Judiciary clarifies judge movements, denies arbitrary transfers

The Judiciary has clarified that internal organizational movements, including those affecting three judges who deemed the measure arbitrary and illegal, are intended to strengthen the balance in the distribution of judicial experience following recent promotions. The Judicial Branch stated these actions constitute internal reassignments within specific collegial bodies, not transfers.

“

These movements do not constitute transfers in the terms provided by Law No. 327-98 on Judicial Career. The transfer implies the change of a judge from one court to another, while the measures adopted through the aforementioned resolution correspond to reassignments in the same court.

In a press release, the Judiciary explained that these movements do not constitute transfers under Law No. 327-98 on the Judicial Career. A transfer, it noted, involves changing a judge from one court to another. The measures adopted, however, involve reassignments within the same chamber, jurisdiction, specialty, and judicial category. The judges involved remain in their current roles without being assigned to different judicial bodies or different matters.

“

The judges and justices involved remain within the same Chamber, jurisdiction, specialty, and judicial category, without being assigned to different judicial bodies or to matters other than those in which they currently exercise their functions.

The resolution in question, No. CPJ-2026-RECA-014, issued by the Judicial Branch Council, had drawn criticism from magistrates Natividad Ramona Santos, Wendy Altagracia Valdez, and Pilar Antonia Rufino Díaz. They had sent communications to the CPJ president and members, arguing that the "unconsulted transfers" violated the Judicial Career Law.

“

unconsulted transfers

Santos, Valdez, and Rufino Díaz were previously members of different panels within the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Appeals of the Judicial District of Santo Domingo. Following the changes, Santos was reassigned to the Second Chamber, while Valdez and Rufino Díaz were moved to the Third Chamber of the same jurisdiction. The Judiciary asserted that these procedures have not yet become final, as legal deadlines for reconsideration appeals remain open, adhering to due administrative process.

“

The correct understanding of these processes strengthens institutional transparency and contributes to public debate being developed on the basis of precise, complete, and contextualized information.