Does the Minister of Health have the right to restrict human rights as published in the recent news?

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
32,502
985
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:

 

CynthiaCom

Member
Nov 22, 2019
55
7
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

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
32,502
985
113
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.
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?
 

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
32,502
985
113
No follow up questions. ;)
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

JDJones

Gold
Jan 7, 2016
2,022
82
48
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.


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

CynthiaCom

Member
Nov 22, 2019
55
7
8
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?
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.
 

CaribeDigital

Active member
Sep 5, 2014
261
90
28
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.
"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.
 

CynthiaCom

Member
Nov 22, 2019
55
7
8
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.
Correction: While he has more power to allocate funds, it must have been within reasons and publicly. It could have been blocked.
 

windeguy

Platinum
Jul 10, 2004
32,502
985
113
Correction: While he has more power to allocate funds, it must have been within reasons and publicly. It could have been blocked.
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: JDJones

NanSanPedro

Well-known member
Apr 12, 2019
1,009
653
113
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.
My kid just got lifted of his cell phone at 10 AM this mornin. That better be one strict curfew! :eek:
 

lifeisgreat

LIVING THE LIFE!
May 7, 2016
1,856
255
83
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.
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

Active member
Oct 17, 2015
233
45
28
It is almost certain that curfews will be in force again next week.
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:;);)