At least 56 articles of the project present legal conflicts.
SANTO DOMINGO. – On October 15, 2025, the Chamber of Deputies assigned the code CD-296-2025 to the file containing the proposal of Deputy Tobías Crespo, which proposes the creation of the Superintendency of Condominiums of the Dominican Republic.
As outlined in the project, the new institution would be responsible for overseeing compliance with regulations on common areas, infrastructure maintenance , internal governance, conflict management, operation of rental condominiums , and regularization processes for housing projects built by the State.
Among the functions of this superintendency are the creation of several national registries such as those for condominiums, rental condominiums, state buildings and actors in the real estate sector, and it would have the power to issue regulations , supervise construction companies and developers, impose administrative sanctions and mediate in disputes between owners and condominium boards.
The proponent has argued that the country's urban growth and the proliferation of vertical residential buildings require a specialized authority capable of guaranteeing maintenance, coexistence, and transparency in the administration of these communities.
The document contains 10 chapters and 63 articles, which state that the new entity would have autonomy and would be responsible for regulating, supervising and supporting the management of condominiums in all their forms, guaranteeing harmonious coexistence, proper administration, transparency and respect for the current legal framework.
This report is based on a mixed (quantitative and qualitative) analysis of the draft bill, which included counting the total number of articles, identifying conflicting articles, and classifying the types of overlaps with existing institutions and laws.
The result is that at least 56 articles of the draft present legal, institutional, or constitutional conflicts , representing 88.8% of the total. These 56 articles clash with the powers, responsibilities, or regulations of at least 12 existing institutions and laws, including
the Constitution of the Dominican Republic.
Judicial Branch
General Consumer Protection (Law 358-05)
Municipalities (Law 176-07)
Real Estate Jurisdiction (Law 108-05)
Law 5038-58 on Condominiums
Ministry of Housing, Habitat and Buildings (MIVHED)
Ministry of Tourism
Ministry of Public Health
DGII
CODIA
Pro Consumer
The types of conflict identified in the document include: 1) overlapping of powers; 2) regulatory duplication; 3) invasion of municipal powers; 4) violation of the principle of legality; 5) interference in the autonomy of the condominium assembly; 6) contradictions with Law 108-05; 7) usurpation of jurisdictional functions; and 8) risks of unconstitutionality in matters of private property.
The voices of warning
The preliminary project comes at a time when life in apartment buildings and residential complexes is facing tensions due to conflicts arising from noise, pets, and parking issues; short-term rentals, internal governance, and conflicts between developers and residents are also being discussed. It is a time when vertical living is a focus of debate, given the exponential growth of residential towers versus short-term rental platforms.
At the seminar “Active Citizenship: From Reflection to Action in Vertical Life,” held in Santo Domingo and cited by Diario Libre in its coverage of November 29, 2025, some of these issues were addressed, and the urgent need to modernize Law 5038-58 was raised.
At that meeting, specialists in the sector agreed that the country does need a comprehensive update of the regulations, but warned that the solution cannot be the creation of a “superinstitution” that duplicates existing functions.
In that context, experts warned about the conflicts and problems that the piece could generate.
Architect JoséAntonio Constanzo, general coordinator of the Faculty of Architecture at Pedro Henríquez Ureña University (UNPHU), participated in the activity in which it was argued that the Condominium Law remained anchored in five-story buildings, but replacing it with an organization that repeats what the municipalities, MIVHED, the Real Estate Jurisdiction and Pro Consumidor already do, instead of improving, could worsen the problem.
Urban planner Víctor Féliz, director of the Global Municipality platform, which organized the seminar, believes the core of the problem lies in governance: “Living together in buildings isn't solved by centralizing power in a superintendency. It's solved by strengthening municipalities and providing residents with clear tools.”
In a recent interview with El Inmobiliario, lawyer Israel López, a specialist in real estate law, warned about the constitutional risks arising from a superintendency:
Regulating the internal affairs of a condominium through an administrative body is a delicate matter. Private property rights can only be limited by law, not by administrative resolutions.
What they proposed
Diario Libre reported that the seminar concluded with several key proposals to modernize life in condominiums, the first being the need for a modern, comprehensive, and technically structured Condominium Lawthat updates current regulations without creating a super-entity with duplicate functions.
On the contrary, they agreed to strengthen the role of local councils in matters of coexistence, noise, pets and local regulation, considering that community life is essentially a municipal responsibility.
Another recommendation was to professionalize condominium management through certifications and sector-specific standards, rather than centralizing these functions in a superintendency. Likewise, the establishment of transparency mechanisms in management was proposed, always respecting the autonomy of owners' assemblies. They also called for improved coordination between the Ministry of Housing Housing (MIVHED), the Real Estate Jurisdiction, and the Consumer Protection Agency (Pro Consumidor), in order to address existing gaps, insisting that no additional bodies should be created that could overlap in their responsibilities.
This is what the structural analysis revealed
A thorough review of the draft bill allowed El Inmobiliario to identify five major areas of conflict:
1. Encroachment on municipal powers (Law 176-07). Municipalities would be subordinated to a central superintendency, contradicting the municipal autonomy guaranteed by the Constitution. This affects more than 20 articles related to noise, public order, sanitation, animal control, activity permits, inspections, and sanctions.
2. Duplication of Real Estate Jurisdiction (Law 108-05). At least 12 articles encroach upon functions such as condominium registration, certifications, title regularization, regularization of state projects, and document validation.
3. Overlap with MIVHED, CODIA, and Pro Consumidor. More than 15 articles create duplication in technical inspections, licenses, construction standards, pre-sales, and developer liability.
4. Interference with the autonomy of the assembly. More than 10 articles would allow the Superintendency to overturn decisions, validate regulations, impose mandatory models, and intervene in elections and sanctions.
5. Improper regulation of short-term rentals (Airbnb and similar). The bill aims to regulate an activity that falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Tourism, municipalities, and the DGII (General Directorate of Internal Revenue), creating a parallel system that fragments the tourism and administrative framework.
This comprehensive analysis reveals that the draft bill submitted by Representative Tobías Crespo presents an extraordinary proportion of problematic articles, almost 90%, coinciding with the specialists in public law and urban planning who have pointed out the constitutional and legal challenges of the piece.
There are also overlaps with existing institutions, duplication of powers in real estate, municipal, tourism and technical, as well as aspects that could require adjustments to ensure consistency with the Constitution, Law 108-05 on Real Estate Registry, Law 176-07 on municipalities and the powers of agencies such as MIVHED, Tourism, DGII and Pro Consumidor.
Experts warn that the creation of this Condominium Superintendency, as currently proposed, does not modernize vertical living, but rather over-regulates it, generating duplication, institutional clashes, and also presents potential risks of unconstitutionality.
