DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 2022 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT

Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2022

United States Department of State • Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor

Page 2

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 2022 HUMAN RIGHTS

REPORT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Dominican Republic is a representative constitutional democracy. In 2020,

Luis Abinader of the Modern Revolutionary Party was elected president for a four-

year term, the first transfer of power from one party to another in 16 years.

Impartial outside observers assessed the election as generally free, fair, and

orderly.

The National Police and National Migration Directorate fall under the Ministry of

Interior and Police but in practice report directly to the president. The Airport

Security Authority, Port Security Authority, and Border Security Corps have some

domestic security responsibilities and report to the Ministry of Defense and

through that ministry to the president. The National Drug Control Directorate,

which has personnel from both police and the armed forces, reports directly to the

president, as does the National Department of Investigations. The National Drug

Control Directorate, National Department of Investigations, and National

Migration Directorate have significant domestic security responsibilities. The

Dominican Directorate of Prisons reports to the Attorney General’s Office.

Civilian authorities generally maintained effective control over the security forces.

There were reports that members of the security forces committed some abuses.

Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: unlawful or arbitrary

killings by government security forces; cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or

punishment by police and other government agents; harsh and life-threatening

prison conditions; arbitrary detention; arbitrary interference with privacy; serious

government corruption; and violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender,

queer, and intersex persons.

The government took steps in some cases to prosecute and punish officials who

committed human rights abuses or corrupt acts, but inconsistent and ineffective

application of the law sometimes led to impunity.

Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person

a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically

Motivated Killings

There were several reports that the National Police and other government security

forces committed arbitrary or unlawful killings of civilians. According to the

National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), at least 170 persons were killed by

the police during the year. While the Attorney General’s Office prosecuted some

high-profile cases of abuse by police, civil society representatives asserted that

many killings and abuses went unreported due to the public’s lack of faith in the

government to investigate and pursue charges or due to fear of retribution by

police.

There were reports of killings and unexplained deaths that occurred during

migration operations, which expanded significantly in the second half of the year.

In November the newspaper Hoy reported the death of a Haitian national, Delouise

Estimable, while in the custody of the National Migration Directorate (DGM). The

victim’s parents alleged the victim had been beaten by migration agents and locked

in a detention truck prior to his death. There were no indications that the DGM

investigated the case or took steps to hold migration officers accountable.

In June the newspaper Diario Libre reported that a group of seven individuals,

including three members of the military, killed a Haitian national and set fire to

eight homes in the La Rosa area of the Majagual sector, in a mountainous area of

the Galván municipality, Bahoruco Province.

According to a report published by the Socialist Movement of Workers (MST), in

March, DGM agents shot and killed a young Haitian man in his home and injured

another man during a raid in a residential area of Las Matas de Farfán, San Juan

Province, that was suspected of housing undocumented Haitian migrants. The

MST described the operation, and others launched throughout the year by DGM, as

being plagued by arbitrariness, robbery, and abuse by migration authorities.

Page 2

b. Disappearance

There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.

c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or

Punishment, and Other Related Abuses

Although the law prohibits torture, beating, and physical abuse, there were reports

that members of government security forces carried out such practices.

From March to May, the deaths of three individuals– José Gregorio Custodio,

Richard Báez, and David de los Santos – while in police custody reignited the

national debate regarding police reform. Police implicated in the incidents were

suspended and turned over to the Attorney General’s Office for prosecution. The

Ministry of Interior and Police publicly acknowledged the cases and recommitted

to implementing police reform initiatives.

Civil society organizations and other observers raised concerns over harsh and

often degrading treatment by migration authorities of undocumented Haitian

migrants and stateless persons of Haitian descent during DGM detention and

deportation operations and at DGM detention centers, particularly its facility in

Haina. These concerns included arbitrary detentions, physical abuse of detainees,

home entries without a warrant, revocation or destruction of identity documents,

theft of personal belongings by migration agents, children being kept in cells with

adults, sexual violence, inadequate access to healthcare throughout the deportation

process, the unlawful deportation of unaccompanied children and pregnant or

lactating mothers, and other hostile or abusive treatment.

In August, the government appointed a new DGM director general. According to

international and civil society observers, under the new director general’s

leadership, the problematic practices and conduct of DGM agents continued.

In September a Dominican citizen who was detained by migration officials under

the assumption that he was Haitian, reported that he was beaten repeatedly by

migration officials to quiet his protests. A partner organization later secured his

release while he was en route to the border for deportation, but he was detained

again at a military checkpoint on his way home. After several days, he was

Page 3

eventually released from custody through the help of a family member and a

lawyer.

In November multiple witnesses reported seeing migration officials beating

detainees with sticks, including two Haitian nationals who were beaten so badly

that they were left unconscious, to the point of requiring intervention by

emergency medical professionals. In another incident, a Haitian national reported

she was beaten during her detention and later thrown from a moving van by

migration officials as punishment for arguing with them. The incident left her with

visible wounds to her face that were not properly treated, resulting in infection.

The government did not provide any evidence that allegations of human rights

abuses by migration officials were seriously investigated or that the government

revised its detention practices.

In January President Abinader established the Commission for the Transformation

of the National Police, which he chaired. The commission included the minister of

the presidency, minister of interior and police, civil society representatives, and an

executive commissioner. The commission was charged with implementing the

recommendations of the December 2021 report Working Group for the

Transformation and Professionalization of the National Police, which, among

other recommendations, called for updates of police protocols based on ethics,

service to the citizenry, and protection of human rights.

Impunity remained a problem within the security forces, particularly the National

Police and the DGM. Civil society organizations reported that police announced

investigations into abuse complaints but did not consistently share the results

publicly. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) alleged that in some cases,

officers suspected of abuses were transferred to other parts of the country to avoid

punishment. The government worked to address issues related to impunity through

training programs for police officers, including specialized courses on human

rights, which were part of their continuing education courses. The government’s

reform and training efforts appeared limited to the National Police; there was no

indication the government undertook similar efforts for the DGM.

Page 4

Prison and Detention Center Conditions

The prison system consists of “new-model” prisons, called correctional

rehabilitation centers (CRCs), and “old-model” prisons, although there is no legal

distinction between them. Conditions ranged from general compliance with

international standards in the CRCs to harsh and life-threatening conditions in old-

model prisons due to overcrowding, violence, physical abuse, and poor living and

sanitary conditions.

Abusive Physical Conditions: Gross overcrowding and unsanitary conditions

remained a problem in many old-model prisons and migration detention centers, in

particular the facility in Haina. Most old-model prisons exceeded capacity, while

the CRCs did not. La Victoria, the oldest prison, held 7,761 inmates, although it

was designed for a maximum capacity of 2,103.

According to the Directorate of Prisons, military and police personnel guarded old-

model prisons, while a trained civilian corps guarded the CRCs. Reports of

mistreatment and violence in old-model prisons were common, as were reports of

harassment, extortion, and inappropriate searches of prison visitors. Some old-

model prisons remained effectively outside the control of authorities, with wardens

often controlling only the perimeter, while inmates controlled the inside with their

own rules and systems of justice. There were reports of drug trafficking, arms

trafficking, prostitution, and sexual abuse in those prisons. Although the law

mandates separation of prisoners according to severity of offense, authorities did

not follow these rules in the old-model prisons.

In old-model prisons, health and sanitary conditions were generally inadequate.

Due to a lack of space and available beds, as well as inadequate restroom facilities,

some inmates reported they had to sleep on the same floors where they were forced

to relieve themselves.

