After the Constitutional Court canceled the Law 1-24, which creates the National Intelligence Directorate (ID), for being “not in accordance” with the Constitution, the Dominican Society of Newspapers (SDD) and the Dominican College of Journalists considered that the Government must develop a new proposal that “does not violate the rights fundamental of the Dominicans”.
When consulted by Free Diarythe president of the SDD, Persio Maldonado, highlighted that the Government must “address a new law adjusted to the Constitution” and reiterated the entity’s willingness to collaborate in drafting it.
Maldonado stressed that, from the beginning, the Law 1-24 was questioned for allowing the ID would request information of citizens without judicial authorization and for having been approved as a law ordinary, when its organic nature required a qualified majority in Congress.
The law was strongly criticized by the sector journalistic, mainly the SDD, and others who questioned the legislation arguing that it violated articles of the Constitution that establish rights to privacy and honor, and freedom of expression and informationamong others.
One of them was the controversial article 11which obliged all State agencies, private institutions or individuals to deliver information to the DNI.
“He Constitutional Court has been clear in establishing that this regulation, in addition to violating fundamental rights such as freedom of expression and privacy, had to be approved as a organic law because it is an issue of national security,” Maldonado added.
“You learn more from setbacks than from victories”
Maldonado stated that the annulment of the law of the ID leaves important lessons for the Government. “The only way now is make a new law adjusted to the Constitution and that respects fundamental rights”, express.
He pointed out that the lack of recognition of its organic character led to the error, but stressed that the ruling of the Constitutional Court provides key elements for a legislation future.
“The country needs an effective security system, but without compromising basic freedoms. As we always say, we learn more from setbacks than from victories.”President of the SDD
“Victory for the defense of rights”
The president of the Dominican College of Journalists (CDP), Aurelio Henriquezagreed with what was expressed by his colleague Maldonado. He said that a new legislative initiative must be prepared, more consensual with all the sectors.
Henríquez described the Court’s decision as a “victory for the defense of the rights fundamental“.
“This ruling confirms that we were right by demanding that the law violated freedom of expression, the professional secrecy of journalists and the privacy of citizens“stated the union representative.
The original proposal, according to Henríquez, had been consensual with various sectorsincluding the SDD, the CDP, the Ombudsman and foundations such as Finjus, and was sent to Congress with specific recommendations. However, The finally approved text did not comply with the proposed corrections.
Both entities agreed that the Government should prioritize the creation of a law modern and transparent that guarantees a system of security cashwithout putting at risk rights fundamental.
“We are willing to contribute our experience and the results of our investigations so that the country has adequate regulations that respect the Constitution,” said the president of CDP.
Other opinions
The annulment of the law has generated multiple reactions from figures public.
Pelegrin Castilloformer deputy and vice president of the National Progressive Force (FNP), affirmed that Congress must comply with the constitutional mandate and create a law suitable for regulating the system national intelligence.
“The law voted was neither adequate nor respectful of the Constitution. It is not positive that these services do not have a regulatory legal framework,” he said.
In addition, Hotoniel Bonillaformer deputy attorney general and specialist in criminal law, indicated that “government authorities must return to legality and subject their actions to constitutional precepts.”, highlighting the importance of respecting the principles established in the Constitution.
Roberto Rosario Marquezformer president of the Central Electoral Board, celebrated the unanimous decision of the Constitutional Court. “Many of the activities carried out under that law, especially in the past electoral process, can be attacked”, express.
Finally, the jurist and constitutional law professor Nassef Perdomo highlighted that the annulment of this law has effects immediatehighlighting the importance of adapting regulations to the frame constitutional.
Articles of the Constitution cited in the ruling that annuls the law of the ID:
1. Article 44, paragraph 3: Right to secrecy and privacy of communications.
- The Law No. 1-24 allows the ID access information without judicial authorization, which contravenes the right to respect for private life and the inviolability of communications enshrined in this article.
2. Article 69: Guarantees of due process.
- It is argued that the Law No. 1-24 violates this article by not establishing adequate judicial controls over the actions of the IDallowing sanctions or investigations without judicial supervision.
3. Article 169: Exclusive role of the Public Ministry.
- According to this article, investigations must be under the direction of the Public Ministry, something that is violated by the broad powers of the ID granted by law.
4. Article 112: Organic law procedures.
- The Law No. 1-24 It regulates national security and affects fundamental rights, so it should have been approved as an organic law under this article, which did not happen.
5. Article 38 and 42: Human dignity and protection against degrading treatment.
- The actions of ID They could attack the dignity and personal safety of citizens without appropriate controls, violating these rights.
On September 11, after more than eight months of conversations, the commission made up of different sectors of journalism, civil society, businessmen, government and jurists, reached an agreement on the points to reform of Law 1-24 . In a plenary session held at the headquarters of the Listín Diario newspaper, in the Miraflores sector of the National District, the president of the Dominican Newspaper Society (SDD), Persio Maldonado, expressed that “a version was managed to be constructed that allows correcting the ambiguities of the regulations”. Two days later, the legal consultant of the Executive Branch, Antoliano Peralta, submitted to the Senate of the Republic the project to modify the attacked law. The proposal submitted proposed modifying the provisions contained in articles 1, 2, 9, 10, 11, 26 and 32 of the law, with the purpose of achieving the greatest possible clarity and specificity. As a main aspect, an adaptation to article 11 was proposed, in order to reinforce the guarantees related to obtaining the content of information from closed sources. The modification proposal included requiring the authorization of a judge for any procedure that limited constitutional rights.
