Minister of Health | Have The Right to Restrict Human Rights?

W

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
42,211
5,969
113
Now that the president had to pass the peso to the Minister of Health on keeping things closed because of CV19, does the minister have the right to
control people and businesses by law?

Jorge Subero Isa, former president of the supreme court, said that the Health Minister does not even have the authority to impose fines on people
for not wearing masks, so how can he do so much more that?


I am speaking of his restrictions and their legality as posted recently in:

 
C

CynthiaCom

Member
Nov 22, 2019
61
16
8
Hello to all. I hope everyone is well and very far from Covid-19 or in the process of recuperating.

The Ministry does have the competency or the power to impose those measures but the Ministry has to work through other public institutions to make them effective and applicable. You can find the institutions they will be working with at the end of the decree 000018-2020 once they formally publish it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: windeguy
W

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
42,211
5,969
113
CynthiaCom said:
Hello to all. I hope everyone is well and very far from Covid-19 or in the process of recuperating.

The Ministry does have the competency or the power to impose those measures but the Ministry has to work through other public institutions to make them effective and applicable. You can find the institutions they will be working with at the end of the decree 000018-2020 once they formally publish it.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the response. It makes me wonder why they bothered to do the State of Emergency in the first place. Why was the SOE needed and what is different between SOE powers and the legal power the health minister has?
 
W

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
42,211
5,969
113
Caonabo said:
No follow up questions. ;)
Click to expand...
Oh well.

I am not going to bother reading the law that allegedly supposedly possibly could give the health minister so many abilities to interfere with human rights. I suppose if he could not do it, someone with big money would already be battling him.

As for CV19, we did see that three months of "flattening the curve" did not really fix anything. No amount of government regulations that people will stand for will fix this problem. Now we have to protect ourselves just like we do regarding every other potential threat that is out there. CV19 is here, there and everywhere, to stay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caonabo
JD Jones

JD Jones

Moderator:North Coast,Santo Domingo,SW Coast,Covid
Jan 7, 2016
11,851
8,242
113
windeguy said:
Oh well.

I am not going to bother reading the law that allegedly supposedly possibly could give the health minister so many abilities to interfere with human rights. I suppose if he could not do it, someone with big money would already be battling him.

As for CV19, we did see that three months of "flattening the curve" did not really fix anything. No amount of government regulations that people will stand for will fix this problem. Now we have to protect ourselves just like we do regarding every other potential threat that is out there. CV19 is here, there and everywhere, to stay.
Click to expand...


Yep. Now the party starts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caonabo
C

CynthiaCom

Member
Nov 22, 2019
61
16
8
windeguy said:
Thank you for the response. It makes me wonder why they bothered to do the State of Emergency in the first place. Why was the SOE needed and what is different between SOE powers and the legal power the health minister has?
Click to expand...
The SOE granted the president the ability to apply measures like the curfew or 'toque de queda' which the Ministry of Health doesn't have. It also gave the Presidente the power to distribute funds as he saw fit. The measures that could be taken by a Power of State and a public institution are very different, and limited in the latter case (as they would need approval or 'help' from other public institutions.

While the measures imposed weren't exactly bad, something more important has to change and that is the public 'conscience' or awareness and understanding of what the virus is. There is not a Democratic Government that could fight, prevent, do something about the pandemic if the people the rule don't abide even the simplest of measures like wearing a mask.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cavok, windeguy and CaribeDigital
CaribeDigital

CaribeDigital

Active member
Sep 5, 2014
295
113
43
CynthiaCom said:
While the measures imposed weren't exactly bad, something more important has to change and that is the public 'conscience' or awareness and understanding of what the virus is. There is not a Democratic Government that could fight, prevent, do something about the pandemic if the people the rule don't abide even the simplest of measures like wearing a mask.
Click to expand...
"Collective responsibility" and "collective awareness" comes to mind.
As to the question in the header of this thread the "human rights" come after you have fulfilled your obligations to the society, not before. Wear the mask first and then say your opinion about the measure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scot_tosh, Son of a sailor, drstock and 1 other person
C

CynthiaCom

Member
Nov 22, 2019
61
16
8
CynthiaCom said:
The SOE granted the president the ability to apply measures like the curfew or 'toque de queda' which the Ministry of Health doesn't have. It also gave the Presidente the power to distribute funds as he saw fit. The measures that could be taken by a Power of State and a public institution are very different, and limited in the latter case (as they would need approval or 'help' from other public institutions.

While the measures imposed weren't exactly bad, something more important has to change and that is the public 'conscience' or awareness and understanding of what the virus is. There is not a Democratic Government that could fight, prevent, do something about the pandemic if the people the rule don't abide even the simplest of measures like wearing a mask.
Click to expand...
Correction: While he has more power to allocate funds, it must have been within reasons and publicly. It could have been blocked.
 
W

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
42,211
5,969
113
CynthiaCom said:
Correction: While he has more power to allocate funds, it must have been within reasons and publicly. It could have been blocked.
Click to expand...
At this time, what are the chances that a new SOE will happen to allow curfews again as some of the medical personnel are talking about?

I am guessing the chance is about zero for that to happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JD Jones
lifeisgreat

lifeisgreat

Enjoying Life
May 7, 2016
3,271
1,163
113
windeguy said:
That is pretty much a certainty.

I am glad that an action to reduce crime will be in place. That is about all it does.
Click to expand...
Jeez Louise...you so negative...crime in DR is during day when your not home silly , well most of time...curfew doesn’t go far enough ..at least it will some what stop evening partying in groups..
 
habi

habi

Active member
Oct 17, 2015
335
128
43
Fabio J. Guzman said:
It is almost certain that curfews will be in force again next week.
Click to expand...

A litlle legal brainstorming....
With the new 45 days of state of emergency in place (yes I do know not yet but it will be...) according to the constitution, is Danilo leaving or has he the right to stay?
And if so tougheter with Luis (I guess the desk at the palacio is big enough for social distancing...) or has Luis to wait?
:unsure::unsure::unsure:;);)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom