Rule of Law or Rule of the person-which is more important?

[johne]

You said an awful lot in one paragraph

The people of the town successfully 'stopped' the illegal destruction of homes that were under construction (now whether those homes are 'legal' or not remains unclear) by the policia who were acting not under the 'rule of law' but in return for monetary compensation (assumed) by persons using the 'rule of person'.

So some small successes are being realized.:bunny:

I am not really clear on the point you are making. Without a determination that the houses were legal or illegal you cannot advance (IMO) further with a point.

john

 

[A.Hidalgo]

But what does the 'awakening populace' have to base their future decisions and actions on? What forces will shape their actions? Where is there a culture that is sustainable that they can learn from? Are they going to build future structure on the basis of a Ghandi, or are they going to learn from their own collective conscious and use a [SIZE=-1]Truillo[/SIZE] as role model?

The collective with lots of personal space as in a Ghandi or the Might of the Individual of a Truillo? Where will the awakening momentum carry the population to?

I don't claim to know the philosophy of some of these groups to know if the Ghandian model is their blueprint, but I can tell you that what some of them have done like this women's group sure shows signs of activism thats on the right track. Remember the girl that was shot in Santiago (her name escapes me) well a large group of Santiageros took to the streets and some justice was achieved.

As far as a Trujillo type taking power, the political, economic and sociological realities of the DR are not conductive for this to happen. The days of dictators are dead and gone and thank goodness for that. Democracy although not perfect is becoming more and more entrenched, but I don't think progressive changes will come from the top, but from human rights groups, civil society organizations or just plain old neighborhood grassroots organizing from the populace.

 

[Chris]

It is all good stuff and I truly understand activism. My question goes deeper. It is activism for the sake of change, or activism for the sake of a focused and planned sustainable society. Mostly however, it would be activism for the sake of change and we all would applaud that, because we don't have anything else to applaud. (Yes, yes it sounds terribly defeatist)

 

[MommC]

It's a complicated situation to be sure john....

I am not really clear on the point you are making. Without a determination that the houses were legal or illegal you cannot advance (IMO) further with a point.

john

A lot of the houses there are built on gov't land, a lot are built on land that was 'settled' so long ago the families now have 'settlers' rights to the land. and some are built on land that was farmed land duly 'titled' to the original farmers. The farm lands were 'leased' to a third party and the 'uneducated-illiterate' farmers 'signed' what they thought was a paper outlining what they were to receive as rental payments on the land. It was actually a 'sale' agreement. Some of the land was 'rented' to said third party however the original owners didn't know of a legal loophole that states if an owner is 'absent' and you take care of his land (keeping it clear etc.) after a defined period of time it is deemed to be YOUR land......

Are you following this??

To make a long story short the land is in dispute and it was the third party involved that was knocking down houses that the owners have a paper to confirm that the land was purchased from the original owners who may or may not have a 'legalized' title to said land.

So the rule of law and rule of person have collided and needs to be sorted out!

 

[Lambada]

I don't claim to know the philosophy of some of these groups to know if the Ghandian model is their blueprint, but I can tell you that what some of them have done like this women's group sure shows signs of activism thats on the right track. Remember the girl that was shot in Santiago (her name escapes me) well a large group of Santiageros took to the streets and some justice was achieved.

The girl was Vanessa, A.Hidalgo and yes her needless death provoked a lot of response.

I think you hit the nail of the head when you alluded to the philosophy of some of these groups. I don't know that there IS a philosophy as such. In my view Dominican activists operate from a pragmatic baseline so the philosophy is pragmatism as in 'a philosophical movement or system having various forms, but generally stressing practical consequences as constituting the essential criterion in determining meaning, truth, or value'. I fail to see how it can be anything else, given where we're at, but I'm only a gringa so would like some Dominican input here, please. I see nothing wrong with a pragmatic, one step at a time approach. I don't even know that it is a given part of the Dominican psyche to look for models of society within which to frame theoretical constructs (help me out here please, Dominican board members).

What it feels like is the beginning of activism based on not being all that far distant in time from the rule of a dictator. So, perforce, it has to be practical. There are Nicaraguan community workers here engaged in consciousness-raising programmes (they don't make a big noise about it ) - they know all about societal models, but what they are doing here is essentially pragmatically based. When you're 'coming out from under' small achievements really count. Yes? No?

 

[johne]

I read your explanation but..

The people of the town successfully 'stopped' the illegal destruction of homes that were under construction (now whether those homes are 'legal' or not remains unclear) by the policia who were acting not under the 'rule of law' but in return for monetary compensation (assumed) by persons using the 'rule of person'.

So some small successes are being realized.:bunny:

the troubling parts of it are:
1) "stopped 'illegal' destruction..."Whether those homes are 'legal' or not remains unclear." Question:How do you stop"illegal" if it is "unclear if legal or not"

2) "the policia who were not acting under the 'rule of law' but in return for monetary compensation (assumed)" Question: Assumed by who? You or the people having houses on land with questionable title?

You stated in your explanation these are complicated matters. I understand that and I am aware of the situation in the DR regarding land title disputes, squatters, boundaries of division,and all of the other questionable land use issues. But, this is part and parcel of using laws, not people's "rule of power" to determine what the outcome should be.

You have given a perfect example, in a way, of (in my OP #1) how "it affects people living in the DR" ie; What is more important Rule of Law or rule of the people?

Please don't consider my use of "this is a perfect example" to be a stamp of approval on my behalf or that I think that in this case the people's rule is correct. I don't have a clue and that is why I would lean towards using
The Rule of Law.

JOHN

 

[MommC]

Point taken......

