Jean Bertrand Aristide, Amaral Duclona and the murder of Bernard Lauture in Haiti by Stanley Lucas

    A. Duclona         J.B. Aristide      J.P. Lauture       J.A.Nazaire

Ten years ago, a Haitian businessman named Claude Bernard Lauture, 51, and known as “Billy” was kidnapped and murdered.  This week the Court of Assise in Paris convicted Amaral Duclona, a Haitian national, of the murder and sentenced him to 25 years in jail.  If it weren’t for a Radio Vision 2000 interview with his widow, Marie Louise Michele Lauture, this conviction would have gone unnoticed. But on May 26, Marie Louise shared with the Haitian public her suffering and what she went though for the past ten years.  This was one of the most emotional interviews I have heard and was shocking for all listeners that day.  In it, she stated that former President Jean Bertrand Aristide was behind the murder, and she laid out his criminal mindset and the weaknesses of Haiti’s judicial system.

    Bernard Lauture

Bernard and Marie Louise Michele Lauture had five children over the course of a happy marriage.  He was a reliable and respected Haitian businessman in the electrical engineering field.  In 2003-04, the normally quiet couple took to the streets to peacefully protest against the growing repression and corruption in the Lavalas government led by Jean Bertrand Aristide.

By way of background, on November 26, 2000 Aristide put in place a puppet electoral body to steal the election.  News reports and Aristide supporters announced that he won a whopping 83% of the vote, but neglect to mention that voter turnout was about 1% and ballot boxes were stuffed.  Then President Bill Clinton and National Security   Anthony Lake  Lake legitimized the electoral coup by signing an eight-point agreement with Aristide, who conceded to implement a variety of democratic measure and promote the rule of law.  At that time President Clinton had so much invested in his foreign policy to Haiti given the 1994 military intervention that he had limited options to deal with the Aristide electoral coup.  Aristide knew it and tried to blackmail the President.

When Aristide took office, instead of implementing the agreement intended to bring return constitutional order to the country, he turned to his normal violent political tactics ignoring the offers for political dialogue and compromise made by the democratic opposition who were pressing the eight-point agreement.  Instead, he burned opposition party headquarters and the private residences of the opposition leadership; attacked women and youth organizations pressing for change; terrorized the press and human rights activists.  Many people died facing his wrath.

When it was clear that Aristide would not compromise, the Haitian citizens, with a proud tradition of holding their leaders accountable and standing up for democracy, rallied to demand Aristide’s resignation including members of his own coalition.  Again, Aristide decided that repression, kidnappings and killings were the best way to counter these peaceful protests.  He organized gangs and distributed machine guns and hand guns to the chimeres.  These gang members, the chimeres, were protected by a highly politicized police force that served Lavalas political goals.  Moise Jean Charles, a member of his Lavalas coalition and a sitting Senator, decided to counter Aristide’s violence by calling for the support of one of a former police commissioners, Guy Philippe, according to two Lavalas senators.  

It was in this context that Bernard’s kidnapping was organized and carried out.  During the interview with Marie Louise Michele, she gave a detailed account of how Amaral Duclona -- under the instruction of Aristide -- kidnapped and killed her husband.  She also shared details on how the police investigation and judicial proceeding led to the facts.  According to the interview and various documents of the police and judicial proceedings, a member of Bernard’s family, Mrs. Gladys Lauture, who was a close associate of Aristide, first approached Bernard.  Given his respected position in the community and growing stance against Aristide, he was offered various positions in the Lavalas cabinet, including Minister of Public Works and Infrastructure, in exchange for his support.  He declined.  Paraphrasing The Godfather, Gladys informed him that this was not an offer you can refuse.  Gladys’ son, Jean Paul Lauture, a student at MIT, and an associate of Aristide also warned Bernard saying that protesting against the President would not turn out well for him.  Bernard remained firm in his rejection. Gladys changed tactics and showed up at his house one day with a letter signed by the President appointing Bernard as a board member for the state owned electric company. Bernard was upset by this action, and said he was not for sale.  He again rejected the offer.  His wife admitted she counseled him to accept the position so as to not annoy President Aristide.  She suggested that he could resign after two meetings claiming that the position was interfering with his ability to manage his business and attend to family priorities.  He followed her advice.  

On January 6, 2004, Amaral Duclona, the head of one of Aristide’s gangs, kidnapped Bernard while he was on his way to pick up his kids at school.  Right before the kidnapping, Bernard was on the phone with his wife.  At the end of the conversation they told each other “I love you” as was their custom. They did not know that would be their last words or their last declaration of love.  Shortly thereafter, the kidnappers called the family and put Bernard on the phone with instruction on what to say.  The family could hear a voice in the background telling him to request US$100,000.  During that phone call, Bernard led the family to believe that he was in the Canapé Vert Commissariat.  The family contacted Gladys and pleaded with her to intervene due to her relationship with Aristide.  Meanwhile, Marie Louise Michele requested support from the French ambassador to Haiti given Bernard’s dual citizenship. 

During the trial, it came out that there was another kidnap victim in the cell with Bernard who managed to be freed.  According to the victim testimony, Amaral Duclona and Junior Charles, alias Yoyo Piman, a lieutenant of Amaral, were throwing Aristide pictures in Bernard’s face.

The link between Aristide, Amaral Duclona and Yoyo Piman was Jacques Anthony Nazaire, who was officially in charge of Aristide’s garage and car fleet, but was most known for managing the Aristide gangs.

Gladys Lauture told Michele Louise that she would see Aristide on her husband’s behalf.  Gladys contacted Aristide the same day and when she returned the following day she told Marie Louis Michelle that she was leaving the country for a medical visit scheduled months ago.  She vanished.

The family had no option but to await another call with instructions on where they should drop the money.  That call never came.  Instead, a heavily armed group of thugs went to the national morgue and dropped off the dead body of Bernard Lauture with specific instructions to the morgue guardian on where to place the corpse.  That day, Aristide’s gang members, or chimeres, had control of the streets in Port-au-Prince.  They destroyed several businesses and with blind and brutal violence went after anyone who opposed them.  

