24950: Hyppolite Pierre (reply) Re: (comment) Simidor re Neptune, St. Vil (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: Hyppolite Pierre <hpierre@irsp.org>

<<<From: daniel simidor <danielsimidor@yahoo.com>
>
> Neptune is under indictment, with probable cause, for
> a crime committed against the people, under his watch
> as prime minister.>>>>

****************

It's amazing how despite our factual knowledge of materials, on the
so-called "La Scierie massacre" that were published on this very list by no
other than Anne Fuller, that some of us are using legal terms to boslter
political goals. This is not just the privy of very skilled writer Daniel
Simidor, but of many others. Nothing personal here, therefore.

It would be a travesty indeed, for anyone to call Anne Fuller a partisan
either way, although her account of the investigation on the La Scierie
political tragedy is somehow at odds with the original "genocide" qualifier
of Pierre Esperance from NCHR/Haiti. She was for instance in the 1990's, a
member of NCHR and I had no idea until I was reading a book written by Götz
Opitz about the 1990's refugees and human rights issue on Haiti (Haitian
Refugees, Forced to Return...). It would be a very hard sell to accuse her
either way considering that Louis Joinet, whom everyone knows had no known
sympathy for Lavalas, has rejected the claims of "genocide" or albeit
subtly, even "massacre".

But let the chips fall where they may. It's quite unfortunate however, at
some level, that the "probable cause" purported by Simidor may never be
deconstructed in a courtroom in Haiti. But Simidor, even when one were to
hypothetically admit that there was "probable cause" in this case, probale
cause without respect of the due process of law renders the prosecutor's
entire argument mute. Moreover Simidor, NCHR/Haiti, a member of the UN
(Louis Joinet), and other human rights organizations have investigated this
case. It is unknown to most of us, even those in the "know", whether or not
the Haitian judiciary had ever conducted its own investigation of this La
Scierie matter. So how then can we talk about probable cause?

Neptune was never charged as required by Haiti's law, and was lying-in-wait
for his impending death until taken away over the weekend by the
internatinal community. As colorful as Haitian politics is, some hard-core
partisans of Aristide are already calling this prudent political act,
another kidnapping. Laughable a claim? Probably so, at least to me anyway.

There is nevertheless, a much larger issue at play here. It is much larger
than Lavalas, G-184, or any political faction in Haiti for that matter. With
the Groupe des 184 so focused on a social contract, I recently went back to
the very book that inspired them by the same title, and rediscovered a
rather begnin phrase but yet, so significant in Haitian politics. The
author, whom we all know or heard of, basically wrote that in essence man
creates, builds institutions; but as the political system firmly gets
implanted into our lives, eventually institutions build us, shape us. So
true. So very true.

Indeed, we may be the staunchest democrats when living in the United States,
in Germany, in France, or in whichever society where politics relies on
democratic process as substance. But once we set foot in Haiti or rather,
once we are talking about Haitian politics, whether intellectuals or
scholars, we forget about the true principles of law, the matter of
political and legal process as substance and not just form, and get engaged
in deadly rants that usually have catastrophic circumstances for individual
politicians and society at large in every single aspect.

It is, because we do not respect the due process of law in Haiti, because we
do not respect nor validate institutions and their prerogatives in Haiti
that the country is the way it is: a national and international laughing
stock. Those who disagree with us, with our political points of view deserve
death, for this is what we were brought up with. That does not make us
wicked; instead, it is one more classic case of what is called, cognitive
dissonance. We know in our mind what is right and what is wrong, yet, we
choose to talk and behave contrary to what our basic knowledge and principle
dictates.

Haiti does not need one more of its citizens killed, massacred, or jailed
because of her or his political opinions. Haitians have to be reminded it
seems, every single time, that the war of independence ended in 1804, and
that Dessalines the Great Warrior had indeed won it with us, for us. It is
now time for us to work towards building a viable state that can create the
conditions for its children to care for themselves and their offsprings. To
placate Rousseau's logic here from his Social Contract, Dessalines the man
did indeed leave behind a legacy that was tooled and retooled over the years
to keep us in an institutional and mental dependency upon revenge. We had
chopped enough heads, koupe tèt (the rightfully or wrongfully so-called
operation baghdad for instance), and burned enough houses, boule kay, (the
disaster for businesses after the second overthrow of Aristide for
instance)for us to have figured out by now that our nation has never
bettered itself through such level of quite frankly, political bestiality.

As Brazilians, Filipinos, Argentines and all the others are trying to save
us from ourselves, let us chill if necessary, in a cool glass of Haitian
kleren (the masses' rum Barbancourt) with ice, spit some of it to the rada
lwas, and learn to move on in other to build a viable state. After all,
those Filipinos who are now helping us as part of a contingent of the UN and
who are also being killed, went through the same process, like us, in the
very same month of February, 1986, when they overthrew Marcos by a popular
revolt. Despite their problems, they all had learned to mend fences as
adversaries (not enemies) in an emerging political system and work out their
problems, albeit very imperfectly. What we need first and foremost at this
point is social peace, so Haiti can get on with the business of building a
viable state, not the chimeric killing of people -even through hunger
strike- because of political revenge.

It was truly bothersome, at least to me, to hear or read stories about
makouts and their children who in 1986, were begging crowds not to kill
them. It is equally bothersome to hear or read stories about Lavalas
children as young as 6 years old, having been killed because their parents
sympathize with a political movement that promised them a rightful place in
the country where they were born. The sad thing is that in both cases, I
heard of the same pleading for mercy from those kids and their parents. In
the makouts' case it was, "please don't kill me; I promise, I won't be a
makout no more"; in the Lavalas case it is now, "please don't kill me; I
promise, I won't be a Lavalas no more".

When, please tell me when that madness will end? Please tell me. Tell us
all.

Best regards,
Hyppolite Pierre
IRSP
http://www.irsp.org