|
|
|
|
Haiti
News
|
|
An Prensip
By Brian Concannon Jr.
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Wednesday 04 May 2005
When Haitians say "an prensip"
(in principle) to explain how something
should work, "an pratik," how it
works in actual practice, is rarely far
behind. An prensip, the bus leaves in ten
minutes, an pratik the driver will wait
for the seats to completely fill up,
squeeze several more people in, then pop
the hood or go looking for gas.
Haiti's current Minister of Justice,
Bernard Gousse, contrasted the principle
and practice of justice in a June 2002
paper titled "Judicial Independence
in Haiti" that he wrote for IFES, an
American non-profit that runs U.S.
government-funded projects in Haiti:
"The Haitian Constitution ...
contains the democratic principles of
separation of power and the rule of law
for all Haitian people - including the
principle of judicial independence.
However ... the Haitian justice system in
practice has never followed either the
letter or spirit of the Constitution [and]
... has almost always been effectively
subject to the administrative, budgetary
and personal whims of an overly-dominant
executive."
The paper was written almost eight years
into Haiti's longest-ever stint of
democracy. Mr. Gousse was a law school
dean and consultant for IFES's judicial
independence program. Professor Gousse was
critical of the elected governments'
pratik, but noted that:
"Despite the circumstances and the
unfavorable environment, some judges
throughout the judicial hierarchy should
be commended for showing a great degree of
courage and independence."
One of the judges who had shown both
courage and independence was Jean-Sénat
Fleury, who had worked his way up through
the judicial hierarchy from rural justice
of the peace to become Haiti's most
respected Juge d'Instruction or
investigating magistrate. He distinguished
himself with impartial investigations of
the country's most complicated and
controversial cases. When he felt he was
being pressured to act contrary to the
law, he would wag his finger, shake his
head, and say "No way. I'm a judge, I
don't do politics."
Not long before Professor Gousse published
his IFES paper, Judge Fleury was caught in
the crossfire of prensip and pratik when
he searched the house of a suspected drug
dealer who was also a client of the then
Minister of Justice. The search was legal
but the Minister was angry, so the Judge
was accused of stealing from the house and
suspended, illegally. A few months later -
too slowly, but surely - the democratic
system corrected itself: the Minister was
gone and Judge Fleury was back on the
bench.
Last November, Judge Fleury was handed
another controversial case, that of Rev. Gérard
Jean-Juste, a Catholic Priest and
political dissident. By that time the
government chosen by Haiti's voters had
been replaced by one chosen by the U.S.
government and Haitian elites. Mr. Gousse
was Minister of Justice, and the architect
of a campaign of repression against
supporters of the ousted Lavalas party.
Hundreds, if not thousands, of
pro-democracy activists had been killed.
The Catholic Church's Justice and Peace
Commission estimated that over 700
political prisoners joined Fr. Jean-Juste
in Minister Gousse's jails. The Minister,
his prosecutor, and the Prime Minister
insisted in press conferences that the
priest was linked to terrorist attacks and
murder. But when the case reached Judge
Fleury's courtroom, no one could produce a
single witness, document or other evidence
linking Fr. Jean-Juste to illegal
activity. So Judge Fleury threw the case
out.
Just before Christmas, another judge, Brédy
Fabien, released several high-profile
dissidents when the government could
produce no evidence against them after 10
months of illegal detention. Minister
Gousse quickly demonstrated how much
justice was "subject to the
administrative, budgetary and personal
whims of an overly-dominant
executive" by instructing the chief
judge to immediately take all of Fleury
and Fabien's cases away from them. This
was a clear violation of the prensip of
judicial independence, enshrined in
Haiti's Constitution and described in Mr.
Gousse's IFES paper. Judge Fleury once
again showed courage and independence: he
chose to resign rather than do the
Minister's politics.
In 2002, Professor Gousse noted that:
"The subordination of the judiciary
is further demonstrated by the lack of
enforcement of judicial decisions, which
require the Government Commissioner to
submit an order of execution for approval
by the executive.
