House Judiciary committee reviews amendments to Law 54; debates 3‑day appeal window, electronic monitoring and exclusion zones

The House of Representatives' Judiciary Commission held a public hearing on Feb. 19 to review Proyecto de la C—mara No. 15, authored by Speaker Méndez Nú—ez, which proposes technical and substantive amendments to Law 54 (the law for prevention and intervention in domestic violence) and to Law 99 (the electronic monitoring program).

The bill would: update and consolidate definitions in Article 1.3; restore a prior certification role for the Office of the Procuradora de las Mujeres (OPM) related to certified legal advocates (intercesoras legales); set a three‑business‑day term for scheduling an appeal hearing (vista en alzada) after a Rule 6 no‑cause or reduced‑charge determination in certain domestic‑violence criminal matters; and change parts of Law 99 (2009) governing mandatory electronic monitoring and the statutory definition of an exclusion zone (including a proposed definition tied to a 30‑minute night driving distance).

Why it matters: The changes would affect how courts, police and prosecutors process domestic‑violence complaints, when protective orders issue automatically after a probable‑cause determination, and when electronic monitoring and exclusion zones are required as bail conditions. Witnesses said implementation depends on administrative practice, available staff and coordination among agencies.

M—nica Hern—ndez, legal adviser to the Office of Administration of the Courts, described the judiciary's existing administrative systems for specialized domestic‑violence processes and recommended caution about moving operational deadlines into statute. “Consideramos que no es necesario establecer un t—rmino para la celebraci—n de la vista en alzada por la v—aa…