Legal expert Carlos Gonzalez Cuello has warned that Dominican Republic courts risk undermining justice by prioritizing speed over legal reasoning when resolving case backlogs.
Writing from Santo Domingo on August 22, 2026, Gonzalez Cuello argued that while judicial authorities have made documented progress in reducing case delays, rapid decisions delivered without proper legal justification threaten judicial legitimacy.
Under Numeral 1 of Article 69 of the Dominican Constitution, citizens are guaranteed access to timely, free, and accessible justice. The legal doctrine that delayed justice is denied justice underscores the principle that late court rulings can cause severe harm to litigants and lose legal efficacy.
The Dominican Republic, a Caribbean nation sharing the island of Hispaniola with Haiti, operates a legal system based on civil law. Its judicial branch has faced long-standing challenges with case backlogs, prompting administrative reform drives across tribunals in the capital of Santo Domingo and surrounding provinces.
Progress in clearing case backlogs
Significant strides in reducing backlog figures have been recorded by Dominican judicial authorities over the past two years. In January 2025, during annual Judicial Branch day celebrations, officials reported that 73 percent of the country's courts were operating free of judicial delay.
Dr. Luis Henry Molina, president of the Supreme Court of Justice, announced further gains during a solemn hearing on January 7, 2026. Molina stated that delay-free courts had reached 87 percent, adding that the high tribunal had completely eliminated case files older than 12 months.
National newspaper Diario Libre subsequently reported that 90 percent of legal cases in the Dominican Republic are currently resolved within less than a year. Gonzalez Cuello acknowledged these achievements, noting that the judicial system had carried a heavy historical backlog and that the progress made was substantial.
Constitutional standards for legal decisions
However, Gonzalez Cuello emphasized that promptness is not the sole benchmark for evaluating judicial success. He cited Supreme Court of Justice Resolution 1920-2003, issued on November 13, 2003, which established that sentence motivation provides the source of legitimacy for judges and guarantees against prejudice and arbitrary rulings.
That requirement was strengthened on February 11, 2013, when the Constitutional Court issued ruling TC/0009/13. The ruling established a mandatory test requiring judges to provide thorough legal grounding to legitimize court decisions before society, establishing that judges cannot forego legal reasoning without relinquishing their legitimacy.
The Supreme Court of Justice serves as the highest court of ordinary jurisdiction in the Dominican Republic, overseeing legal interpretation across lower tribunals. The Constitutional Court, established under the country's 2010 constitution, acts as the supreme authority on constitutional interpretation and fundamental rights guarantees.
Concerns over unreasoned court verdicts
Gonzalez Cuello warned of two equal failures in the judicial system: a well-founded ruling that arrives five years late, and an unreasoned ruling delivered in three months. He noted that swift decisions lacking proper legal arguments occur more frequently in Dominican courts than desired.
Practicing lawyers frequently encounter rulings that transcribe party requests and summarize evidence before leaping directly to a conclusion without logical argumentation. Other verdicts cite extensive legal articles that bear no relation to resolving the dispute, or fail to rule on requests that were transcribed earlier in the document.
Because official performance metrics track decision turnaround times rather than the quality of legal reasoning, Gonzalez Cuello questioned whether judicial motivation is being sacrificed to meet backlog reduction targets. He argued that quantitative figures alone cannot measure judicial quality.
Infrastructure deficits and judicial strikes
The critique highlighted severe physical and operational constraints facing judges across the Dominican justice system. Until recently, Santo Domingo province administered justice in what was recognized as the worst judicial infrastructure in the country, holding coercion measure hearings inside transport trailers.
In May 2026, 450 of the country's 737 judges staged a 24-hour strike to demand dignified working conditions and qualified court personnel. Gonzalez Cuello stressed that the systemic infrastructure is at fault rather than individual magistrates, observing that judges cannot be expected to draft well-reasoned decisions while working out of temporary trailers.
In Dominican criminal procedure, coercion measure hearings are preliminary court proceedings where judges determine pre-trial detention, bail conditions, or travel restrictions for accused individuals. These hearings require careful judicial evaluation of evidence and constitutional rights.
Call for balanced judicial appointments
To address the imbalance, Gonzalez Cuello called on judicial authorities to rethink national performance targets. He advocated for metrics that monitor comprehensive case analysis, including full evaluation of party petitions, proper synthesis of evidence, application of relevant jurisprudence, and coherent verdict orders.
Looking ahead, Gonzalez Cuello appealed to the National Council of the Magistracy, the constitutional body tasked with selecting new judges for the country's higher courts. He urged the council to select magistrates who will honor both timely resolutions and thorough legal reasoning rather than choosing one duty over the other.
The National Council of the Magistracy is the constitutional organ in the Dominican Republic chaired by the president of the republic, responsible for appointing judges to the Supreme Court of Justice, the Constitutional Court, and the Superior Electoral Court.
