This Sun., Feb. 7 marked the 30th anniversary of
Jean-Claude Duvalier’s departure and the end of
President’s Michel Martelly’s term. A last-minute
negotiated deal secured Martelly’s departure, but it may
not succeed in producing a long-term solution. Tensions
leading up to Feb. 7 provoked violent confrontations
between pro-government paramilitaries and opposition
protestors in Port-au-Prince, resulting in one dead, as
well as the
cancellation of the
first day of Carnaval. And while foreign diplomats
welcomed the accord, a number of opposition parties
raised objections to the agreement.
On Feb. 6, Martelly publicly signed a political
accord with Chancy Cholzer and Jocelerme Privert, the
presidents of the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate,
respectively. The agreement confirmed that Martelly
would leave office and laid out a process for
establishing a transitional government to take over. As
de facto Prime Minister Evans Paul stays on, the
Parliament will supposedly select a new provisional
president within five days following the end of
Martelly’s term. The new president will then engage in
consultations to appoint a consensus prime minister and
“redynamize” the Provisional Electoral Council (CEP).
Once a new government is in place, the accord
stipulates, it is responsible for implementing the
“technical recommendations” of the Evaluation Commission
and “restarting” the electoral process begun in 2015.
The interrupted elections are to resume on Apr. 24,
definitive results to be announced on May 6, and a new
President sworn in on May 14. [However, all of these
dates would have to be established by the new CEP, the
independent institution which governs all electoral
matters. - HL]
In his final
speech as President
on Sunday, Martelly
expressed
satisfaction with the political accord, saying lawmakers
“gave me a guarantee that the country is going to be
stable.” Martelly also directly referred to the
electoral impasse, admitting that although he had the
sense of “a job well done,” there was also “a mission
that is not yet completed.” A small group of Haitian
Bald-Headed Party (PHTK) supporters greeted the outgoing
president outside the parliament, wearing pink shirts
with the words “Je Suis Martelly” (I Am Martelly).
Thousands of anti-Martelly protesters also
took to the streets
in the capital, the mood a mix of defiant celebration
and uncertainty as to what comes next.
The international community were unanimously
favorable toward the accord, emphasizing the need to
complete the elections as quickly as possible. The Core
Group
welcomed the signing
of the accord, seeing it as “a crucial step towards
overcoming the political challenges Haiti faces.” The
Core Group statement described the agreement as “a
solution in keeping with the Constitution” and invited
“the actors concerned to implement all the commitments
entered into,” especially “the continuation of the
electoral process within the timeframes indicated.” The
U.S. State Department also
hailed the accord
for ensuring “the continuity of governance and the
completion of the ongoing electoral process.” UN
Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon likewise
celebrated the
accord for “providing a roadmap to the swift conclusion
of the electoral cycle underway.”
The opposition’s Group of Eight (G-8), on the
other hand, immediately
condemned the accord
as anti-democratic and unconstitutional. The G-8
denounced the large role given to parliament in the
accord, given the questionable legitimacy of many
members of parliament. Instead, the G-8
suggested an
alternative solution by handing the power to a judge of
the Supreme Court and called for the establishment of an
electoral verification commission that would examine
both the Oct. 25 and Aug. 9 elections. Fanmi Lavalas
made a similar
call for an
investigation of both the presidential and legislative
elections, as did
other parties such
as FUSION, Kontrapèpla, and OPL. The G-8 statement,
however, was only signed by Samuel Madistin; although
officially still part of the G-8, Jude Célestin and his
party LAPEH have not yet made any statements regarding
the accord.
The accord was concluded on the heels of a tense
day in the capital and other cities. On Fri., Feb. 5,
groups of armed militia men claiming to be ex-soldiers
from Haiti’s disbanded military
patrolled menacingly
through Port-au-Prince, Les Cayes, and other cities. In
Port-au-Prince, the appearance of pro-government
paramilitaries coincided with a demonstration calling
for Martelly’s resignation. Paramilitaries
fired shots at the
demonstrators near Champs de Mars, who responded by
attacking the ex-soldiers with stones, resulting in the
death of one paramilitary. After Feb. 7, one
paramilitary member warned, “all illegal arms will
become legal!” Neither UN Mission to Stabilize Haiti
(MINUSTAH) troops nor Haitian National Police (PNH)
officers made any attempt to control the paramilitaries.
MINUSTAH
condemned the
violence in a statement issued the following day and
“noted with concern the organized presence of several
dozen people in green uniforms, some of whom were
armed.” Although it was unclear who was in charge of the
armed men, former paramilitary leader and Senate
candidate Guy Philippe had recently threatened to have
his supporters march on Port-au-Prince. “We are ready
for war,” Philippe
said in a radio
interview on Jan. 24. The G-8 pointed out the
coincidence of the political accord and the deployment
of paramilitaries, criticizing the signatories for
ignoring this “serious event” and the threat it
represents for democracy.
Earlier in the week, protests against the
controversial arrival of an Organization of American
States (OAS) Special Mission had continued, with a
sit-in held outside
the U.S. Embassy on Feb. 4. In a
statement released
on Thursday, the Coordination Europe-Haiti (CoEH), for
their part, urged the European Union to support Haitian
democracy, strongly criticizing the EU’s Electoral
Observation Mission for taking “the position of
defending the legitimacy of the Oct. 25 election
outcome, even
after
the
Government
of Haiti’s
decision
to
postpone the
second
round indefinitely.” The EU Observation Mission
was the only international mission to explicitly take
this stance. CoEH urged the Mission to “prove its
independence and professionalism” and “stop minimizing
the ‘serious’ irregularities, verging on fraud, as
observed by the BCEN and the
CEEI
during their
verifications, and
denounced
by a
large
majority of
civil society and the political opposition.”
Despite strong opposition among Haitians to
foreign intervention, some foreign commentators claimed
prior to the accord that a Haitian-led solution was
impossible. The
Washington Post
insisted in a Feb. 3 editorial that “a strong
international hand is required, one that can encourage
or, if necessary, coerce the country’s political, civic
and business leaders to come to terms on a Haitian
resolution.” The OAS Special Mission, which was present
during both the negotiations leading to the accord and
the signing ceremony on Feb. 6,
judged that its
presence had “a favorable impact on the search for a
consensus formula among the various groups.” The State
Department also
highlighted the
“constructive role” played by OAS Special Mission in
fostering a “spirit of consensus.”
Following, Martelly’s
verbal harassment of
Liliane Pierre-Paul, a journalist from Radio Kiskeya,
women’s organizations and civil groups
organized a
gathering in support of Ms. Pierre-Paul, Jean Monard
Métellus, from Radio Television Caraïbes, and the
country’s independent media.
While Martelly may be gone, the resolution of Haiti’s
electoral crisis is far from guaranteed. Martelly
departed as he came, as
one headline put it
(in reference to his contested 2010 electoral victory):
amid uncertainty and disorder.
|