13564: Re: 13550: Hyppolite Pierre regarding Stanle's latest response (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: Hyppolite Pierre <hpierre@irsp.org>

Stanley,

I am not hoping to get into an endless debate with you here. Let's first
clarify something. Call me Pierre, or Hyppolite. Please leave the "Mr." out.

You wrote:
> in your questions about the fleet of armored vehicles, you stated a price
> that i cannot corroborate.  however, i have heard that a series of armored
> suburbans were ordered at his request and i have seen at least one of them.
> i cannot say if these are the automobiles that mr nadal was refering to, but
> i can say that, according to information i have, these vehicles are of the
> same type as those used for the american president.  at this time, i don't
> have confirmation of this information. >

I reply:
 -Well, Nadal was very specific. He said 25 at 250,000 dolarrs each. That
made the total amount $6,250,000, according to his own, correct arithmethic.

You wrote, Stanley:
<as for the airplane, i have a
> question for u.  do u think it was justified for the state to spend an
> excessive amount of money for a trip to johannesburg (less than 3 days) when
> this country is under great financial burden? (just one of many expensive
> trips taken by jba and his croonies)>

My Answer:
What was the goal in going on the trip? Did he accomplish his goal? Was it
to further the interest of the country? If so, it was worth it. If not, he
still had tried.

Also, I was specific on the "airplane" thing. It was an airplane that was
purchased, bought with real money.

Stanley:
> as for your "esprit de suite" question, the haitian constitution assures the
> transition if a president resigns.>

Pierre:
Did the president offer to resign? If so, please give me/us more info on
that.

Stanley:
article 149 states the mechanisms in
> place for a new president to be named for the purposes of holding a general
> election.>

Pierre:
How are you going to have general elections for president, senator,
municipal councils, etc, when before the 822 OAS resolution, Paul Denis et
al., Convergence voices, weres asking for more time, at least a year before
partial, not general elections can take place? Are they now ready a few
months later, or are you willing to leave them behind? That wouldn't be fair
would it?

Stanley:
< another possibility is a political solution that is not
> necessarily constitutional.  one would cry illegality but it is already
> being done.  one clear example is the CEP (PROVISIONAL electoral council)
> which is, strictly speaking, unconstitutional.  the constitution of 1987 had
> only allowed for one provisional council (disposition transitoires) and
> afterwards for a permanent one.  everyone has apparently accepted this
> political solution in an attempt to remove this country from the quagmire it
> is currently in.  if it is possible in this case, why not in the case of
> presidential succession?>

Pierre:

I understand. I do get your point. But I have two small problems with it.
The president at least as far as we all know, has every intent to fulfill
his constitutional obligation and to finish his term of 5 years. One more
thing. The elections in May 2000 were supposed to have resolved the issue of
a Permanent CEP. According to the constitution, the CEP should be comprised
of individuals chosen by members of CASEC if I recall correctly, members who
themselves have been elected. Since the legitimacy of these people have been
questioned, then we don't have a permanent CEP yet.

Stanley:
> one possible option may be a provisional government not issued from article
> 149, yet with a consensus appointment, a clearly defined mandate, and a time
> frame to achieve certain goals.>

Pierre:
Would you include Lavalas in that consensus government? How long would it
take for you to forge it? 2 years? 3? 4 years? Or would it be an
international force determining who should be part of that "consensus
government"?

Stanley:
> as for the issue of "another" international force, i would like to remind
> you that the first international force was requested by jba, which is
> unconstitutional (art 21).  the correct term in this case is high treason.
> the punishment for high treason is stated in art 21-1.>

Pierre:
Go state your last thoughts to Paul Denis, Gérard Pierre-Charles, Evans Paul
aka Kompè Plim, the majority of the Haitian people and a substantial
majority in the Diaspora. They all thought along with Aristde, that it was
the proper and only way to end the coup d'etat of Michel François and Raoul
Cedras.

Stanley:

> now, for your information, l. manigat became president after elections in
> jan, 1988.  the elections of 29 nov '87 were aborted.>

Pierre:

Yes you are correct. And if the November 1987 elections took place as
planned, not in a sea of blood, then citizen Gérard Gourgue would have been
Haiti's president. He was the likely winner, according to all polls taken
back then.

Most leaders from the political class and the overwhelming majority of the
Haitian people abstained from the elections that followed these murders in a
sign of protest. Manigat thought rightfully, that it was his only way to
become president. And so he was. For three months until Namphy and Regala
got tired of him and sent him back to Venezuela.