On January 8, the widow, Marie Louise Michele, went to the morgue aided by a childhood friend.  When she got there, a tearful morgue guardian asked her for forgiveness and told her that he did not know that was her husband.  He said that they give him specific instructions to poorly manage the corpse.  He retrieved Bernard’s dead body for her confirmation.  She saw at least 10 bullet holes in his lifeless body.  She was forbidden to take possession of his body at that point because according to Haitian law a medical examiner must conduct an autopsy prior to releasing the body.  She could not find the medical examiner.

When Marie Louise Michele was leaving the morgue, Jean Paul Lauture, on behalf of Jean Bertrand Aristide, threatened her.  He told her that the game she was playing with the French embassy is not going to be good for you.  Marie Louise Michele has not told anyone of her discussions with the French government, and replied, “I don’t understand what you are saying to me.”  My husband Billy is dead.  I did not even cry, when I saw him.  I got on my knees and prayed to God.  I said to God you gave him to me and now you took him back.  That’s your will, God.”  While she was saying those words, she heard Jean Paul on his cell phone say, “Yes, Excellency”.  He then said, “You don’t with who I am talking? I am talking with President Jean Bertrand Aristide.”  Jean Paul said that the President asked me to convey a message to you, Marie Louise Michele: “A dog with tale does not cross fire,” which in creole means that you better be careful or your kids (the tale) are next.  This remark betrayed the fact that Aristide was worried about the French embassy investigation.  

Facing these threats from Aristide, Marie Louise Michele and her five children fled Haiti to exile in Madrid.  Before to her departure, aided by a Haitian human rights organization, she filed her deposition on her husband’s murder with the Haitian judicial system through the Office of Commissaire du Gouvernement. Aristide had that office ransacked and her file disappeared.

While the Haitian judicial proceeding was essentially dead, the French judicial system was still proceeding with an investigation.  During the judicial proceedings in France, Jean Paul Lauture was summoned by the court to testify.  He declined saying that it would disrupt his studies at MIT.  Both Gladys and Jean Paul escaped prosecution despite their full awareness of Aristide’s intent to kidnap and murder Bernard and their role as intermediaries in delivering specific threats against the family. 

Marie Louise Michele believes that Gladys and Jean Paul were merely functionaries and messengers.  Rather, she fully believes that despite the conviction of Duclona, former President Aristide is the guilty party and evidence presented during the trial, including phone records and witness testimony, supports that.  The judicial proceedings established that Amaral Duclona was responsible for Bernard Lauture’s killing, but Marie Louise Michele believes that Jacques Anthony Nazaire and Aristide should have to face a jury as well, but knows they never will.  She deplores that the Haitian judicial system is weak and witnesses in Haiti are still afraid of the perpetrators.

Quite unfortunately, she has a valid point and is not the only family to face this tragedy.  The judicial proceedings for the assassination of the journalist Jean Dominique in 2000 are ongoing.  Over the past 14 years, Aristide has had witnesses killed and used political power to block justice.  Four months ago, Judge Yvickel Dabrezil concluded his findings and identified the nine people responsible for Jean Dominique killing.  All of them henchmen of former President Aristide, who allegedly had him killed because Dominique represented a threat to his return to power. The investigation into the murder of Venel Joseph, a former governor of Haiti’s Central Bank, is facing similar political pressure.  Venel was going to travel to Miami to testify in U.S. court about a telecommunications corruption scandal. His son, Patrick Joseph, was already in U.S. judicial custody and provided details on Aristide’s telecommunications corruption in Haiti.  Two days before Venel’s trip, an article appeared in the Miami Herald revealing what he was going to do, and Aristide had him executed.

For me, and I imagine all listeners, hearing what this woman went through with her kids in Haiti, the sheer terror they faced, and their subsequent struggles to adapt to life in a foreign land was heartbreaking.  When she was asked how she survived, she said her faith was key.

In addition to recounting the facts, she talked openly about the deep emotional impact the murder and subsequent political persecution had on her children.  The kids faced mockery from their schoolmates based on rumors surrounding the murder.  She said her kids would hang their heads in shame.  With this court ruling, her kids can lift their heads in pride for a father who was a political hero; a man who never backed down in the face of threats and bullies.  He stands in the company of Haitian greats like Sylvio Claude and Jacques Roche who fought for their people and never backed down.  Bernard was a man of principle.  As Winston Churchill once said – “if you have enemies, it means you stood up for something in your life”.  Bernard did just that.  Unfortunately, his enemies made him pay the ultimate price.

In the end, this is a hollow victory, she said.  Despite the conviction, they can never return to their home while Aristide remains in country.

Evalyasyon Demokrasi Nan Peyi Dayiti pa Stanley Lucas

Apre yon diskisyon sou radyo Enèji Boston Samdi 17 Me, mwen deside pale de kisa demokrasi a ye e evalye eta demokrasi peyi dayiti. Lè wa pale de sitiyasyon osinon nan ki eta ke demokrasi andedan nenpot ki peyi ye, ou dwe evalye 7 karakteristik pou detèmine eske demokrasi ap vanse osinon eske lap fè bak. Jodia a se ekzèsis sa a ke nou pral fè pou nou gade ansanm ki kote nou ye e kisa ki dwe fèt pou nou vanse nan peyi nou Ayiti.

Premye evalyasyon: Patisipasyon sitwayen yo nan lavi politik la

Nan pati sa a n a pral analize si sitwayen yo patisipe efektivman nan desizyon politik peyi a, paske, san patisipasyon reyèl, sitwayen yo pa gen demokrasi. Nan yon sistèm demokratik, sitwayen yo patisipe dirèkteman nan desizyon politik, lè yal vote. Nan peyi nou gen 4.5 milyon sitwayen ki kapab vote. Nou poko konnen ki pousantaj nan 4.6 milyon Ayisyen kap viv aletranje ki elijib pou vote. Fok lalwa ak KEP la defini sa e mete estrikti pousa. Sitwayen yo gen 2 jan ke yo kapab vote.

Premye jan an se lè yo patisipe pèsonèlman nan diskisyon yo e ke yo vote pou bay opinion yo sou yon kesyon. Sitwayen peyi dayiti te fèsa le 29 Mas 1987 lè yo tal vote pou apwouve konstitisyon 1987 la. Lè ekzèsis sa a fèt yo rele sa demokrasi dirèk.

