In Santo Domingo, the Dominican Republic, a recent violent incident at a state-run youth shelter has pulled long-simmering public tensions over juvenile criminal justice back into the national spotlight. Three teenagers stand accused of involvement in the death of a 17-year-old girl at a facility operated by the National Council for Children and Adolescents (CONANI), and the case has sparked renewed public conversation about how Dominican law handles minors who commit serious offenses like homicide.
A widespread public perception has taken hold across the country that minors who break the law effectively enjoy a de facto ‘immunity’ from legal consequences. This belief has been amplified by a string of high-profile recent cases that have named teenagers and even pre-teens as members or leaders of organized criminal gangs, with some young offenders openly asserting they cannot be punished because they have not reached the legal age of majority. But legal experts are pushing back on this narrative, clarifying that while Dominican law does maintain a separate specialized legal framework for children and adolescents, this system does not grant full exemption from responsibility for violent criminal acts.
Félix Portes, a prominent criminal and constitutional law expert, broke down the structure of the country’s juvenile justice regime, laid out in the nation’s Law 136-03. Under existing legislation, the severity of any penalty imposed on a young offender is determined first by the person’s age at the time they committed the offense, rather than the classification of the crime itself.
For adolescents between the ages of 13 and 15, the law allows for detention sentences ranging from one to five years. For older minors aged 16 to 17, outlined in the Code for the System of Protection and Fundamental Rights of Children and Adolescents, the maximum allowable period of internment extends to eight years. Even in the most serious cases, Portes explained, a young offender can be held in detention up until the point they reach legal adulthood, as long as the sentence handed down by the court stays within the maximum limits set by the country’s juvenile-specific legislation.
Portes emphasized that the juvenile penalty framework is rooted in international human rights standards, specifically the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child — a treaty the Dominican Republic has ratified, and whose core principles are embedded in Law 136-03. The system is built around the foundational principle of prioritizing the best interests of the child, focusing on rehabilitation and social reintegration rather than purely punitive measures. The expert also confirmed that the upcoming implementation of the country’s new Penal Code will not alter this existing specialized regime for juvenile criminal responsibility.
For children under the age of 13, Dominican law does not recognize criminal responsibility, and these children cannot legally be deprived of their liberty as a penalty for harmful acts.
The current case at the CONANI shelter is not an isolated incident: public records show at least three deaths of minors in state-run, CONANI-supervised shelters or care programs between 2023 and 2026. In all three cases, the victims were minors receiving state protection through the CONANI-administered care system, and all deaths have prompted formal investigations from the Public Prosecutor’s Office. Preliminary investigative findings have implicated other minors in two of these three fatal incidents, including the most recent death that has sparked the current national debate.
If the three teens accused in the 17-year-old girl’s death are ultimately found guilty, they will face penalties aligned with their ages at the time of the crime, combining court-ordered socio-educational programming with periods of detention within the legal maximums already set by Law 136-03.