Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 111

Thread: Haitians Born in the DR of illegal parents stripped of DR Citizenship

  1. #61
    Platinum
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,158
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    "hundreds of thousands" is what the press is saying

    Haiti Recalls Its Ambassador to the Dominican Republic

  2. #62
    Poll's Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    7,165
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mountainannie
    So am I correct in that all the JCE has to do is go through all the birth records since 1929 and check that both the father and mother.. or at least the mother or father .. had a Dominican cedula number?
    They are going to check the immigration status of the parents and correct those situations where Dominican papers were given in contradiction to the law.

    Quote Originally Posted by mountainannie
    Did Dominicans have cedulas in 1929?
    No, cedulas were put in place by the Trujillo regime and until the 1940s, only men over the age of 18 could have one. However, the civil registry predates the Trujillo regime, although things gets sketchy in the late colonial periods because of the numerous Haitian military incursions under which many documents were lost in fires or intentional destructions by the invading forces. Much of the colonial documents were maintained by the Catholic Church.

    Quote Originally Posted by mountainannie
    How does one determine if a cedula that was issued is illegal?
    Depends on the legal status of whomever received the cedula.

    Quote Originally Posted by Castle
    And yes, NALs, maybe the sirians didn't make the news much because they were not haitians, and so there weren't any radical, racist, and intolerant forces behind that decision.
    There is such a thing as projecting…

    Moderator Polls Forum

  3. #63
    Poll's Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    7,165
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Castle View Post
    So I guess a baby born to a raped mother doesn't have the right to exist, since that baby is the consequence of an illegal act.
    Rape has nothing to do with nationality/citizenship laws, so it makes no sense to include that in anything of this nature. Now, if the raped woman is illegally in Dominican territory and the rapist is never found, then the child will inherit his mother's citizenship.

    Moderator Polls Forum

  4. #64
    Poll's Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    7,165
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mountainannie
    Well Nals, I guess there will be a test in of the Haitian Constitution when and if the DR decides to deport those tens of thousands of children of in transit Haitians who were born and raised here since 1987. I do not know how many there are. I do not know if any one does. Certainly it does seem that all this is a prelude to establishing the legal grounds to do that. And I am certain that Haiti will let them in, if only for the publicity.
    They are going to be given a time period to regularize their status, those that fail to do so may face deportation.

    Moderator Polls Forum

  5. #65
    Silver
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,969
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NALs View Post
    Rape has nothing to do with nationality/citizenship laws, so it makes no sense to include that in anything of this nature. Now, if the raped woman is illegally in Dominican territory and the rapist is never found, then the child will inherit his mother's citizenship.
    You are deflecting the reason behind the question. You said "Dominican jurisprudence doesn’t accepts that a legal right can be conferred on an illegal act." Rape is an illegal act, therefore the baby must not have any legal rights.

    But in any case, do you really think this is going to end here? Do you think this kind of actions don't have any consequencues? Do you think a country as dependent on international help as DR can suddenly turn its back on international organizations? There are the actions you can see and then there are those of which you only see the consequences. Prepare to see many of the latter. It seems weird that a bunch of expats are really trying to defend DR while dominicans try to do the opposite. I'm done here. I just wish everything works out OK for DR in the end. I really do.

  6. #66
    Bronze
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,476
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NALs View Post
    They are going to be given a time period to regularize their status, those that fail to do so may face deportation.
    I don't wish to be in this debate, but I don't believe this to be true. Already, inspectors are visiting businesses to check documents of employed Haitians. Fines follow.

    Further, unless something has changed within the past week, procedure-wise, passports were being piled up in border immigration offices waiting for visas. Someone my group was helping out had one there more than a month. Finally, it was released, but without the "legalization." I assume that means the stamp on top of the visa. That would have required an even longer wait. I had decided that the police on the street wouldn't know the difference, as would most employers. Had I known about the inspectors at that time, I would have waited for the legalization. (I don't know if inspectors is the right term, to give these people. )

    It all creates a double bind. If a Haitian does not have proper documents, including a visa, he/she could lose his job. But, if he/she sends his passport off for the visa and it is held up for an extended period of time and in the meantime, the "inspectors" come, what recourse does he/she have? There will still be penalties.

    Am I missing something?

    Lindsey

  7. #67
    Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    442
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The high profile opponents to DR in this issue are loosing the war.

