Haiti is a failed State and a weak and vulnerable society which must be resolved by Haitians

Bringing peace to Haiti demands an absolutely critical step: there must be justice for the assassination of President Jovenel Moïse 

Democracy and Security in Haiti

Statement of the OAS General Secretariat on Haiti

  August 8, 2022

Democracy and Security

The institutional crisis that Haiti is experiencing right now is a direct result of the actions taken by the country's endogenous forces and by the international community.

The last 20 years of the international community's presence in Haiti has amounted to one of the worst and clearest failures implemented and executed within the framework of any international cooperation.

This is not to blame the individuals who, with a vocation for service and altruism, worked as cooperators and made their best efforts—in some cases giving their lives—for Haiti.  These persons deserve our greatest respect and remembrance.

Instead, this failure has to do with 20 years of erratic political strategy by an international community that was not capable of facilitating the construction of a single institution with the capacity to address the problems facing Haitians.  After 20 years, not a single institution is stronger than it was before.

It was under this umbrella provided by the international community that the criminal gangs that today lay siege to the country fermented and germinated, even as the process of deinstitutionalization and political crisis that we see today grew and took shape.

Then, seeing its failure, the international community left Haiti, leaving chaos, destruction, and violence behind.

Right now, it is absurd to think that in this context of destruction, the Haitians—left completely alone, polarized, and with very few resources—would be able to rebuild or build the kind of security, deinstitutionalization, and development project that could enable its 12 million inhabitants to once again live in peaceful coexistence: Without resources, in a climate of violence, without technological capabilities, without financial accumulation, without any of that today, they want us to believe a completely endogenous Haitian solution could prosper.  This is not so.

Without the basic conditions of democracy and security, the country today is suffering from the international community’s lack of ideas and real capacity, as well as from its own structural problems.  This is the international community that never knew if it should leave the MINUSTAH in place or remove it, an international community that thought that contributing money was the same as having ideas, an international community that thought that paying its own consultants would solve Haitians’ problems.  Obviously none of that was possible and none of this is possible.

Democracy

Building democracy requires citizens, strong institutions that must be constantly strengthened, and a political system with the capacity for dialogue, as well as honesty.  Essentially, it requires the branches of State government to be in place and with the independent capacity to act.  It requires the exercise of and full respect for liberties and fundamental guarantees (and for the State to ensure it) in the framework of the fullest possible exercise of economic and social rights, along with an electoral process that is trustworthy, fair, and transparent.

The exercise of power in keeping with the rule of law and administrative and institutional efficiency in providing solutions to Haitians’ problems are basic conditions for the functioning of the State that were never guaranteed by the international community in Haiti, that were never built by the international community in Haiti, and that Haiti fundamentally does not have.  We should be clear that what we are facing is, more or less, a failed State and a weak and vulnerable society.  The worst of all worlds: a weak State and a weak civil society.

This must be resolved by Haitians, there is no question about that.  But the international community has a role to play.

Haitian society is very vulnerable and polarized.  Its institutions are weak, its organizations are weak, and the path must be struck toward building them from zero, or even less than zero.

Without reducing polarization, without building capacities and bridges between Haitians, this will not be possible.  Without dialogue, it is impossible.

Building Haitian democracy means encouraging capacity for dialogue, which includes building mutual trust among the various social and political actors in Haiti.  Today, there is no system of checks and balances, neither politically nor socially.  On the contrary, violence is prevalent, as is the abuse of force internally, actions with criminal intent, failed institutions, and a lack of civil society capacity.

Bringing peace to the country demands an absolutely critical step: there must be justice for the assassination of President Jovenel Moïse.  Without shedding light on the truth and without justice, no progress can ever be made towards reconciliation and harmony.

To begin to address these issues, the following processes must be built up:

• An institutionalized and inclusive process of dialogue that includes all the political forces that can possibly be brought together for it.  Within that process, the international community can contribute resources and build bridges between the stakeholders to strengthen all of them and place them on a path towards building organizational and institutional capacities.
• A trustworthy, fair, transparent electoral process.
• An institutional security process for the country.

These processes require the cooperation of the international community, obviously in everything with regard to the necessary resources, whether financial, human, or material.

We would be fooling ourselves to think that any of this could be built without the support of the international community, that none of these processes are needed to ensure the country can find its way out of the crisis facing it and that still impacts the country’s political and socioeconomic outlook. This will not be possible without the international community paying the bill.  Not many members of the international community have the capacity to do so.  Therefore, the responsibility for paying this bill falls to only a few who must not and cannot delay in taking up their responsibility, as time is running out for Haiti, with everything that is happening simply worsening the situation.