Dezyèm jan an se lè sitwayen yo al vote pou chwazi kèk lot sitwayen pou al reprezante yo andedan leta a. Nan 2 ka sa yo peyi dayiti fè anpil progrè depi 1986 pou rive jodia. Men genyen jefo ki dwe fèt pou ke sosyete a ede sitwayen yo gen plis konesans kap pèmèt yo analize pi byen ki stil chwa ki devan yo. Nan yon peyi ki gen 56 pousan analfabèt, sitwayen yo pandan 20 lane pran gwo koutba ak desepsyon nan chwa politik ke yo te fè. Yo chwazi kandida nan Lavalas, Lespwa ak INITE ki pa realize sa yo te pwomèt. Kandida sa yo lè yo vin chef, yo bliye pèp la ke yo kite nan plis mizè.

Kesyon ki poze jodia nan kad patisipasyon politik sitwayen yo, se kisa nou ta dwe fè, antan ke sosyete, pou ranfòse kapasite sitwayen yo, pou yo wè pi klè, lè yap chwazi moun pou dirije peyi a? Kisa ki kapab fèt onivo edikasyon politik nan baz pèp la, pou ede’l pran mwens move kou lè y ap chwazi dirijan magouyè e vole, dirijan chat nan sak?  Jodia gen anpil sitwayen kap plenyen de move kou ke yo pran nan men Aristide ak Lavalas ki pa respekte pawòl yo e de koutba yo pran nan men Preval ak Lespwa e INITE ki pa remèt anyen tou. Pwen sa a mande gwo refleksyon, pou nou kapab fè patisipasyon politik la pi efikas, pou ke demokrasi nou kontinye vanse. Entelektyèl yo ta dwe fè gwo jefò pou kompran fenomèn sa a e pou yo pwoduy kèk rekomandasyon ak strateji pou ede peyi a sou kesyon sa a.

Dezyèm evalyasyon: Egalite

Lè ou ap konstwui oun sistèm demokratik yon sèten egalite fèt pou egziste ant sitwayen yo. Lè diskisyon ap fèt sou egalite nan yon sosyete demokratik, genyen de moun ki panse ke, sou yon fòm ou sou yon lòt, fòk sosyete a chèche ekilibre egalite ant sitwayen yo. Pou moun sa yo, egalite sa a, ki ta dwe ekziste, se yon bagay ki obligatwa. Gen lòt moun ki panse ke reyalizasyon egalite sa a se yon bagay ki enposib. Genyen yon twazyèm gwoup moun ki panse ke men’m si egalite sa ta posib, li pa ta swetab. Nan oun vizyon jeneral, lè nap pale noumenm de egalite nan yon sosyete demokratik, kisa nou vle di pasa?  Noumenm lè nou pale de egalite, nou wè 5 bagay. Egalite politik, egalite devan lalwa, egalite pou chak sitwayen jwen menm chans nan sosyete a, egalite ekonomik ak egalite sosyal ke nou rele egalite respè tou.

Kisa sa vle di egalite politik et ki kote nou ye nan sa?

Kom nou nan yon demokrasi patisipativ e repwezantativ, egalite politik vle di dwa pou chwazi moun ka pral dirije’w e dwa ke ou genyen pou vin kandida tou. Nan konsiderasyon sa yo, chak sitwayen dwe jwen yon kote poul vote lib libè, e vot chak sitwayen gen menm valè, lè y ap konte vot yo. Fòk nou pa bliye di ke pou ou kapab vote, fòk ou se yon sitwayen. Chak peyi k ap konstwui yon demokrasi toujou defini kimoun ki sitwayen, osinon kijan ou kapab vin yon sitwayen si ou chwazi sa. Genyen yon seri de peyi ki otorize sitwayen yo pran sitwayènte lòt peyi ; genyen peyi tou ki pa otorize sa. Gen posibilite tou pou pèdi sitwayènte’w. Gen anpil peyi ki fè ou pèdi sitwayènte ke ou genyen, lè yo fè’w sèmante sou konstitisyon yo. Yo rele sa sèman alejans. Chak peyi tabli règleman sou sa. Sijè sa a reprezante yon gwo deba jodi a nan mitan Diaspora a. Nan peyi panou, egalite politik la egziste.

Kisa sa vle di egalite devan lalwa?

Sa vle di ke sistèm jiridik la ap trete tout moun menm jan. Se pousa ke sembòl lajistis se yon dam ki gen yon bandwòl bouche je l ki ampeche li wè. Sembòl sa a empòtan pou komprann, paske li vle di ke lajistis pa gen fòs kote, nan oun demokrasi. Se pousa, nan yon demokrasi, yo tabli lalwa ke tout moun dwe respekte. Sou dosye sa a, peyi nou genyen anpil jefo poul fè, pou tabli yon sosyete kote lajistis blayi. Jodi a sistèm jiridik peyi nou an gen anpil pwoblèm, e pa genyen sa yo rele egalite sitwayen yo devan lalwa. Sa vle di ke gen travay ki dwe fèt pou chanje sa. Kisa ki ta dwe fèt pou chanje sa ? Mesye kap fè politik yo pa vrèman enterese nan dosye sa a, paske yo pa pibliye okenn pwopozisyon sou sa. Yo plis enterese politize dosye jistis yo, olye ke yo pale de modènizasyon sistèm jidisyè a. Anpil fwa dosye jidisyè yo tounen yon zouti pou fè zen ou make pwen politik. Dosye Jij Jean Serge Joseph la se yon bon egzamp. Malgre konsiderasyon sa yo, sa pa vle di ke lajistis pa fè pwogwè. Okontrè. Enstalasyon Konsèy Siperyè Pouvwa Jidisyè ke tout moun rele CSPJ a, se yon pa nan oun bon direksyon. Lefèt ke lajistis ap fè jefò nan dosye Jean Dominik la, se yon bon siyal ke empinite, penyen lage a ki te eksziste sou gouvènman anakopopilis yo pap kontinye donnen nan peyi dayiti. Lefèt ke ministè lajistis la ap travay sou dosye detansyon prevantif la, se yon bon bagay tou. Men sa pa sifi. Fòk gen travay ki fèt pou fòme jij yo, modènize tribinal yo, mete bonjan ekipman, aktyalize kòd yo elatrye. Fòk moun kap fè politik yo fè plis jefò, nan kad anbisyon politik yo,  pou yo prezante nasyon an oun plan pou modènize e amelyore sistèm jidisyè nou an. Kanta politisyen ki ofisyèlman prezante, pibliye e distribye plan pa yo, mwen pokò tande yo eksplike, si yo ta gen pouvwa a nan men yo, kijan yo ta modènize lajistis, pou fè egalite sitwayen yo devan lalwa tounen yon reyalite.

