Santo Domingo, DR– On May 2, the Senate received a bill from the Executive Branch that seeks to reform Law 61-32 on Freedom of Expression and Dissemination of Thought, adapting it to the current challenges of digital media.
This is in addition to another bill submitted to the upper house. Although it would not alter Law 61-32, it would create a new law to regulate content disseminated through mass platforms, including traditional and digital ones: A piece that aims to “prevent, classify, and punish hate speech” in the country.
The legislative document prepared by La Altagracia Senator Rafael Duluc defines “hate speech” as any oral, written, graphic, audiovisual, or digital expression that incites hatred, “hostility, discrimination, or violence against a person or group on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, nationality, ethnicity, religion, disability, immigration status, language, socioeconomic status, or any other condition of identity or belonging.”
The penalties for those who commit this crime would be imprisonment for one to three years and a fine of 10 to 50 times the minimum wage in the public sector.
Those who “publicly deny, minimize, or justify” crimes of hate, genocide, or crimes against humanity recognized by the courts would be punished with imprisonment for six months to two years, along with a fine of up to 30 times the minimum wage.
It also establishes that when hate speech is disseminated through social networks, digital platforms, electronic media, or messaging services, in addition to the penalties provided, the judge could impose a ban on using such platforms for up to three years.
The penalties would be increased in court in cases where the act is committed by a public official, teacher, religious leader, or community authority. Furthermore, when this occurs in educational, health, spiritual, or prison facilities and the speech incites acts of physical or material violence against persons or property.
According to the bill, victims of hate speech would be entitled to comprehensive reparations, including public apologies, financial compensation, restitution measures, and guarantees of non-repetition.
If both chambers of the Legislative Branch approve the law, the National Congress would order the Public Ministry to create a unit specialized in investigating and prosecuting hate speech, with personnel trained in human rights, digital technologies, and the analysis of discriminatory language.
“People who report acts of hate speech or collaborate with the authorities will be guaranteed protection of their identity, integrity, and privacy, in accordance with the human rights framework,” the bill states.
It would also require digital platforms to collaborate with Dominican authorities to detect, report, and remove the specified content.
The Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Culture would implement permanent educational programs that promote diversity, respect for human rights, equality, and the prevention of hate speech at all levels of the education system.
Meanwhile, the government’s bill to amend the regulation of the right to freedom of expression enshrined in Article 49 of the Constitution continues to generate opposition in various sectors of society, which claim that it would undermine fundamental rights.
Although no decision has been made, the special Senate committee members have confirmed that they are willing to hold public hearings to ensure societal consensus.
The Bar Association of the Dominican Republic (CARD), led by Ricardo de los Santos, submitted a critical analysis to the Senate on Wednesday, declaring the government’s bill “unconstitutionality and unconventionality.”
In addition, they assert that the legislative document drafted by the executive branch and an honorary commission made up of representatives of the national press violates “principles and values that underpin democracy.”
To support his position, CARD president Trajano Vidal Potentini explained that only the recitals, the first 15 articles of the bill, and the references to laws and treaties are under the Constitution.
However, the remaining 60 articles affect provisions that are essential for the proper exercise of communication in Dominican society, such as “the conscience clause, professional secrecy, no prior censorship, the doctrine of the double dimension of freedom of expression, the right to confidentiality of sources of information, the right of rectification or response, and the protection of children and adolescents.”
Vidal Potentini also regretted that it infringed on the guarantees outlined in Article 69 of the Constitution, which allows “every person, in the exercise of their legitimate rights and interests, the right to effective judicial protection, with due process of law.”
She pointed out that the sanctioning power granted to the National Institute of Communication (Inacom), which the Presidency of the Republic proposes to create through legislative amendment, exceeds constitutional limits.