Interesting reading. Imo the concordat should be abrogated. The damn thing was created by the dictator Trujillo who was looking out for himself and his corrupt friends. The concordat undermines the progression of the democratic process in the DR. It makes a mockery of the constitution.
- Thread starter aegap
- Start date
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Dominican Constitution; ..Amending it
Interesting reading. Imo the concordat should be abrogated. The damn thing was created by the dictator Trujillo who was looking out for himself and his corrupt friends. The concordat undermines the progression of the democratic process in the DR. It makes a mockery of the constitution.
elchino, did you fail to read my post #55, as you used it as a quote, whereas I said, "Article 86 applies to the governors of each district and in said document you will notice that other then stating that the executive branch shall pick them you will notice that there are no duties assigned to them. Rather, it says that their duties will be determined by laws which happen to be separate from the constitution.(((((((( Because of that then I agree that they should be voted into office also and article 86 stricken from the constitution."))))))))))))?
I will admit that the "church is very influencial and legally, active in the Dominican Republic?s political arena" and this is not the fault of the constitution but rather the signing of the concordat, Vicariato Castrense and the Patronato Nacional San Rafael by your buddy Trujillo.
As the constitution clearly states that no law will be passed that goes against the constitution then it only requires a through inspection of the three aforementioned documents to ascertain if they in fact go against the constitution. If it is a fact that any of the three counter that which is stipulated in the DR constitution then a law suit filed with the supreme court is the proper way to go. If something like this were to ever take place it would have to be insured that all the duckies are in a row because the catholic church would have their very best lawyers fighting on their side to win said arguement.
What I find a little surprising is that in the time I've lived here I've never heard any complaints against the catholic church in the media to the point whereas it was debated amongst the general population.
Now that the DR is in a constitutional reform state and whereas the president wants the population to have a hand in its forming rather then in the hands of elected officials, as is normally done, I once again fail to understand why I'm not seeing an outcry from the public toward the church.
Why is it that I've only seen the idea of an addition to the constitution concerning religion on DR1? As a number of Dominicans have spoken out against the concordat, Vicariato Castrense and the Patronato Nacional San Rafael over the years, as evidenced by the links I supplied earlier, then it would seem that now is the time to makes those voices heard.
Not the type of thing I can do but one that a Dominican can.
People talk about corruption and let me assure you that there is a tremendous amount there due to those three documents I mentioned. Just the taxes alone would enlarge the Dominican coffers. Those priests drawing a salary from the church and the Dominican military probably add up to a tidy sum. The amount of time and money spent in teaching one specific religion in the public and private school system would be better spent on those subjects that are needed to prepare the children for a world made up of many religions.
So elchino I would suggest that you contact the Dominican media and see if you can get the ball rolling on bringing about change within the Dominican constitution. You have Dominican media there in your comfortable domain within the US and there is the media here which can be accessed with the internet or the telephone.
It is also my suggestion that you research the concordat, Vicariato Castrense and the Patronato Nacional San Rafael to see if you can acquire a copy of them. I haven't been able to but with your connections maybe you can. If you can how about directing us to them. If people like I were to have a copy I would do my part in educating the people here in El Seybo as to their content. I know that the vast majority of the Dominican population have no idea that the idiot Trujillo did that to them and if they do happen to know they are not familiar as to what those documents say.
Rick
Here is a state that have and are trying to mess with the religious factor;
Top Stories | KMOV.com | St. Louis, MO
I will admit that the "church is very influencial and legally, active in the Dominican Republic?s political arena" and this is not the fault of the constitution but rather the signing of the concordat, Vicariato Castrense and the Patronato Nacional San Rafael by your buddy Trujillo.
As the constitution clearly states that no law will be passed that goes against the constitution then it only requires a through inspection of the three aforementioned documents to ascertain if they in fact go against the constitution. If it is a fact that any of the three counter that which is stipulated in the DR constitution then a law suit filed with the supreme court is the proper way to go. If something like this were to ever take place it would have to be insured that all the duckies are in a row because the catholic church would have their very best lawyers fighting on their side to win said arguement.
