A 64-year-old woman in the Dominican Republic has found herself at the center of a national debate after performing the country’s national anthem in an unconventional style during a karaoke night at a popular local restaurant. Amarilis Brito Rodríguez was arrested following allegations that her performance constituted disrespect toward one of the nation’s most important symbols.
The incident, which occurred at Mofongo & Variedades Eddy, quickly went viral on social media, prompting strong reactions from both critics and supporters. Authorities have charged her under Article 37 of Law 210-19, legislation that governs the use and protection of national symbols in the Dominican Republic. If convicted, she could face several months in prison and a monetary fine. The case has reignited discussions about freedom of expression, cultural creativity, and the limits imposed by laws intended to safeguard national identity.
The Karaoke Performance That Sparked Controversy
The controversy began when a video surfaced online showing Amarilis Brito Rodríguez performing the Dominican national anthem in a dembow rhythm, a high-tempo urban musical style that is widely popular across the Caribbean. In the footage, she is seen holding a microphone in one hand while raising the other to emphasize certain words of the anthem. She sways gently to the beat as background music accompanies her interpretation, and some patrons in the restaurant can be heard joining in the singing. The atmosphere appears celebratory rather than confrontational, with Brito seemingly expressing enthusiasm and personal pride in the performance.
Dembow, known for its energetic tempo and association with contemporary urban culture, is not traditionally linked to solemn or official occasions. The national anthem, by contrast, is typically performed in a formal and dignified manner during state events, school ceremonies, and official gatherings. By merging these two distinct cultural elements, Brito created a rendition that some viewers perceived as innovative and spirited, while others viewed it as inappropriate and irreverent.
The performance took place earlier this month at Mofongo & Variedades Eddy, a restaurant known for hosting social events and karaoke nights. Within days of the video being shared online, it attracted widespread attention. Public opinion quickly polarized. Some social media users criticized the singer for what they considered a disrespectful reinterpretation of a sacred national symbol. Others argued that her rendition reflected cultural evolution and personal expression rather than intentional mockery.
La mujer que fue detenida este martes en Espaillat, identificada como Amarilis Brito Rodríguez, de 64 años, por haberle faltado el respeto al Himno Nacional dominicano, interpretándolo en género urbano en un establecimiento comercial, pidió disculpas a la ciudadanía al momento de… pic.twitter.com/kYhsfk03hN
— Noticias Telemicro (@NTelemicro5) February 24, 2026
As the video circulated, law enforcement authorities initiated an investigation. According to police statements, Amarilis Brito Rodríguez was later located at her home in the municipality of San Víctor and arrested on Monday. The arrest itself was documented by local media, showing her being led into a government building in handcuffs. When approached by reporters, she reportedly smiled and said, “Sorry, sorry,” as she was escorted inside.
Legal Grounds: Article 37 of Law 210-19 and National Symbols
Authorities have stated that Brito violated Article 37 of Law 210-19, a law that regulates the use and protection of national symbols in the Dominican Republic. This legislation outlines what constitutes acts of outrage or disrespect toward the national anthem, flag, and coat of arms. The police report asserts that performing the anthem in an urban-style genre at a public venue falls within the scope of actions considered offensive under the statute.
Law 210-19 was enacted to reinforce respect for national identity and to establish clear guidelines regarding how national symbols should be treated in public and private contexts. The law provides penalties for those found guilty of desecrating or misusing such symbols. In Brito’s case, the potential consequences include several months of imprisonment and a financial penalty if she is convicted.
Read : 20-Year-Old Indian Student at University of Pittsburgh Missing in Dominican Republic
Brito has maintained that she did not intend to violate the law. She told reporters that she had written her version of the anthem 22 years ago and that, at that time, there was no law prohibiting that type of interpretation. She emphasized that she was unaware that her performance would constitute a legal offense under the current legislation. Her remarks suggest that she views her rendition as a longstanding creative expression rather than a recent attempt to provoke controversy.
In interviews following her arrest, Brito stated, “I used the anthem’s verses to express my free spirit.” She added that she complies with what the law says but does not regret her performance because she believes she did no harm. When asked whether she would apologize to the country, she responded with a smile, saying, “Forgive me, my country, forgive me in every way I need to ask.” She further remarked, while raising her shackled hands, that “it’s much easier to ask for forgiveness than it was to ask for permission.”
Her statements reflect a tension between personal expression and statutory boundaries. While she acknowledged the authority of the law, she also conveyed a sense of conviction that her actions were not malicious. The legal process ahead will determine whether the court interprets her performance as an act of artistic reinterpretation or as a punishable offense under the existing legal framework.
Public Reaction and the Broader Debate on Expression
The arrest has sparked intense public discussion throughout the Dominican Republic and beyond. On social media platforms, reactions have ranged from condemnation to support. Critics argue that the national anthem is a solemn symbol of collective identity and sacrifice, and that altering its tone or style diminishes its dignity. For these individuals, adherence to traditional performance standards is essential to maintaining respect for national heritage.
Read : Canadian Man Sues Dominican Republic Resort After Family Died of Food Poisoning
Supporters of Brito, however, contend that her rendition did not display contempt but rather creativity. They point out that music evolves over time and that blending traditional elements with contemporary genres can be a way of connecting younger generations to national symbols. Some commentators have questioned whether criminal charges are an appropriate response to what they see as a harmless artistic interpretation.
The case has also prompted broader reflections on law enforcement priorities. Certain social media users have criticized authorities for pursuing charges over a karaoke performance while the country faces challenges such as violent crime and corruption. These critics suggest that legal resources should focus on more pressing public safety concerns. Others counter that the rule of law must be applied consistently, and that statutes governing national symbols exist precisely to prevent actions that could erode respect for them.
The incident underscores the complexity of balancing respect for national traditions with evolving cultural expression. In many societies, national anthems hold deep symbolic significance, representing historical struggles, collective achievements, and shared identity. Laws protecting such symbols are often rooted in the desire to preserve unity and prevent deliberate acts of desecration. At the same time, cultural landscapes are continually shaped by new artistic movements and generational shifts.
For Brito, what began as a karaoke performance has become a legal and cultural flashpoint. Her assertion that she did not feel she caused harm suggests a personal interpretation of patriotism that differs from the formal standards codified in law. The court’s eventual ruling may clarify how broadly Article 37 of Law 210-19 can be applied and whether intent plays a significant role in determining culpability.
As proceedings move forward, the case continues to generate discussion about the boundaries of artistic freedom and the responsibilities that accompany public performance of national symbols. Regardless of the outcome, the arrest of Amarilis Brito Rodríguez has drawn attention to the intersection of music, law, and identity in the Dominican Republic, highlighting how a single performance can ignite a nationwide conversation about tradition, respect, and expression.