Egalite chans

Sa gen rapò a jan sosyete a oganize sosyalman, e jan li pèmèt chak moun pwogwese e evolye nan lavi ya. Egalite chans vle di tou ke chak moun gen dwa monte ou desann nan eskalye sosyal ke chak peyi genyen. Nan peyi dayiti, yo gen tandans di ke genyen 3 klas sosyal : Boujwa, klas mwayèn ak mas la. Mwen pa konnen si se vre. Egalite chans vle di tou ke pap gen baryè atifisyèl ki anpeche moun touché sa yo dwe touché an fonksyon de kompetans yo e de travay ke yo reyalize . Fòk nou di tou ke gen kèk sosyete ki marye lajan ak jan sosyete a oganize sosyalman, ak jan sitwayen yo monte ou desann sot nan yon klass sosyal al nan oun lòt. Pa egzamp, pwofesè inivèsite yo, anjeneral, yo pa byen peye yo, men w ap jwen ke sosyete a mete yo nan yon kategori sosyal siperyè ki pa gen rapò ak konbyen lajan yap touche. Sa a se yon lot diskisyon. Sa vle di ke menm si gen de moun ki kwè sa, selon sosyete a, lajan pa deside de nivo ou ran sosyal ou. Egalite chans lan depann de valè ke sosyete a chwazi pou detèmine ran sosyal yo. Nan peyi dayiti, egalite chans pa vrèman ekziste. Moun ki vle pouvwa pa vrèman konnen kijan pou chanje sitiyasyon sa a e kijan pou yo kreye yon sosyete kote egalite chans la ekziste toudbon. Deba sou kesyon empotan sa a manke anpil nan sosyete panou. Jodi a moun ki gen vizibilite piblik yo ta dwe ap diskite sou ki mannyè pou yo ta kreye egalite chans nan peyi Dayiti.

Egalite ekonomik

Lè ou tande tèm sa, ou kapab panse ke sa vle di ke tout moun nan sosyete a ap fè menm kalite lajan. Se pasa. Lè nap pale de egalite ekonomik, kisa sa vle di ? Sa vle di ke tout moun nan sosyete a ta dwe benefisye de yon minimòm sekirite ekonomik. San sa, lap difisil pou gen vrèman sa yo rele libète, ak lòt egalite yo ki kle pou demokrasi. Sekirite ekonomik la bay sitwayen yo posibilite pou vin yon sitwayen aktif toudbon. Yon moun ki nan mizè pa kapab patisipe aktivman nan lavi kominote a. Gen moun ki di ke, lè gen anpil inegalite, sa elimine sa yo rele egalite chans, nan oun demokrasi. Jodi a, nan peyi nou, eske egalite ekonomik la se yon reyalite? Repons la se non. Kisa ki dwe fèt pou kreye yon sèten egalite ekonomik nan sosyete panou? Ki pwogram pati politik yo ak lidè yo, pou kreye egalite ekonomik sa a, ki t ap bon pou anpil sitwayen nou yo? Anpil nan lidè sa yo pase plis tan ap pale de zen nan radyo, olye yo vin prezante ou pwopoze nasyon an oun plan ki ta ka pèmèt egalite ekonomik sa vin yon reyalite e retire pèp peyi dayiti nan mizè.

Egalite sosyal

Egalite sosyal ou egalite respè se yon bagay ki difisil pou eksplike. Lè wap pale de egalite sosyal, sa ta vle di ke nan sosyete a pa gen ni klass ni ran sosyal ke tout sosyete rekonèt egzistans yo. Lè w ap pale de egalite sosyal, sa ta vle di ke menmsi gen oun pakèt moun ki gen orijin diferan, sitiyasyon diferan ak mwayen diferan, sosyete a aksepte tout malgre diferans sa yo. Lè wap pale de egalite sosyal, sa gen ladanl tout yon aspè relasyon pèsonèl, ke okenn lòt aspè egalite yo pa modifye, tankou lè moun di ke nèg lavil se grannèg. Pwen sa a enpòtan pou analize, paske Duvalyeris yo sèvi avèk li pou mennen revolisyon yo. Lavalas tou sèvi avèk li, lè lap pale de moun anwo ak moun anba, lè yo te kon pale de wòch nan dlo ak wòch nan solèy, osinon de boujwa patripòch, pa rapò a malere. Jodi a yon deba serye dwe fèt sou kesyon sa a nan peyi nou. Genyen anpil pwogrè ki fèt nan nouvo jèn jenerasyon ayisyen kap monte yo. Men pa gen okenn pwopozisyon politik de lidè politik nou yo pou diskite de kesyon sa a nan kad demokrasi ke nap eseye konstwui a.

Twazyèm Evalyasyon: Libète ke sosyete a garanti bay sitwayen yo

Se sa anpil moun rele libète ak dwa nan demokrasi. Sa se vle di libète pou sitwayen lan aji san okenn restriksyon osinon avèk yon seri de restriksyon ke lalwa defini. Lè ou pale de dwa nan kontèks sa a, sa vle di libète espesifik ke lalwa garanti. Bagay ke yo rele libète total la pa egziste nan demokrasi. Libète pa’w fini kote libète lòt la komanse. Sa vle di nan sa w ap fè nan demokrasi, ou pa dwe bliye ke genyen yon lòt ki egziste e ki pa nesèman panse ou vle aji menm jan avèk ou. Genyen plizyè kategori de libète, ke ou jwenn nan dwa sivik yo: Dwa pou w vote, libète lapawòl, libète laprès, libète reyinion, libète relijyon, libète pou sikile e sistèm jiridik la pa dwe gen ladanl oken trètman gwo ponyèt. Nan konstwui yon sistèm demokratik ki respekte eleman sa yo, genyen yon eleman ki esansyèl, se latolerans. San li, anyen pa kapab mache. Peyi dayiti fè anpil pwogwè nan domen libète sa yo, menmsi gen de twa moun ki di le kontrè. Jodi a onivo libète pou laprès, ayiti 47èm sou 185 peyi. Sa se gwo progrè menmsi gen anpil travay ki rete poufèt. Map fè nou sonje ke an 2003 sou Aristide nou te 185èm mondyal nan domèn sa a. Sa pa t bon ditou alepòk e rapò yo la pou montre sa.