    Who are they? mainly the UN

    Their main and probably only argument, as far as i can see, is that DR signed some international agreements which are in conflict with DR position, which is not a new position btw, but just a review of the issue and spoken out loud.

    DR judges are not stupid, they sure looked at the issue from all angles and possible consequences.

    So the UN went back to the drawing board, why?

    Because DR told UN [in diplomatic words] that even if DR did signed such agreements, it was illegally signed and no agreement could be supra-constitutional, above the constitution.

    No DR representative, even the president, can agree on anything that is not according to DR CONSTITUTION, which is stated in the constitution itself.

    Any kind of agreement for that matter is invalid when signing it violates a prior disposition.

    A poor analogy would be if an underage individual sign a contract, it is invalid as an underage can not sign contracts, a prior disposition, they even need approval from parents to get marry.

    DR congressman can even make a law, approved by the president, but later someone can challenge the particular law if it did not comply with the constitution when enacted.

    So, I think some have mentioned a law enacted during 1939 to favor the haitian position, but if that law was not in agreement with the 1929 constitution... it is unconstitutional, not valid.

    BTW, I already mentioned that trujillo was in power during 1939, anyone that really knows him will doubt he would approve a law to benefit the haitians to such extent, it may give that impression, to suit the purpose, but carefull reading is needed.

  8. Likes Riva_31 liked this post
  9. #68
    Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    452
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Empiric View Post
    The high profile opponents to DR in this issue are loosing the war.

    Who are they? mainly the UN

    Their main and probably only argument, as far as i can see, is that DR signed some international agreements which are in conflict with DR position, which is not a new position btw, but just a review of the issue and spoken out loud.

    DR judges are not stupid, they sure looked at the issue from all angles and possible consequences.

    So the UN went back to the drawing board, why?

    Because DR told UN [in diplomatic words] that even if DR did signed such agreements, it was illegally signed and no agreement could be supra-constitutional, above the constitution.

    No DR representative, even the president, can agree on anything that is not according to DR CONSTITUTION, which is stated in the constitution itself.

    Any kind of agreement for that matter is invalid when signing it violates a prior disposition.

    A poor analogy would be if an underage individual sign a contract, it is invalid as an underage can not sign contracts, a prior disposition, they even need approval from parents to get marry.

    DR congressman can even make a law, approved by the president, but later someone can challenge the particular law if it did not comply with the constitution when enacted.

    So, I think some have mentioned a law enacted during 1939 to favor the haitian position, but if that law was not in agreement with the 1929 constitution... it is unconstitutional, not valid.

    BTW, I already mentioned that trujillo was in power during 1939, anyone that really knows him will doubt he would approve a law to benefit the haitians to such extent, it may give that impression, to suit the purpose, but carefull reading is needed.
    You are right, another thing that I have noticed in the most of the newspapers is that they said only half true, when I read it i said that is imposible, go back to 1929, because they only mentioned the updates on the 2010 consitution, but was until I read the same news in Periodico Hoy where they detailed the sentence and was when I found out that the part that says that are not Dominican the born in Dominican territories of Diplomatics and foreigners in transit since out constitution from 1966 not 2010 like most of the newspapers refer.


    Here check title III - Section I [url]http://bonoc.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/constitucion-dominicana-1966.pdf[/url

  10. #69
    Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    452
    Post Thanks / Like

  11. #70
    Bronze
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    665
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NALs View Post

    In this example, you were never accepted as a citizen of the country because your documents were given to you against what the law stipulated. That voids those fraudulent documents and if they are voided, it means whatever they claimed you were has always been false.

    People can claim whatever they want, but what defines who gets what citizenship is the law and nothing else.
    Very good point then it would be great for the majority of the Dominicans who entered through fraudulent means such as, marrying for papers, falsifying documents, bank account to obtain a visa then overstaying. Uncles, Aunts cousins marrying a relative in the DR to file for their residency. The many Dominican schemes especially in the Cibao (reason why most Dominicans in the USA are from this region) where one would come to the USA as a child of someone they didn't even know by falsifying papers. Let's not get into the welfare scheme of Dominicans to collect while working under the table or working under another SSI. All of their offspring since 1929 should get packing in head back to Banana Republic. I am sure fewer than 100 Dominicans would be in the USA. It's only the law right!! Time to pack your backpack and leave Connecticut and live the great life in the DR and ride the metro as the metro north is still out of service. A lot of Dominicans claiming Americans but are really fake nationals.

Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •