On March 8, International Women’s Day, police forces in the Dominican Republic violently attempted to repress a peaceful demonstration advocating for gender equality and women’s rights. In an op-ed for El Mitin, CGFoE’s Senior Legal and Policy Advisor, Anderson Javiel Dirocie De León, critically examines the government’s endorsement of these actions, particularly the troubling statements from Minister of Interior and Police, Faride Raful, who justified the need to protect ‘‘sacred’’ public spaces. The piece highlights the broader implications of state-sanctioned repression against marginalized voices and calls for accountability in the protection of fundamental freedoms. Read the original full article in Spanish here, or find a translated version in English below. 

Minister Faride Raful backs police repression against peaceful demonstrations in public spaces.

On Monday, March 10, the Minister of the Interior and Police of the Dominican Republic, Faride Raful, held a press conference in which she addressed the incident that occurred on March 8, when National Police officers arbitrarily interrupted a demonstration in Independence Park in observance of International Women’s Day. The police burst in just as Corina, a peasant woman from Monte Plata, was performing the song “Aguacero, Agua” (Aguacero, Water), in a traditional Dominican rhythm, with her group Salve. Despite the fact that the performance was in Spanish and this rhythm is a cultural expression of the country, the officers violently disconnected the sound equipment. While doing so, the officer apparently in charge justified his actions by stating: “They’re not going to give me a Haitian concert. If they’re going to sing to me, they’re not going to sing to me in Creole“.

At that moment, the police officers, whose job it is to ensure the safety of the protesters, established themselves as judges of freedom of expression and association, deciding not only who could exercise the right to peaceful protest—despite the demonstration being legally authorized—but also in what language it was acceptable or not. The activity could only continue when the officer in charge, after reviewing the event authorization and facing opposition from the crowd, backed down and admitted that he “has a somewhat bad hearing ,” after Corina explained that she is Dominican and doesn’t even speak Creole. This episode reflects how prejudice and ignorance dominated police action: in an arbitrary, authoritarian, and discriminatory manner, they attempted to silence a Dominican cultural expression because they considered it “Haitian.”

Faced with an outrage of this magnitude, one would expect the authorities to investigate what happened and take measures to prevent future arbitrary restrictions on freedom of expression and peaceful association, especially when these restrictions are motivated by racial and xenophobic prejudices. However, far from rejecting the police action, Minister Faride Raful fully backed it. In her address to the media on Monday, Minister Raful justified the police repression by arguing that Independence Park is “a space of great historical and symbolic value .” She stated that officers must guarantee both the right to protest and ” the preservation of respect and security for these solemn places,” adding:

“These places are highly sensitive, and the final resting place of the Founding Fathers must also be protected with some kind of special protocol.”

Thus, instead of addressing the complaints of the protesting organizations, the minister, with her statement, granted the National Police full discretion to decide which peaceful demonstrations are admissible in public spaces of historical and symbolic value. Her position supports the repression of political demonstrations in these spaces under the pretext of protecting their “solemnity.” What could have been an opportunity to educate officers about Dominican cultural diversity and their duty to guarantee fundamental rights without discrimination became the prelude to a new policy in Minister Raful’s view: certain public spaces are “sacred” and therefore inaccessible to certain people and causes. Even worse, this restriction does not depend on legal compliance with the authorization procedure exhausted by the protesters, but rather on the arbitrary discretion of the police officers, who now have carte blanche from the minister to apply her idea of ​​a proper “special protocol,” which, in legal and material terms, is nonexistent.

Minister Raful’s statements are deeply troubling, and it is not easy to gauge their pernicious impact on freedom of expression and association, the right to equality, the right to culture, the rule of law, and institutionality. First, they ignore that the right to peaceful protest necessarily implies that these demonstrations can take place in spaces of symbolic and historical significance, such as Independence Park. In fact, this is precisely the reason why protests of various kinds have traditionally taken place in spaces like Flag Plaza or Independence Park itself. They are not held in a parking lot or on a basketball court, because the significance of the place is part of the message.

On the other hand, the minister speaks of ” preserving the respect and security of these solemn places ” without presenting any evidence that the demonstration posed a risk to the security of the site. Rather, by invoking “solemnity” as a justification, the minister sends a clear message: certain public spaces are not suitable for peaceful demonstrations such as this one. This position reinforces the same racial and xenophobic prejudices that motivated the officers’ actions, since, in practice, it suggests that all demonstrations are acceptable, except those that incorporate elements that the officer on duty associates with African or Haitian culture. 

Minister Raful has set a dangerous precedent: in her view, national symbols deserve more protection than people’s fundamental rights. I hope she reconsiders and rectifies her position in time.