This week in HaitiHaïti Progrès
February 28 - March 6 2001
Dispute Over Justice in the Senate
On Wednesday, Feb. 21, a bitter fracas broke out in the Senate, even though all the sitting senators are members of the same party, the Lavalas Family (FL).
It began when Sen. Pierre Sonson Prince strongly criticized the Senate's move to grant immunity to Sen. Dany Toussaint, who has not responded to three court summons from Claudy Gassant, the magistrate investigating the Apr. 3 murder of radio journalist Jean Dominique.
Toussaint was summoned, not as an accused, but merely to testify. Nonetheless, Senate leader Yvon Neptune said that Toussaint should not respond to the summons because, according to one interpretation of the Constitution, Senators are immune from any action from the courts. Several senators have privately disapproved of the Senate position, saying it made it appear that there was something to hide. Sen. Prince's intervention opened up this can of worms.
"To be honest with ourselves, the question is simple but has been posed in a complex manner," Prince declared in the session. "Today, we must pose this question in all its simplicity. By using the weaknesses in the wording of our laws, we must not try to mask the truth, which will only open our veins to the venom of impunity. All of this is simply to say that Senator Dany Toussaint should present himself before the investigating magistrate Claudy Gassant."
Sen. Prince was supported in his remarks by Senators Lans Clonès and Gilles Gérard, who said that Prince's position "expressed the will of several senators to have truth shine on this odious assassination of one of the comrades of liberty." Sen. Toussaint was absent.
As tempers flared on the Senate floor, some popular organization leaders in the gallery also became impassioned. René Civil of Popular Power Youth (JPP) and Paul Raymond of the St. Jean Bosco Chapter of the Small Church Community (TKL) exchanged words with an aide to Sen. Prince. The aide reported to the senator that Civil and Raymond had threatened his life. The senator then proceeded to denounce the alleged threat on the Senate floor, further fueling the tumult. The session finally ended when three senators -- Lans Clonès, Yvon Feuillé and Médard Joseph - got up and left the hall, leaving those remaining without a quorum.
Civil energetically denied threatening the life of Sen. Prince, saying that "if he says that, then somebody has sent him to sow confusion." Raymond also repudiated the charge, but remained obtusely hostile. "If there is a senator who makes a declaration which goes against what the Haitian people have decided, it is not for us as individuals to judge him," Raymond said. "It is the Haitian people, with their power to vote on May 21 and with their ballot for which they made many sacrifices, who will be the judge."
Sen. Clonès put the blame for the flare up on Sen. Neptune. "The president of the senate should have recognized that he poured gasoline on a fire that was almost extinguished," Clonès said. "According to Article 90 of the Penal Code, a senator is not a major state functionary, and according to the Constitution, a Senator should testify without any hitches before justice."
After the fiery session, Neptune decided to close the Senate to the press and public when the body is in session.
The next day, Sen. Toussaint made an unscheduled and unannounced visit to Judge Gassant, offering all his cooperation in the investigation. The judge said he was not prepared for the visit and asked Toussaint to return the next morning.
But the informal meeting on Friday, Feb. 23 did not occur either. The judge came to his quarters early in the morning but then left. Toussaint never showed up. Instead he attended that morning a meeting of Lavalas parliamentarians with President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the head of the party, at the Aristide Foundation in Tabarre. The closed-door meeting was reportedly to review and assess the Feb. 21 Senate session and lay down principles for legislators to follow in their debates. Jonas Petit, an FL spokesman, said the meeting resolved many issues. "There are a number of good ways to treat questions, whether you agree with someone or not," he said. "This is all part of the political education process we are undertaking in the Lavalas Family."
Meanwhile, Sen. Toussaint wrote a letter to the Senate asking for authorization to go before the judge. "I asked the assembly for permission to go before the investigating magistrate so that I can respond, testify, or collaborate, whatever form that they want to give it," he said. "While I am awaiting their decision, I will abstain from sitting as a parliamentarian so as not to upset other parliamentarians." Toussaint says he has not yet appeared before the judge because he does not yet have Neptune's consent.
The Association of Haitian Journalists (AJH) praised the "Lavalo-Lavalassian conflict," as it was called by Radio Kiskeya. "We welcome the declaration of Pierre Sonson Prince about the necessity for Sen. Dany Toussaint to appear before the judge," said Guyler Delva, the AJH president. "There is nothing, no attitude, right or wrong, which is justified if it impedes the investigation. Therefore, we encourage the senators to continue in this direction."
Charles Suffrat, coordinator of the peasant organization Kozepèp,
also commended the dissident senators for the debate. "We hope that
the Senate lifts the blockage from the Jean Dominique investigation, so
that justice can triumph," Suffrat said.
Does
the opposition oppose peace?
by Emmanuel
Gracia Louis
Most governments face political constraints in implementing their policies. In Haiti, these constraints have become very evident after the defeat of the opposition in last year's elections. Clearly, dialogue is needed to reduce divergences. It is not by violence or brute force that the country can advance. The Democratic Convergence also seems ready to encourage international economic sanctions, to which Haiti is vulnerable.
What is needed, however, is for foreign countries to show solidarity. They should contribute to the development of Haiti and collaborate in good faith with the constitutional government.
Meanwhile, the opposition's attempt to overthrow the regime is a flagrant violation of the Constitution and therefore an unlawful act.
In a well-functioning society, political actors must at least talk to one another, even if they don't always agree. The opposition must recognize the need for dialogue, and ways must be found, if not to entirely reconcile with the constitutional government, at least to compromise and resolve the present conflict. The fundamental problem is a lack of cooperation.
In spite of all the government's efforts to make peace, the opposition stubbornly refuses to cooperate. Instead, it very often rejects proposals without even examining them and without condescending to say why.
The most ironic aspect of the situation is that the parties in the Democratic Convergence have done nothing to advance the intellectual development or economic prosperity of the country, and yet they oppose the Lavalas Family's efforts toward these ends. I assume that the Lavalas Family does not believe that the projects which it has prepared are perfect, but at least they approximate the vital needs of the country.
Meanwhile, the opposition acts at will, without regard for law, obliging the regime to accept its propositions. The unwillingness of the Democratic Convergence to pursue peace and the common good creates a problem, but not an impasse. Haiti must and will continue on its way.
If the present authorities are devoted to their work and sacrifice themselves to meet the needs of the Haitian people, the people will recognize their efforts. And it will be clear to all that the opposition is just opposing peace.
The author is a medical student who lives in Port-au-Prince.
*~