What I find a little surprising is that in the time I've lived here I've never heard any complaints against the catholic church in the media to the point whereas it was debated amongst the general population.
Now that the DR is in a constitutional reform state and whereas the president wants the population to have a hand in its forming rather then in the hands of elected officials, as is normally done, I once again fail to understand why I'm not seeing an outcry from the public toward the church.
Why is it that I've only seen the idea of an addition to the constitution concerning religion on DR1? As a number of Dominicans have spoken out against the concordat, Vicariato Castrense and the Patronato Nacional San Rafael over the years, as evidenced by the links I supplied earlier, then it would seem that now is the time to makes those voices heard.
Not the type of thing I can do but one that a Dominican can.
People talk about corruption and let me assure you that there is a tremendous amount there due to those three documents I mentioned. Just the taxes alone would enlarge the Dominican coffers. Those priests drawing a salary from the church and the Dominican military probably add up to a tidy sum. The amount of time and money spent in teaching one specific religion in the public and private school system would be better spent on those subjects that are needed to prepare the children for a world made up of many religions.
So elchino I would suggest that you contact the Dominican media and see if you can get the ball rolling on bringing about change within the Dominican constitution. You have Dominican media there in your comfortable domain within the US and there is the media here which can be accessed with the internet or the telephone.
It is also my suggestion that you research the concordat, Vicariato Castrense and the Patronato Nacional San Rafael to see if you can acquire a copy of them. I haven't been able to but with your connections maybe you can. If you can how about directing us to them. If people like I were to have a copy I would do my part in educating the people here in El Seybo as to their content. I know that the vast majority of the Dominican population have no idea that the idiot Trujillo did that to them and if they do happen to know they are not familiar as to what those documents say.
Rick
Here is a state that have and are trying to mess with the religious factor;
Top Stories | KMOV.com | St. Louis, MO
Last edited:
Did you see this elchino?
http://www.dominicantoday.com/app/article.aspx?id=18767
Anyone see this?
http://www.dominicantoday.com/app/article.aspx?id=18756
http://www.dominicantoday.com/app/article.aspx?id=18767
Anyone see this?
http://www.dominicantoday.com/app/article.aspx?id=18756
Did you see this elchino?
http://www.dominicantoday.com/app/article.aspx?id=18767
Anyone see this?
http://www.dominicantoday.com/app/article.aspx?id=18756
Will the cult of Trujillo be strong enough to propel the grandnephew to political life in the DR, slim to none.
Kind of interesting when you start to research something and what you come across. I found this link;
Dominican Republic
which has a very nice description of the history of the DR. It explains about the Bosch administration and their oddity in Dominican history up to that point in that they crafted a constitution that ?separated church and state, guaranteed civil and individual rights, and endorsed civilian control of the military. These and other changes, such as land reform, struck conservative landholders and military officers as radical and threatening, particularly when juxtaposed against three decades of somnolent authoritarianism under Trujillo. The hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church also resented the secular nature of the new constitution, in particular its provision for legalized divorce.? Needless to say the following coup pushed all those fabulous changes under the rug.
I also found that the attempt to outlaw the Concordat seems to be a yearly affair and really needs to have more Dominicans getting involved with this movement;
ALC Noticias
ALC Noticias
ALC Noticias
Dominican Republic
It seems this separation between the two is of interest in another country as explained here;
ALC Noticias
I am also reminded that LF, who seems to be lacking some intelligence (or maybe not), appointed Monsignor Agripino Nunez Collado to be in charge of this constitutional reform. Might this be a prior indicator as to possible resistance to any suggestion to an amendment requiring a separation between church and state? Makes me wonder.
I also wonder as to why there is never a mention of the Vicariato Castrense and the Patronato Nacional San Rafael. From all indications there two documents are just as damaging as the concordat.
Has anyone been able to find any of these three documents??????