Observers reported inhuman conditions in migration detention centers, particularly

late in the year as detention and deportation operations surged and centers were

increasingly overcrowded. This included reports of overcrowded facilities with no

access to beds or seating, detainees being held outdoors, lack of access to

restrooms, detainees relieving themselves where they were being held, and lack of

Page 5

access to food or water for periods ranging from several hours to several days.

Some detention centers reportedly served one poor-quality meal a day at noon,

while others reportedly served no food or water at all, including to infants and

children. There were also credible reports that DGM agents committed acts of

sexual violence against detainees and that the DGM did not take the necessary

precautions to separate male and female detainees or separate adults from children

in its detention facilities.

Prison officials did not separate sick inmates, except for prisoners reporting

COVID-19 symptoms. Delays in receiving medical attention were common in

both the old-model prisons and the CRCs. All prisons had infirmaries, but most

infirmaries did not meet the needs of the prison population. In most cases, inmates

purchased their own medications or relied on family members or outside associates

to provide medications. According to the Directorate of Prisons, all prisons

provided treatment for HIV and AIDS, but the NHRC stated that none of the old-

model prisons was properly equipped to provide such treatment. Illness was the

primary cause of deaths reported in the prison system.

In the CRCs and certain old-model prisons, a subset of the prison population with

mental disabilities received treatment, including therapy, for their conditions. In

most old-model prisons, however, the government did not provide services to

prisoners with mental disabilities. In general, the mental-health services provided

to prisoners were inadequate or inconsistent with prisoners’ needs.

The government reported it had installed wheelchair ramps in some prisons for

prisoners with physical disabilities. NGOs claimed most prisons did not provide

access for inmates with disabilities.

Administration: Authorities investigated credible allegations of mistreatment.

Independent Monitoring: The government permitted visits to and monitoring of

prisons by independently funded and operated nongovernmental observers,

international organizations, and media. The NHRC, National Office of Public

Defense, Attorney General’s Office, and CRC prison administration together

created human rights committees in each CRC that were authorized to conduct

surprise visits. Access to migrant detention centers for monitoring, however, was

Page 6

not systematically granted to human rights organizations.

d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention

The constitution prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention and provides for the right

of any person to challenge the lawfulness of his or her detention in court. The

government generally observed this requirement, but arbitrary arrests and

detentions remained a problem. Civil society observers reported a sharp increase

in arbitrary arrests and detentions by migration authorities and other security forces

of persons perceived to be undocumented Haitian migrants, especially after

President Abinader announced deportations would increase in November.

Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees

The law provides that an accused person may be detained for up to 48 hours

without a warrant before being presented to judicial authorities. Nonetheless, there

were reports of detainees who remained in police stations for long periods of time,

even weeks, before being transferred to a prison. Police stations did not have

adequate physical conditions or the resources, including food, to provide for

detainees for an extended period.

The law permits police to apprehend, without an arrest warrant, any person caught

in the act of committing a crime or reasonably linked to a crime, such as cases

involving hot pursuit or escaped prisoners. Police often detained all suspects and

witnesses to a crime. It was common for authorities to detain, fingerprint,

question, and then release detainees with little or no explanation for the detention.

Successful habeas corpus hearings reduced abuses of the arrest law significantly.

There was a functioning bail system and a system of house arrest.

The law permits migration authorities to detain and deport a person when the

illegal migration status of the person is established, however, there were reports

that migration officials arbitrarily detained citizens and foreigners based primarily

on the perception they could be undocumented Haitian migrants. Many of these

persons were deported to Haiti. Others were released only after their legal status

could be proven, either by immediately providing documentation or after being

detained and moved to a migration detention center for verification, which often

required the intervention of family members or outside organizations.

Page 7

Additionally, migration law states minors, pregnant or lactating women, the

elderly, and asylum seekers should not be detained by migration officials, but

migration officials often detained and deported members of these groups.

The law requires provision of counsel to indigent defendants. The National Office

of Public Defense provided free legal aid to those who could not afford counsel,

but due to inadequate staffing, many detainees and prisoners who could not afford

private counsel did not have prompt access to a lawyer. Prosecutors and judges

handled interrogations of juveniles since the law prohibits interrogation of

juveniles by or in the presence of police.

Arbitrary Arrest: Police made sporadic sweeps or roundups in low-income,

high-crime communities during which they arrested and detained individuals

without warrants. During these operations, police detained large numbers of

residents and seized personal property allegedly used in criminal activity. Civil

society groups claimed police were often unable to show proof or provide reasons

for the detentions. The DGM employed similar tactics in its detention operations.

Civil society groups reported several instances of DGM operations targeting

persons of color suspected of being undocumented Haitians, resulting in both

lawful arrests and deportations, as well as instances of arbitrary detention of

citizens and foreigners with valid residency documents. Migration officials

reportedly confiscated or destroyed identity documents and held individuals until

bribes were paid.

In May media outlets and civil society organizations raised concerns regarding

arbitrary mass arrests and abusive treatment by migration agents during a large-

scale operation in the Ciudad Juan Bosch residential area. During this operation,

over 600 individuals were detained over several days and taken to the Haina

Detention Center on suspicion of being undocumented Haitian migrants. Credible

allegations included the detention of persons with valid documentation, cruel or

degrading treatment of migrants in custody (including beatings, denial of food and

water, and denial of access to restroom facilities), unlawful entry of private

residences, and removal of individuals from their homes without court orders.

According to the DGM, during one day of the operation, 325 of these detainees

were determined to be undocumented and scheduled for deportation, while 60 of

the detained individuals were determined to be legally present in the country and

Page 8

were eventually released. The government did not provide any evidence that

allegations of human rights abuses by migration officials were seriously

investigated. (See section 1.f. regarding arbitrary arrests.)

In June, migration agents wearing facial coverings raided and cleared the

restaurant L’Aromate Creole in Santiago and detained 21 individuals suspected of

being undocumented Haitians. According to civil society organizations, the DGM

claimed it was investigating a passport and visa trafficking gang, but it did not

have a search warrant for the operation, and many of the detained individuals had

valid citizenship or residency documents.

Civil society and international organizations reported that unlawful deportations of

documented and vulnerable persons continued as the government increased border

security measures and deportation operations. These deportations also included

cases of Haitian migrants and their children, as well as Dominican citizens, being

arbitrarily detained and deported because authorities did not permit them to

retrieve their immigration or citizenship documents from their residences.

There were reports of unlawful deportations of unaccompanied children, parents

who were forced to leave children behind, and women who were pregnant or

lactating. During a migration operation in late November, a woman reported she

had left her two daughters at home and fled to the local church. Upon returning

home, she found that the DGM had entered and taken away her daughters and

personal property. In October 2021, then Director General for Migration Enrique

Garcia stated that citizens “cannot allow them [Haitians] to take away our country”

and noted that “the Haitian solution is not in the Dominican Republic.” During a

December 2021 radio interview, Garcia stated that the deportation of pregnant

Haitians was not illegal since the law only prohibits their “detention.” He added

that he could even look for them “under the beds…because the law allows [him]

to.”

Civil society organization representatives said the government deported individuals

in violation of international standards by taking them across the border without

documentation, which the DGM referred to as “devolutions” or “not admitted.”

The International Organization for Migration (IOM) worked with the government

on a system for nonadmitted persons.

Page 9

Pretrial Detention: Many suspects endured long pretrial detention. A judge may

order detention lasting between three and 18 months. According to the Directorate

of Prisons, as of September, nearly 60 percent of all prisoners were in pretrial

detention. The length of such pretrial detentions occasionally equaled or exceeded

the maximum sentence for the alleged crime, with some detentions reportedly

lasting years. Time served in pretrial detention counted toward completing a

sentence.

