|
Private
Investigators and Private Detectives in the State of Florida. "Private Investigator and Protection Services" Private Partners, Private
Detectives and Private Investigators |
|
Phone:
(754) 235-3428 Toll Free 1-888-277-4779
FL License No. A
2000291
Po Box 56-0791
Miami Florida 33256 |
|
What
is a Private Investigator? By
Leonardo Espinal
A
Private Investigator or Private Detective is an individual who obtains
information through surveillance and other measures. According to
Chapter 493.0 Florida State statutes Private Investigators and Private
Investigative agencies serve in positions of trust. Untrained and
unlicensed persons or businesses, or persons not of good moral
character, are a threat to the public safety and welfare.
Individuals
or agencies claiming to provide or advertise private investigator
services must be licensed. You can check if a Florida Private
Investigator is licensed at www.dos.state.fl.us/ click on link to licensing and if he owns
an investigative agency. These services Include:
Subcontracting
with the government to determine crimes or wrongdoings against the
United States.
Determining
the identity, habits, conduct, movements, whereabouts, affiliations,
associations, transactions, reputation of character of any society,
person, or group of persons.
The
credibility of witnesses or other persons.
The
whereabouts of missing persons, owners of abandoned or escheated
property, heirs to estates.
The
location or recovery of lost or stolen property.
The
causes or origins of fires, libels, slanders, losses,
accidents, damage or injury to real or personal property.
Securing
evidence to be secured before investigating committees or boards of
award or arbitration or trial of civil or criminal cases.
Most
Private Investigators are retained by attorneys and law firms for
surveillance, process service, accident reconstruction, and even to
locate witnesses.
Insurance
companies hire Private Investigators to perform surveillance and
activity checks on their insurance claims to make sure that the
claimant is not committing insurance fraud. From my experience as an
insurance fraud investigator and many hours of surveillance, I would
say 9 out of 10 claims are false. So why do you think our insurance
rates are so high? It is a federal offense to commit insurance fraud,
however our government agencies usually on most cases won't follow
through and prosecute these individuals who are committing these
federal crimes.
The
general public hire Private Investigators to find lost loved ones, to
check on cheating spouses, and criminal background checks. A good
Private Investigator can perform all these basic tasks and do not
specialize in one specific field. The Public should be aware when
hiring a P.I overseas that most countries don't require or have any
type of Private Investigator license. I have done many International
Investigations in Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, and Costa Rica did you
know that in theses countries there are no licensed Private
Investigators I wouldn't subcontract a case to a P.I. in another
country not only because they are not licensed, but because their work
requires supervision. Don't get me wrong I use other Investigators,
however I work along with them and supervise their activities it's my
reputation on the line.
The
government also use Private Investigator Services to determine crimes
or wrongdoings done or threatened against the United States.
When
having persons followed you should be ready to pay a high rate usually
it takes two Private Investigators to follow a subject and this is do
to traffic congestion (gridlock) and the subject's driving habits.
Be
wary of Private Detectives or Private Investigators in other countries.
Most countries do not regulate the industry which means there
is no licensing requirement. They may take your money and you'll
probably never hear from them again. Remember you get what you pay for.
Author:
Leonardo Espinal Date:
12/02/2005
Dominican
Republic
The
Dominican Republic is a representative constitutional democracy with a
population of approximately 8.8 million, including an estimated 650
thousand undocumented Haitians. In August 2004 President Leonel
Fernandez of the Dominican Liberation Party (PLD) was re-elected in a
generally free and fair election. While civilian authorities generally
maintained effective control of the security forces, there were some
instances in which elements of the security forces acted independently
of government authority. The
government's human rights record remained poor. Although there were
improvements in a few areas, serious problems remained. The following
human rights problems were reported:
The
government made some advances in improving respect for human rights. A
new Criminal Procedures Code and a new Code for Minors provided
suspects with additional protections but also stiffer sanctions in
cases of sexual or commercial exploitation. The government improved its
capacity to fight trafficking in persons, to provide assistance for
victims, and to increase investigations of traffickers. RESPECT
FOR HUMAN RIGHTS Section
1 Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom From: a.
Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life Although
the government or its agents did not commit any politically motivated
killings, security forces were involved in many killings that were
unlawful, unwarranted, or involved excessive use of force. According
to the Attorney General's Office, security forces killed between 400
and 440 persons during the year. The National Police reported 371
deaths at the hands of police between January and September, an average
of 41 per month. However, such deaths declined in the second half of
the year, under the administration of a new police chief, to a monthly
figure of 14 in December. In the majority of killings by police, the
police stated that the deaths resulted from gunfire exchange in the
course of an arrest, which required officers to act in self-defense.
According to the National Commission on Human Rights, many killings
were related to aggressive tactics on the part of the police. Human
rights organizations stated that the police employed unwarranted deadly
force against criminal suspects as in previous years, and uniformed
vigilantism persisted on a less-than-deadly level (see section 1.c.).
The lack of qualified investigators and the nontransparent conduct of
investigations of killings in "exchanges of gunfire" resulted in
impunity in a number of cases. Late in the year, however, the new
police chief instituted a mandatory formal review whenever a member of
the police force was involved in a death by shooting. Many
cases previously referred to courts for investigation remained
unresolved or resulted in the release of the accused. There was no
record of any Supreme Court investigation into the court-ordered
release of police officer Cristino Alvarez Ventura, who shot and killed
a youth in 2003. In
October a court sentenced former police Sergeants Rafael Matos Feliz
and Homero Zapata and Lieutenant Cristian Feliz Gomez to 20, 10, and 3
years' imprisonment, respectively, for the 2002 killing of a university
student in which the officers claimed that they thought he was a
delinquent. Police
Lieutenant Juan Bautista Berroa was jailed for an unlawful killing in
2002 in San Francisco de Macoris. His trial was rescheduled several
times, most recently for February 2006. A
significant number of deaths occurred in custody due to negligence by
prison authorities (see section 1.c.). There
were reports of violence against demonstrators and protesters by
members of the security forces, including some killings (see section
2.b.). On
a number of occasions citizens attacked Haitians in vigilante-style
reprisals for violent crimes allegedly committed by other Haitians. In
some cases the Haitians targeted were killed. In
August a late night drunken robbery attempt in the Santo Domingo suburb
of Haina turned into a violent attack when several Dominicans beat four
Haitians, then doused them with flammable liquid, and set them on fire.
Three died, and the fourth fled with severe burns. A special commission
from the National Police investigated the case. In
December in Villa Trina a group of Haitians killed a Dominican who they
alleged had been attacking them. Subsequently, unidentified Dominicans
killed a Haitian man, injured others, and burned down several Haitian
residences. b.
Disappearance There
were no reports of politically motivated disappearances. There
were no developments in the case of Narciso Gonzalez, a university
professor and critic of the Balaguer government who disappeared in
1994. c.
Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Although
the law prohibits such practices, security force personnel, primarily
mid-level and lower-ranking members of the police, continued to
torture, beat, and otherwise physically abuse detainees and prisoners. The
law provides penalties for torture and physical abuse, including
sentences of 10 to 15 years in prison. Civilian prosecutors sometimes
filed charges against police and military officials alleging torture,
physical abuse, and related crimes. New abuse and torture cases were
remanded to civilian criminal courts as they arose; mid-level officers
sometimes contested civilian jurisdiction (see section 1.e.). Senior
police officials took the prohibition on torture and physical abuse
seriously, but lack of supervision, training, and accountability
throughout the law enforcement and corrections systems undercut efforts
to contain the problem. Human rights groups reported repeated instances
of physical abuse of detainees, including various forms of torture,
beatings, and sexual abuse. According
to human rights organizations, both the National Police and prison
officials used forms of torture. The method most often used was
beating. Human rights organizations also reported asphyxiation with
plastic bags to elicit confessions as a form of torture. According
to the National Commission on Human Rights, military and police
officials reportedly harassed, beat, and randomly deported Haitians
living in the border towns of Pedernales and Elias Pina (see section
2.d.). Lawyers
from the National District Prosecutor's Office monitored the
investigative process to ensure that detainees' rights were respected
in high-volume police stations and in several National Drug Control
Directorate (DNCD) offices (see section 1.d.). There was some evidence
that assistant prosecutors at times acquiesced in traditional police
practices rather than attempt to raise these practices to
constitutional standards. However, with the implementation of the new
Criminal Procedures Code in September 2004, detainees received
additional protections, and respect for detainee rights improved,
including through increased enforcement of time limits for pretrial
detention (see section 1.d.). Both
the National Police and armed forces offered training courses in human
rights (see section 1.d.). Prison
and Detention Center Conditions Prison
conditions ranged from poor to harsh. Reports of torture and
mistreatment in prisons were common. The prisons were seriously
overcrowded, health and sanitary conditions were poor, and some prisons
were out of the authorities' control. Budget allocations for
necessities such as food, medicine, and transportation were
insufficient. Most inmates begged or purchased food from persons in the
vicinity of the prison or obtained it from family members. Prisoners
were not taken to their trials unless they paid bribes to the guards
(see sections 1.d. and 1.e.), and visitors often had to bribe prison
guards in order to visit prisoners. Prison officials accepted money in
exchange for a recommendation that a prisoner be furloughed or released
for health reasons. Prisons often did not provide adequate medical care
to inmates. Prisoners immobilized by AIDS or who had terminal illnesses
were not transferred to hospitals. According
to the Directorate of Prisons, the police and the military held
approximately 13 thousand prisoners and detainees in 35 prisons with an
intended capacity of approximately 9 thousand. Virtually all prisons
experienced extreme overcrowding. La Victoria prison, the largest in
the country, held more than 3,500 prisoners in a facility designed for
1 thousand and had only 354 beds for its inmates. Rafey prison held
approximately 1,200 prisoners in a facility designed to hold 600. Although
a warden who reports to the attorney general was responsible for
running each prison, in practice a police or military officer
(generally appointed for a period of only three to six months and
responsible for providing security) was usually in charge of the
prison. Overcrowding was so severe that some prisons were totally out
of the authorities' control and were, in effect, operated by gangs and
armed inmates. The
press and human rights groups reported extensive drug and arms
trafficking within the prisons, as well as prostitution and sexual
abuse, including abuse of minors. There
were a number of deaths due to negligence in the prisons. During a riot
in March, armed rival gangs fought for control of a section of the
Higuey prison called Vietnam. During the fight inmates set fire to a
cellblock. At least 136 inmates died and 26 were injured. According to
the National Police, firefighters could not reach the prisoners in time
because inmates had jammed the locks with sand and other debris. While
the Higuey prison was built to hold 80 inmates, the prison director
reported that it held 426 inmates at the time of the fire. The burned
cellblock, designed for no more than 40, held more than 150 inmates.
The majority of the persons who died in the fire were in pretrial
custody. Government officials announced that authorities would file
murder charges against prisoners and law enforcement officials who were
involved, and they arrested five inmates who were awaiting trail at
year's end. Although
female inmates generally were separated from male inmates, there were
some cases of male and female prisoners being held together. Half of
the total female population was held in a female-only prison.
Conditions in the female prison wings generally were better than those
in male prison wings. There were some reports of guards physically and
sexually abusing female inmates. Female inmates, unlike their male
counterparts, were prohibited from receiving conjugal visits. Those who
gave birth while incarcerated were permitted to keep their babies with
them for a year. Juveniles
often were detained with the general prison population. The authorities
sometimes treated minors as adults and incarcerated them in prison
rather than juvenile detention centers. Pretrial
detainees were held together with convicted prisoners. Inmates were not
separated by crime within the prison population; however, they could be
put into solitary confinement for disturbances while incarcerated. The
government permitted prison visits by independent human rights
observers and by the press, and such visits took place during the year. d.
Arbitrary Arrest or Detention Although
the Criminal Procedures Code implemented in September 2004 prohibits
detention without a warrant unless a suspect is apprehended in the act
or in other limited circumstances, arbitrary arrest and detention
continued to be problems. Role
of the Police and Security Apparatus The
National Police, the National Department of Investigations (DNI), the
DNCD, the Airport Security Authority (CESA), Port Security Authority
(CESEP), and the armed forces (army, air force, and navy) form the
security forces. The Ministry of the Interior and Police is responsible
for making policy decisions affecting the police force. The military's
domestic responsibilities include maintaining public order and
protecting persons and property. The military, CESA, and CESEP are
under the secretary of the armed forces; and the DNI and the DNCD,
which have personnel both from the police and from the military, report
directly to the president. According
to the National Commission on Human Rights, the military and police
collaborated with their Haitian counterparts at the border to obtain
bribes from Haitians attempting to cross illegally. The
Police Abuse Prevention Center (CEPRAPO) reported more than 40 cases of
police abuse to the police Office of Internal Affairs. According to
CEPRAPO, police officially responded to only two of these cases. Police
officers were fired for violent attacks, extortion, drug use, and
trafficking. Significant problems of this nature remained, in part
because of insufficient vetting of the backgrounds of police recruits.
Many persons with prior criminal records allegedly were incorporated
into police ranks, either under false names or with identification or
recommendations from other state institutions, such as the army. Many
members of the police force lacked basic education, had received
inadequate training, and showed weak discipline, all factors that
directly contributed to unlawful
or unwarranted
killings and to cruel or inhuman treatment (see section 1.a.). The
Institute of Human Dignity, a branch of the National Police, monitors
human rights abuses committed by members of the National Police. The
institute held more than 100 courses, seminars, and conferences, which
were attended by members of the National Police, armed forces, and
civilians. From January to September, more than 1,500 participants
graduated from the police human dignity course. Training
for military and DNCD enlisted personnel and officers included
instruction on human rights. The Military Institute of Human Rights
offered diploma courses in human rights and regularly sent
representatives to border units to conduct mandatory human rights
training. Nearly seven thousand participants from the military and
civil society received training during the year. Systems
for monitoring and sanctioning abuses of human rights remained
ineffective. Arrest
and Detention The
law provides that an accused may be detained for 48 hours before being
presented to judicial authorities. It also provides for recourse to
habeas corpus proceedings to request the release of those unlawfully
held; however, at times the police violated constitutional and legal
provisions by detaining suspects for investigation or interrogation
beyond the prescribed 48-hour limit or detaining suspects without a
warrant. Police often detained all suspects and witnesses in a crime
and used the investigative process to determine who were innocent and
merited release, and who they should continue to hold. Additionally
police continued to detain relatives and friends of suspects in order
to pressure suspects to surrender or to confess. These practices were
employed less often after the new Criminal Procedures Code came into
force. Given
the historical inefficiency of the courts (see section 1.e.), granting
bail served as a de facto criminal justice system, and defendants
awarded bail rarely faced an actual trial. Few defendants were granted
bail, although bail became more common following implementation of the
new Criminal Procedures Code, which requires judicial review of
detentions at an earlier point in a criminal case. Most
detainees and prisoners did not have prompt access to a lawyer and
could not afford adequate defense services. The National Office of
Judicial Defense, with foreign donor support, provided legal advice and
representation to indigent persons. As of October the government's
program to train public defenders had placed 80 public defenders in
Santo Domingo, Santiago, and some smaller areas. The Supreme Court also
paid 97 private lawyers across the country to provide part-time legal
services to indigent defendants. Police
continued the practice of making sporadic sweeps or roundups in
low-income, high-crime communities in which they arrested and detained
individuals without warrant, allegedly to fight delinquency. During
these sweeps, police arrested large numbers of residents and seized
property, including motorcycles, other vehicles, and weapons.
