Dominican Republic

National Dialogue on HIV and Human Rights

City/State/Region
Begin – End: 2013 – 2013
Name of organization in charge: UNDP
Type of organization in charge: government international organization
Level: national

Impact

?

Implementation: was the innovation effectively, partially or not put into practice at all?

Fulfillment of Aims: were the goals of the innovation completely, partially or not achieved at all?

Output: has the innovation generated recommendations, initiatives, decisions or policies?

Outcome: if there were a policy output, was it enacted or implemented?

Implementation: yes
Fulfillment of Democratic Innovation’s aim: yes
Output: yes
Policy Outcome: yes

In 2013, the Dominican Republic and the United Nations National Office carried out a public dialogue on HIV/AIDS and Human Rights. Together with 53 representatives from civil society affected by discrimination, and 48 government officials and other 6 representatives from cooperating agencies, a two-day summit was held. It offered space for exchange, deliberation and assessment of the functionality of the current legal framework in relation to the enforcement of human rights for people with HIV/AIDS, and of the existing legal support system. During the meeting individuals and representatives from civil society presented cases of human rights violations, discussing how governmental institutions could improve their work in order to comply with human rights standards as proclaimed by the Dominican constitution. As a result of the dialogue, the UNPD published an extensive review of the process, detailing policy recommendations and specific legal adjustments necessary to improve the situation of people with HIV/AIDS in the Dominican Republic.

Institutional design

?

Formalization: is the innovation embedded in the constitution or legislation, in an administrative act, or not formalized at all?

Frequency: how often does the innovation take place: only once, sporadically, or is it permanent or regular?

Mode of Selection of Participants: is the innovation open to all participants, access is restricted to some kind of condition, or both methods apply?

Type of participants: those who participate are individual citizens, civil society organizations, private stakeholders or a combination of those?

Decisiveness: does the innovation takes binding, non-binding or no decision at all?

Co-governance: is there involvement of the government in the process or not?

Formalization: not backed by constitution nor legislation, nor by any governmental policy or program
Frequency: single
Mode of selection of participants: restricted
Type of participants: citizens civil society
Decisiveness: democratic innovation yields no decision
Co-Governance: yes

Means

Deliberation
Direct Voting
E-Participation
Citizen Representation

Ends

Accountability
Responsiveness
Rule of Law
Political Inclusion
Social Equality

Policy cycle

Agenda setting

Formulation and decision-making

Implementation

Policy Evaluation

Sources

http://saludysociedadcivil.org.do