The failure of prison authorities to produce detainees for court hearings caused trial

postponements. Many inmates had their court dates postponed due to a lack of

transportation from prison to court. In other cases, lawyers, codefendants,

interpreters, or witnesses did not appear or were not officially called by the court to

appear. Despite protections in the law for defendants, in some cases, authorities

held inmates beyond the legally mandated deadlines, even when there were no

formal charges against the inmates.

e. Denial of Fair Public Trial

The law provides for an independent judiciary. Observers noted the government

generally respected judicial independence and impartiality. The Attorney

General’s Office investigated high-level cases of corruption and drug trafficking,

including cases involving government allies.

Civil society and attorneys complained of the backlog of cases in the judicial

system and what they considered undue delay in legal proceedings.

Trial Procedures

The law provides for the right to a defense in a fair and public trial; however, the

judiciary did not always enforce this right. The courts sometimes exceeded the

maximum period of time established by the law for setting hearing dates. Due to

personnel and resource constraints in the legal system, some defendants were

denied one or more rights such as receiving a public defender or having the time

and facilities to prepare a defense.

Page 10

Political Prisoners and Detainees

There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.

Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies

There are separate court systems for criminal law, commercial law, civil law, labor

law, real estate law, and administrative law. Commercial and civil courts

reportedly had lengthy delays in adjudicating cases, although their ultimate

decisions were generally enforced. Political and economic influence in civil court

decisions continued to be a problem, although less so under the Abinader

administration.

Citizens have recourse to file a writ of amparo, an action to seek redress of any

violation of a constitutional right, including violations of fundamental rights.

f. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home,

or Correspondence

The law prohibits arbitrary entry into a private residence. The law provides that all

other entries into a private residence require an arrest or search warrant issued by a

judge, except when police are in hot pursuit of a suspect, a suspect is caught in the

act of committing a crime, or police suspect a life is in danger. Despite these limits

on government authorities, police and migration officials conducted illegal

searches and seizures, including raids without warrants on private residences in

poor neighborhoods. The government did not provide any evidence that these

alleged human rights abuses were seriously investigated.

In May media outlets published video of DGM agents in Ciudad Juan Bosch

climbing the balconies of multistory residential buildings to enter homes and detain

suspected undocumented Haitian migrants. Civil society organizations described

those actions and others that day as arbitrary entries into private residences because

the DGM agents lacked court orders. Civil society representatives also reported

instances of DGM agents taking money or personal property from both legal

residents and undocumented migrants. They said these actions were the type of

aggressive tactics frequently employed by the DGM during detention operations

targeting undocumented persons (see also section 1.d.). The government did not

Page 11

provide any evidence that the allegations of human rights abuses by migration

officials were seriously investigated, although it did confirm that no DGM agents

were punished in connection with the operation.

According to international and civil society observers, in November, during

intensified migration operations across the country ordered by President Abinader,

migration agents and other security forces unlawfully entered homes without

search warrants and detained individuals suspected of being undocumented Haitian

migrants without checking their documentation. During the operations, several

Dominican citizens were detained in public, including persons traveling to work

and a university student walking to class. Migration officials also broke into

homes, including those owned by Dominican citizens, and detained those who

could not prove their citizenship. A media outlet shared video of an incident in

Dajabon in which a man was pulled from his home into the street by security

forces as onlookers shouted, “He’s Dominican! He’s Dominican!”

In November, one organization gathered statements from witnesses reporting that

during a raid by migration officials and armed forces in a rural community in the

northwest, migration officials used force to break down doors to enter private

residences and used violence to detain individuals in the middle of the night,

apparently without court orders. In many cases, witnesses said, migration officials

demanded bribes or stole belongings from homes, and did not give detainees a

chance to dress or gather their belongings before locking them in vehicles for

transportation to migration detention facilities.

Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties

a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and

Other Media

The constitution provides for freedom of expression, including for members of the

press and other media, and the government generally respected this right. Media

expressed a wide variety of views, but the government, political parties, and large

businesses frequently influenced the press, in part through their large advertising

budgets. The concentration of media ownership, weaknesses in the judiciary, and

political influence also limited media’s independence.

Page 12

Freedom of Expression: Individuals and groups were generally able to criticize

the government publicly and privately without retaliation. There were incidents in

which authorities or political factions intimidated members of the press or online

content creators for media content that was critical of the state or on certain social

issues. In an extreme example, an individual faced harassment and remained under

pretrial probation for more than two years for retweeting an altered image of a

historical figure; a judge determined the retweet violated the law regarding national

figures and symbols.

Censorship or Content Restrictions for Members of the Press and Other

Media, including Online Media: Observers indicated the government exerted

influence on the press, including through advertising contracts. Additionally,

journalists likely practiced self-censorship, particularly when coverage could

adversely affect the economic or political interests of government leaders or media

owners.

Libel/Slander Laws: The law criminalizes defamation and insult, with harsher

punishment for offenses committed against public or state figures than for offenses

against private individuals. The law penalizes libel for statements concerning the

private lives of certain public figures, including government officials and foreign

heads of state. The were no reported cases of government or public figures using

these laws to punish critics of the government or retaliate against journalists or

political opponents.

Internet Freedom

The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online

content. There were no credible reports that the government monitored private

online communications without appropriate legal authority.

b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association

The law provides for the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, and the

government generally respected these rights.

Page 13

Freedom of Peaceful Assembly

While the freedom of peaceful assembly was largely protected and respected,

confrontations between protesters and security forces, and between different

groups of protesters, occurred. Nationalist groups, which held large protests in

Santo Domingo and other cities without government interference, often disrupted

other gatherings with little reaction from the National Police, such as the

harassment and intimidation of activists protesting the “Day of the Race” in

Columbus Park in October. Conversely, in July, security forces aggressively

intervened using fencing, batons, and pepper spray to block medical personnel

from the Colegio Medico Dominicano who were marching in protest outside the

National Palace and calling for employment benefits and improvements in the

health-care system.

c. Freedom of Religion

See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at

https://www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.

d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country

The law provides for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration,

and repatriation, and the government generally respected these related rights, with

some exceptions.

In-country Movement: Civil society representatives reported that citizens of

Haitian descent, those perceived to be Haitian, Haitian migrants, and stateless

individuals faced obstacles while traveling within the country. NGO

representatives reported that security forces at times asked travelers to show

immigration and citizenship documents at road checkpoints throughout the

country. Citizens of Haitian descent and migrants without valid identity

documents (and even some who held valid documents) reported fear of swift

deportation when traveling within the country, especially near the border with

Haiti. This fear of deportation led to these persons limiting their movements

outside of their residential communities, thus restricting their ability to access

health care and employment and inhibiting their labor rights under the law (see

Page 14

also section 1.d.).

Citizenship: Civil society organizations reported instances of citizens of Haitian

descent having their citizenship documentation confiscated on an arbitrary or

discriminatory basis by police, migration officers, health-care workers, or other

government officials who required the presentation of such documentation (see

also section 2.g.).

e. Protection of Refugees

The government cooperated in a limited manner with the Office of the UN High

Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other humanitarian organizations in

providing protection and assistance to refugees, returning refugees, or asylum

seekers, as well as other persons of concern.

In mid-2021, the government registered approximately 43,000 Venezuelan

nationals residing in the country with irregular migration status. Registered

individuals received a 60-day extension of legal status and those approved could

apply for a temporary work or education visa. This status may be automatically

renewed until the National Council on Migration declares an end to the current

extraordinary situation in Venezuela. The program applied to Venezuelans,

including children, who entered the country legally between January 2014 and

March 2020. The government allowed Venezuelan applicants to apply with

expired passports, which was not allowed for other foreigners.