Katryèm evalyasyon: Youn sistèm pou reprezante tout moun

Nan yon demokrasi patisipatif e reprezantatif, sistèm politik la kreye yon seri de pòs pou al reprezante yon nomb spesifik de moun. Sa vle di ke moun sa a ke pèp la chwazi nan oun zòn, pral aji nan enterè moun ki ba l manda pousa. Nan peyi dayiti gen yon nomb de sitwayen nan seksyon kominal ki chwazi Kasèk. Genyen tou yon nomb de sitwayen anndan yon sikonskripsyon ki chwazi depite. Finalman, sitwayen depatman yo ki gen plizyè komin ladan yo chwazi senatè. Depi 24 lane nou remake ke moun ki resevwa manda yo ,fè oun politik ki pa nan enterè kominote ki nonmen yo. Wòl reprezantan sa ke pèp la chwazi a, se pou li respekte manda li nan respekte pwomès ki fèt. M ap repete l, nan peyi nou, moun sa yo ki resevwa manda yo pote non Kasek, Majistra, Depite, Senatè ak Prezidan. Depi ke nou komanse konstwui demokrasi nou, genyen yon gwo pwoblèm. Nan chak eleksyon ki fèt, soti 1990 rive 2010, pèp la toujou chanje 99% depite yo, 99% senatè yo ak 99% majistra yo, paske yo pa remèt machandiz ke yo te pwomèt, lè yo tap fè kampay. Kisa ki dwe fèt, pou fòse reprezantan ke pèp la chwazi pou al reprezante l nan meri yo ak nan palman an respekte manda yo ? Lè nou gade bilan elu ke pèp la chwazi depi 24 lane, bilan sa yo pa bon ditou, paske yo negatif. Elu sa yo plis regle zafè yo ke yo regle zafè pèp la. Anakopopilis yo toujou reyisi san pèp la. Kisa ki ta dwe fèt pou ke elu yo travay pou pèp la, olye ke yo reyisi san pèp la? Kisa ki ta dwe fèt pou nou tout ayisyen gen bonjan reprezantasyon anndan leta a?

Senkyèm evalyasyon: Rejim Lalwa

Nan yon demokrasi se lalwa ki mèt, se lalwa ki domine tout bagay, e se respè total de sa lwa yo di. Tout moun dwe obsève, respekte sa lwa yo di jiskaske yo chanje. Kelkeswa moun ki nan sosyete a, li mèt chèf, li pa chèf, ke l rich ke l pòv, tout moun anba lalwa. Rejim lalwa ponkò ateri nan peyi dayiti menm si gen jefò kap fèt pou chanje sa. CSPJ ya gen anpil travay devan li pou ke li fè sistèm jidisyè ya endependan e modèn.

Sizyèm evalyasyon: Sistèm elektoral

Nan yon sistèm demokratik premye objektif rejim reprezantatif e patisipatif la, se pèmèt sitwayen yo egzèse yon kontwòl sou desizyon politik yo ak sou otorite ki nan tèt leta a. Kòm pèp la pa kapab prevwa kijan Prezidan, Senatè, Depite ak Majistra ke li chwazi pral aji lè yo rantre anndan biwo leta, sèl mwayen ke pèp la genyen nan men li, se vote pou l konsève chèf kap travay, e elimine sa ki pa respekte pwomès yo. Se pou rezon sa a ke, nan yon demokrasi, yon sistèm elektoral fyab  sa kapital pou fè demokrasi a mache, paske se sou li ke patisipasyon politik la baze. Sistèm elektoral fyab la ankouraje patisipasyon votan yo anfonksyon de ankourajman ou de desepsyon yo, pa rapò a lidè politik kap dirije yo nan palman e nan pouvwa ekzekitif la. Depi 1987 nap eseye konstwui yon sistèm elektoral ki fyab. Jodi a apre 10 eleksyon, 17 konsèy elektoral pwovizwa e plis pase 700 milyon dola meriken ki depanse pou eleksyon peyi dayiti pokò genyen yon sistèm elektoral ki fyab. Lavalas, Lespwa ak INITE ki bay 4 gouvènman konstitisyonèl pa jamen oganize yon eleksyon lib, onèt e demokratik. Ekip politik sa ke mwen rele anakopopilis te kontwole 14 nan 17 konsèy elektoral yo. Yo te toujou sèvi ak kontwòl sa pou fè koudeta elektoral. Sa vle di chanje rezilta eleksyon yo ak mamb KEP ke yo kontwole.  Ekip sa a fò nan vòlè eleksyon. Yo pap mete pye nan eleksyon si yo pa kontwole KEP ya. Tout eleksyon akseptab ki fèt an Ayiti depi 1990, se toujou gouvènman pwovizwa ki toujou oganize yo. Prezidan Trouillot ak Prezidan Alexandre, se yo ki te oganize eleksyon lib libè an 1990 e an 2006. Gouvènman konstitisyonèl Lavalas, Lespwa ak INITE toujou nan koudeta elektoral e nan vòlè eleksyon. Si pou demokrasi peyi nou vanse, fòk nou finalman tabli yon sistèm elektoral fyab kote sitwayen kapab vote san presyon e kote mamb KEP pa prale nan politik chanje rezilta eleksyon. Yon sistèm elektoral fyab ap jwe yon wol enpòtan nan fè demokrasi nou mache byen. Pa genyen anpil refleksyon nan peyi nou sou kijan pou konstwui yon sistèm elektoral ki fyab e ke tout ayisyen fè konfyans.