Prosecutors generally did not actively investigate cases; they often
depended on police reports, many of which were based on forced
confessions. Local
human rights observers reported roundups of Haitian and
Dominican-Haitian construction workers. Officials allegedly took groups
of darker-skinned or "Haitian-looking" individuals to empty buildings
soon after they were paid, in order to extort money from them. There
were no reports of political detainees. Many
suspects endured long pretrial detention. According to several reports,
66 percent of inmates were held without charges or while awaiting
trial. The average pretrial detention was more than six months. Time
served in pretrial detention counted toward a sentence. Juveniles
held at the Department for Minors at the Villa Juana police station
commonly were held well beyond the 12-hour limit for sending the case
to the district attorney's office. The law prohibits interrogation of
juveniles by the police or in the presence of police; prosecutors and
judges handle questioning. The
failure of prison authorities to produce the accused for court hearings
caused a significant percentage of trial postponements (see section
1.e.). In addition inmates often had their court dates postponed
because their lawyer or witnesses did not appear. The authorities held
some inmates even though there were no formal charges against them. A
large backlog of criminal cases under the previous Criminal Procedures
Code remained in the National District and throughout the country. The
Supreme Court's plans to unclog the court dockets proceeded slowly due
to budget constraints. Dockets were crowded with traffic infractions
that, by statute, should have been heard in traffic courts; these
courts had not been established, due to a lack of funds. Other
complications in clearing the backlog arose from the lack of funds for
transporting inmates to court. Many cases were rescheduled when the
accused or key witnesses did not appear. In some instances a defendant
would appear before the judge on the scheduled trial date, but the
trial would not go forward due to the absence of one or more
co-defendants. The decision of the trial judge to decline to try
co-defendant cases separately prejudiced defendants who complied with
the law. e.
Denial of Fair Public Trial Although
the law provides for an independent judiciary, public and private
entities continued to undermine judicial independence. The judiciary
received training in the Criminal Procedures Code to help create and
maintain professional standards, but undue influence remained a problem. The
judiciary includes a 16-member Supreme Court, appeals courts, courts of
first instance, and justices of the peace. There are specialized courts
that handle tax, labor, land, and juvenile matters. The Supreme Court
is responsible for naming all lower court judges according to criteria
defined by law. The government established 17 of the 25 tribunals
provided for by law and 5 courts of appeals for children and
adolescents. The Code for Minors outlines the judicial system for
criminal cases involving juveniles and family disputes. Trial
Procedures The
law provides for a presumption of innocence, the right of appeal, and
the right to confront or question witnesses. The law establishes a
citizen's right not to be deprived of liberty without trial or legal
formalities, or for reasons other than those provided by law; the right
not to be a witness against oneself; and the right to a defense in an
impartial and public trial. The authorities commonly violated these
rights. Citizens
have recourse to the remedy of amparo, an action to seek redress of any violation
of a constitutional right, including violations by judicial officials.
This remedy was rarely used, except by those with sophisticated legal
counsel. Until
recently, military and police tribunals enjoyed exclusive jurisdiction
over cases involving members of the security forces; however, some
cases of killings allegedly committed during the year by members of the
security forces were remanded to civilian criminal courts (see section
1.a.). Political
Prisoners There
were no reports of political prisoners. f.
Arbitrary Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence The
law contains provisions against arbitrary entrance into one's home
except when police are in hot pursuit of a suspect or when a suspect is
caught in the act of committing a crime. Although all other entrances
require a judge to issue an arrest or search warrant, the police
conducted illegal searches and seizures. The Dominican Human Rights
Committee reported that police carried out raids on private homes in
many poor Santo Domingo neighborhoods. Although
the government denied using unauthorized wiretapping and other
surreptitious methods to interfere with the private lives of
individuals and families, human rights groups alleged continued
interference. There was an active illegal private wiretapping industry. Section
2 Respect for Civil Liberties, Including: a.
Freedom of Speech and Press The
law provides for freedom of speech and of the press, and the government
generally respected these rights in practice. Individuals or groups
generally were able to criticize the government publicly and privately
without reprisal. Newspapers
and magazines presented a variety of opinions and criticisms. There
were eight daily newspapers, a number of weekly newspapers, and several
online news outlets. Editors at times practiced self-censorship,
particularly when coverage could adversely affect the economic or
political interests of media owners. There
were many privately owned radio and television stations, broadcasting a
wide spectrum of political views. The government controlled one
television station. International media were allowed to operate freely. In
February an editorial in a newspaper of limited circulation alleged
that the government-operated Dominican Telecommunication Institute
(Indotel) had suspended two television programs for criticizing a
government project to construct a subway. Indotel denied this
allegation. There
were occasional reports of harassment of journalists. In February two
agents of the Metropolitan Transportation Police beat two photo
journalists after they had allegedly run a red light. Witnesses said
the transportation police used unwarranted force when one journalist
attempted to take photos of the arrest of his colleague. There
were no government restrictions on the Internet or academic freedom. b.
Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association Freedom
of Assembly The
law provides for freedom of assembly, but outdoor public marches and
meetings require permits, which the government usually granted. On some
occasions, when police officers used force to break up spontaneous
demonstrations, they caused deaths and injuries, either to
demonstrators or bystanders. In August police injured at least 10
demonstrators in Nagua who were seeking construction of basic city
infrastructure. They also killed a 12-year-old bystander who received a
shot in the head when police began shooting toward demonstrators. Freedom
of Association The
law provides for freedom of association, and the government generally
respected this right in practice. c.
Freedom of Religion The
law provides for freedom of religion, and the government generally
respected this right in practice. The law prohibits discrimination on
religious grounds, and many religions and denominations were active. The
Catholic Church enjoyed special privileges not extended to other
religions, under the terms of a concordat. For example the Cardinal has
the rank of a military general officer, and there is a Catholic chapel
at the presidential palace. The Catholic Church also received public
funding to cover some church expenses such as rehabilitation of church
facilities. Societal
Abuses and Discrimination Relations
among different religious congregations were harmonious, and society
was generally tolerant with respect to religious matters. However,
because Catholics enjoy some special treatment, there was resentment by
non-Catholic groups towards Catholics. The
Jewish community is very small, and there were no reports of
anti-Semitic acts. For
a more detailed discussion, see the 2005
International Religious Freedom Report .d.
Freedom of Movement within the Country, Foreign Travel, Emigration, and
Repatriation Although
the law provides for these rights, and the government generally
respected these provisions in practice, there were some exceptions. For
example human rights groups alleged that many Haitians were not allowed
to leave the sugarcane plantations where they worked (see section
6.e.). Local and international human rights groups charged that there
was discrimination against Haitian migrants and that they were subject
to arbitrary and unjustified action by the authorities (see section 5). The
law prohibits forced exile, and there were no reports of its use. Haitians
continued to immigrate in great numbers to the country in search of
economic opportunity, and many of them were repatriated. Migration
authorities and security forces conducted periodic sweeps throughout
the year to locate and repatriate illegal migrants. Some of the
Haitians removed from the country reported that they were denied the
opportunity to demonstrate that they were legal residents, to make
arrangements for their families or property, or to express a credible
fear of persecution or torture if returned to Haiti. Migration
officials and security forces sometimes destroyed and confiscated
expellees' residency documents. In some cases expellees with
appropriate legal documents received permission to return. Government
officials stated that President Fernandez ordered the suspension of
"mass repatriations" in June. The
constitution provides that anyone born in the country is a citizen,
except those in transit or children born to diplomats. NGOs defending
Haitians reported that children born of Haitian parents in the country
often were denied registration as citizens under the transit exception,
even when their parents had resided in the country for long periods of
time (see section 5). In December the Supreme Court ruled that "in
transit" status applied to children of illegal migrants. The
government's policy was that of strict enforcement of documentary
requirements and repatriation of individuals found to be lacking
documents. However, enforcement was selective and affected by
dependence on Haitian labor for certain types of poorly paid work in
agriculture and construction. Military officers and other officials
exercised discretion, and many regularly collected bribes in return for
releasing individuals suspected to be in irregular or undocumented
status. Protection
of Refugees The
law provides for the granting of asylum or refugee status in accordance
with the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its
1967 protocol, but the government has not established a system for
providing protection to refugees. In practice the government provided
some protection against refoulement, the return of persons to a country where
they feared persecution. This protection generally applied to
individuals who gained access to the refugee process and had been
issued proof that they were refugees or had applications pending.