The government and NGOs estimated an additional 100,000 Venezuelans lived in

the country in an irregular migration status. In 2019, the government instituted a

regulation requiring Venezuelans to apply for a tourist visa before entering the

country. Previously, Venezuelans needed only a valid passport and could receive a

tourist visa at the point of entry. Many Venezuelans in the country entered legally

before the new regulation and stayed longer than the three-month allowance.

Venezuelan refugee and immigrant associations, with the support of the IOM,

UNHCR, and the Coordination Platform for Refugees and Migrants from

Venezuela (R4V Platform), coordinated with the government and civil society

organizations to provide public-health and legal services for Venezuelan refugees

and migrants. The R4V Platform was a regional interagency platform, led by the

Page 15

IOM and UNHCR, for coordinating the humanitarian response for refugees and

migrants from Venezuela.

Access to Asylum: Presidential decrees from the 1980s established a system for

granting asylum or refugee status; however, the system was not implemented

through legislation. The constitution prohibits administrative detention of asylum

seekers, and migration law establishes that asylum seekers should not be detained

under any circumstance. The system for providing protection to refugees was not

effectively implemented and falls short of international standards. The government

recognized and issued identity documents to fewer than 10 refugees during the past

few years. Rejection rates for asylum claims were above 90 percent, and asylum

applications often remained pending for several years.

The National Commission for Refugees (CONARE), an interministerial body led

by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, was responsible for adjudicating asylum claims.

The process requires individuals to apply for asylum within 15 days of arrival in

the country. If an asylum seeker was in the country for more than 15 days before

applying for asylum, CONARE usually rejected the case on procedural grounds

without analyzing the merit of the claim. CONARE also tended to reject any

asylum application from an individual who was in, or who proceeded from, a

foreign country where the individual could have sought asylum, considering it a

“safe third country” even when there was no demonstration of the safety or

availability of refugee protection procedures in such countries.

NGOs working with refugees and asylum seekers reported there was no

information posted online or at points of entry to provide notice of the right to seek

asylum, or of the timeline and process for doing so. The national asylum system

remained highly centralized; asylum applications can only be submitted in person

in the capital. Persons arriving through the land border or at international airports

and ports were at risk of immediate deportation due to the lack of a clear process

for formalizing asylum claims.

NGO representatives reported that immigration and other security officials did not

handle asylum cases in a manner consistent with the country’s international

commitments. The government’s obligation to ensure due process to asylum

applicants who express a fear of return to their country stems from the country’s

Page 16

international human rights commitments, which have constitutional standing.

Nonetheless, there was generally neither judicial review of deportation orders nor

any third-party review of “credible fear” determinations.

UN officials reported asylum seekers were not consistently notified of

inadmissibility decisions. CONARE did not provide rejected asylum seekers with

details of the grounds for the rejection of their asylum application or with

information on the appeal process. Rejected applicants received a letter stating

they had 30 days to leave the country voluntarily. According to government

policy, from the time they receive the notice of denial, rejected asylum seekers

have seven days to file an appeal. The notice-of-denial letter does not mention this

right of appeal.

Observers reported that a lack of due process in migration procedures resulted in

arbitrary detention of persons with no administrative or judicial review (see also

section 1.d.). As a result, asylum seekers and refugees in the country were at risk

of refoulement and prolonged detention.

According to refugee organizations, CONARE does not acknowledge that the 1951

Refugee Convention’s definition of a refugee applies to persons who express a

well-founded fear of persecution perpetrated by nonstate agents. This lack of

acknowledgement had a detrimental effect on persons fleeing sexual and gender-

based violence, trafficking, sexual exploitation, and discrimination due to their

sexual orientation or gender identity.

Refoulement: There were reports of persons potentially in need of international

protection who were denied admission at the point of entry and subsequently

deported to their countries of origin without being granted access to the asylum

process (see also section 1.d.).

Freedom of Movement: Persons claiming asylum often waited months to receive

a certificate as an asylum seeker and to be registered in the government database.

The certificate had to be renewed every 30 days at the national office in Santo

Domingo, forcing asylum seekers who lived outside Santo Domingo to return

monthly to the capital, accompanied by all their family members, or lose their

claim to asylum. At the same time, this mandatory monthly movement within the

Page 17

country further exposed the asylum seekers to the risk of detention and

refoulement. Observers reported individual instances of asylum seekers being

detained on the way to renew their certificate. Asylum seekers with pending cases

had only this certificate, or sometimes nothing at all, to present to avoid

deportation. This restricted their freedom of movement. During the year, these

certificates did not protect asylum seekers from detention and removal by

migration officers, including to countries where they had expressed a fear of

return.

Top migration officials openly admitted removing individuals holding asylum

certificates, which they justified on the basis that the certificates were easy to

forge. In several cases where asylum seekers were detained for lack of

documentation, refugee and human rights organizations were able to advocate for

their release, although incidents were reported of refoulment of asylum seekers

who had claims pending with CONARE.

Some refugees recognized by CONARE were issued travel documents that were

not accepted in visa application processes, and some were not issued travel

documents at all.

Employment: Some approved refugees were unable to acquire from government

authorities the documentation they needed to work.

Access to Basic Services: Approved refugees have the same rights and

responsibilities as legal migrants with temporary residence permits. Approved

refugees have the right to education, employment, health care, and other social

services. Nonetheless, refugee organizations reported that problems remained,

particularly related to refugees’ ability to afford such services. Refugees reported

their government-issued identification numbers were sometimes not recognized,

and thus they could not open a bank account or begin service contracts for basic

utilities. Refugees sometimes had to rely on friends or family for such services.

Temporary Protection: Launched in 2013, the National Regularization Plan for

Foreigners (PNRE) enabled undocumented migrants in the country to apply for

temporary legal residency. Although the exact number of undocumented migrants

was unknown, in 2013, the government granted temporary residency status to more

Page 18

than 260,000 applicants, 97 percent of whom were Haitian. The vast majority of

such permits expired.

Observers described the PNRE as a failure. Under the administration of President

Abinader, the government imposed strict documentary requirements and other

hurdles that made it impossible for most of the beneficiaries under the PNRE to

renew their status. As a result, almost all of the 260,000 individuals who were

granted temporary residency status under the PNRE had fallen out of status,

leaving them vulnerable to heightened migration enforcement and deportation.

No temporary residence documents were granted to asylum seekers; those found to

be admissible to the process were issued a paper certificate that supposedly

provided them with protection from deportation but did not confer other rights.

This certificate often took months to be delivered to asylum seekers. Due in part to

this delay, both refugees and asylum seekers lived on the margins of the migration

system. Even many asylum seekers who held valid certificates were detained by

the DGM and deported to countries to which they had expressed a fear of return.

Foreigners often were asked to present legal migration documents to obtain legal

assistance or to access the judicial system; therefore, the many refugees and

asylum seekers who lacked these documents were unable to access legal help for

situations they faced under criminal, labor, family, or civil law.