Setyèm evaliasyon: Edikasyon

Edikasyon se prensip fondamantal e se poto mitan demokrasi a. Pou yon demokrasi mache byen, ou bezwen sitwayen ki gen yon ti konesans lakay yo menm si nou kapab diskite de nati de konesans sa ki nesesè. Yon sitwayen genyen poul fè chwa pa rapò ak kandida yo, pwogwam ke yo pwopoze e sou diferan kesyon. Pou sitwayen an kapab fè sa, li dwe konnen li, li dwe konn ekri e li dwe konn konte. Fòk li kapab jije, analize e peze enfomasyon yo pou l kapab jije sa k bon ak sa k pa bon, e kisa ki pi bon pou li, anfonksyon de enterè li kòm sitwayen. Nan refleksyon sa a, li klè ke sitwayen an dwe gen kapasite klè, pou li defini kisa ki reprezante enterè li. Li difisil anpil pou yon demokrasi fonksyone si sitwayen li yo pa konnen ni li ni ekri ni konte. Peyi nou gen gwo defi pou li leve nan nivo sa a. Nap viv nan yon peyi kote nivo moun ki analfabèt reprezante preske 56 pousan aloske 52 pousan pwofesè kap fè lekòl pa gen kalifikasyon pou yo pwofesè. Jodi a si nou vle ke demokrasi nou mache toudbon, fòk nou komanse reflechi sou kijan nou pral bay edikasyon peyi nou jarèt. Peyi a ta renmen tande ki pwogwam edikasyon chak lidè politik genyen pou nasyon an.

Demokrasi a se yon sistèm ki komplèks. Pou kapab kompran li byen fòk ou viv li nan kè w, nan kilti w men fòk ou chache tou. Pou kompran sistèm sa a, lanvè tankou landwat, fòk w al gade sa yon seri de gwo zotobre te ekri. fòk wal li Periclès, Aristote, Montesquieu, Spinoza, Locke, Kant, Tocqueville, Stuart Mill, Marx, Lenine ak Schumpeter fòk nou al chache sou listwa panou tou. Kòman demokrasi te mache lakay nou an Afrik anvan ke nou ateri an Ayiti. Pa bliye pa gen pèson lòtbò dlo ki kapab konstwui demokrasi pou ou. Se oumenm sèlman kòm ayisyen ki gen kapasite detèmine kisa demokrasi panou dwe sanble. Sa pa vle di ke nou pap pran konsèy nan men lòt moun. Sa vle sèlman di ke nou pap pran dikte. Jodi a, moun ki konnen yo genyen yon responsabilite pou yo bay kontribisyon yo pou avansman demokrasi a. Yo pa kapab chita e rete gade anakopilis yo ki pa komprann anyen dappiyan peyi a pandan ke yap mete kompetans yo deyo. Bagay yo dwe chanje.

Aristide’s Lawyers File Corruption Charges Against the Clintons in Haiti by Stanley Lucas

After decades of stealing from the Haitian people, Aristide has orchestrated an investigation into the Clinton’s deployment of earthquake aid and reconstruction funds.  On April 12, 2014, one of Jean Bertrand Aristide’s proxies, Newton St. Juste, a Haitian lawyer, filed corruption charges with Haiti’s General Accounting Office (Cour Superieure des Comptes) against former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary Hillary Clinton.  Based on press reports, the corruption filing alleges that Secretary Clinton and former President Clinton diverted Haitian relief funds. St. Juste stated that they intend to also investigate Cheryl Mills, Secretary Clinton’s former Chief of Staff, who served as the principal manager of Haiti projects. Aristide’s lawyers wrote to Secretary John Kerry to inform him of the process. This action has generated a firestorm of interest on social media outlets among Haitians around the world.

Given St. Juste’s links to Aristide it is widely believed that Aristide is behind this action.  There is informed speculation that Aristide is positioning his American wife, Mildred Aristide, to run for the presidency in 2015 – a position for which she is not eligible due to her dual citizenship.  This filing then serves three strategic goals: 1. Blackmail the Clintons and others in the U.S. who received the bulk of the aid and relief funds (i.e. threaten the suit and offer to withdraw it for their support for his wife); 2. Garner favor with the Haitian public whose frustration with the lack of demonstrable progress in the wake of the 2010 earthquake is palpable; and, 3. Appear “tough on the US” in order to whitewash his 1994 and 2004 requests for military support in Haiti to bolster his ailing regime.  These requests were tremendously unpopular and have not been forgiven or forgotten by Haitian voters.  Further, Aristide needs support from Washington to alleviate the pressure that he is getting from the Jean Dominique Judicial proceedings, where he is being called in to answer questions about the 2000 murder of the popular reporter. 

Aristide has a proven track record manipulating U.S. policy toward Haiti in his favor. When he wanted to return to power after the 1991-94 coup, he used a member of the Congressional Black Caucus and couple of well paid lobbyists, including Randall Robinson and his wife, to drive President Clinton’s Haiti policy. He first obtained sanctions that destroyed Haiti’s economy and the environment and later, organized a wave of boat people that forced the White House into a US military intervention in 1994 to reinstate his presidency.  As part of that deal, he made a series of commitments to Washington to institutionalize democracy and modernize the economy.  He reneged on all of those promises.

A few months after his return in 1994, Aristide began a violent spree of retribution having his political opponents in parliament, political parties, human rights activists, the press and civil society murdered.  He rigged elections and presided over the country being named one of the three most corrupt countries on earth – for the first time in its 200-year history.  

Meanwhile in Washington he used Haitian taxpayer funds to lavishly compensate lobbyists and well-positioned political allies. He used corrupt business deals in Haiti’s telecommunications sector, namely with the FUSION and IDT companies, to enrich US politicians. Facing legislative and municipal elections in 1995, Aristide tried to blackmail the Clinton administration by saying in a well-publicized speech, “for things to go well in Washington things have to go well in Haiti” meaning if Washington did not support his actions to preserve his party during those elections, he was in a position to create trouble for the Clinton Administration in a US election year. Aristide has created in Haiti the popular belief that he has enough evidence in hand to blackmail some politicians in the US who did business with him.  No one knows if this is truth or fiction.

