31. The Dominican State claims that the repatriation of foreigners living illegally in Dominican territory is its irrenunciable and nonnegotiable right as a cornerstone of sovereignty. It also contends that this right is protected under the domestic legal order and contravenes no treaty or convention to which the Dominican State is party. 32. The State affirms that the petitioners’ figures on repatriated people have not been confirmed by independent sources. It asserts that statistics from the General Directorate for Migration [Dirección General de Migración] indicate an average repatriation rate of 717 people a month and that the figure has never exceeded 1,000 people. The State adds that this figure correlates directly to the mass immigration of Haitians into Dominican territory. 33. The State contends that there is a lawful procedure in place in the Dominican Republic and that it is implemented by the General Directorate for Migration. The law ensures due process for people subject to repatriation, and their cases are handled individually. The process, according to the State, includes three stages: i) detention and identification, ii) investigation, screening and verification, and iii) confirmation. The competent authorities accurately establish the identity and legal status of the detainees and a final verification is conducted prior to turning the individuals over to the border posts; the Haitian consuls of Barahona and Dajabón participate in this process so as to avoid receiving any citizens who are not Haitian nationals. 34. The State points out that this procedure is directed by “migration personnel trained by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).”4 It adds that the process includes an opportunity to submit documentation and contact family members. In addition, the repatriates are transported in buses rented for the process, and are provided food and lodging until the process has been finalized. 35. The State likewise asserts that this repatriation process has been strengthened by joint decisions adopted with Haiti and that “the neighboring countries are the ones who should discuss it, without outside interference, any differences that may arise concerning the way in which to carry out the repatriations.”5 The work in both countries is carried out through the Dominican - Bilateral Commission. 36. The State adds that the General Directorate for Migration has, on numerous occasions, publicly invited nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to participate as observers in the repatriation process. It contends that this process is carried out transparently and with respect for human rights. 37. It further indicates that in view of the Haitian immigration problem, the State took on the responsibility of organizing a conference to air the problem objectively. A meeting was held with the presidents of both countries on the issue of migration flows, and legal measures were taken in the form of a draft migration law to replace the existing law that dates back to 1939. 38. The State observes that the two countries have signed the Protocol of Understanding between the Dominican Republic and the Republic of Haiti on Repatriation Mechanisms containing agreements on the procedures used and their improvement. That document includes a provision to avoid separating “nuclear” families and to contact the Haitian authorities in advance with a list of people in the repatriation process. 39. Finally, the Dominican State affirms its firm commitment to continue to improve these mechanisms and to rectify any isolated case of excesses by bringing the migration authorities involved to justice. IV. ANALYSIS A. Competence ratione personae, ratione materiae, ratione temporis, ratione loci 4 5 Observations submitted by the Dominican State, December 7, 1999, p. 2. Idem. 4