Refugees recognized by CONARE were issued one-year temporary residence

permits that could not be converted to a permanent residence permit and must

undergo annual reevaluation of the person’s need for international protection, a

procedure contrary to international standards. Overall, observers said the process

for refugees lacked a pathway to effective local integration as a durable solution.

f. Status and Treatment of Internally Displaced Persons

Not applicable.

g. Stateless Persons

A large population of stateless persons resided in the country. A constitutional

change in 2010 and a 2013 Constitutional Tribunal ruling revised the country’s

Page 19

citizenship laws. One effect was to retroactively strip citizenship from more than

100,000 persons, mostly the children of undocumented Haitian migrants, who

previously had citizenship by virtue of the jus soli (citizenship by birth within the

country) policy in place since 1929.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights found that these legal revisions

led to statelessness for the persons who lost their citizenship. UN officials and

NGOs stated the legal changes had a disproportionate and negative impact on

women and their children. All stateless persons were at increased risk for human

trafficking.

Dominican-born persons with expired documents or without citizenship or identity

documents faced obstacles traveling both within and outside the country. Stateless

persons did not have access to electoral participation, formal-sector employment,

marriage registration, birth registration, formal loans, judicial procedures, state

social-protection programs, or property ownership. The access of stateless persons

to primary public education and health care was limited. In addition, those able to

receive an education did not receive official recognition, such as a diploma, for

completed schooling and were not allowed to attend universities.

Law 169-14, introduced in 2014, includes a mechanism to provide citizenship

papers or a naturalization process to persons rendered stateless by the 2013

Constitutional Tribunal ruling. The exact mechanism depended on the status of the

individual prior to the 2010 change in the constitution. Those determined to have

been registered in the civil registry at birth (Group A) could apply for citizenship

documents immediately, while those not registered at birth (Group B) were forced

to register as “foreigners” under the PNRE and apply for naturalization only after a

two-year residency period.

In practice, the 2014 documentation mechanism was only partially successful.

Many stateless persons were not able to claim their citizenship documents. Others

did not register and consequently had no legal path to citizenship. In 2020, the

outgoing government approved the naturalization of 749 individuals, most of

whom were minors who were stripped of their citizenship by the 2013

Constitutional Tribunal ruling and who were part of Group B. In May 2021,

President Abinader approved the naturalization of an additional 50 individuals

Page 20

from the same group. There were initial reports that some of the 799 individuals

began receiving identification documents in late 2022.

In 2014, through a mechanism outlined in the law for individuals who were

registered at birth in the civil registry (Group A), the government identified more

than 60,000 persons who were eligible to receive nationality documentation

confirming their Dominican citizenship. The Central Electoral Board (JCE) issued

birth certificates and national identity documents to approximately 26,000

individuals, leaving 34,000 eligible Group A beneficiaries who did not receive

national identity documents. As of December, many of those additional

individuals had not been identified or had not received an identity document due to

concerns regarding their supporting documentation. The pool of individuals

identified as potentially part of Group A extended back to individuals born as early

as 1929. Because a number of those individuals may have died or moved out of

the country in the ensuing decades, the remaining number of eligible Group A

individuals could be smaller than the 34,000 persons previously identified by the

JCE. Observers called on the government to enhance efforts to audit and

investigate the outstanding claims by members of Group A.

According to observers, approximately 7,000 stateless individuals falling under the

Group B profile who registered with the government under the PNRE and were on

track for naturalization after a two-year residency period had since seen their

documents expire. The office responsible for registering foreigners ceased

operations in February 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and as of December

2022, it had not reopened, leaving these individuals in a state of legal limbo,

unable to access public services and vulnerable to deportation. Observers called on

the government to facilitate the renewal of residence permits and identity cards,

and to review the naturalization claims, for members of Group B.

A number of other stateless individuals were unable or unwilling to register as

“foreigners” during the 180-day application window established by Law 169-14.

As of December, there was no way for this second group of an estimated 23,000

persons, known as Group B2, to register as foreigners or secure Dominican

nationality.

Page 21

Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process

The constitution provides citizens the ability to choose their government in free

and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on nearly universal,

direct, and equal suffrage. Active-duty police and military personnel are

prohibited from voting or participating in partisan political activities.

Elections and Political Participation

Recent Elections: In the 2020 election, Luis Abinader of the Modern

Revolutionary Party was elected as president for a four-year term. This was the

first time since 2000 that a member of the opposition party won a presidential

election. Some congressional and municipal races remained contested for weeks,

leading to sporadic protests and violence, mainly in the National District, regarding

seats in the lower chamber of congress. Overall, however, civil society and

international observers praised the citizens and electoral authorities for a voting

process that was orderly and largely peaceful, despite complications from COVID-

19.

During both the municipal and presidential elections, the Organization of

American States (OAS) and domestic observers noted widespread illegal political

campaigning immediately outside of voting stations, indications of vote buying,

lack of financial transparency by political parties and candidates, and illegal use of

public funds during the campaign. Most electoral crimes were not prosecuted.

Political Parties and Political Participation: By law, major parties, defined as

those that received 5 percent of the vote or more in the previous election, receive

80 percent of public campaign finances, while minor parties share the remaining 20

percent. The OAS, domestic NGOs, and minor parties criticized this allocation of

funding as unequal and unfair. Civil society groups criticized the government and

the then ruling Dominican Liberation Party for using public funds to pay for

advertising shortly before the elections, despite the legal prohibition on the use of

public funds for campaigns.

Participation of Women and Members of Minority Groups: No laws limit the

participation of women or members of minority groups in the political process, and

Page 22

they did participate.

Section 4. Corruption and Lack of Transparency in

Government

The law provides criminal penalties for corruption by officials, and in a change

from years past noted by independent observers, the government generally

implemented the law effectively. The attorney general, through the Office of the

Specialized Prosecutor on Administrative Corruption (PEPCA), investigated

allegedly corrupt officials. Nonetheless, government corruption remained a serious

problem.

NGO representatives said that previously the greatest hindrance to effective

investigations was a lack of political will to prosecute individuals accused of

corruption, particularly well-connected individuals or high-level politicians. In

recent years, the attorney general pursued several cases against public officials,

including high-level politicians and their families, although most had not yet been

prosecuted in court, and the legal system’s ability to successfully do so remained in

question.

Corruption: NGOs and individual citizens regularly reported acts of corruption

by various law enforcement officials, including police, immigration officials, and

prison officials. The government on occasion used nonjudicial punishments as a

tool to fight corruption, including dismissal or transfer of military personnel,

police, judges, and minor officials.

On August 28, the coordinating judge for the Examining Court of the National

District authorized PEPCA to move forward with a corruption investigation against

Donald Guerrero, minister of finance during the Medina administration from 2016

to 2020. According to PEPCA, Guerrero was being investigated for alleged

conspiracy to commit corruption, falsification, public fraud, bribery, and money

laundering while in office. The investigation included several other former

officials, including former administrator of BanReservas, the state-owned bank; the

former general comptroller; and the former general director of the budget. PEPCA

stated that this group of officials took advantage of the payments of public debts

related to land expropriations and purchase of lands by the government by taking

Page 23

bribes and negotiating payments with the affected families while in office.

Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and

Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human

Rights

A number of domestic and international organizations generally operated without

government restriction, investigating and publishing their findings on human rights

cases. While government officials often were cooperative and responsive to their

views, human rights groups that advocated for the rights of Haitians and persons of

Haitian descent faced occasional government obstruction.

The United Nations or Other International Bodies: The government

maintained a generally positive relationship with the UN country office and

subordinate organizations. Some UN organizations, however, were authorized

only on a year-to-year basis, thus requiring frequent negotiation of new

authorizations. This limited their ability to implement long-term programming and

restricted potential support to vulnerable populations. UN organizations also

experienced protests, harassment, and intimidation by far-right nationalist groups,

to the extent that some senior UN officials had to leave the country for periods of

time. It was unclear to what extent the government was investigating or addressing

these threats.