After his electoral coup in November 2000, an agreement of eight points for the return of constitutional order signed between Aristide and President Clinton’s National Security Advisor Anthony Lake created an air of legitimacy despite the fact that the country was opposed to the coup.  Amidst protests around the country, after his February 2001 swearing in, Aristide went after his political opponents again, burning headquarters of political parties, private residences of political party leaders, killing and repressing journalists and various sectors of civil society including youth, peasants, women organizations and the private sector.  All this while his Administration plunged the country into deeper corruption and poverty.

As a result, another popular uprising started in 2003-04 demanding his resignation.  Members of his own Fanmi Lavalas party saw him as a threat to their political future.  To prop up his undemocratic and unpopular regime, Aristide responded by requesting US military intervention from a reticent Bush Administration.  To force their hands, he returned to the familiar tactic of attempting to orchestrate another massive wave of boat people to Florida by destroying Haiti’s newly formed coast guard.  He failed.  Without external military support he had to face the Haitian people -- and even his own supporters.  

Contrary to Aristide’s propaganda machine, national figures from Fanmi Lavalas, including Moise Jean Charles, reached out to Guy Philippe, a former police commissioner, living in the Dominican Republic.  Moise Jean Charles brought Guy Philippe to Haiti to lead the effort to oust Aristide. That fact was confirmed years later during a contentious interview between Jean Charles and Lavalas Senators Gerald Gilles on Radio Galaxie in Haiti. This revelation contradicted all previous statements made by Aristide allies and lobbyist in the US.

Facing a popular uprising, Aristide was saved by the US and France -- just like Duvalier before him.  Aristide resigned in 2004 and went into exile in South Africa. Upon his arrival, he fabricated a story that the US kidnapped him.  His allies, namely Kim Ives dutifully broadcast this storyline. That storyline, however, was only for international consumption.  In Haiti everyone knew that he suffered the same fate as Duvalier because of the way he ruled the country.

After his 2010 return to Haiti, his US political allies and lobbyists have revived his anti-Americanism strategy to return him to power through his wife.  This strategy will again include creating chaos in country and weakening democratic institutions, blackmailing US politicians and removing Martelly’s constitutional government by blocking the electoral process. Already, Aristide has effectively worked with Senate President Simon Dieuseul Desras to prevent the vote on the electoral law necessary to organize the October 2014 elections – the law has already passed the lower house. 

Aristide again is banking on the fact the US foreign affairs bureaucracy favors stability and peace above all else, and therefore, always responds to threats of violence.  He has secured the support of one member of the Congressional Black Caucus and is banking on support from one or two sympathizers in the US bureaucracy who serve on the Haiti Desk at the US State Department in 1994.  He is further banking on extra political sensitivity given the 2016 US presidential campaign and the speculation that Mrs. Clinton will be a frontrunner. 

What Aristide forgets – as usual – is that in Haiti all politics are local. Haitians have already rejected him for his undemocratic practices and corruption.  They will see right through this deception as business as usual and flatly reject him again.  The silver lining in this “business as usual” story, is that there will be a much needed – and long overdue -- investigation into where the aid funds actually went.  There are still 150,000 people living under tents and only modest improvement in the country  as the allocation of aid funds has not been strategic  or effective despite the Haitian government’s efforts to help shape the overall aid deployment. The Haitian Government – mainly using Canadian aid – relocated 1.35 million people but lack the aid to finish the job.  It should be noted that the Haitian Government itself only receive 1 percent of the aid funds with the remainder going mainly to international NGOs and politically connected contractors.

Haitian Justice, Aristide’s Thugs and the Killing of Journalist Jean Dominique by Stanley Lucas

Jean Dominique is a Haitian journalist who was assassinated in April 3, 2000. For the past fourteen years judges and the Attorneys General of Haiti who were in charge of the case, were victims of intimidation, sabotage and forced resignation by members of the former Aristide Administration trying to protect the killers (see: http://www.haitipolicy.org/content/178.htm ).  Many witnesses to the Dominique killing over the years were targeted and killed (see: http://www.alterpresse.org/spip.php?article14345 ) along with many Haitian journalists.

For the first time in twenty-five years, a Haitian judge, Ivickel Dabresil, has demonstrated the courage to pursue this important investigation into the Jean Dominique assassination to bring those responsible to justice. Judge Dabresil concluded his investigation, which is now public in accordance with Haitian law, identified the nine persons who masterminded and executed Jean Dominique. He requested their imprisonment. The report identified the mastermind of the crime as a former Lavalas senator, Mirlande Libérus Pavert, a close associate of Jean Bertrand Aristide now residing in Florida.  According to testimony by Aristide’s security chief, she was given the mission to silence Jean Dominique to ensure that he would not interfere with Aristide’s plan to return to power in 2000. Eight others responsible for the crime are also identified in the report.  Voodoo priest, Annette Auguste, alias Sô Ann, a Lavalas activist; former Deputy Mayor of Port-au-Prince, Gabriel Harold Sévère; Frantz Camille, alias Franco Camille; Jeudy Jean Daniel; Markington Michel Mérité; Dimsley Milien; and Toussaint Mercidieu are among those implicated. For more details see: http://radiokiskeya.com/spip.php?article9968 Markington Michel fled Haiti into hiding. He was arrested by the police in Argentina this week and will be extradited in Haiti. For more details see: http://www.haitian-truth.org/suspect-in-killing-of-haitis-famous-journalist-held-in-argentina/   

In a communiqué released on May 3, 2014, SOS Journalistes called on the Argentine government's to provide special protection to the detained suspect lest he be killed as other key witnesses and co- accused in the murder of Jean Dominique had been in the past. The head of SOS Journalists, Joseph Guyler C. Delva, expressed the concerns of the organization about "the safety of Markington Philippe who is an extremely important element in the investigation into the assassination of Jean Dominique, as several other witnesses and alleged perpetrators of the crime have been eliminated, with the obvious purpose of avoiding overwhelming testimonies and to clear clues and evidence.  Therefore, we call on the Argentine government to ensure that those who visit Markington Philippe or those who feed him are subject to strict control by relevant clearance entities to avoid that he be assassinated by those who would not want him to speak, "  For more details see: http://hcnn.ht/en/201405/local/281/SOS-Journalistes-calls-on-Argentine-government-to-provide-special-protection-to-detained-suspect-Haiti-Argentina-Jean-Dominique-Guy-Delva-SOS-Journalistes.htm

The Haiti judicial system is making significant progress to bring the killers to justice. How did they get there? In January 2013 Judge Dabresil summoned former Prime Minister Yvon Neptune, former Fanmi Lavalas Senator Danny Toussaint and former President Rene Preval for interrogation.