However, the government did not apply standards agreed upon with the
office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to improve
receipt and adjudication of refugee claims. Although the UNHCR
strengthened its protection activities in 2003 by re-establishing its
presence in Santo Domingo, in July UNHCR withdrew its personnel and
subsequently monitored migration and refugee issues from a regional
office outside the country. An
applicant for refugee status must be referred by the National Office of
Refugees in the Migration Directorate to the Technical Subcommittee of
the National Commission for Refugees, which is chaired by the Foreign
Ministry. The subcommittee has the responsibility of making a
recommendation to the commission, made up of members from the Foreign
Ministry, the DNI, and the Migration Directorate. The commission, with
responsibility for the final decision on the application, includes the
three members of the subcommittee, the legal advisor to the president
and members from the National Police, the Ministry of Labor, and the
Attorney General's Office. As
of October the Migration Directorate reported 267 applications awaiting
decision, nearly all made by Haitians. Some of these cases had been
pending since 2000. In April the National Commission for Refugees
reviewed and granted asylum in five cases, three of which were
submitted by members of the same family. This was the committee's first
meeting in 10 years. According to the UNHCR, as many as 600 recognized
refugees were living in the country, most of whom lacked documentation
sufficient to obtain permission to work legally and to exercise other
rights, such as obtaining documentation for their children. The
Union of Haitian Refugees in the Dominican Republic stated that
authorities regularly issued Haitians requesting asylum a migration
document, which the petitioners must renew every two months. The
document cost approximately $8 (250 pesos), a fee collected upon every
renewal. The organization considered the document to be worthless
because even Haitians bearing it were arrested and repatriated. Section
3 Respect for Political Rights: The Right of Citizens to Change their
Government The
law provides citizens with the right to change their government
peacefully, and citizens exercised this right in practice through
periodic, free, and fair elections held on the basis of nearly
universal suffrage. Active duty police and military personnel may not
vote or participate in partisan political activity. Elections
and Political Participation In
2004 PLD candidate Leonel Fernandez won the presidency in an election
described as generally free and fair by the Organization of American
States, the National Democratic Institute, and the International
Foundation for Electoral Systems, as well as by the government
electoral board and the nongovernmental organization (NGO) Citizen
Participation. By
law parties must reserve for women 33 percent of positions on their
lists of candidates for the Chamber of Deputies and city councils; in
practice the parties often placed women so low on the lists as to make
their election difficult or impossible. Women held three cabinet posts
in the Fernandez administration. There were 2 women in the 32-member
Senate, 24 women in the 150-member Chamber of Deputies, and 5 women on
the 16-seat Supreme Court. Government
Corruption and Transparency There
were reports of, and a widespread perception of, corruption in
government. The authorities lodged charges against a number of
officials from the previous administration and individuals who had done
business with them, and the courts convicted some of them. In
April the president appointed a Government Ethics and Anti-Corruption
Commission with authority to receive allegations of corruption within
the government and channel the complaints to the offices that had
authority to investigate. In
2004 Congress passed and the president promulgated a comprehensive law
providing public access to government information. It allows limits on
the availability of public information only under specified
circumstances (such as to protect national security) and provides for a
penalty of up to six months to two years in prison and a five-year ban
from positions of public trust for government officials who obstruct
access to public information. A court may review the decision of an
agency to deny access to information. In
September Congress ratified a free trade agreement that requires
measures to prevent corruption in trade matters and to enhance
transparency of government procurement. Section
4 Governmental Attitude Regarding International and Nongovernmental
Investigation of Alleged Violations of Human Rights A
number of domestic and international human rights groups generally
operated without government restriction, investigating and publishing
their findings on human rights cases. Government officials generally
were cooperative and responsive to their views. Principal
local groups included the Dominican Human Rights Committee, the
National Human Rights Commission, and the Santo Domingo Institute of
Human Rights. There were also several smaller organizations, both
secular and religious, that addressed, among other things, women's
rights, labor issues, and the rights of Haitians. Even
though a 2001 law created a human rights ombudsman's office with
authority over public sector problems involving human rights, the
environment, women's issues, youth issues, and consumer protection,
selection of an ombudsman remained pending at year's end. Section
5 Discrimination, Societal Abuses, and Trafficking in Persons Although
the law prohibits discrimination based on race and gender, such
discrimination existed, and the government seldom acknowledged its
existence or made efforts to combat it. Women Domestic
violence continued to be a serious problem. Under the Law against
Domestic Violence, the state can prosecute rape, incest, sexual
aggression, and other forms of domestic violence. Penalties for these
crimes range from 1 year to 30 years in prison and fines ranging from
approximately $20 to $7 thousand (600 to 210 thousand pesos). Several
newspaper articles alleged that society had become more violent, and
many government officials and NGOs publicly denounced the problem.
However, a lack of awareness and training of police, prosecutors, and
investigators hampered action against crimes of domestic violence (as
well as other types of crime). A local NGO estimated that 24 percent of
women between the ages of 15 and 49 had been victims of physical abuse.
According to the Secretariat of Women, from January to July, 94 women
were killed in "crimes of passion" by their spouses or lovers, compared
with 117 such victims in all of 2004. The
Secretariat of Women, as well as various NGOs, conducted outreach
programs on domestic violence and legal rights. The Non-Violence
Department of the Secretariat of Women received approximately 388
complaints of domestic violence during the year. Female
victims of abuse had few resources, although the NGO Piedra Blanca
operated a shelter for battered women, and the Secretariat of Women
supported operation of a center for victims of domestic violence in
Bani, where victims of abuse could make a report to the police and
receive counseling. In August the Attorney General's Office created the
National Advisory Directorate for Victims, which coordinates efforts of
official and nongovernmental institutions that offer services to
victims of violence including domestic and sexual abuse. Rape
was a serious and widely underreported problem. The penalties for
committing rape are 10 to 15 years in prison (or 10 to 20 years in case
of rape against a vulnerable person or under other egregious
circumstances) and a fine of approximately $3,300 to $6,600 (100
thousand to 200 thousand pesos). The state may prosecute a suspect for
rape even if the victim does not file charges, and rape victims may
press charges against a spouse. In 2002, the last year for which
official statistics were compiled, the Secretariat of Women reported
more than 3,300 complaints of sexual abuse. Victims often did not
report cases of rape because of fear of social stigma, as well as the
perception that the police and the judiciary would fail to provide
redress. The police were reluctant to handle rape cases and often
encouraged victims to seek assistance from NGOs. Prostitution
is legal, although there are some prohibitions against sex with minors,
and it is illegal for a third party to derive financial gain from
prostitution. However, the government usually did not enforce
prostitution laws. Sex tourism was a serious problem in Sosua and Boca
Chica. Human rights groups reported continuing prostitution in
sugarcane work camps and areas outside of the capital. NGOs conducted
programs on prostitution and child sexual exploitation for hotel and
industrial zone workers, male and female prostitutes, and other
high-risk groups. Trafficking in women and children was a problem (see
section 5, Trafficking). The
law prohibits sexual harassment in the workplace, which was considered
a misdemeanor and carried a possible penalty of 1 year in prison and a
fine of up to $333 (10 thousand pesos); however, union leaders reported
that the law was not enforced, and sexual harassment was a problem. Although
the law provides that women have the same legal status as men, in
practice women experienced discrimination. Traditionally,
women have not enjoyed equal social and economic status or opportunity
with men, and men held the majority of leadership positions in all
sectors. In many instances women were paid less than men in jobs of
equal content and requiring equal skill level. Some employers
reportedly gave pregnancy tests to women before hiring them, as part of
a required medical examination. Union leaders reported that pregnant
women often were not hired, and that female employees who became
pregnant sometimes were fired. There were no effective government
programs to combat economic discrimination against women. Children The
government declared its commitment to children's rights and welfare and
tried to increase protection for children, with emphasis on eliminating
child labor. The Code for Minors, which was implemented in October
2004, established the National Council for Children and Adolescents
(CONANI) as a noncabinet, decentralized public agency to coordinate
public policy to protect children's human rights and to administer the
code. While the law stipulates that CONANI is to receive at least 2
percent of the national budget and that a minimum of 5 percent of
municipal government budgets must be devoted to projects to benefit
children, this requirement was not met. Education
is free, universal, and compulsory
for all minors
through the eighth grade, but legal mechanisms provide only for primary
schooling, which was interpreted as extending through the fourth grade.