Government Human Rights Bodies: The constitution establishes the position of

human rights ombudsperson to safeguard human rights and protect collective

interests, although it was unclear whether the office was independent and effective.

There was also a human rights commission, cochaired by the minister of foreign

affairs and the attorney general. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, under the

direction of the Presidency, coordinated the National Action Plan for human rights,

which outlined shared goals and allocated responsibilities between the government

ministries and other public entities. The Attorney General’s Office had its own

human rights division.

Page 24

Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses

Women

Rape and Domestic Violence: The law criminalizes rape of men and women,

spousal rape, domestic violence, incest, and sexual aggression. While many cases

were prosecuted, observers estimated many more went unreported due to victims’

lack of confidence in the justice system. Sentences for rape range from 10 to 15

years in prison and an additional modest fine. The Attorney General’s Office

oversees the Violence Prevention and Attention Unit, which had 19 offices among

the country’s 32 provinces. The office instructed its officers not to settle cases of

violence against women and to continue judicial processes even when survivors

withdrew charges. District attorneys played a key role in providing assistance and

protection to survivors of violence by referring them to appropriate institutions for

legal, medical, and psychological counseling.

The Ministry of Women promoted equality and worked to prevent violence against

women and members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex

(LGBTQI+) community by implementing education and awareness programs, as

well as providing training programs for other ministries and offices. The ministry

managed 15 shelters for women and child victims of violence, including one

dedicated to victims of trafficking. The ministry also hosted training in

collaboration with the Attorney General’s Office, National Police, and the National

Institute for Migration to strengthen comprehensive assistance to survivors of

gender-based violence, including survivors of human trafficking.

The Ministry of Women provided psychological services, legal services, and

economic reparation, and operated an emergency assistance telephone line for

women who were survivors of violence and threats. The ministry liaised with

other ministries and government offices to promote gender mainstreaming and

nondiscrimination of women in all spheres of public and private life, including

women’s political, economic, political, and individual rights. NGO representatives

generally welcomed these and other efforts but insisted more was needed.

Other Forms of Gender-based Violence: The Attorney General’s Office

registered several dozen femicides, killings of women committed by a partner or

Page 25

former partner. Acid attacks, predominantly against women, with a mix of

sulfuric, hydrochloric, and muriatic acid, a concoction commonly referred to as

devil’s acid, made up 7 percent of annual admissions to the burn unit in the

country’s largest trauma center. In September 2021, Attorney General Miriam

German instructed public prosecutors to treat attacks with devil’s acid as “acts of

torture or cruelty.” Persons convicted of this crime received sentences of up to 20

years’ imprisonment but often spent only a few years in prison, according to civil

society organizations.

Sexual Harassment: The law defines sexual harassment by an authority figure as

a misdemeanor; conviction carries a sentence of one year in prison and a large fine.

Observers reported the law was not adequately enforced and that sexual

harassment remained a problem.

Reproductive Rights: There were no reports of coerced abortion on the part of

the government, although involuntary sterilization reportedly was performed on

poor and disabled women without their consent, according to civil society

observers.

Economic and cultural barriers prevented couples and individuals, especially

women and young persons, from accessing contraception. Low incomes and lack

of educational programs in schools were barriers to many persons who needed

information and resources for family planning and reproductive health care. While

family-planning NGOs provided contraceptives without charge, many low-income

women, particularly those in rural areas, lacked access or used contraceptives

inconsistently due to costs, irregular availability, societal influences, and cultural

male dominance. According to civil society observers, such low-income, rural

women were likely to experience obstacles in accessing inpatient health care for

pregnancy and childbirth, as well as most other health services. Emergency

contraception was available for purchase without prescription at most pharmacies.

The government provided some access to sexual and reproductive health services

for survivors of sexual violence through the Ministry of Women, but most of the

burden for providing these services fell on women’s rights NGOs. The Ministry of

Women managed the Center for the Promotion of Comprehensive Health for

Adolescents, offering comprehensive education on sexual health to young persons

Page 26

in order to contribute to informed decision-making on sexual and reproductive

health.

According to the Ministry of Public Health and other observers, the maternal death

rate was 97 per 100,000 births, a decline from previous years, while the adolescent

pregnancy rate remained above 20 percent for girls and young women ages 15 to

19. According to civil society observers, pregnant students and young mothers

often found it difficult or impossible to continue their education. They cited many

reasons, including the impact of pregnancy on their health and deficiencies in the

educational system that prevented many women and girls from returning to school.

Many young mothers or pregnant girls were expelled from school, although it was

illegal to do so, or were moved to night classes under the pretext that they were a

“bad example” to other students. Observers also noted that once young women

and girls became pregnant, their families and communities considered them

emancipated, regardless of their age, and the young women and girls were

expected to stay home to take care of the baby and carry out other household

chores.

Discrimination: Although the law provides women and men the same legal

rights, women did not enjoy social and economic status or opportunity equal to that

of men. Civil society organizations explained that women faced obstacles

regarding economic equality and independence. In addition, no law requires equal

pay for equal work. Observers reported women who lived in rural areas, women of

color, women with disabilities, and women who were undocumented migrants

faced higher rates of discrimination.

Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination

The law prohibits discrimination based on skin color and nationality. There was

evidence of racial prejudice and discrimination by the security forces and other

government offices against persons of dark complexion, Haitians, or those

perceived to be Haitian, especially those who were perceived to be undocumented

migrants. Civil society and international organizations reported that officials

denied health care and documentation services to persons of Haitian descent and

Haitian migrants (see also sections 1.d., 2.d., and 2.g.).

Page 27

Darker-complected persons experienced discrimination when accessing a variety

of government services. Hospitals sometimes wrongfully gave pink birth

certificates (indicating foreigner status) to children of parents assumed to be

Haitian migrants based on the color of their skin, accent, or name. Police,

migration agents, and other security forces detained persons of Haitian descent for

deportation or alleged crimes based on their skin color, their accent, their place of

residence, or their name. Observers reported incidents of citizens being detained

under suspicion they were undocumented Haitian migrants and transported to

migration detention centers before authorities determined their legal status and

released them.

Office closures and bureaucratic hurdles prevented persons of Haitian descent from

applying for naturalization or registering as foreigners, while those persons were

simultaneously being targeted for deportation to Haiti for not having such

identification documents. In November 2021, as part of newly instituted migration

policies to curb the prevalence of undocumented immigrants, the country began

unlawfully deporting Haitians and persons of Haitian descent who were pregnant

or recently gave birth.

Children

Birth Registration: Citizenship comes with birth in the country, except to

children born to diplomats, to those who are “in transit,” or to parents who are

illegally in the country (see also section 2.g.). A child born abroad to a Dominican

mother or father may also acquire citizenship. Children not registered at birth

remain undocumented until the parents file a late declaration of birth.

The law requires a special birth certificate for children born to foreign women who

do not have documentation of legal residency. Observers reported that some

mothers faced discrimination while registering the births of their children despite

the fathers being Dominican, in particular, mothers of Haitian origin who were

legally stateless or undocumented migrants. This was less frequent in the reverse

situation when children were born to a Dominican-citizen mother and a foreign-

born father. These obstacles to timely birth registration, which is necessary to

determine citizenship, put at risk children’s access to a wide range of rights,

including the right to nationality, to a name and identity, and to equality before the

Page 28

law.

Education: Education was free and compulsory at the primary level, and free but

not mandatory at the secondary level. Observers reported that children of

undocumented migrants were denied access to schools and were not allowed to

obtain diplomas or apply to university.