Obviously, we should expect internal Haitian forces to oppose these three processes, to oppose the institutionalized dialogue because that process can have the advantage of bringing political stability to the country, which would seriously impact a number of interests that today prevail in Haiti.  Obviously, those forces will also oppose a trustworthy, fair, and transparent electoral process because the current ways and means of taking power have been completely different.  There will also certainly be opposition to developing an institutional security process for the country with a strong commitment of the international community because doing so would dismantle the current situation in which violence perpetrated by armed gangs and organized crime predominates.

When we look at Haiti’s current situation, we understand why there were internal forces—with external complicity—that wanted MINUSTAH withdrawn.  Doing so simply paved the way for a situation like the one we have today.

It is absolutely necessary to reverse the process of violence by implementing other institutional conditions and securing a different international commitment to bring the violence under control and disarm the armed gangs.  It is crucial to reign in the territorial operations of organized criminal groups.  But more of the human, financial, and material resources for this must come from the international community.  Haiti does not have the prepared and trained human resources.  It does not have the financial capacity, nor does it have the technical capacity to address the current security situation.  Taking another path would therefore be a complete distortion of reality.

Similar capacities must be developed to implement a process of dialogue leading to a free and fair electoral process.  We believe that the entire international community has a role to play, but it is crucial to concentrate all of the resources for these processes into a single institutionalized and centralized mechanism, not overlapping and ineffective volunteer efforts.

These processes are absolutely necessary, and it is crucial to launch them as soon as possible, with the dialogue process being the first one.  It should be assumed that the other two processes will be based on the first, not on completely external extemporaneous decisions not aligned with what the country’s social and political culture are capable of receiving and doing.  However, it is obvious that Haiti does not have the resources and that the resources have to be provided to Haiti through an institutionalized process by the international community with a strong monitoring component and capacity to combat corruption to prevent the resources from being diverted and misused.

Bringing peace to the country demands an absolutely critical step: there must be justice for the assassination of President Jovenel Moïse.  Without the truth being brought to light and without justice, no progress can ever be made towards reconciliation and harmony.

Based on the work done under these three processes, a new Constitution will have to be drafted that fixes the grave deficiencies and problems of the current Constitution.

• An autonomous, strong, and responsible Central Bank
• A strong, efficient, and independent justice system
• An educational system capable of providing real solutions to the needs of Haitian youth and children
• An incremental investment process toward providing work and jobs to Haitian men and women

Ignoring this need would mean completely ignoring reality.  Taking the approach of waiting for Haiti to develop its own capacities without international assistance would take years.  The country does not today, nor will it in the near future, have the conditions for accomplishing this alone.

Attempting to resolve the crisis and Haiti's serious problems without any of these elements would mean we are in the final phase of self-deception, which would not be so bad except for the fact that we are also deceiving the Haitian people into believing that we have a real solution for them.

As we continue to wait for the situation in Haiti to improve, the problems worsen.  According to UNICEF, many schools have been closed for three years due to the COVID-19 pandemic.  Attempts to reopen them have been frustrated by the criminal violence affecting communities throughout the country and the extortion to which school authorities are subjected.

The international community, international financial institutions, the multilateral system, and the international financial community of donor countries must make a decision: whether they want to industrialize Haiti sufficiently to ensure work for nine million Haitians, or whether it is economically more profitable to continue absorbing Haitian migrants and let host countries accommodate them as and how they can and in such economic conditions as they can offer.  This is a critical decision because on it depends whether the Haitian situation continues in a state of permanent crisis with increasingly tragic dimensions, or whether we can move toward a process of transformation in which we ensure sufficient investments on sustainable terms and, therefore, the social stability of the country.  It is necessary to ensure a strategy that includes the “what comes after?” aspect.  That includes the importance of the educational model and job security conditions.

Furthermore, Haiti's future prosperity depends on the development of its youth. Chronic malnutrition in children is irreversible, reducing their cognitive capacity by 40%. To build a sustainable future in Haiti, its human capital must be highly trained and able to compete in local and international job markets.  The current deficiencies in food security, caused by the low investment in agriculture and the difficulties of transporting food due to blockades imposed by criminal groups and poor infrastructure will only move the country further from its goal of eliminating extreme poverty.

In order to stop the academic backsliding and the malnutrition suffered by Haiti’s children as quickly as possible, the internal war must be ended.  We publicly reiterate our request for an end to armed violence in the country.

It is urgent to continue working to increase security and begin the democratization process.