Although the Ministry of Education reported a 97 percent enrollment
rate in grades 1 through 8 in 2004, a government study also estimated
that the average grade level achieved by children in public schools was
the fifth grade in rural areas and the sixth grade in urban areas.
Children of Haitian descent, and those of undocumented citizens,
experienced difficulties gaining acceptance to school due to their lack
of official status (see section 5, National/Racial/Ethnic Minorities). There
were several government programs to provide medical care for children
in public hospitals, but these programs, as well as all other medical
programs, faced severe budget limitations. Abuse
of children, including physical, sexual, and psychological abuse, was a
serious problem. According to a CONANI employee, the Santo Domingo
District Attorney's Office received up to 25 reports of child abuse per
day. CONANI asserted that 3 of every 10 children in Santo Domingo had
been sexually abused. Few such cases reached the courts due to fear of
family embarrassment, lack of economic resources, or lack of knowledge
regarding available legal assistance. The Santo Domingo District
Attorney's Office reported that in 85 percent of abuse cases, the
accused was a person close to the child, such as a family member or
close family friend. The law provides for removal of a mistreated child
to a protective environment. In
February CONANI asked the attorney general to carry out an
investigation of Hogar Luby, a home for disabled children in Santo
Domingo, based on allegations of child abuse, neglect, and misuse of
funds. As of September the owner of the home had gone into hiding, and
the investigation was inactive. In
a highly publicized October 2004 case, 12 persons were accused of
sexually abusing at least 29 young children at a shelter in Higuey.
They were held in preventive detention, and in March two of the accused
died in the Higuey prison fire (see section 1.c.). In July a judge of
instruction dismissed the charges, and the attorney general appealed
the dismissal. At year's end six of the accused were free on bail, one
had died from heart failure, and the remaining three suspects were in
detention awaiting the outcome of the appeal. According
to local monitors, instances of child abuse were underreported because
of traditional beliefs that family problems should be dealt with inside
the family. The law contains strengthened provisions against the
problem areas of child abuse, including physical and emotional
mistreatment, sexual exploitation, and child labor (see sections 5,
Trafficking and 6.d.). The law provides penalties of between two and
five years' incarceration and a fine of three to five times the monthly
minimum wage for persons found guilty of abuse of a minor. The penalty
is doubled if the abuse is related to trafficking. Trafficking
and sexual exploitation of children within the country were problems,
particularly in popular tourist destinations (see section 5,
Trafficking). Adolescent girls and boys from poor families sometimes
were enticed into performing sexual acts by the promise of food or
clothing. Child
labor was a serious problem in the informal sector of the economy (see
Section 6.d.). Trafficking
in Persons Although
the law prohibits trafficking in persons, there were reports that women
and children were trafficked to, from, and within the country. The
law includes penalties for traffickers of 15 to 20 years' imprisonment
and a fine of up to 175 times the monthly minimum wage. The Code for
Minors provides penalties for sexual abuse of children of 20 to 30
years' imprisonment and fines from 100 to 150 times the minimum wage. The
attorney general's antitrafficking unit coordinated the investigation
and prosecution of trafficking cases. Units at the National Police, the
Migration Directorate, and the Attorney General's Office targeted
trafficking in persons, as did the interagency Committee for the
Protection of Migrant Women. The Migration Directorate created an
antitrafficking department, which coordinates with the Attorney
General's Office and the National Police to find and prosecute persons
dedicated to trafficking women for prostitution and commercial sexual
exploitation. The
International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimated that 50
thousand Dominican women worked in prostitution around the world and of
these women, one third were victims of trafficking. Principal
destination countries were in Europe, the Caribbean, and Latin America,
and included Argentina, Australia, Austria, Brazil, Costa Rica,
Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Panama, Spain, St. Maarten,
and Switzerland. Japan became a new destination for trafficking, while
traffickers in the Caribbean strengthened their networks. Women 18 to
25 years of age were at the highest risk of being trafficked. Many
victims were uneducated single mothers desperate to improve the living
conditions of their children. Within
the country, the prostitution of minors, primarily in the tourist
areas, was a problem. An official 2003 study estimated that 50 to 60
Haitian children were trafficked into the country each week and that
many Haitian girls age 12 and older were brought into the country to
work as prostitutes. In
April DNI dismantled a child prostitution and pornography ring in Sosua
that had posted sexually explicit photos of young children on the
Internet. Police arrested two men. At the request of the attorney
general, police closed down several bars, nightclubs, and "massage
parlors" in Santiago, Santo Domingo, and Boca Chica used for child
prostitution and sexual exploitation of women. In
May a judge convicted and sentenced 3 men to 15 years in prison under
the antitrafficking law for sexually exploiting 24 children in Boca
Chica in 2004. As of October a fourth suspect was in detention and
awaiting trail. NGOs
estimated that there were hundreds of alien smuggling and trafficking
rings operating within the country. According to the NGO Center for
Integral Orientation and Investigation (COIN) and the IOM, trafficking
organizations were typically small groups. Individuals in the country
recruited the persons to be trafficked and obtained identification and
travel documents. Traffickers frequently were introduced to women
through friends and family; they promised some form of employment,
obtained false or legitimate documents for the women, and often
retained their passports once in the destination country. Trafficking
organizations reportedly received $5 thousand to $8 thousand (150
thousand pesos to 240 thousand pesos)
for trafficking a
woman for purposes of prostitution. Some
elements within the tourist industry facilitated the sexual
exploitation of children. Particular problem areas were Boca Chica,
Puerto Plata, and Sosua. Europeans overseas marketed tours by
suggesting that boys and girls could be found as sex partners. In
March the Supreme Court resumed proceedings in the trial of Congressman
Guillermo Radhames Ramos Garcia (formerly a consul in Cap Haitien,
Haiti) on charges of alien smuggling. Because of Ramos Garcia's status
as a congressman, the case was assigned directly to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court found Ramos guilty and sentenced him to 18 months in
prison. He was paroled in October after completing nine months and
eight days of his sentence, including periods of pretrial detention.
Two co-defendants were found guilty and sentenced to time served. The
government made efforts to investigate, fire, and prosecute when
appropriate public officials who facilitated, condoned, or were
complicit in trafficking activities or migrant smuggling. NGOs alleged
corruption among the military and migration officials stationed at
border posts and noted that these officials sometimes facilitated the
illegal transit of Haitian workers into the country to work on sugar
plantations and construction sites (see sections 2.d. and 6.c.). There
were also elements within the Migration Directorate and the National
Police that organized or facilitated the smuggling of aliens through
the international airports. The
government provided limited assistance to trafficking victims by
working with NGOs to develop job-training programs for returned women.
When trafficked individuals were repatriated from abroad, they were
given a control record that went into their official police record and
were interviewed by a migration inspector. According to COIN, most
victims were too embarrassed or frightened to seek legal action against
traffickers and victims received no psychological counseling. COIN
worked to develop relationships with embassies and consulates that
serve trafficked victims and with other NGOs in destination countries
that serve similar populations. There were several church-run shelters
that provided refuge to children who escaped prostitution. COIN
and the IOM counseled women planning to accept job offers in Europe and
the eastern Caribbean about immigration, health, and other problems,
including the dangers of trafficking, forced prostitution, and domestic
servitude. COIN administered the Center for Health and Migration
Information for Migrant Women, which carried out community education
campaigns in high risk areas on various issues, including citizenship,
legal work requirements, dangers of trafficking, forced prostitution,
and domestic servitude. With IOM support, COIN also provided a minimal
level of clinical services and adult education classes for returned
women. Persons
with Disabilities Although
the law prohibits discrimination against persons with disabilities,
they encountered discrimination in employment and in the provision of
other services. While the law provides for physical access for persons
with disabilities to all new public and private buildings, the
authorities did not enforce this law. The Dominican Association for
Rehabilitation, which has 17 branches around the country, receives a
subsidy from the Ministry of Public Health to provide rehabilitation
assistance to persons with disabilities. Little
effort was made to design public works to accommodate persons with
disabilities. Discrimination
against persons with mental illness was common, and there were few
resources dedicated to the mentally ill. CONANI
charged that a home for disabled children was abusing and neglecting
them. As of October authorities were investigating the case (see
section 5, Children). National/Racial/Ethnic
Minorities There
was racial prejudice targeting persons of dark complexion, but the
government did little to address the problem. As a result, acts of
discrimination were common, ranging from the petty to the more serious.
