Dominican Republic's Public Ministry leans towards plea deals in corruption cases

The Public Ministry in the Dominican Republic has increasingly favored negotiated settlements in corruption cases over the last five years. This approach, while questioned by some, is backed by key figures within the justice system. The recently enacted Code of Criminal Procedure further solidifies this trend by obligating judges to encourage negotiations when parties are not inclined to reconcile.

Out of six significant corruption cases brought before the courts, only the case involving former Intrant director Hugo Beras has not seen any announced agreements involving admissions of guilt, delation, or economic restitution in exchange for reduced or suspended sentences. The Public Ministry has stated it does not rule out the possibility of future agreements in the massive alleged fraud of nearly 16 billion pesos in the National Health Insurance (Senasa), though none currently exist.

Despite denials of reaching any arrangement in the Senasa case, the Specialized Prosecutor's Office against Administrative Corruption (Pepca) has identified individuals like Roberto Canáán and Carmen José Velásquez, former Senasa officials, and businessman José Pablo Ortiz Giráldez as key figures in the alleged scheme led by ex-director Santiago Hazim Albainy. These individuals have not yet been formally prosecuted, and the investigation's conclusion is due soon. The new Code of Criminal Procedure aims to streamline justice by promoting conciliation, but its application in high-profile corruption cases continues to draw scrutiny.

“

You all know that we are pro-agreements and we do not deny the possibility that in the future, if the conditions arise, such agreements could exist; at this moment, they do not exist.