Source

Elections on hold in Haiti: Stability versus democracy

By Clement Doleac
Research Associate for the Council On Hemispheric Affairs:


Democracy in Haiti is again at risk, as a fierce political battle has erupted, preventing the scheduling of new elections. The United Nations (UN), the Organization of American States (OAS), along with the US and French governments have all called for the adoption of a new electoral law, which would allow the elections to go forward. However, given the deeply flawed nature of the present Haitian political system, it is far from clear if just holding elections will accomplish much.

An Unsettled Past


Haiti’s political landscape is today comprised of poorly-organized and highly fluid coalitions of parties, a situation which grows out of the troubled nation’s tumultuous recent history. François “Papa Doc” Duvalier was democratically elected – after a fashion – in 1957, although he quickly came to believe that he was indispensable, declaring himself president for life. He delivered on this threat, ruling as a cruel and paranoid dictator until his death in 1971.

With the passing of Papa Doc power fell to his son, Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier, who continued his father’s authoritarian regime. Opposition gathered and in 1986, Jean-Claude was finally forced to flee Haiti, one step ahead of an armed revolt against his repressive dictatorship.

In the years since 1986, democratically elected presidents have governed Haiti, most notably the charismatic Jean-Bertrand Aristide (1991, 1995-1996, and 2001-2004) and today the talented and handsome singer Michel “Sweet Micky” Martelly (2011-present).

Haiti’s Jumbled Party System

However all is not well in the Haitian democracy, where anarchy reigns in the nation’s fragmented political system. A bewildering array of parties are presently represented in the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate.

Overall, a total of 18 parties are represented in the Chamber of Deputies and seven in the Senate. Because of their small size, most Haitian political parties tend to organize themselves into loose political groupings to build electoral alliances. For example, Inité (Unity), which dominates the current composition of Congress, was formed as a political grouping of several smaller parties to support former president René Préval.

The report by the International Crisis Group (ICG) correctly sums up the chaotic situation. The lack of “ideolog[ical] […] clarity leaves citizens unable […] to choose between clearly defined platforms” in this fragmented political landscape. “Over 100 parties and groups have produced the 5,000 signatures required for registration,” the report continues, and yet for all this diffusion of political input, actual power rests in the hands of only a few well-positioned party leaders. As it stands, the Haitian political parties fail at the most basic tasks, failing to articulate institutionalized policies and to effectively reach out to the citizens.

Citizenship Skepticism

The weak democratic institutions and the power vacuum provoked by the 2004 crisis led to the absence of strong parties. The ICG report stated that charismatic personalities and “shallow politicians are unfortunately filling this vacuum”. Rather than holding politicians accountable for not addressing Haiti’s economic and social troubles, these personalities have removed citizens from decision-making, who in turn have rendered public policy suspect because of a lack of confidence in the democratic system.

This political skepticism, as the myriad of small parties who have little organization, inconspicuous ideologies, and murky proposals consequently created a moldable alliance system and indecipherable political game. However, there are some stable identifiable structures in recent Haitian political history.

For example, former President Préval’s platform Inité (Unity, formerly referred to as Lespwa, Hope) counting with a majority in the Senate and partly representing the Fanmi Lavalas tendency (from former elected President Aristide); and the Convention of political parties which brings together 12 political parties and represents the Fanmi Lavalas political group.

Another notable party includes the Mouvement de l’Opposition Démocratique (“Democratic Opposition Movement,” MOPOD), an opposition platform led by Mirlande Manigat, former ex-first lady before 2011 and the unfortunate candidate for the 2011 elections.

To most Haitian citizens, politics seem to be little more than an unseemly scramble by opportunistic charlatans fighting over the spoils of office. To most people, their elected political officials seem to be utterly devoid of any guiding principal, faithlessly switching allegiances overnight, and accepting alliances with the very leaders they so convincingly denounced just the day before. The political effect of this is to remove ordinary voters from the decision-making process. Given the endlessly shifting positions of all politicians, no one have any real idea about what they might be voting for.

It is within this context that the long overdue elections for the Chamber of Deputies and a third of the Senate, along with local and municipal elections, were supposed to take place this year. Initially scheduled for 2012, then 2013, and finally October 26, 2014, the elections have now been delayed once again, this time indefinitely. It is anyone’s guess when, or if they might be held at all.

President Martelly’s Pressure Led to a Legislative Blockage

On September 24, the Haitian Prime Minister, Laurent Lamothe, tried to resolve the situation, promising that “we will continue working to ensure that the elections take place as soon as possible. There … [has been a pending] law in Parliament for more than 185 days,” Prime Minister Lamothe explained, “[but it is] awaiting ratification by the Senate, where there are six […] extremists who [are] block[ing] the vote, so that the elections are not [being] held.”

