Haiti needs vigilance by the International Community
By Sir Ronald Sanders
Kaieteur News – At a meeting of the Permanent Council of the American Provinces (OAS) on March 17, I said “no decision is perfect, and no resolution satisfies all nations, but we cannot sacrifice goodness on the altar of aspiring perfection.”
The decision related to the current constitutional, political and humanitarian situation in Haiti, which is very serious and shows all signs of worsening. The Antigua and Barbuda delegation was the architect of the original decision, which sought to make the OAS member states express concern about Haiti and offer to facilitate a meaningful dialogue between the President, Jovenel Moïse, and all other stakeholders.
It was regrettable that, despite the strong statement from CARICOM Heads of Government, regarding Haiti, on February 11, CARICOM delegations in the OAS were again split. CARICOM Heads were clear that they wanted “all parties in Haiti to engage in meaningful dialogue in the interests of peace and stability.” Heads also said they were looking forward to “holding free and fair Presidential elections in accordance with the Haiti Constitution.” It supported eight CARICOM countries – Barbados, Belize, Grenada, Guyana, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, Suriname and Trinidad and Tobago draft decision of Antigua and Barbuda.
In the end, through a two-week process of negotiations, countries with important concerns about Haiti, Brazil, Canada, Chile, the Dominican Republic, and the United States joined the nine Caribbean countries to settle a draft resolution which was then discussed with ‘ r Haitian delegation.
By the nature of the negotiations, concessions had to be made. So, it wasn’t a perfect decision and not every paragraph of it was satisfying. But it was enough to allow the OAS Permanent Council to adopt it by consensus.
In essence, he proposed “the good offices of the OAS, under the authority of the Permanent Council, to facilitate dialogue leading to free and fair elections” and asked the President of Haiti to “consider inviting the Permanent Council to do so.”
This was done against a backdrop of no legislature and no government in Haiti since January 2020, and President Moïse has been ruling by decree. Further, maritime gangs have been raping women, including young women, kidnapping people (rich and poor) and demanding massive ransoms. Violence has exploded in the country, especially as hundreds of thousands of people have been protesting against President Moïse and lethal force has been used against them by allegedly highly political police.
The United Nations High Commission for Human Rights has noted its “concerns about judicial independence” which, it said, “further eroded the separation of powers” in Haiti.
Time is fast disappearing to avoid further worsening the situation in Haiti. The OAS decision, which offers to facilitate dialogue, came only after deep polarization and distrust of the country. The OAS should have acted much sooner. If President Moïse does not respond positively and swiftly to the OAS proposal, dialogue between stakeholders may not be possible. Stand-off between them will occur with further conflict. Many Haitians have already publicly stated that “no dialogue is possible with Moïse,” nor has he sought meaningful dialogue.
Instead, it is continuing with plans to hold a referendum in June on changing the Constitution. But there has been no consultation with major Haitian players who say it has no authority to hold such a referendum. What is clear is that in 2015, Haiti had more than 6.5 million people registered to vote. Moïse has now issued new ID cards, which its OAS Ambassador says have been distributed to four million people. Human rights groups in Haiti disagree with that figure, putting it closer to two million. Either way more than 2.5 million people are currently disenfranchised. No referendum or election held under these conditions would be credible or acceptable.
Worse still, the current Provisional Electoral Council, to manage referendum and elections, consists only of individuals appointed by Moïse. They are known to have close links with him. Similarly, the draft Constitution is written by hand-picked people. None of this “in accordance with the Haiti Constitution,” and, for the opposition, is red bulls for bulls.
On March 29, Haiti will mark the anniversary of its 1987 Constitution, exactly what the President is trying to change. Stakeholders pledge to put more than two million people on the streets in its defense on March 28 and 29.
The OAS Charter completely prohibits interference in the internal affairs of States. And, while there have been some OAS member states to avoid that ban, most countries generally adhere to that principle. As a result, the OAS cannot insist that President Moïse accept his offer to play the role of good offices. We must wait for his invitation to do so.
In this context, the member states of the Foundation should work behind the scenes with Moïse and other stakeholders to encourage them to speak up and, in doing so, to remove the idea of a referendum on the Constitution on anyone’s agenda; ensure that independent electoral machines are set up by agreement of all parties and that Presidential, legislative and local elections are held at the earliest possible date, and until then Presidential decrees should be suspended on anything other than players major decide it.
While this diplomatic work is taking place – and CARICOM should be involved – the OAS should remain vigilant about developments in Haiti and be prepared to speak out against any further deterioration in the constitutional, political and humanitarian situation .
The people of Haiti need and deserve objective and constructive support for their collective benefit, not for the benefit of any political elite.
(The author is Antigua and Barbuda Ambassador to the United States and the American Provincial Institute. He is also a Senior Fellow at the Institute of Commonwealth Studies at the University of London and Massey College at the University of Toronto. The views expressed are entirely his own .)
Previous responses and commentaries: www.sirronaldsanders.com