Rick
Speaking of the downfall of the power of the church check out this link from what is happening in the US;
Court: Groups must offer contraceptives - Yahoo! News
Dominican Republic
which has a very nice description of the history of the DR. It explains about the Bosch administration and their oddity in Dominican history up to that point in that they crafted a constitution that ?separated church and state, guaranteed civil and individual rights, and endorsed civilian control of the military. These and other changes, such as land reform, struck conservative landholders and military officers as radical and threatening, particularly when juxtaposed against three decades of somnolent authoritarianism under Trujillo. The hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church also resented the secular nature of the new constitution, in particular its provision for legalized divorce.? Needless to say the following coup pushed all those fabulous changes under the rug.
I also found that the attempt to outlaw the Concordat seems to be a yearly affair and really needs to have more Dominicans getting involved with this movement;
ALC Noticias
ALC Noticias
ALC Noticias
Dominican Republic
It seems this separation between the two is of interest in another country as explained here;
ALC Noticias
I am also reminded that LF, who seems to be lacking some intelligence (or maybe not), appointed Monsignor Agripino Nunez Collado to be in charge of this constitutional reform. Might this be a prior indicator as to possible resistance to any suggestion to an amendment requiring a separation between church and state? Makes me wonder.
I also wonder as to why there is never a mention of the Vicariato Castrense and the Patronato Nacional San Rafael. From all indications there two documents are just as damaging as the concordat.
Has anyone been able to find any of these three documents??????
Rick
Speaking of the downfall of the power of the church check out this link from what is happening in the US;
Court: Groups must offer contraceptives - Yahoo! News
Interesting how the link "Mongabay.com" states "the apparent establishment of a democratic process in 1978 was a promising development". This being said it could be interpreted that according to the writer of the article the years of 1966 to 1978 that Balaguer was president, those years were NOT of a democratic nature. Rightly so.
The thing that mystifies me about----
The Dominican Constitution is that it imulates a Federalist System of Government Structure by concentrating all functions and controls at the Fedral Level, notwithstanding that much of the Administration and control "should" be passed on to the local Provincial and Municipal levels.
While I can understand the necessity for this arraingement during the early days of governmental formation, the recent developments in transportation, communication and politically driven philosophies, would lead one to think in terms of a more efficient and dynamic administration of the country's needs.
The same issues are argued by the same political parties leading up to each election process, yet no individual political party has ever presented a truly effective platform for initiating or carrying out those necessary functions and law-based promulgations that would tend to solve the social and economic problems that are endemic to this society.
It is my considered opinion that this "lack of effective action" on the part of each Administration, past and present, is a common denominator endemic in the political system. That is to say, the "platforms" of all political parties are designed(??) to maintain the Status Quo regardless of which party "rules the roost". The main thrust is to assure that "The Party" get in Power and maintains this as an objective, regardless of its ineffectiveness or inefficiency in managing the day-to-day activities and the innaugeration of socially progressive formulations.
Someplace along the line, these parties have lost sight of the intent of a Constitution> Insteaad of perceiving thedocument as a BASIS for promulgating laws and regulation derived from those laws, they have sought to embody the laws themselves in the document. Such a method leads to a lengthy document which looses its effectiveness by its sheer volume. Thus you have a document that is neither understood, but embodies a large degree of conflict within itself.
Personally, I think it would be wiser to completely re-write the document, reduce its volume, have it speak to BASIC rights and philosophy, then leave it up to the Legislative bodies to promulgate laws of implementation in conformation. Use the document to revamp the Functions of Government, establish lower levels of Administration in keeping with Democratic principles, define clearly the seperation of powers and the limitations of those powers by defining the specifics of each branch of the Government.
Essentially, the evolution of government in the DR has been one of a continuous concentration of power at the Federal level. This is contrary to the principles of a society "of and for the people", which is an evolutionary advance in Democratic philosophy by itself.
Here, as in other countries, Democracy has evolved from the population of a "city-state" casting their "yeas and nays" on specific laws presented by a council of elders, into a system of elected persons acting "for" those who have placed them in such positions. Thus, a Republic has been formed as the population grew out of the assimulation of the "city-states" into a cohesive collection called simply a "state".