The six senators are from the opposition grouping, mostly from Inite such as Jean-Baptiste Bien-Aimé (elected in the department of the North-East), Jean-Charles Moïse (elected in the department of the North), Francky Exius (elected in the department of the South), John Joël Joseph (elected in the department of the West), Westner Polycarpe (from Altenativ party and elected in the department of the North), and Jean William Jeanty (from Konba party, elected in the department of Nippes).

In the opinion of this so-called “G-6” (group of six), the presidential draft of the Electoral Law was adopted without any respect for the Constitution or the legislative process. Legislators previously proposed a first draft in 2011, but it was never ratified by President Martelly. The G-6 criticize the way the executive power by decree imposed the members of the Conseil Electoral Provisoire (Provisional Electoral Council, CEP) to be in charge of ruling the electoral process.

As The Miami Herald pointed out, “[i]n addition to the senators, several large political parties in Haiti are also opposed to the agreement and were not part of the negotiations [the so-called El Rancho Accord]. In addition to raising constitutional issues, Martelly’s opponents have also raised questions about the formation of the CEP tasked with organizing the vote”. Many feel that it is currently being controlled by the President.”

International Support to an Authoritarian Electoral Process

The Permanent Council of the OAS, weighing in on the matter, blandly and predictably called for the prompt carrying out of the overdue elections. The Permanent Council expressed its, “deep concern for the lack of progress in the electoral process” in Haiti, and urged all political stakeholders to continue dialogue and to fulfill their obligations under the Constitution. The OAS depicted the six senators as the culprits in the electoral hold up.

“The Draft Electoral Act, an essential tool for organizing these elections,” the OAS noted, “was passed on April 1 2014 by Haiti’s Chamber of Deputies and immediately transmitted to the Senate for its consideration and approval.” However, the OAS, pointed out, “no action has been taken by the Senate” on this matter. Samantha Power, US Ambassador to the UN, has echoed this outlook, noting with dismay that “a group of six senators seems intent on holding elections hostage to partisan concerns, even going so far as to prevent a debate on the electoral law.”

However, Mirlande Manigat, Haitian constitutional scholar and runner up in the 2011 presidential elections, blames President Martelly: “for three years, he refused to call elections,” she said. “A large part of this is his fault,” she added, “[and it is therefore] unfair to accuse the six senators for the crisis.”

Last year, Sandra Honoré, the head of the UN Mission to Stabilize Haiti (MINUSTAH), explained what caused the G-6 senators to unite: “Despite the executive branch’s repeated public statements in favor of holding the elections as soon as possible […] [it] had intentionally delayed the process to ensure that Parliament would become non-functional.”

Despite this, problems are much deeper regarding political governance in Haiti. The principal opposition party, Fanmi Lavalas, was not allowed to participate in past presidential elections for questionable reasons, which later led to a boycott of legislative elections. Besides the boycott, some political actors of Fanmi Lavalas ran in the last electoral race and got elected thanks to the Lespwa political platform (and joined Inite), and represent now four senators of six who oppose the actual draft of the Electoral Law.

Even with no official representation in the official bodies of the State, Fanmi Lavalas is one of the strongest platforms in the country and should be able to participate in the electoral process. The CEP should also have the support of every political party in the country, in order to avoid future electoral disputes.

Why Hold a Flawed Election?

The Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR) concluded last month how the United States and other countries involved in Haiti, having done no more than making speeches each year calling for fair elections, “are now willing to accept any sort of election”, even at the cost of violating the Constitution. One of the ICG’s principle recommendations in their February 2013 report was for Haiti to seek “to develop and promote more genuinely representative, better-structured parties capable of formulating and sustaining substantive platforms and playing a more effective role in the country’s development.”

Only this, the ICG stated, would allow Haiti to achieve “truly inclusive and competitive elections.” This seems accurate. Certainly Haiti needs to hold elections, but after the fiasco in2010, with massive fraud and less than a quarter of potential voters bothering to cast ballots, it is highly doubtful that simply holding an election will resolve the long-term problems of Haitian political life. It may be impossible to have democracy without elections, but, as Haiti is proving, it is all together possible to have elections and still not have anything close to resembling democracy. What Haiti needs is a real democracy, and elections alone will not accomplish that.

The Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975, is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and information organization. It has been described on the Senate floor as being "one of the nation's most respected bodies of scholars and policy makers." For more information, visit www.coha.org or email coha@coha.org

December 11, 2014

Caribbeannewsnow 

May 14 or February 7: What does the Haitian constitution say?

