Guillermo Moreno, dean of the UNIBE Law School, writes about the double standards in Dominican justice in his column in today’s Diario Libre. He explains that Dominican judges do not apply the same rigor to procedures and guarantees, and have two measures for judging people, depending on the subject, the people and their influences. “That is, our penal judges, with a surprising coherence, in matters of corruption will release the accused for lack of proof or because these were not legally obtained or because the right to defense was violated,” he writes. He observes that in the past 45 years, in matters of corruption, there have only been six definite sentences, of which five went on to be acquitted.
“Is it that no acts of corruption were committed during that period, or is it that we have not had state prosecutors to accuse and judges to penalize?” he asks. In his opinion, “It appears that the only cases in which the state prosecutors do not respect the guarantees or do not base them on evidence or sufficient proof is in matters of corruption,” he points out. He points out that he does not seek complacent judges with all cases presented by the state prosecution, but that society should aspire to a Judicial Branch made up of judges who are consistent in the interpreting and application of the rules.
“What is unacceptable is a biased and discriminatory judicial sector that applies the rules differently, depending on who they are judging,” he writes.