Constitutional Court defends its most controversial decisions

The president of Constitutional Court (TC), Napoleon Ricardo Estévez Lavandier, defended some of the decisions More controversial that this high court has adopted since he and four other judges assumed the position on December 28, 2023.

In your first Accountabilityregarding the tenth anniversary of the TC, the magistrate assured has guided a stage of institutional transformations and renewal that managed to increase the amount of sentences issued at 1,251.

Among them was the 0788/24which has generated the rejection of political parties for allowing the participation of independent candidates in the elections without having an organization that supports them.

“Here it should be noted that the Constitutional Court did not create the figure of the independent candidaciesbut adjusted the writing of the contested legal text to the principle of reasonableness, “he replied.

The aforementioned decision determined that the drafting of the contested regulations suffered from shortcomings that violated the right to the political participation of citizenship in electoral processes.

https://resources.diariolibre.com/images/2025/01/23/imagen-22012025—Audience-solemne-de-rendicion-de-cuentas—matias-boncosky01.jpg

Debates

The magistrate assured that those decisions They have generated “interesting legal-constitutional debates“To which the high court would pay special attention.

“While ours sentences They are enough for themselves and we cannot intervene in the debates, I can ensure that in the collegiate we pay special attention in order to improve the Constitutional justicebecause we are aware of the effects and scope of our decisions For the nation, “he said.

Agreements

Estévez Lavandier referred publicly for the first time to the Treaty signed Foreign Ministry with the Kingdom of the Netherlands to redefine the exclusive economic zone of the Dominican Republic in the Caribbean Sea and that has been rejected by the opposition that, he affirms, has yielded territorial waters of the country.

He Agreement between the Dominican Republic and the Kingdom of the Netherlands On maritime legitimation was validated by the high court and declared in accordance with the Constitution with seven votes in favor, four dissidents and two saved.

In this regard, the magistrate said that his court is responsible for contrasting the agreements with the Constitution, but not “determine the fair or the unfair.”

“The TC function consists in confronting the provisions of the agreement with the constitutional provisions. This Court cannot determine the fair or unfair thing of what was agreed, as it would be interfere with exclusive powers of the President of the Republic as head of state,” he said.

Proconsumor and the Code

Also referred to the sentence 0723/24on the sanctioning power of pro-consumer. The TC said that the law governing the matter Do not contemplate such a faculty in a clear and unequivocal way and urged the National Congress to review In full, the sanctioning administrative regime provided for in Law 358-05, General for the Protection of Consumer Rights or User.

Regarding the ruling that declared the unconstitutionality of Law 10-15, which modifies the Code Criminal Procedure, he reiterated that in his approval the Congress disabled the procedure provided to learn about the observations made by the Executive Power, which should be known by both legislative chambers.

Dissidents

In those referred sentences They can be found dissident votes of judges who did not share the criteria of the majority.

Estévez valued the importance of these discrepancies and considered them proof that there was a genuine debate.

“The dissident vote is a true right of the judge, deduced from the right that everyone has to freely express their thoughts … This is the unequivocal evidence that there has been a genuine debate To adopt the failures, “he said.

Measures for expedite processes

1. Lifting of the files With more age of age.
2. Implementation of mechanisms for early review of the admissibility of actions.
3. Permanence in agenda of the cases not approved until their consensus is achieved.
4. Increase in the amount of files scheduled.
5. Prioritization of the files electoral in elections.
6. Technological tools for the deliberation, vote and digital signature of the decisions.
7. Inclusion of actions concerning children and adolescents within the declared cases of emergency.