When I said "illegal" destruction it was because the 'persons' doing the destruction were not within their 'legal' rights to do so.
Therefore the policia aiding those persons were NOT doing so under the "Rule of Law" since there was no legal basis for their actions.
That said some of the houses slated for destruction (which was stopped by the huelga) may well be 'legal' (I do not have that info).

BTW, These matters are before the courts and have been for many years with no 'resolution' to date!

Which is why I also thought it a 'perfect example', in a way, of (in your OP #1) how "it affects people living in the DR" ie; What is more important Rule of Law or rule of the people?

 

[cobraboy]

I have a personal example of where the Rule of Law meets the Rule of People in the DR.

60 years ago, well before she was born, Alida's father and his brothers went far into the rugged mountains outside of Janico and Juancalito and homesteaded and planted many, many acres of coffee. There was no "ownership" of the property back then, as it was rugged frontier. They build a "passable" road (I smile while I type that, it's carved out of the face of mountains) and over many years built a community based on their coffee. They operated, pretty much, on land acquired via "Law of Person" on untitled land.

At some time, I'm not sure when, but I think under Balaguer (I'm sure Hillbilly would know), the land was officially sequestered as a small portion of much larger National Land, and no development was permitted. Obviously, this was rather concerning to her family, as they had done well growing fine coffee for many years on that land, and had built a community.

This was a Rule of Law vs. Rule of Person conflict.

Her father plead his case and offered evidence of his homesteading of the and, and ultimately was granted title to the land. So now he has "Rule of Law" protecting his interest where he formally had "Rule of Person".

 

[MommC]

Excellent example.......

both of the concepts and of how 'title' is quite often obtained both here in the DR and in other countries.

 

[Lambada]

Another example would be the Plan Renove case - Supreme Court has upheld lower court's judgement which means prison terms of 3 months to 4 years for some of the Transport Unions heads (plus fines). Reaction? The unions threaten work stoppage. Plan Renove was a massive fraud (do I recall 1.8 billion pesos correctly?) so in this case I hope Rule of Law prevails.

http://www.elcaribecdn.com/articulo_multimedios.aspx?id=157923&guid=D91EC6C381C34BE9A0085D04FF0F2E35&Seccion=63

 

[Chip]

Another example would be the Plan Renove case - Supreme Court has upheld lower court's judgement which means prison terms of 3 months to 4 years for some of the Transport Unions heads (plus fines). Reaction? The unions threaten work stoppage. Plan Renove was a massive fraud (do I recall 1.8 billion pesos correctly?) so in this case I hope Rule of Law prevails.

http://www.elcaribecdn.com/articulo_multimedios.aspx?id=157923&guid=D91EC6C381C34BE9A0085D04FF0F2E35&Seccion=63

Nice article. I especially like the comments:

empiece a desaparecer la impunidad en el pa?s

Es necesario que la judicatura siga sancionando a cualquier persona implicada en corrupci?n sin importar el nivel de la persona de quien se trate.

BTW, what was Plan Renove?

 

[A.Hidalgo]

We could probably find endless examples of rule of law vs rule of the person.....just pick up any newspaper.

 

[Lambada]

BTW, what was Plan Renove?

Read the papers Chip :cheeky:. This has been yo-yoing between Courts for the last 4 years or so. Fraudulent use of state money in relation to purchase of public vehicles; there was even a foreign guy involved (an Israeli resident in US) who legged it during one of the hearings. Each time a Court issues a finding of guilt, the accused appeal. Summary from 2005 here
Condenan a prisi?n a diez de los catorce acusados en caso Plan Renove

Google in Spanish to get full history
Plan Renove

From DR1 News 24th. Oct 2005:
Sam Goodson to be extradited (foreigner referred to above)
One of the key figures in the RENOVE corruption case, Sam Goodson, a.k.a. Shlomo Ben-Tov, will be extradited back to the Dominican Republic to stand trial for his part in the RD$1.8 billion scandal. Readers may remember that last spring Goodson left the Dominican Republic as the magistrate was still reading his decision to send the case to trial. In August, judge Esther Agelan Casasnovas declared Goodson to be a fugitive from justice. As reported in Diario Libre, this is the first time that a United States citizen will have been extradited to the Dominican Republic, although two Dominican residents of the United States have been extradited in the past. The Southern District of Florida Federal Court accepted the Dominican request for extradition last Friday. Goodson figured as the head of the Hyundai Americas Corporation. In April, while magistrate Alfredo Rios Fabian was reading the restraining orders that consisted of a RD$50 million bail bond and no exit permit, Goodson walked out of the courtroom with his lawyers. The presiding judge had indicated that there were enough indications about Goodson's participation to hold him for trial.

Also read
DR1 - Daily News 10 February 2004

 

[NALs]

We could probably find endless examples of rule of law vs rule of the person.....just pick up any newspaper.

I was planning to type a 500 word essay, but since you said it in one sentence, I'll leave it at that. :cheeky:

-NALs

 

[El sabelot?]

I was planning to type a 500 word essay, but since you said it in one sentence, I'll leave it at that. :cheeky:

-NALs

Type? Why change now? Cut-and-paste was good enough for sweetbabyjesus and good enough for you.

 

[NALs]

Type? Why change now? Cut-and-paste was good enough for sweetbabyjesus and good enough for you.

Coming from you, I'll take it as a complement. irate:

Thanks sabe n?, I mean sabelot?. :cheeky:

-NALs

 

[Julio Tulio]

Santo Domingo is the golden rule meets the "its good to be the king"(in our case a member of the party in power).


Any case can be put away or dismissed there for a few thousand greenbacks,even murder.