with corruption and wrongful choices such as arbitrary imprisonment. Despite the principle of presumed innocence, people are judged as the accused and it seems that it is almost their responsibility to prove otherwise. Efforts are being made with the help of USAID and other organizations to reform the criminal justice system in the Dominican Republic, but much work still has to be done.
References
Brotherton, D., & Barrios, L. (1997). Prison notes in the Dominican Republic. Humanity & Society, 21(4), 425–434.
Chemonics. (n.d.). Improving the Dominican Republic’s justice system.
Frosini, J.O., & Pegoraro, L. (2008). Constitutional courts in Latin America: A testing ground for new parameters of classification. JCL, 3(2), 39-45.
Granados, J.J.D. (2012). Issues related with Dominican Republic.
Peirce, J. (2020). Overuse of Pretrial Detention in tension with Judicial and Prison Reforms in the Dominican Republic. Latin American Law Review, 5, 45–69.
Steven J. Green School of International & Public Affairs. (n.d.). Dominical Republic.
White, T. (2019). How the judicial system in Dominican Republic differs from US. WPRI12.