Child Abuse: Abuse of children younger than age 18, including physical, sexual,

and psychological abuse, was a serious problem. The law contains provisions

concerning child abuse, including physical and emotional mistreatment, sexual

exploitation, and child labor. The law provides for sentences of two to five years’

incarceration and a large fine for persons convicted of physical and psychological

abuse of a minor. Despite this legal framework for combatting child abuse, local

NGOs reported that few abuse cases were reported to authorities and fewer still

were prosecuted.

Child, Early, and Forced Marriage: A January 2021 law prohibits marriage of

persons younger than 18. The law in part aimed to prevent girls from becoming

trafficking victims. Girls often married much older men and were considered

emancipated upon marriage. Child marriage occurred more frequently among girls

who were uneducated, poor, and living in rural areas. According to data from

UNICEF in 2019, 36 percent of Dominican women were married or in a union by

age 18. More than 58 percent of women in the country’s poorest quintile were

married or cohabitating by age 18.

Sexual Exploitation of Children: The law defines statutory rape as sexual

relations with anyone younger than 18. Penalties for conviction of statutory rape

are 10 to 20 years in prison and a significant fine.

The law prohibits child pornography and commercial sexual exploitation of

children. Observers reported children were trafficked for commercial sex,

particularly in tourist locations and major urban areas, and child pornography was

rampant and growing due to the ease of online exploitation. The government

conducted successful law enforcement operations and training programs to combat

the sexual exploitation of minors.

Displaced Children: Large populations of children, primarily Haitians or persons

Page 29

of Haitian descent, lived on the streets and were vulnerable to trafficking.

Antisemitism

The Jewish community comprised approximately 350 persons. There were no

reports of antisemitic acts.

Trafficking in Persons

See the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at

https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/

Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on

Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex

Characteristics

Criminalization: The law does not criminalize consensual same-sex sexual

conduct between adults or so-called cross-dressing. According to civil society

observers, there were cases of members of the LGBTQI+ community, in particular

transgender women, being arbitrarily harassed, abused, and arrested by police and

other authority figures who cited public indecency, loitering, or other seemingly

neutral laws to justify their actions.

Violence against LGBTQI+ Persons: Violence and threats of violence against

LGBTQI+ persons were common, especially against gay men, lesbians, and

transgender women. Victims often declined to file complaints due to fears of

further harassment or being outed. The National Police largely failed to respond to

reports of these crimes because police generally did not prioritize this victim group

and often showed indifference or outright hostility to the LGBTQI+ community.

Prosecutors referred cases of violence against LGBTQI+ persons to the Attorney

General’s Human Rights Unit.

Media and civil society observers highlighted several reports of LGBTQI+ persons

being targeted for robbery, extortion, abuse, or murder through location-based

dating apps. In July Frederick Perez was killed by a group of men who targeted

him through an app. A media program by journalist Altagracia Salazar broadcast

following Perez’s killing pointed out that a large number of young, middle-class

Page 30

men “of a very similar profile” had gone missing or were killed in recent years. In

December, civil society organizations identified 15 violent murders against

LGBTQI+ persons that occurred during the year. Civil society representatives

called on the government to investigate and to take action to prevent future

violence targeting members of the LGBTQI+ community.

Discrimination: The constitution protects the principles of nondiscrimination and

equality before the law, but it does not specifically include sexual orientation,

gender identity and expression, or sex characteristics as protected categories. It

prohibits discrimination on the grounds of “social or personal condition” and

mandates that the state “prevent and combat discrimination, marginalization,

vulnerability, and exclusion.” The law prohibits discrimination based on sexual

orientation and gender identity only for policies related to youth and youth

development.

Civil society organizations reported widespread discrimination against LGBTQI+

persons, especially transgender individuals (both transfeminine and

transmasculine), which limited their ability to access education, employment,

health care, housing, justice, security, and other services.

Availability of Legal Gender Recognition: The government does not allow

transgender or intersex individuals to change the gender listed on their identity

documents to align with their gender identity and sex characteristics. There was no

option to identify as nonbinary, intersex, or gender nonconforming. This was a

source of harassment for many persons attempting to access public services.

Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices Specifically

Targeting LGBTQI+ Individuals: The government and health authorities did not

take a public position on so-called conversion therapy practices. According to civil

society organizations, religious groups attempted to “convert” LGBTQI+ persons

into heterosexuals through practices that were emotionally and physically

damaging.

Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly:

There are no anti-LGBTQI+ propaganda laws, “hate speech” laws, or other laws or

legal restrictions on the ability of LGBTQI+ organizations to legally register or

Page 31

convene events such as Pride festivities. According to civil society observers,

however, unequal enforcement of the law or support from public institutions

sometimes limited LGBTQI+ individuals and organizations from exercising these

rights on an equal basis.

Persons with Disabilities

Persons with disabilities were unable to access education, health services, public

buildings, or transportation on an equal basis with others. The law states the

government should provide access to the labor market and to cultural, recreational,

and religious activities for persons with disabilities, as well as physical access to

all new public and private buildings. The law was not consistently enforced. The

law specifies that each ministry should collaborate with the National Disability

Council to implement these provisions. Very few public buildings were fully

accessible. Lack of accessible public transportation was a major impediment.

There were three government centers for the care of children with disabilities: one

each in Santo Domingo, Santiago de los Caballeros, and San Juan de la Maguana.

These centers served a small percentage of the population with disabilities,

offering services to children with cerebral palsy, Down syndrome, and autism

spectrum disorder. The centers had lengthy waiting lists for children seeking care.

According to a 2016 Ministry of Education report, 80 percent of registered students

with disabilities attended some form of school.

Other Societal Violence or Discrimination

There were reports of citizens attacking and sometimes killing suspected criminals

in vigilante retaliations for theft, robbery, or burglary. Authorities usually

investigated these incidents and prosecuted those involved.

Although the law prohibits the use of HIV testing to screen employees, the

government, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the International

Labor Organization (ILO) reported that workers in various industries faced

obligatory HIV testing. Workers were sometimes tested without their knowledge

or consent. Many job applicants found to have HIV were not hired, and some of

those already employed were either fired from their jobs or denied adequate health

Page 32

care.

Section 7. Worker Rights

a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining

The law provides for the right of workers, with the exception of the military and

police, to form and join independent unions, conduct legal strikes, and bargain

collectively; however, it places several restrictions on these rights. For example,

the law restricts collective bargaining rights to those unions that represent a

minimum of 51 percent of the workers in an enterprise. In addition, the law

prohibits strikes until mandatory mediation requirements have been met. Formal

strikes occurred but were not common.

Formal requirements for a strike to be legal include the support of an absolute

majority of all company workers for the strike, written notification to the Ministry

of Labor, and a 10-day waiting period following notification before the strike can

proceed. Government workers and essential public-service personnel may not

strike. The government adopted a broad definition of essential workers that

included teachers and public-service workers in communications, water supply,

energy supply, hospitals, and pharmacies.

The law prohibits antiunion discrimination and forbids employers from dismissing

an employee for participating in union activities, including being on a committee

seeking to form a union. Although the Ministry of Labor must register a union for

the union to be legal, the law provides for automatic recognition of a union if the

ministry does not act on an application within 30 days. The law allows unions to

conduct their activities without government interference.

Public-sector workers may form associations registered through the Office of

Public Administration. For the association to be formed, the law requires that 40

percent of employees of a government entity agree to join. According to the

Ministry of Labor, the labor code applies to all workers, including foreign workers,

those working as domestic workers, workers without legal documentation, and

workers in the free-trade zones.

