21277: lyall on 'Understanding the Haitian Constitution' and abolition/suspension (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: j.david lyall <j.david@lyalls.net>

Thank you for beginning this research. Most people have never looked
at the haitian
constitution and have but vague ideas of what it includes. I have had
police tell me that
the Haitian Constitution requires the use of baby seats in cars!

I must note that he following conjecture on disbanding the Armed
Forces compared with disbanding parliament does not have  a logical
connection.

Disbanding a Parliament is a normal procedure in a parliamentary
system. Specifying that the Haitian parliament may NOT be disbanded
by the president is required to clarify the separation of powers
(strange ones, true) in the Haitian System of the 1987 constitution.
Dissolving a parliament is preparatory to new elections to form a new
parliament/government.

Disbanding an Army is a decidedly unusual procedure. Specifying the
existence of an army may be unusual also. I cannot recall the USA
constitution establishing military units. I do know that the
existence of a permanent army in the USA was opposed for some time in
the congress.

So, no 'strong inference' can be made that after establishing an army
in the constitution but not prohibiting a 'dissolution' of same that
it is permitted. Why? Again, dissolving a legislature is a normal
procedure, to be followed by new elections for the legislature.

Now, a purging of the army created by the constitution, a
re-organization, would certainly be permitted.

It is said that the army actually still exists in the form of a
marching band. I've never seen this remnant of a military. Does a
haitian version of Palace Guards exist as a remnant of the ancien
military?

The real puzzle is why did the Lavalas movement never move to amend
the constitution to make the abolition of the military legal? And why
did they not legalize dual citizenship to allow US citizens to run
for the legislature of Haiti?

Ah, a legislature containing US citizens elected in violation of the
constitution cannot amend the constitution to retroactively allow
their election. Wi.

>   No provision of the Constitution outlaws disbanding
>the Armed Forces. Given the contrast with the rule with respect to the
>legislature, which the Constitution clearly specifies cannot be
>dissolved,[xxv] a strong inference can be made that the dissolution of the
>Armed Forces is not unconstitutional.

-- 
J.David Lyall, or
     Jedidiah Daudi
http://www.lyalls.net/