In particular there were strong prejudices against Haitians, which
disadvantaged many Haitians and Dominicans of Haitian ancestry, as well
as other foreigners of dark complexion (see sections 1.d. and 2.d.).
Few government officials acknowledged the existence of this
discrimination; others regularly and publicly asserted that there was
no discrimination against Haitians or other persons of dark complexion.
Efforts
by the authorities to stem the influx of illegal Haitian immigrants
made life more difficult for those Haitians already in the country
legally. Police regulations permit the confiscation of vehicles
offering transportation to illegal immigrants, thereby discouraging
taxi and bus drivers from picking up darker-skinned persons. In
roundups aimed at illegal immigrants, the authorities picked up and
expelled darker Dominicans as well as legal Haitian residents (see
section 1.d.). The
IOM estimated that approximately 650 thousand Haitian immigrants--or
7.5 percent of the country's population--lived in shantytowns or
sugarcane work camps known as bateyes, which were harsh environments with limited
or no electricity, usually no running water, and no adequate schooling.
Although some Haitians were brought to the country specifically to work
in sugarcane camps, many had no documentation. Human rights NGOs, the
Catholic Church, and activists described Haitian living conditions in bateyes
as modern-day slavery. In most bateyes, medical assistance either was rudimentary or
not readily available. Housing in the bateyes
was poor; many individuals slept in barracks on iron beds without
mattresses or on dirt floors. Many families of 5 or more shared living
quarters that measured as little as 10 by 9 feet. Bathroom facilities,
where available, were generally unhygienic, and cooking facilities were
usually improvised. The availability of fresh food, including fruits
and vegetables, was severely limited. Clean water was often unavailable. Some
individuals estimated that as many as one million Haitians lived in the
country, many illegally, but several Haitian rights NGOs were concerned
that this estimate included Haitians born in Haiti and their offspring
born in the Dominican Republic. The civil registry authorities
regularly refused to recognize and document as citizens many
individuals of Haitian ancestry born in the country (see section 2.d.).
Since many Haitian parents never possessed documentation of their own
births, they were unable to demonstrate their own citizenship or that
of their children. On
October 8, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights found against the
government in a case brought on behalf of two Dominican girls of
Haitian ancestry to whom government registrars had refused to provide
birth certificates. Plaintiffs had lodged the case with the
Inter-American Human Rights Commission in 1998, and when mediation
failed to achieve an amicable solution in 2001, including changes to
laws and procedures, the commission referred the case to the court. A
December 12 press release quoted the foreign minister as saying that
even though the verdict against the country was unjust, the country
would pay as instructed by the court. Although
a legal ordinance allows undocumented children to attend school through
the fifth grade, some school administrators denied undocumented
children access to school, particularly those who appeared to be of
Haitian ancestry. NGOs reported that undocumented Haitian children were
prevented from enrolling in school to a greater degree than were
similarly undocumented Dominican children. When
permitted to attend primary school, the children of poor Haitian
parents, like poor Dominican children in the same bateyes,
rarely progressed beyond the sixth grade. Other
Societal Abuses and Discrimination Persons
with HIV/AIDS, particularly women, faced discrimination in the
workplace and elsewhere. An estimated 50 thousand to 100 thousand
persons in the country were infected with the disease. According to
Human Rights Watch, workers in many industries faced involuntary HIV
testing in the workplace or when seeking medical care or medical
insurance. Workers or patients found to have the disease could be fired
from their jobs or denied adequate healthcare. Although
the law prohibits the use of HIV testing to screen employees or for
medical services unrelated to the disease, this law rarely was enforced. Section
6 Worker Rights a.
The Right of Association The
law provides for the freedom to organize labor unions, and all workers,
except the military and the police, were free to form and join unions
of their choice. Organized labor represented an estimated 8 percent of
the work force. The law calls for automatic recognition of a union if
the government has not acted on its application within 30 days. Although
the law forbids companies to fire union organizers or members, it was
enforced inconsistently, and penalties were insufficient to deter
employers from violating worker rights. There were additional reports
of harassment and intimidation by employers in an effort to prevent
union activity, especially in the free trade zones (FTZs) (see section
6.b.). The Dominican Federation of Free Trade Zone Workers
(FEDOTRAZONAS) reported additional incidents of antiunion activity at
the FM company in Santiago, 1 of 13 production facilities belonging to
apparel manufacturing firm Grupo M, one of the largest private sector
employers in the country. FM company management conducted a public
campaign against union organizers and affiliates, which included the
creation of a rival union favoring company policies. As of October, a
decision on the legality of this group was pending. b.
The Right to Organize and Bargain Collectively Collective
bargaining is legal and must be used in firms in which a union has
gained the support of an absolute majority of the workers. Few
companies have collective bargaining pacts, and the International Labor
Organization (ILO) considered the requirements for collective
bargaining rights to be excessive and an impediment to collective
bargaining. The
law establishes a system of labor courts for dealing with disputes.
While cases did make their way through the labor courts, the process
was often long and cases remained pending for several years. The
law provides for the right of most workers to strike (and for private
sector employers to lock out workers), but formal strikes were not
common. Formal requirements for a strike include the support of an
absolute majority of all company workers whether unionized or not, a
prior attempt to resolve the conflict through mediation, written
notification to the Ministry of Labor, and a 10-day waiting period
following notification before proceeding with the strike. Government
workers and essential public service personnel are not allowed to
strike. Despite this prohibition, government-employed physicians of the
Dominican Medical Association went on strike repeatedly throughout 2004
and during the first half of the year for periods ranging from one day
to one week, insisting on salary increases and improvements in
resources for government-run hospitals. The health minister and
eventually the president became directly involved in these labor
negotiations. The government did not propose any sanctions against
those who had disregarded the legal prohibition on strikes. In October
the president and health minister signed an agreement with the
Dominican Medical Association president, undertaking, among other
items, to provide salary increases in 2007. The agreement met the
association's principal demands. A
few labor unions represented a small number of Haitian workers, who are
covered by the Labor Code regardless of legal status. Various
NGOs reported that the majority of Haitian laborers in the sugar and
construction industries did not exercise their rights, fearing
deportation or job loss. The
Labor Code applies in the 40 established FTZs, which employed
approximately 175 thousand workers. According to the National Council
of Labor Unions, only four of the unions that had achieved collective
bargaining agreements in the FTZs were active. Workplace regulations
and their enforcement in the FTZs did not differ from those in the
country at large, although working conditions were sometimes better and
the pay was occasionally higher. Mandatory overtime was a common
practice, and it was sometimes enforced through locked doors or loss of
pay or employment for those who refused (see section 6.c.). There
were reports of widespread covert intimidation by employers in the FTZs
in an effort to prevent union activity (see section 6.a.). Unions in
the FTZs reported that their members hesitated to discuss union
activity at work, even during break time, for fear of losing their
jobs. Some FTZ companies were accused of discharging workers who
attempted to organize unions. The majority of the unions in the FTZs
were affiliated with the National Federation of Free Trade Zone Workers
(FENATRAZONAS) or FEDOTRAZONAS (see section 6.a.). FEDOTRAZONAS
estimated that less than 10 percent of the workers in the FTZs were
unionized. Employer resistance to union organization, especially in the
FTZs, increased in response to growing competitive pressure from firms
in Asia. Industry observers estimated that 30 thousand jobs had been
lost in the sector as a result. Many
of the major manufacturers in the FTZs had voluntary codes of conduct
that included worker rights protection clauses generally consistent
with the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work.