Minister Gousse has demonstrated that
subordination by blocking the enforcement
of judicial decisions liberating political
prisoners. Two of the political prisoners
ordered free by Judge Fabien at Christmas,
Harold Sévère and Anthony Nazaire, are
still in prison under an illegal order
from the Minister, even though Gousse's
own prosecutor approved the release.
Gousse even transferred one dissident,
Jacques Mathelier, to a prison four hours
away from the jurisdiction of a judge who
appeared ready to free him in July (Mathelier
remains in prison)."
Throwing your political opponents into a
Haitian prison does not just shut them up,
it can kill them as well. In January, the
U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals found
"no doubt" that Haitian prison
conditions "are indeed miserable and
inhuman." Tuberculosis and other
disease is epidemic, healthcare and food
are in short supply. Some cells are so
crowded that prisoners must take turns to
sleep on the concrete floor. The misery is
intentional: last November, the official
running the UN Development Program's work
in Haiti's prisons quit because the
Haitian government refused to accept
international help to improve conditions.
The killing can be intentional too: on
December 1, as Colin Powell was visiting
Haiti's National Palace, police responded
to a non-lethal prison protest with
sustained automatic weapons fire into the
cells. The government admits to ten
prisoners killed, but independent human
rights groups and journalists report many
times that number.
The struggle between pratik and prensip is
not confined to Haiti. America's
government has its own principles about
judicial independence and respecting
democracy. IFES commits itself in its
mission statement to "government by
the people and for the people," an
prensip. But according to a January report
by the Center for the Study of Human
Rights at the University of Miami Law
School, an pratik, IFES used millions of
U.S. taxpayer dollars to undermine the
government elected by Haiti's people. The
report, based on interviews with IFES
employees and research on the IFES
website, documented a vast network of
groups that IFES created and funded to
oppose Haiti's Constitutional government,
including student groups, business groups,
media organizations, human rights
committees and bar associations. Some of
these groups engaged in violent, illegal
protests. IFES employees were even
required to attend anti-government
protests and submit reports. Many
officials of Haiti's illegal interim
government, including Minister Gousse and
Prime Minister Gérard Latortue, worked
for this program, effectively obtaining
their jobs by throwing out their elected
predecessors. IFES employees conceded that
Gousse himself even coordinated with the
rebels who launched an armed insurrection
in February 2004.
In February 2005, members of the U.S.
House of Representatives invited the
author of the University of Miami report
and IFES to a hearing, where some members
expressed outrage at IFES's undermining of
Haitian democracy. IFES, which advocates
the prensip of transparency in government,
responded by cleaning up its website. The
Haiti Program description no longer even
mentions IFES's creation of the network
that was so proudly displayed in January.
Nor does it link to Professor Gousse's
analysis of attacks on judicial
independence, which now looks more like
his Ministry's strategy plan than a
critique.
For 200 years, American policy makers have
been throwing up their hands and calling
Haiti a basket case, doomed to failure
despite our best efforts to save it. But
for 200 years we have been installing,
supporting and protecting leaders like
Minister Gousse, no matter what they did
to the Haitian people, as long as they
also did our bidding. When Haiti's leaders
resist our dictates, as the Lavalas
government did, we replace them with
someone more compliant. Haitians will
never enjoy the stability and prosperity
that Americans take for granted until we
abandon this tradition, and allow Haiti's
leaders to actually represent their
citizens. Until, in other words, our
pratik in Haiti matches our democratic
prensip.
Brian Concannon Jr. directs the
Institute for Justice & Democracy in
Haiti (IJDH). Both the University of Miami
Law School report and "Judicial
Independence in Haiti" can be found
on the IJDH's website, www.ijdh.org
|
|
|
|
|
environment,
entrepreneurship and health. |
|
|
|
This web site is sponsored by Town
Computer Advanced Technical Service. |
|
|