By Jean H Charles


The Haitian Constitution is clear and neat in its article 134.1: “the term of the president begins and ends on the February 7 following the date of the elections.” Rene Preval, the Haitian president has succeeded with corrupt money to have legislation passed that would extend his mandate until May 14. The term of the legislators that extended the mandate expired on January 11, 2010; as such they had no authority to pass such a law on May 17, 2010.

The promulgation of the law certifying his presidency on March 24, 2006, indeed stipulated that his mandate will end on February 7, 2011. He had thirty days to contest. He failed to do so. At his inauguration five years ago, he did recognize that the letter and the terms of the Constitution shall be the last word: “I will remit the power on February 7, 2011, whatever the time and the date of my inauguration.”

President Preval during his five years in power has succeeded in emasculating the judiciary. He has refused to name a chief justice. When confronted with this major dereliction of duty, he claimed he was too busy with other matters to perform that crucial constitutional obligation, in a casual remark he continued, “All the justices minus one are unconstitutional.”

The United States is unique in the world in having a strong Constitutional Court – the Federal courts as well as the Supreme Court – that intervene to prevent problems and bring about solutions to conflicting political issues.

John Marshall, the eminent American jurist, in a seminal decision – Marbury vs. Madison – in 1800 stated it is the province of the court to say what the law is. This dictum reproduced in the jurisprudence of most western countries put the judiciary on a higher platform where actions by the legislative and by the executive can be reviewed by the court for their conformity with the established constitution.

To solve the Haitian dilemma we must go into the spirit and the minds of the framers to find out what the deadline of February 7 meant in their deliberations. I have consulted two of the framers who toiled for months to produce the Haitian constitution.

They told me the date of February 7 was chosen as a strong barrier against any volition of dictatorship from future presidents. The last dictator, Jean Claude Duvalier, was chased from power on February 7. To extirpate for ever from the Haitian mind and spirit the possibility of incubating a new dictator, February 7 as the last date for remaining in power has been written in stone in the Haitian Constitution. The law extending the term of the President to May 14 is repugnant to the Haitian Constitution.

Since 1987, Haiti has made three small steps that may lead its nascent democracy to leaps and bounds.

1. February 7 has been set as a road block that cannot be removed or crossed by any wannabe dictator to implement a new form of dictatorship into Haiti.

2. The current president cannot present himself for a second term consecutively. After a non consecutive two terms he cannot run again.

3. The reigning president cannot use his power to legitimise an associate as the next president. The permanent electoral board is responsible for organizing and controlling with complete independence all electoral procedures until the results of the election are announced.

President Preval has succeeded in running amok of all the acquisitions of the Haitian democracy. Having succeeded to be elected for a second term, he is trying to go beyond February 7, in his mandate. Furthermore, he is insisting that his candidate Jude Celestin be rubber-stamped by an electoral council as the next president.

President Preval has presented the spurious arguments that he is and shall remain the only interlocutor accepted by the international community to defend and present the interest of the Haitian people.

His disastrous leadership during the last five years in general, his poor handling of the catastrophe that befell Haiti since January 12, his dubious handling of the electoral processes, all indicate that his credibility after his mandate is at a low point to help Haiti cross the Rubicon of its recovery.

Haiti, after two hundred years, has for the first time the entire constellation in its favour to usher into a new era of prosperity and fulfillment. It has a large educated Diaspora (in love with the motherland), ready and willing to help. Its population has experienced without relief but with ‘saintly resilience’ the dictatorship of the Duvaliers, the militarism of Namphy, Cedras, and Avril. It went into the anarchic-mercurial governance of Aristide and Preval as well as the corrupt bureaucratic transition of Latortue. It is now ready and thirsty for true democracy.

For the first time in its history, due to the devastating earthquake, the entire world was concerned about and wanted to help Haiti. Yet the corrupt leadership of the present government thwarted any coordination of the aid agencies that would bring incremental relief to the Haitian people.

President Preval stands across Haiti’s smooth process of recovery. At the end of his mandate on February 7 the people of Haiti, the commerce and the industry, the church, as well as the true friends of Haiti should stand as one to prevent (using former Assistant US Secretary of State, Roger Noriega’s language) the clumsy electoral farce from turning into needless political violence.

Letting Preval formulate and implement at his own discretion the date of his departure from power is a dangerous precedent that will impede forever the young Haitian democratic process.

It will create also chaos and instability with no end in sight!

January 22, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International