Workers were not always aware of such codes or the principles they
contained. c.
Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor Although
the law prohibits forced or compulsory labor, including by children,
there were reports that such practices occurred (see section 5). Some
young children, particularly Haitians, were "adopted" by families and
worked under a kind of indentured servitude (see section 6.d.). There
were also reports that workers in sugarcane plantations were prevented
from leaving during the harvest (see section 6.e.). d.
Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment While
the law prohibits employment of children less than 14 years of age and
places restrictions on the employment of children under the age of 16,
child labor was a serious problem. The Central Bank's Statistics
Department estimated that 15 percent of children between the ages of 14
and 17 engaged in some sort of work. Regulations applying to children
between the ages of 14 and 16 limited the number of hours worked daily
to 6, prohibited employment in dangerous occupations or in
establishments serving alcohol, and limited nighttime work. Fines and
legal sanctions may be applied to firms employing underage children.
While the government effectively enforced these regulations, child
labor was largely a problem in the informal sector beyond regulatory
reach. The
high level of overall unemployment and the lack of a social safety net
created pressures on families to allow or encourage children to earn
supplemental income. Tens of thousands of children began working before
the age of 14. Child labor took place primarily in the informal
economy, small businesses, clandestine factories, sugarcane fields, and
places of prostitution. Conditions in clandestine factories were
generally poor, unsanitary, and often dangerous. There was evidence
that poor Haitian and Dominican adolescents accompanied their parents
to work in sugarcane fields, with the tacit approval of sugar
companies. Children 12 years old and younger also worked planting
sugarcane, earning as little as $1 (30 pesos) for a full day of labor. Some
poor Haitian families arranged for Dominican families to "adopt" and
employ their children, in hopes of assuring a more promising future for
them. The adopting parents usually registered the child as their own.
In exchange the birth parents received monetary payment or a supply of
clothes and food. In many cases adoptive parents did not treat the
adopted children as full family members and expected them to work in
the households or family businesses rather than to attend school. This
resulted in a kind of indentured servitude for children and
adolescents. The
Ministry of Labor, in collaboration with the ILO's Program for the
Eradication of Child Labor and other international labor rights
organizations, continued programs to combat child labor. These included
programs to eliminate child labor in the tomato-producing province of
Azua, the coffee-growing province of San Jose de Ocoa, and the
agricultural province of Constanza, and a program to combat the
commercial sexual exploitation of minors in popular tourist
destinations. The Ministries of Labor and Education continued to
support the Combating Child Labor through Education Program, which
established several camps that hosted more than one thousand children
and adolescents. An ILO and Ministry of Labor program in Boca
Chica to combat commercial sexual exploitation of minors provided
psychological support and medical assistance, returned children to
classrooms, and reunited children with their families and communities
whenever possible. The program also provided legal assistance to child
victims in order to arrest and convict exploiters. The Ministry of
Education provided a subsidy of $17 (500 pesos) monthly to
the poorest families to keep their children in school and away from
work. The Armed Forces sponsored a program to rescue, supervise, and
rehabilitate victims of child labor or those at risk and operated
several walk-in programs and a permanent "village" that provided room,
board, and educational activities. There
were no confirmed reports of forced child labor in the formal sector. e.
Acceptable Conditions of Work The
executive branch sets minimum wage levels for public workers, and the
National Salary Committee sets levels for the private sector, with the
exception of workers in the FTZs and the sugar, construction, hotel,
and shoe manufacturing industries. The minimum monthly salary was
approximately $119 (3,561 pesos) in the FTZs and $164 (4,920 pesos)
outside the FTZs. The minimum wage for the public sector was
approximately $64 (1,906 pesos) per month. The minimum wage for farm
workers who are covered by minimum wage regulations was approximately
$0.43 an hour (13 pesos), based on a 10-hour day. The national minimum
wage did not provide a decent standard of living for a worker and
family. The
law establishes a standard work period of 44 hours per week and
stipulates that all workers are entitled to 36 hours of uninterrupted
rest each week. The law provides premium pay for overtime, which was
mandatory at some firms in the FTZs. On
sugar plantations, cane cutters usually were paid by the weight of cane
cut rather than the hours worked. Observers suspected fraud at some
weighing stations, and noted that employers sometimes did not provide
trucks or carts to transport the newly cut cane at the end of the
workday, causing workers to receive lower compensation because the cane
dried out and weighed less. The amount of cane a worker could cut
varied, but many cane cutters earned less than $2.50 (75 pesos) per
day. Workers were paid every two weeks with tickets that were
exchangeable for cash only in centers that often were far away. Workers
who used the tickets to purchase items at private stores located on the
plantations often had to pay a 10 percent "service charge." Starting in
December, however, workers were no longer paid in tickets but directly
in cash. Conditions
for agricultural workers were poor, particularly in the sugar industry.
Most sugarcane worker villages lacked schools, medical facilities,
running water, and sewage systems, and had high rates of disease.
Company-provided housing was sub-standard (see section 5).
Approximately 83 percent of sugarcane workers were Haitian or of
Haitian descent. In various sugarcane industry shantytowns, field
guards reportedly kept workers' clothes and documents to prevent them
from leaving until the end of the harvest. Employers also withheld
wages to keep workers in the fields. Sugarcane workers often did not
receive medical services or pensions due them even though deductions
were taken from their pay. The
Diocese San Pedro de Macoris developed a proposed model work contract
and submitted it to the Vicini Consortium and other companies in 2001.
The companies did not adopt the contract, but the consortium continued
to improve working and living conditions of sugarcane workers. The
Diocese continued to promote Haitian worker rights in the bateyes
and to seek a work contract for Haitian workers. Officials of the
association of sugar industries regularly criticized the priest heading
this effort, and newspapers carried unfounded allegations that he had
encouraged workers to destroy property. The
Dominican Social Security Institute (IDSS) sets workplace safety and
health conditions. Both the IDSS and the Ministry of Labor had a small
corps of inspectors charged with enforcing standards. The Secretariat
of Labor had 185 active inspectors. Inspector positions customarily
were filled through political patronage, and inspectors typically took
bribes from businesses. Workers complained that inspectors were not
trained and did not respond to health and safety complaints. While the
law requires that employers provide a safe working environment, in
practice workers could not remove themselves from hazardous working
situations without losing their jobs. Comments
of David Mayo intended and in [ ] brackets. Additional notes by David
Mayo appended.
Declaration
of Margaret Dellerson I,
Margaret Dellerson, do hereby declare as follows: 1.
I am over the age of 18 years. I am a resident of Broward county,
Florida. I have personal knowledge of the matters specified in this
affidavit and, if called upon to do so, could and would testify
competently thereto. 2.
I am a licensed private investigator in the State of Florida, license
number C8900676. I am a retired police officer for the North Miami
Police Department in North Miami, Dade County, Florida. At the time of
my retirement from the city of North Miami I was a homicide detective
in the detective unit of that department. I have testified in numerous
criminal and civil cases and have experience in evidence collection and
presentation. [Retired
police officer, now a private investigator, working for Scientology.
Any connection with Eugene Ingram?] 3.
In the fall of 1994, I was retained to hand serve on David and Julia
Mayo their copies of a civil summons and complaint by the Church of
Spiritual Technology against the Church of the New Civilization, David
Mayo and Julia Mayo. 4.
During the three weeks I spent attempting to serve the Mayos, in the
Dominican Republic and Miami, one incident was memorable. I was in
Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic, attempting to serve them at their
residence on October 5th. Their home was being guarded by a
machete-carrying local named Chago. The house was dark and apparently
empty but I had reason to believe they were on the island as they had
been seen riding on their motorbike. [The
Mayos were at home on the night of the 5th. We were not aware of her
visit. Had Dellerson visibly approached Chago or spoken, he would have
advised us. We left for Miami the next day, October 6th, to attend
medical appointments made in September, 1994.] 5.
