#3563: English version of Jean Dominique's last commentary (CEP/CNO) (fwd)

[Robert Corbett <bcorbett@netcom.com>]

From:Haiti123@aol.com

Translation of last commentary by Jean Dominique on March 27, 2000 

"In the light of the concept of free, transparent, democratic and honest 
elections, this should be the duty of of impartial observers?  However, Mr. 
Leopold Berlanger, the Coordinator of the Conseil National d'Observateurs 
(CNO), is part of a coalition, working through Vision 2000, which is engaged 
in the destruction of Lavalas.  First Point.  

Second point.  The Senator Wesner Emmanuel at this microphone and publicly, 
assuming his responsibility as a functioning senator, pointed out that Mr. 
Leopold Berlanger (who at that time had no credentials or title relating to 
the election process) during the December 16, 1990 presidential elections 
convinced a computer operator to change the results of the senatorial 
elections for the West.  Senator Wesner Emmanuel further stated that he has a 
taped recording of this conversation between the employee and Berlanger and 
when this employee told Senator Wesner Emmanuel that the results of the 
elections are not the ones being announced by the President of the 
Departmental Electoral Bureau, Senator Emmanuel replied that he has a tape of 
the conversation with Berlanger and that he would publicize this trickery on 
the air.  The employee considered this and then retreated and said that the 
results are correct and then gave the original results.

Voila, so this individual is now a member of a coalition which for five years 
has worked virulently with Vision 2000 against the Lavalas movement and this 
same person is the head of a national commission to observe the elections 
while in 1990 he tried to manipulate the results, and this is the person 
President Leon Manus gave the power to receive all information and documents 
related to the electoral process that should be sent to him quickly:  First 
point.

Second point,  to have the monopoly of the electoral observers: that all the 
national observers accredited by the CEP to observe the elections must be 
recommended by the CNO.  Total monopoly! This is the second point.

Third point, which is more critical. In the case whereh is no original or a 
duplicate available the observer from the CNO can put together a report of 
the balloting as he observed it.  This report which contains the numbers 
written out would be signed by the members of the head of the electoral 
bureau and the observer from the CNO.  So, here is Mr. Berlanger having the 
power to put together the written report of the results of the vote.  

Meanwhile, the electoral law is clear in Article 158: the written process of 
the balloting is drawn and signed by the members of the electoral bureau and 
in some cases by the representative of the party, groups, or political groups 
who are officially recognized, or cartels or candidates.  The written report 
is prepared in at least six formally signed originals.  If the representative 
of a party, group, or political party, officially recognized, or cartels or 
candidates refuse to sign the report, they will state the reason invoked or 
alleged for their refusal to sign and these protestations have no immediate 
value, and are only for future reference.  The refusal to sign a report by 
the representative of the electoral bureau has no effect on the validity of 
the electoral operations.  

The word observer never appears in Article 158.  Never!

Article 159:  An original of the written report of the balloting is attached 
to the door of the electoral bureau by the president of the bureau and the 
other originals are distributed as follows:  one to the BEC, two to the BED 
which transmits one to the CEP,  two others go to the two representatives of 
the candidates that obtained the largest number of votes.

There is no mention in the electoral law of an original written report or a 
copy to be given to an observers named by Berlanger .  No mention whatsoever. 
 The question we are posing now before further analyzing this text, which is 
unbelievable, is the following:  Is President Manus, the president of the 
CEP, qualified to sign an agreement which contradicts the text and the spirit 
of the electoral law?

We have noted in the course of the electoral process, with the passion that 
you all know we have, the legitimate suspicion that there is a threat to the 
process with the successive unpleasant revelations of the role of IFES inside 
of the CEP and financed and directly manipulated by USAID.  So, these 
legitimate suspicions about the CEP are getting larger by that unbelievable 
accord with the CNO.  The question we are asking is the following:  Did 
President Manus sign this very important text to give Mr. Leopold Berlanger 
the possibility of altering the results of the vote?  Is President Manus' 
signature in accord with the other eight  members of the CEP?  I already know 
that one of them doesn't even know about the accord.

Secondly, Berlanger, who is the Coordinator General of the CNO, did he check 
with the CNO to sign , negotiate and sign the text? Thirdly, it is written in 
this agreement that all the documents should be directed to the executive.  
Did they send this protocole d'accord to the Executive?  I direct this 
question to the President of the Republic."