The government did not effectively enforce laws related to freedom of association

Page 33

and collective bargaining, and penalties were less than those for other laws

involving denials of civil rights. Penalties were rarely applied against violators.

The process for addressing labor violations through criminal courts could take

years, leaving workers with limited protection in the meantime.

In recent years, there were reports of intimidation, threats, and blackmail by

employers to prevent union activity. Some unions required members to provide

identity documents to participate in the union even though the labor code protects

all workers regardless of their legal status.

Labor NGO representatives reported companies resisted collective negotiating

practices and union activities. In recent years, companies reportedly fired workers

for union activity and blacklisted trade unionists, among other antiunion practices.

Workers reported they believed they had to sign documents pledging to abstain

from participating in union activities. Companies also created and supported

“yellow” or company-backed unions to counter free and democratic unions.

Although some companies had collective bargaining agreements, other companies

created obstacles to union formation and used expensive and lengthy judicial

processes to avoid independent unions and collective bargaining.

b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor

The law prohibits and criminalizes all forms of forced labor. The government did

not consistently enforce the law. The law prescribes imprisonment of 15-20 years

and fines for persons convicted of exploiting forced labor; penalties were less than

penalties for similar crimes such as kidnapping. Penalties were rarely applied

against violators.

Civil society organizations reported that forced labor of adults, particularly

undocumented Haitian migrants and stateless persons of Haitian descent, likely

occurred in the construction, agriculture, and service sectors. Advocates for these

workers reported receiving threats. Forced labor of children also likely occurred

(see section 7.c.). International observers indicated the government needed to do

more to screen for forced labor indicators in workplaces. The Attorney General’s

Office reported carrying out a program to increase awareness of forced child labor

and its legal consequences in tourist areas, as well as training programs for judges,

Page 34

prosecutors, and investigators.

The labor code applies equally to all workers regardless of nationality, but Haitian

migrant workers’ lack of documentation and uncertain legal status in the country

made them more vulnerable to forced labor and less likely to report indicators of

forced labor. NGO representatives reported many irregular Haitian laborers and

stateless persons of Haitian descent did not exercise their labor rights due to fear of

being fired or deported.

Also see the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at

https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/

c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment

See the Department of Labor’s Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor at

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/resources/reports/child-labor/findings/

d. Discrimination with Respect to Employment and Occupation

The constitution creates rights of equality and nondiscrimination, regardless of sex,

skin color, age, disability, nationality, family ties, language, religion, political

opinion or philosophy, and social or personal condition. The law prohibits

discrimination, exclusion, or preference in employment, but there is no law against

discrimination in employment based on sexual orientation, gender identity, or

stateless status. The government did not effectively enforce the law against

discrimination in employment, and penalties were less than penalties for other civil

rights violations. Penalties were rarely applied against violators. Discrimination in

employment and occupation occurred with respect to persons with HIV or AIDS,

persons with disabilities, persons of color or of Haitian descent, LGBTQI+

persons, and women (see section 6).

Between 2014 and 2020, on average, women received 16.7 percent less salary than

men, according to a study from the Office of National Statistics. Reports estimated

that women were 41 percent less likely to receive an equal wage for similar work

in comparison to men.

Page 35

e. Acceptable Conditions of Work

Wage and Hour Laws: The law provides for a minimum wage that varies

depending on the size of the enterprise and the type of labor. As of September, the

minimum wage for all sectors within the formal economy was above the official

poverty line.

The law establishes a standard workweek of 44 hours, not to exceed eight hours

per day on weekdays, and four hours on Saturdays before noon. Agricultural

workers are exempt from this limit, however, and may be required to work up to 10

hours each workday without premium compensation.

The law covers different labor sectors individually. For example, the labor code

covers workers in the free-trade zones, but those workers are not entitled to bonus

payments, which represented a significant part of the income of most workers in

the country.

A new guideline to formalize domestic work, one of the least-regulated labor

sectors, was announced on September 1, with a 90-day implementation timeline.

The new guideline requires registration of domestic workers in social security,

establishes a minimum wage, and limits working hours, among other benefits.

Mandatory overtime was a common practice in factories, enforced through loss of

pay or employment for those who refused. The Federation of Free Trade Zone

Workers reported that some companies in the textile industry set up “four-by-four”

work schedules under which employees worked 12-hour shifts for four days. In a

few cases, employees working the four-by-four schedules were not paid overtime

for work beyond eight hours per day or 44 hours per week.

Occupational Safety and Health: The Ministry of Labor set occupational safety

and health (OSH) regulations that were appropriate for the main industries. By

regulation, employers are obligated to provide for the safety and health of

employees in all aspects related to the job. By law, employees may remove

themselves from situations that endanger health or safety without jeopardy to their

employment, but they may face other punishments for their action.

In March the Ministry of Labor launched guidelines on the safe application of

Page 36

pesticides.

The Dominican Institute for the Prevention and Protection of Occupation Risks

reported in 2021 that 64 percent of workers ages 20 to 39 reported accidents, and

35 percent of workers ages 40 to 60 reported accidents.

The law requires the establishment of Safety and Health Committees in workplaces

with 15 or more workers, and Safety and Health Coordinators in smaller

workplaces. Ministry of Labor inspectors are trained to inspect for OSH standards

as part of their standard inspection procedures, although the number of labor

inspectors was insufficient for the size of the nation’s workforce.

Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement: Ministry of Labor authorities conducted

inspections but did not effectively enforce minimum wages, hours of work, and

OSH standards. Penalties for violations were less than those for similar crimes

such as fraud or negligence and were rarely applied against violators. The number

of labor inspectors was not sufficient to enforce compliance. Inspectors have the

authority to conduct unannounced inspections. Inspectors did not have the

authority to assess penalties but could recommend sanctions to the Public Ministry,

which was responsible for pursuing and applying penalties for labor violations

uncovered by labor inspectors. In practice, penalties were rarely if ever applied.

Conditions for agricultural workers were poor. Many workers worked long hours,

often 12 hours per day and seven days per week, and suffered from hazardous

working conditions, including exposure to pesticides, long periods in the sun,

limited access to potable water, and sharp and heavy tools. Some workers reported

they were not paid the legally mandated minimum wage.

The Central Romana Corporation and other sugar producers faced allegations that

they paid their workers substandard wages. Sugarcane cutters were paid in cash

weekly according to the number of tons of cane they cut. The rate paid for cut

cane ranged between 80 and 217 pesos ($1.50-$4.00) per ton, depending on how

the cane was prepared for harvest, and whether it was manually loaded on carts.

Workers varied widely in their productivity but could typically cut between two

and six tons per day. Canecutters typically worked six days a week, and many

reported earning between 2,000-3,500 pesos ($36-$64) a week. A series of

Page 37

journalistic investigations alleged that Central Romana Corporation, which was

responsible for nearly 60 percent of domestic sugar production, might have

systematically deprived workers of promised benefits or drastically limited access

to benefits, including health care, lodging, and pensions.

Industrial accidents caused injury and death to some workers. There were reports

that Central Romana routinely exposed its workers to dangerous working

conditions, including exposure to chemicals and unsafe machinery, and did not

support workers’ medical expenses when they were injured or became ill as a

result of workplace incidents.

Informal Sector: The law applies to both the formal and informal sectors, but it

was seldom enforced in the informal sector, which comprised approximately one-

half of all workers. Most of the informal-sector jobs were in construction,

agriculture, and commerce. Many of the informal-sector workers were

undocumented persons or women. Workers in the informal economy faced more

precarious working conditions than formal-sector workers.

Page 38