The next day, on October 6th, I returned to the Mayos' home to make
another service attempt. Due to the armed guard at the entrance, and
their personal armed guard, Chago, I was accompanied by an off duty
police officer to assist me in the attempt. Chago informed the police
officer and me that the Mayos were on the island, but not home. [Later,
when we returned home from Miami, on October 26, 1994, Chago informed
us of these incidents. He said that he told Dellerson and the police
officer that the Mayos were NOT on the island and that they were in
Miami. Dellerson also told Chago that she was a personal friend of the
Mayos and had brought a gift and wanted to put it in the house. Chago
informed her - and the off-duty police - that he did not believe her,
had never seen her when the Mayos were present and denied her
permission to enter.] 6.
On the 7th of October, I returned to their home with the off-duty
police officer to again attempt service. We passed through the armed
guard at the entranceway to the subdivision. When we reached Mayo's
house approximately 1/2 mile down the road, in addition to Chago, there
were four other men and one female sitting in chairs on the dirt road
adjacent to the house. Three of the men appeared to be locals. They
were seated in a semi-circle, under a street light, which was operated
off a generator. Two seats within the semi-circle were vacant. One of
the locals had a short-barrel shotgun at his side. It is unknown if
this weapon was loaded. [According
to Chago, Dellerson returned with not one but two off-duty police
officers. There were not "four other men and one female" but Chago, two
other men and one female. One of those men was a German tourist and the
female was a German resident and they were accompanied by the other
man, Jorge, a local who worked for the German lady. They were seated
under a street light drinking coffee and chatting in the evening. It is
not a "dirt road" but a sealed (asphalted) road. The street light is
connected to the national electrical supply; the street light was not
and could not be run off a generator. Neither Chago nor Jorge (the two
locals) nor the two Germans had a short-barrel shotgun; none had a
permit for such a weapon and would have been arrested by the police
accompanying Dellerson if they had been in possession of such a
weapon.] 7.
When the police officer and I attempted to enter the walkway to Mayos'
home, our entry was blocked by Chago. We were told to wait. Chago then
walked to a small shed, located at the rear of the house, and exited
carrying a machete. We were then told that we could not proceed and
that we were to leave. As I attempted to move further up the walkway,
Chago raised the machete in front of me in a threatening manner. The
local man, with the short barrel shotgun, stood up and moved to a
position behind us. The police officer tried to explain that we only
wanted to give papers to the Mayos and then we would leave. At this
point, all the local men were standing around us and Chago continued to
wave the machete as he spoke. At this point, I observed a second male
also holding a machete. Fearing for our safety we left the area and as
we proceeded through the original guard gate observed that the guards
had expanded from one to three men. [According
to Chago, Jorge and the German lady, Dellerson stated that she was a
personal friend of the Mayos, that she had brought something for them
and was going to go into the house to leave it for them. Chago told her
that she did not have permission to go onto the property, that the
house was locked and there was no one inside. Dellerson then told Chago
to unlock the door and let her in. He refused and also said that he did
not have a key. Dellerson then asked Chago to break in to the house for
her and started to walk onto the property (trespassing). Chago said he
stepped in front of her with his machete in hand, ordered her off the
property and asked the off-duty police officers who accompanied
Dellerson, to assist him. Per Chago, one of the off-duty police stated
that Chago was right, told Dellerson that they were all leaving, that
she had paid them to accompany her, not to act against the law. The two
off-duty police and Dellerson left.] 8.
While standing in front of the residence, known to be that of David and
Julia Mayo, I observed movement inside the residence. This, along with
the fact that two of the chairs outside were empty, led me to believe
that the Mayos were hiding inside the house and that Chago was
following their orders, as his employer, not to allow us entry. [Not
true. The house was locked while the Mayos were away and there was not
anyone inside.] 9.
Early the next morning, around 7 a.m., the police officer and I
returned to the Mayos' residence in daylight. The house appeared to
have been abandoned. There were no signs of activity anywhere in the
vicinity of the house. I subsequently learned that the Mayos were
staying in another home in the development and later left the island
for Miami. [Not
true. The Mayos had left for Miami on Oct. 6th and did not return until
October 26th, after the incidents described by Dellerson in this
declaration.] 10.
Due to the fact that I felt my life was threatened I did not attempt to
serve the papers at the residence after this date. [Her
life was not threatened, besides she was accompanied by off-duty
police!] 11.
I also learned, that, unlike the United States, police officers in the
Dominican Republic have limited authority, especially during nighttime,
in dealing with houses on private property, and that it is not uncommon
for locals to totally disregard their position. [Not
true. Is Dellerson saying that it is legal in the United States for a
police officer to break into a house at night without a court order
when the residents are away to "leave a gift " or papers or for any
other reason?] I
declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed
this 6th day of January 1995 at Miami, Florida. (signed)
Footnotes:
The
addition of details like "dirt road" and "a street light, which was
operated off a generator." were no doubt intended to give her story and
the declaration added realism. That road has been asphalted since 1991.
Although small portable generators are common in the Dominican
Republic, (where there are frequent blackouts and brownouts) you don't
have to be an electrician to know that you cannot connect a generator
to a street light and thus into the national grid without disaster! During
the relevant period of time the Mayos were tailed (followed) after
their arrival in Miami and were photographed on Sunday Oct 9th, in
Miami, showing that the cult knew the Mayos were in Miami and not in
the Dominican Republic. Besides, Dellerson is not licensed to serve
papers in the Dominican Republic. So why did Dellerson go there and
want to get into the residence?
Background:
This
declaration is from Church
of Spiritual Technology v. Church of the New Civilization, David Mayo
and Julia Mayo, San Mateo
Superior Court, Case No. 389471. Litigation
between myself and various of the Scientology organizations commenced
in 1984 and ended near the end of 1992. All of the (4) cases they had
filed against me were dismissed and my counter-suit against them was
also dismissed. Of
the four cases they filed against me, one of those cases they withdrew
themselves before it even got started. After one of the remaining three
cases was dismissed, Helena Kobrin, Bowles & Moxon, were
penalized $17,000 for frivolous prosecution (this one became well known
on a.r.s.). Half of that money went to the court and half of it went to
my lawyers. Of the remaining two cases, which had been combined into
one big case, we were awarded $2.9 million because the $cn corpns had
litigated in bad faith, etc. $cn
has not paid the 2.9m (now more with interest) and appealed the
decision, there was a hearing on Nov 14, 1995 (same morning as the
Fishman hearing, same panel of judges). However, before Scientology
could file that appeal they had to post a bond in case they lost the
appeal. Scientology was afraid that we would get the money the Court
had ordered them to pay us, if they lost that appeal. Gerbode,
an ex-Scientologist who had litigation of his own with Scientology, had
donated a large sum of money toward our legal expenses and had loaned a
smaller amount of money that he would have been paid back after we
collected from Scientology. Miscavige and Rinder (of Scientology) and
Gerbode made a secret agreement that included Scientology settling
their cases with Gerbode, ceasing their harassment of him, if he would
help them against David Mayo. One of the actions he did was to sign
over the loan to C.O.S.T. -- he has also written false declarations for
them. Based on that, C.O.S.T. filed a new lawsuit against us, in mid
1994, claiming that we owed C.O.S.T. $5.5 million (a grossly inflated
figure) for the Gerbode loan. Then C.O.S.T. "attached" (put a lien
against) the $2.9m, by then $3.5m, so that if RTC, CSI lost their
appeal, we could not get the money - if anything, it would go to
C.O.S.T.! This COST case is supposed to go to trial in August 1996 but
Scientology will probably try to delay it as long as possible. We
are currently waiting for the result of the Appeal of the other cases,
which could come out any time now or in the next few months. In
summation, the COST case was only filed against us to prevent us from
receiving the Court ordered sanction against RTC, CSI et al. Dellerson
filed the declaration as a character assassination (dead agent)
attempt, both in this case and to cover up other harassment activities
OSA has been conducting against my wife and I to force us to "settle"
on their terms.
|