DistantNews
Support us
Dominican electoral board members clash over poll publication ban
🇩🇴 Dominican Republic /Elections & Politics

Dominican electoral board members clash over poll publication ban

From Diario Libre · () Spanish

Translated from Spanish and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.

At a glance

News Sources not specified Context piece
  • Two members of the Dominican Republic's Central Electoral Board (JCE) dissented from a majority decision to suspend a rule banning poll publications outside campaign periods.
  • The dissenting members argued the JCE lacked the authority to administratively suspend a regulation it had previously approved.
  • Their objections focus on procedural issues and the limits of the JCE's powers, rather than defending the poll ban itself.

A dispute has erupted within the Dominican Republic's Central Electoral Board (JCE) following a decision to provisionally suspend a rule that restricted the publication of electoral polls outside of official campaign periods.

The JCE does not have the authority to suspend a rule through an administrative resolution.

— Hirayda Marcelle Fernández GuzmánStating her objection to the JCE's decision-making process.

Two of the JCE's five members, Hirayda Marcelle Fernández Guzmán and Rafael Armando Vallejo Santelises, voted against the August 20 decision. Their objections center not on defending the ban on poll publications, but rather on questioning the procedure used to suspend it and the extent of the JCE's authority.

The majority, comprising Román Andrés Jáquez Liranzo, Dolores Altagracia Fernández Sánchez, and Samir Rafael Chami Isa, opted to temporarily suspend Article 13 of the regulation concerning polling firms and poll publication. This article prohibited the dissemination of electoral polls outside designated precampaign and campaign timelines and included restrictions on studies for internal party use.

A regulation has a normative character and therefore cannot be suspended or nullified by a simple administrative decision.

— Hirayda Marcelle Fernández GuzmánExplaining her legal reasoning against the JCE's action.

Fernández Guzmán, in her dissenting vote, argued that the JCE should not intervene by suspending a rule on its own initiative while a constitutional dispute is pending. She contended that a regulation, being a normative act, cannot be overturned by a simple administrative decision. According to Fernández, any modification or suspension of a regulation requires following the same formal procedure used for its original approval.

Suspending a regulatory provision provisionally through an administrative resolution can generate uncertainty about which rule is actually in force and affect principles such as legal certainty.

— Hirayda Marcelle Fernández GuzmánHighlighting the potential negative consequences of the JCE's decision.

Vallejo Santelises echoed similar criticisms, focusing on the principle of normative hierarchy. He argued that a regulation is not an ordinary administrative act and that the JCE's actions may undermine legal certainty by creating ambiguity about which rules are currently in effect.

A regulation is not just any administrative act.

— Rafael Armando Vallejo SantelisesExpressing his view on the hierarchical status of regulations.
About this summary

Originally published by Diario Libre in Spanish. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.

More Stories

From Our Blog