On May 8, 2013, Aristide was also summoned by the Judge.  One of the investigative scenarios named the former President as a suspect in the killing of Jean Dominique. According to that scenario, he ordered Dominique killed for two reasons: first, Dominique was a harsh critic of the corruption and abuse of power by Aristide; and second, with the support of President Preval, Dominique was going to be a candidate with the political organization Koze Pep in the November 2000 Presidential elections thus undermining Aristide plan to return to power, for more see the following two links:

   http://www.haitipolicy.org/content/148.htm   

  http://www.haitipolicy.org/content/149.htm

After receiving the judge’s summons, the Aristide propaganda machine (a website call Haiti Action) swung into action lobbying in Haiti and overseas attempting to politicize and undermine these judicial proceeding by creating various political diversions.  While his well-paid lobbyists are trying to make it about his return to politics, in Haiti, the debate is not political but legal. Aristide’s foreign lobbyists are doing their best in their continuing attempt to undermine Haiti’s judicial system. Many readers may recall that with Haitian tax payer money, Jean Bertrand Aristide made Ira Kurzban, board member of the Miami Herald and current lawyer for Mirlande Liberus, the crime mastermind, and Brian Concannon of Institute of Democracy and Justice (see: http://www.haitipolicy.org/Lobbying7.htm ) millionaires with lucrative consulting contracts.  There is only one central question that the Haitians and their judicial system are trying to answer after fourteen years: who killed journalist Jean Dominique?

Toussaint, Neptune and Preval responded peacefully and cooperated with the judge’s summon. They each answered the judge’s questions for hours. 

Jean Bertrand Aristide’s behavior toward these judicial proceedings was completely different. Aristide has always acted as if he is above the law in Haiti.  Last January, after the victims of his cooperative scheme who stole millions filed a complaint with the office of the Attorney General Lucmane Delile, Aristide refused to respond to the legal summons. With threats and violence, Aristide forced the Attorney General to come to his house making a mockery of Haiti’s judicial system (see: http://www.alterpresse.org/spip.php?article13915#.UZRoKGDgIzY ).

Aristide attempted he same tactics with Judge Dabresil. On May 7, 2013 he tried to intimidate the judge and the judicial system of Haiti by dispatching 300 paid Lavalas chimeres (thugs) into the streets of Port-au=Prince to lead violent demonstrations (see: http://lematinhaiti.com/contenu.php?idtexte=35715&idtypetexte ).  Aristide’s violence did not intimidate the judge who did not budge from his position.

Again in order to intimidate the judge, on Wednesday, May 8, 2013, Aristide and his Fanmi Lavalas party turned the summons into a political rally in front of the judge’s offices where hundreds turned out to protest. With courage, the judge did not cede to these political pressures and acts of intimidation and violence. Rather, Judge Dabresil interrogated Aristide for several hours. Again that day supporters of Aristide used violence. Journalist Henry Frantz Delice of Radio-Tele Ginen was assaulted by Aristide’s chimeres. They also attacked the offices of Radio-Tele Ginen.  These acts of violence against the press were condemned by the National Association of Haitian Media (ANMH) led by Lilianne Pierre Paul. For more details see the following two links:

http://signalfmhaiti.com/index.php/124-note-de-presse/512-l-anmh-condamne-l-agression-contre-tele-ginen

 http://www.radiokiskeya.com/spip.php?article9563

The majority of Haitians condemned Aristide’s violent attitude and his Fanmi Lavalas party toward Haiti’s judicial system. After these events many Haitians believe that Aristide has become the prime suspect behind the killers. The widow of Jean Dominique, Michele Montas, told Reuters last year that Aristide knows who killed her husband.  In a previous interview she stated:

“ The Haitian police arrested Port-au-Prince former deputy mayor, Harold Severe, a member of President Aristide's cabinet, as well as Rouspide Petion, alias Douze for their alleged involvement in the murder of Jean Dominique. Harold Severe had been indicted on January 28, 2003 by instructing judge Bernard St Vil but his name was, at the last minute, taken out of the judge's final report.” (see: http://www.potomitan.info/vedrine/dominique.php )

The antidemocratic behavior of Aristide of May 2013 has also refreshed the memory of many Haitians. They recall that during the period 2000-2004 Jean Bertrand Aristide was considered by Reporters Without Borders www.rsf.org as one of the 38 presidents considered as predators of press freedom around the world. For more details on the repression of the government of Jean Bertrand Aristide and his Fanmi Lavalas party against Haitian journalists and the Haitian press in general during that period check the following links: 

·       http://www.alterpresse.org/spip.php?article168  

·       http://www.haitipolicy.org/content/991.htm

·        http://www.haitipolicy.org/content/945.htm

·        http://en.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=10005

·        https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/forumculturel/7SUTcCf81Uk/-SQHEBYn7IoJ

·       http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-52753110.html

During that Aristide era, Haiti was ranked 161 as one of the worst countries in relation to freedom of the press in comparison to today where Haiti was ranked 47 in the 2013 global report - the United States is ranked 46.

Repression and the killing of political opponents was so bad under Aristide that Haitian Senator Irvelt Chery wrote a letter to all Attorneys General of the country to ask them to trigger judicial actions against the perpetrators for those various crimes (see: http://www.haitian-truth.org/28-fevrier-2004-1013-neuf-ans-apres-la-demission-du-dictateur-jean-betrand-aristide-toujours-pas-de-justice-pour-les-victimes-de-la-repression-lavalas/ ).

Haitians hope that their judicial system will find and punish the killers who murdered not only Jean Dominique, but those that killed journalist Brignol Lindor, Jacques Roche and Georges Honorat.  Judges will not back down in the face of threats by violent anarchists.  This brave action by one judge signals hope for the Haitian people that Haiti could transition into a country that follows the rule of law over the rule of one man.  Let’s hope that highly paid foreign consultants don’t undermine that hope.