I won't preach to the choir on the development of nation-states because it would become an exercise in redundancy.
The point is, these naation-states needed a document from and by which the governing laws could be promulgated in support of the philosophy contained therein and from which a government could be formed which conformed with that document.
The Bolivarian Constitution as well as the Dominican Constitution go too far in their attempt to lay out the structure of the government and the rights of the constituents of the countries.
When and as societies change, as they all do, the laws which govern those societies must also change. If these laws are embodied in a Constitution, that also must be changed.
That is the situation today.
It follows, that many of the "Articles" of the existing Constitution must be changed and/or eliminated to fit the needs of the present society and its government.
The main question remains. Which elements need to be modified or eliminiated in order to bring the document "up to date" in such a manner as to preclude the necessity for future frequent ammendments.
Texas Bill
The Dominican Constitution is that it imulates a Federalist System of Government Structure by concentrating all functions and controls at the Fedral Level, notwithstanding that much of the Administration and control "should" be passed on to the local Provincial and Municipal levels.
While I can understand the necessity for this arraingement during the early days of governmental formation, the recent developments in transportation, communication and politically driven philosophies, would lead one to think in terms of a more efficient and dynamic administration of the country's needs.
The same issues are argued by the same political parties leading up to each election process, yet no individual political party has ever presented a truly effective platform for initiating or carrying out those necessary functions and law-based promulgations that would tend to solve the social and economic problems that are endemic to this society.
It is my considered opinion that this "lack of effective action" on the part of each Administration, past and present, is a common denominator endemic in the political system. That is to say, the "platforms" of all political parties are designed(??) to maintain the Status Quo regardless of which party "rules the roost". The main thrust is to assure that "The Party" get in Power and maintains this as an objective, regardless of its ineffectiveness or inefficiency in managing the day-to-day activities and the innaugeration of socially progressive formulations.
Someplace along the line, these parties have lost sight of the intent of a Constitution> Insteaad of perceiving thedocument as a BASIS for promulgating laws and regulation derived from those laws, they have sought to embody the laws themselves in the document. Such a method leads to a lengthy document which looses its effectiveness by its sheer volume. Thus you have a document that is neither understood, but embodies a large degree of conflict within itself.
Personally, I think it would be wiser to completely re-write the document, reduce its volume, have it speak to BASIC rights and philosophy, then leave it up to the Legislative bodies to promulgate laws of implementation in conformation. Use the document to revamp the Functions of Government, establish lower levels of Administration in keeping with Democratic principles, define clearly the seperation of powers and the limitations of those powers by defining the specifics of each branch of the Government.
Essentially, the evolution of government in the DR has been one of a continuous concentration of power at the Federal level. This is contrary to the principles of a society "of and for the people", which is an evolutionary advance in Democratic philosophy by itself.
Here, as in other countries, Democracy has evolved from the population of a "city-state" casting their "yeas and nays" on specific laws presented by a council of elders, into a system of elected persons acting "for" those who have placed them in such positions. Thus, a Republic has been formed as the population grew out of the assimulation of the "city-states" into a cohesive collection called simply a "state".
I won't preach to the choir on the development of nation-states because it would become an exercise in redundancy.
The point is, these naation-states needed a document from and by which the governing laws could be promulgated in support of the philosophy contained therein and from which a government could be formed which conformed with that document.
The Bolivarian Constitution as well as the Dominican Constitution go too far in their attempt to lay out the structure of the government and the rights of the constituents of the countries.
When and as societies change, as they all do, the laws which govern those societies must also change. If these laws are embodied in a Constitution, that also must be changed.
That is the situation today.
It follows, that many of the "Articles" of the existing Constitution must be changed and/or eliminated to fit the needs of the present society and its government.
The main question remains. Which elements need to be modified or eliminiated in order to bring the document "up to date" in such a manner as to preclude the necessity for future frequent ammendments.
Texas Bill