He Constitutional Court (TC) established new standards for the treatment of adolescents subjected to criminal proceedings, by providing that judicial decisions that affect them must be notified directly to the minor and explained in a clear language and understandable, according to his age, as essential guarantee of due process.
The criterion was set by ruling TC/0039/26in which the high court annulled a resolution of the Second Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ) that had declared inadmissible a appeal for alleged late submission. For the TC, the calculation was incorrect because the appeal ruling was only notified to the father of the then teenager accused and not the sanctioned person himself.
The decision introduces the principle that, if a teenager can be investigated, tried and penalized, he must also personally know the decisions taken against him and understand their effects.
The case originated after events that occurred in 2021, when the teenagerwhich then had 16 years of age, was declared responsible for violating articles 379, 383, 384 and 385 of the Dominican Penal Code, relating to the crime of robbery in its aggravated modalities.
- As a result, he was sentenced to five years of deprivation of libertya sanction later confirmed on appeal. The minor’s representatives then raised a appeal which the Supreme Court declared inadmissible because it was deposited outside the legal deadline.
In its analysis, the Constitutional Court held that the notification of the judicial decisions does not constitute a simple procedural formality, but rather a substantive guarantee of the right of defense and of the effective judicial protection. The high court indicated that the teenager He is an active subject of the criminal process and direct recipient of the sanction, so he must have real knowledge of the decisions that may affect his freedom.
The court based its reasoning on the principle of the best interests of the child and the minor’s right to be heard within the judicial process, guarantees recognized by the Code for the Protection System and the Fundamental Rights of Children and Adolescents (Law 136-03).
As he explained, this right implies that the teenager cannot be relegated to a passive role or represented exclusively by adults, but must actively participate and understand the judicial actions that affect their legal situation.
The ruling placed emphasis on the language used by the courts. The Constitutional Court established that decisions directed at adolescents must be communicated “in a simple language and appropriate for their age, avoiding technicalities and ensuring that they can actively participate in the process.”
The ruling maintains that communication of the decision is not only a formal requirement, but also a essential guarantee of their rights, so understanding the ruling allows the teenager know the reasons for the sanction, the obligations that must be fulfilled and the recursive ways available.
Strengthen your dignity
For the court, limiting information to third parties or using incomprehensible documents turns the minor into an object of criminal proceedings. On the other hand, informing him in a direct and understandable way strengthens his dignity, his right of defense and its process social reintegration within the juvenile justice system.
The TC also highlighted that the model foreseen in the Law 136-03 prioritizes education, progressive responsibility and the social reintegration above merely punitive punishment, which requires a active participation of the teenager throughout the entire process.
As a result, the court accepted the review resource constitutional, annulled the decision of the Supreme Court and ordered the file to be sent again to that jurisdiction, reopening the possibility of knowing the appeal.
