Acting Minister of Foreign Relations Jose Manuel Trullols is leading actions by the Ministry to use the diplomatic network to explain the Dominican government’s position on Constitutional Court ruling 168-13 that confirms the long-standing restrictions on birthright nationality.
“This action is aimed at explaining our official position on the ruling to the world, to fulfill President Danilo Medina’s instructions for it to be better understood and thus prevent false interpretations,” said Trullols.
The Constitutional Court of the Dominican Republic has issued a statement clarifying the notion that people born before Constitution 2010 had automatic right to Dominican citizenship. The statement explaining this misconception is published in several print media today, including the two free newspapers, Diario Libre and El Dia.
The Constitutional Court explains that there has not been a change in the way the Dominican Republic has dealt with the issue since the start of the 20th century when jus solis was incorporated in the Dominican constitution. It says the ruling cannot be retroactive because the 1929 Constitution confirms the decision that the jus solis, or birthright citizenship would not be allowed for people in transit. All subsequent Constitutions have contained this exception. The court says that there are countless precedents of cases in the judiciary where the term ‘in transit’ is defined as lack of permanent legal residence, going on to point out that Immigration Law 285-04 passed on 15 August 2004 establishes: “Non-residents are considered persons in transit, for the application of Art. 11 of the Constitution.”
The ruling was based on the case of Juliana Dequis or Deguis Pierre who took her case to the higher court when her birth certificate and cedula were not renewed on the grounds that they had been issued irregularly. The Constitutional Court says that Dequis was born to non-resident Haitian parents under the 1966 Constitution that established the exception for jus solis.
The Constitutional Court says that the legislative branch of government is in charge of establishing the conditions for nationality, and this is an internationally recognized prerogative. The Constitutional Court says that there is no legal standing for any debate on this sovereign right of the state to decide the grounds for nationality.
The Constitutional Court is responding to allegations that the ruling will make the children of parents without legal residence stateless. It explains that people in that situation will only acquire Dominican nationality when they do not have the right to another nationality, in keeping with the Children’s Rights Convention and the International Pact on Civil and Political Rights. The Haitian Constitution grants Haitian nationality to all children born to a Haitian parent, regardless of where the birth takes place.
“We would like to point out that contrary to claims that the ruling will make people stateless and denationalize supposed Dominican citizens, the ruling seeks instead to contribute to the regularization of the immigrant status of these people, who are currently in legal limbo. They will now have the opportunity to be part of economic, social and juridical life in the Dominican Republic with all the guarantees of a social and democratic rule of law. It is a responsible and fair ruling that seeks to correct situations that undermine human dignity.”
Ambassador Anibal de Castro also has responded to misconceptions in the New York Times 24 October article on the Constitutional Court ruling. See response in the dr1.com/forum link below.
http://www.dr1.com/forums/government/138645-disputing-misperceptions-constitutional-court-ruling-168-13-a.html
www.tribunalconstitucional.gob.do/node/1815
http://tribunalconstitucional.gob.do/sites/default/files/documentos/Sentencia%20TC%200168-13%20-%20C.pdf