A look at articles 48 to 63 reveals the most delicate part of the text: sanctions, precautionary measures and regulations of coexistence that clash with municipal autonomy and legal reserve.
SANTO DOMINGO – In this installment of the special series on the “Draft Bill Creating the Superintendency of Condominiums,” El Inmobiliario.do examines the final chapters of the document. And while everything reviewed so far reveals regulatory tensions , these two chapters are, without a doubt, the icing on the cake.
That is because chapters IX and X, which cover 16 articles (from 48 to 63), not only replicate problems identified in the previous sections, but amplify them, especially regarding sanctions, coexistence, noise, domestic animals and the disciplinary powers that the Superintendency would assume.
These last two chapters of the bill submitted by Representative
Tobías Crespo contain the highest number of provisions with a high risk of regulatory conflict in the entire text. Of the 16 articles evaluated, 11 present conflicts, and 7 are considered high-risk.
Chapters IX and X address everyday issues for any residential community: pet ownership, coexistence, noise, use of common areas, conflicts between co-owners, disciplinary measures, sanctioning procedures, fines, appeals, and enforcement of sanctions.
The goal is to bring order to life in condominiums. The problem is how to do it.
To achieve these goals, the bill grants the Superintendency powers that currently belong to municipalities, Public Health, the Environment, the municipal governments (Law 176-07), Law 248-12 on Animal Protection, the Municipal Police, and, in some cases, the courts.
The fines system, the biggest point of contention:
Articles 48 through 63 create a comprehensive sanctions regime and are the most sensitive part of the entire bill because they introduce powers that are currently distributed among several institutions.
According to the project, the Superintendency could impose : economic fines, temporary suspension of the right to use common areas, restrictions on private activities within the condominium, closures, suspension of the registration of a unit or condominium, immediate precautionary measures, sanctions for non-compliance with internal regulations, sanctions for noise, sanctions for pets and sanctions for rental activities.
So far, so good, but many of these matters, such as noise control, hygiene and sanitation, domestic animals, neighborhood coexistence, inspections, economic establishments, occupation of common spaces, are the exclusive competence of the municipalities, according to Law 176-07.
Furthermore, the bill allows the Superintendency to impose sanctions for “infractions defined by the regulations,” which is incompatible with the Constitution, which establishes that only a law can create infractions and sanctions (Articles 40.15 and 74.2). No administrative regulation can establish new fines.
The bill authorizes the Superintendency to order temporary closures , preventive suspensions, limitations on use, urgent measures within the condominium, and restrictions on internal economic activities—measures that, under other legal frameworks, require judicial or municipal intervention, depending on the nature of the act.
The main points of contention identified in the last two chapters of the bill are:
a) Statutory Reservation Regarding Sanctions:
The fines and sanctions are not defined by law but are delegated to the Operating Regulations.
The Constitution (Articles 40.15 and 74.2) indicates that this is not possible.
b) Municipal autonomy (Articles 199-200 of the Constitution):
The powers regarding public order, noise, cleanliness, and domestic animals belong to the municipal councils.
c) Property rights:
Suspending private activities, closing spaces, or restricting uses affects fundamental rights without judicial oversight.
d) Dual sanctions regime:
A resident could face fines from both the Superintendency and the municipality for the same conduct.
Pets: an everyday issue that the project complicates.
Chapter IX regulates: which animals can be kept, owner responsibilities, noise and nuisance management, prohibited or restricted animals, and penalties for non-compliance.
The conflict arises because there are already existing municipal ordinances, Law 248-12 on Animal Protection, Public Health protocols, and Environmental regulations for prohibited species.
The proposed Condominium Superintendency Bill creates a parallel system, where the Superintendency would define rules and penalties that are currently under another institutional framework.
These findings reinforce the importance of the study commission rigorously evaluating the project's punitive scope, ensuring respect for the Constitution, municipal autonomy, and institutional balance.
Articles with the most serious deficiencies: Chapters IX and X
| Art. | Subject | Affected Institutions / Laws | Type of conflict / overlap | Alert level |
| Art. 51 | Dangerous animals, prohibited animals, or animals subject to special licenses | Ministry of Environment; Ministry of Health; Municipalities; Law 248-12 on Animal Protection | It defines prohibitions and controls that fall under the jurisdiction of health and environmental authorities. It duplicates municipal requirements and licenses. | HIGH |
| Art. 52 | Responsibility for sanitary control, vaccination and damages | Municipalities; Public Health; Law 248-12 | It imposes obligations and sanctions parallel to those of municipal and health authorities. Risk of double scrutiny. | HIGH |
| Art. 53 | Disciplinary proceedings for conflicts involving pets | Law 107-13 on Administrative Procedure; Municipalities | It creates a specialized sanctioning system that can contradict or duplicate existing municipal and administrative processes. | HIGH |
| Art. 55 | Supplementary regulations to be issued by the Superintendency | Constitution (Law Reserved); MIVHED; DGII; Environment; Municipalities, Law 176-07 | Broad regulatory power that could encroach on matters reserved by law, creating mandatory rules outside the constitutional scope. | HIGH |
| Art. 56 | Mandatory registration and adaptation deadlines | Real Estate Jurisdiction (Law 108-05), Municipalities, DGII. | Duplication of administrative records and possible clash with the single registration system. | HIGH |
| Art. 57 | Regularization and validity of existing boards | Law 5038-58 on Condominiums; Municipalities | It conditions the validity of meetings on registration with the Superintendency, interfering with the internal autonomy of condominiums. Law 5038-58 | HIGH |
| Art. 58 | Temporary closures, immediate restrictions, limitations on use, urgent precautionary measures | Municipalities (Law 176-07), Municipal Police, Public Ministry, Courts. | The Superintendency would assume disciplinary and coercive powers that constitutionally require judicial or municipal control. | HIGH. |
