[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
26292: Rossier: Re: 26250: Dailey re 26226 (Antoine)and 26239 (Jean-Pierre) (fwd)
From: Nicolas Rossier <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Your long email add to the whole confusion. It is quite simple. A president
for 5 years in Haiti and we would not be here today in Haiti if the opposition
had accepted the Caricom plan agreed by Aristide in February 2004.
A good majority of Haitians (seen by your colleagues as lacking the right
education to choose freely their representative) don't understand why their
leader was sent in a plane
to Central Africa.
You might say everything you want against people who support the lavalas
but I wonder what the human rights situation would be today in Haiti without
IJDH and a few
zealots like KPina and GDelva who dare to speak out despite weekly death
against them. It is thanks to them that people massacred or jailed by the HNP
a voice in Haiti.
Even if you don't agree with Arsitide's policy or Lavalas agenda or don't
think he was the right leader
for Haiti, you need to accept one crucial fact which is that Haiti is in much
worse shape today than before February 2004.
I believe that the people today in Haiti who cheered Guy Philippe in 2004 as
their freedom fighter feel extremely unease today. I let you ponder on this
great quote taken from NKlein in a recent article in the Guardian:
« Aristide is certainly no saint. But even if the worst of the allegations are
true, they pale next to the rap sheets of the convicted killers, drug
smugglers and arms traders who ousted Aristide and continue to enjoy free
rein, with full support from the Bush Administration and the UN. Turning Haiti
over to this underworld gang out of concern for Aristide's lack of "good
governance" is like escaping an annoying date by accepting a lift home from
Charles Manson ».
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Corbett" <email@example.com>
To: "Bob Corbett's Haiti list" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 10:03 AM
Subject: 26250: Dailey re 26226 (Antoine)and 26239 (Jean-Pierre) (fwd)
From: Peter Dailey <email@example.com>
Were one attempting to summarize the status of Human Rights in Haiti over
the last year, a detailed and comprehensive account could be drawn from
NCHR-Haiti, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Haiti
Democracy Project. The same could not be said for the IJDH, the Haitian
Lawyers Leadership Network, Trente Septembre, or the Haiti Progres. There
has not been a single episode- the La Scerie massacre, the killing of Dred
Wilme, the soccer murders, etc.- where their desire for short term
political advantage has not overriden their commitment to the truth. If
anyone doubts this he or she has only to consult these organizations'
websites to learn that La Scerie was a hoax perpetrated by Pierre
Esperance, that 14,000 Haitians have been killed since February, 2004 as
part of a genocidal campaign, that 60+ Cite Soleil residents were killed
in the shootout between the U.N. and popular community organizer Dred
Unfortunately, Windows on Haiti is not a whole lot more reliable. In his
recent post, Guy Antoine protests threats against the press under the
current regime, pointing to the jailing of Kevin and Jean Ristil, and
attempts to intimidate Guy Delva- the name of Jean Roche is an interesting
or not so interesting omission- and asks where is Robert Menard and
Reporters Sans Frontieres? I don't imagine Guy is suggesting that the
situation today resembles even remotely the assault on the press freedom
under Aristide- that would be ludicrous. If his point is that Haiti today
is in incomparably worse condition than it was in February, 2004, thanks
to the blan, he could probably find a more persuasive way of asserting
this than heavy-handed sarcasm, which doesn't really suit him. But I
suspect that his remarks about the hypocrisy of the French, Kofi Annan,
the Americans etc. really have no purpose more exaulted than venting his
outraged feelings over the trampling of Haitian sovereignty by the
foreigner. I suppose I am sympathetic, although I heard all of it, every
single bit, word for word, in 1994 from people of the same social
background as Antoine although decidedly different politics, an experience
which reinforced my belief that that sort of patriotism is the last
refuge of a scoundrel.
Given that MINUSTAH has been an enormous, expensive failure, why is it
that the streets are not filled with people calling for the U.N.'s
withdrawal, and that so far such calls have been limited to the Haiti
Action Committee, Haiti Progres, and others with an interest in promoting
disorder? Why, in a recent Gallup Poll taken in PauP, Gonaives, Jacmel,
Jeremie, OKap, and Les Cayes, did the respondents overwhelmingly select
J-C Duvalier as the best Haitian president of the last twenty years
followed by Rene Preval? Why was the constitutional president at the
bottom of the list along with Namphy and Avril?
The reality of Port-au-Prince today is that the population from top to
bottom has been collectively traumatized by kidnapping and violence that
has cut all the way across the ideological spectrum- from rapes by
hoodlums who have outfitted themselves with razor blades and have turned
popular neighborhoods into prisons from which no one may leave, from raids
by police, ex-army, and criminal gangs financed by wealthy entrepreneurs.
And as long as this is the case, MINUSTAH will continue to be seen as the
one thing preventing the ultimate descent into a kind of Hobbesian
universe and patriotic appeals such as Antoine's are likely to fall on
Apparently Dr. Allen and I have made some "clearly keen references" to the
Haitian Constitution that Jean Jean-Pierre believes are part of a
"wonderful trend." Thanks bro! And evidently he is curious about my
"whereabouts" during the period from 1987 on when Haiti's laws were being
violated on a daily basis. Well, for most of that period I was right here
in New York City, same as you Jean Jean.
If I read him correctly Jean-Pierre is asserting that the present interim
government is extraconstitutional or unconstitutional. This is true. (It
was true of its predecessor as well although Jean-Pierre is apparently
uncomfortable discussing this.) In fact, the interim government's claim of
constitutional legitimacy is considerably more compromised that J-P's list
of reasons would suggest.
As Mr. J-P notes, Article 137 states that the President will appoint a
Prime Minister from the majority party in parliament. Since the term of
the last sitting parliament had expired, this was an impossibility, hence
the counsel of sages. Article 149 provides for an interim president whose
term shall not exceed 90 days, by which time elections for a successor
shall have been held. The impossibility of carrying out elections has
resulted in the anomaly of an interim president serving 18 months. J-P
correctly notes as well that the Haitian constitution makes no provision
for a CEP, a situation dating back to 1995.
All of these are a consequence of the collapse of the last government.
From a constitutional point of view the remedy is elections. Finally J-P
asserts "we either take or reject Haiti's constitution as a whole. Period.
Selectivity is not an option." I do wish that J-P had indicated which
party he subscribed to. If what he means is that all violations of the
constitution are of equal gravity and that none are more serious than
others, then this is pure sophistry.
----- End forwarded message -----