Stanley:
> Nothing is scary about elections, but a mascarade is not only a waste of
> time, effort, and money but also ridiculous.  accepting a CEP in this manner
> and being involved in fraudulant elections can be interpretted as tacit
> approval.>

Pierre:
We don't even know who the members of this CEP are yet. So why already
questionning its legitimacy. Last I read, just about everyone agreed to send
their representative to that new electoral council. Except of course the
Convergence. How can you determine that the CEP is not good even before they
took the oath of office? Do you know their name already? Do they have a
shady past? Please tell me, please tell us. Please do.

Stanley:
> as for the problem of aristide being a dictator... if the problem exists,
> that is reason enough for him to go...>

Pierre:
What's the problem? Please tell us.

Stanley:
< now, in terms of press freedom (or
> lack thereof) i will not get into a discussion of quantification or
> qualification of violations of press freedom.  suffice it to say that he is
> a predator of press freedom (see list of reporters without borders for
> confirmation).  that, once again is a violation of the constitution.>

Pierre:
How is he a predator of press freedom? I am not being ill-willed. I just
want to know. I know that the independent media has problems in Haiti, a
country with a long dictatorial past that is now struggling to deal with the
issue of an independent media. That everyone knows.

In any case, the media function and say whatever they want on the radio, and
write whatever they want in the papers. So if we wish to resolve this issue,
let's be specific about it. There have been two infamous cases of outright
abuse resulting in the death of Jean Dominique and Brignol Lindor. That's an
outrage but I think the media is freer today than when I was growing up down
there. When I go to Haiti, I listen to the press reports and the radio
debates, and I must tell you, except for the courageous efforts of Jean Do
when I was there, the press was never as free as it is today. That's the
simple truth.

Stanley:
> when you mention campaigning for supposed parliamentary elections in 2003,
> you make an error in logic that i would like to point out here.  you assume
> that the CEP (which was not announced this morning as promised) will be
> credible and the elections will be just and free.that is my point exactly.
> taking into consideration the record in this matter and others, i do not
> feel that this is possible.  therefore, since your premise is flawed, then
> you conclusion is also.>

Pierre:
Okay, you are right. I don't know what makes you right but you are right.


Stanley:
> now, i have a question for you.  you spoke of "we" in terms of impeaching
> aristide.  who is this "we" that you speak of?  forgive me for asking this
> question, but i seem to remember you stating that you have lived in the
> united states for a long time.  are you a us citizen?

Pierre:
I am a citizen. Do you mean to ask me whether I am a US citizen? Well, I'll
respond. I have at home only Haitian passports, past and present.

Stanley:
> finally, i will say that i do live in haiti and am forced to provide for my
> own security as there is a government that does not fulfil its
> constitutional obligations, including providing security for its citizens.>

Pierre:
There I agree with you. The role of government should be to ensure
everyone's security. But the country is so poor and the poor statistically
is by far the greates victim of violence in Haiti. Maybe when the funds are
released, then we can have more security in Haiti for all. Are you helping
the GOH get the funds released?

Stanley:
> this is yet another reason why jba must go.>

Pierre:
Forgive me Stanley but I don't get the deduction. Everyone spend their money
in ways that they can and see fit. You certainly do.

Stanley:
<  as for your last comment, i see
> you have realized  that jba has groups of chimeres out trying to intimidate
> opponents and who will not hesitate to attack any dissident, which is
> another reason for him to go (i hate to sound repetitive, but i'm hoping
> some will see the point).  just principles, sir, go beyond the day to day
> needs of an individual.  if something should happen to me today (as a result
> of my opposition), then i hope that someone else will continue to oppose
> this man and add my name to the long list of crimes perpetuated by he and
> his followers.  this will only lengthen the list of reasons why he must go.
> i am not interested in being a martyr, au contraire...  but i do feel that
> this country is bigger than any individual and we must risk whatever it
> takes to make it better.  only with sustained effort, sacrifice, and
> perseverence will we rid ourselves of this plague.>

Pierre:
So principled! I like that. I don't know what to tell you except this. If
you have never voted in Haiti, in 2003, go vote for your partisan and bring
a few friends of the same ideas along. Better yet, be a poll watcher as well
to keep a close eye on Lavalas. Organize democratically so that you or your
party win. But please, give Haiti a break from that coup d'etat thing, and
help the party that you belong to (if you do) prepare for the next
presidential election in Haiti, scheduled for November 2005.

Enjoy the warm climate of Haiti, Stanley. I am freezing here.

My best to you,
Hyppolite Pierre
IRSP
http://www.irsp.org