a899: Further Information concerning Human Rights Watch's Standards in Haiti (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: kevin pina <kpinbox@hotmail.com>

Re: Human Rights Watch and the Equal Application of Standards regarding
Haiti



Bureau des Avocats Internationaux

Via Fax and regular Mail
Jose Miguel Vivanco
Executive Director, Americas Division
Human Rights Watch
350 Fifth Avenue
34th Floor
New York, NY 10118-3299

December 21, 2001

Re: Human Rights Watch Press Release, December 18, 2001: "Haiti: Political
Violence Condemned"


Dear Mr. Vivanco:


Human Rights Watch's (HRW) Press Release of December 18, titled "Haiti:
Political Violence Condemned" (Release) justifiably criticizes Monday's
violent attacks against certain opposition parties and journalists in Haiti,
but inexplicably fails to condemn the more violent attack the same day on
Haiti's National Palace. This is not only disrespectful to the police and
civilians killed and wounded in the attack, but is a sharp departure from
the standards of objectivity that HRW observes with respect to other
countries, and that other human rights groups observed with respect to this
incident. This departure from objectivity standards is, unfortunately, part
of a trend of biased reporting on Haiti by HRW.

The release notes that on Monday, December 17, there was an armed assault on
the National Palace, in which police and bystanders were killed, and that in
response to the attack two people were killed, some journalists threatened
and several buildings were destroyed, apparently by groups of people
supporting the government. The Release properly calls the violent
retaliation "serious acts of political violence" which "raises serious
concerns" and which is "condemned."

The Release does not, however, apply any of its concern or condemnation to
the violent well-armed assault on the National Palace, which is not called
"political violence," even though it was targeted directly at Haiti's
government and claimed more lives than the response did. Had the attack not
been repulsed, the violence would have been exponentially greater: past HRW
reports have documented the horrible toll of Haiti's successful coups,
including the last one in September 1991, when the military and its
paramilitary allies killed more innocent civilians than al-Qaeda ever has.
The 1991 attack, like this one, started with an assault on the Palace while
the President was absent. In both cases the population took to the streets
to try and stop the coup.

The Release appears to group all responses to the attack under the same
category of "political violence." As with others, the Haitian people's
response to the terrorist attack included some inappropriate measures, but
also many legitimate and justified measures of self-defense. Taking to the
streets and erecting barracades including burning tires is a time-honored
technique of protecting Haitian democracy against a dictatorship. As HRW has
reported, Haitians used these techniques successfully to thwart the January,
1991 attempted, and less successfully but courageously against the September
1991 coup. The vast majority of Haitians who took the streets throughout the
country did not participate in any act of violence.

The Release's unfairness is highlighted by comparison with HRW's own
reporting on the U.S. response to the September 11 attacks. HRW criticizes
aspects of the U.S. response that potentiallly violate human rights norms,
but always takes care to condemn the original attack, and express its
sympathy with the victims, even though the attack was not carried out by a
government. Others critisizing Monday's events in Haiti have shown the same
balance and consideration: Amnesty International expressed both condemnation
and concern about the palace attack. The National Coalition for Haitian
Rights "is deeply distressed by" both the attack and the response. The U.S.
State Department "condemned" both.

The Release's unfairness fits a recent trend of unfair reporting on Haiti by
HRW. Although it is HRW's obligation to critisize the Haitian government
where it finds indications of human rights violations, HRW has been taking
full advantage of opportunities to critisize, without reporting the positive
developments that are necessary to understand Haiti's human rights
situation. For example, in 2000, the Haitian justice system conducted the
two best human rights trials in its history, the Carrefour Feuilles and
Raboteau trials. Although HRW had often criticized the Haitian government
for not prosecuting those two massacres, neither successful trial was
mentioned in the HRW 2000 report (although Raboteau ended near press time in
November, it started in September, and Carrefour Feuilles ended in August).
This June, when Haitian authorities arrested former dictator Prosper Avril
and Mr. Avril's allies mounted a campaign for his release, human rights
groups around the world publicly advocated his prosecution. Although HRW had
repeatedly criticized the failure to prosecute Avril in the past, it
declined to support his prosecution when the time came.

If you would like to discuss any of these issues, please contact me at your
earliest convenience. I look forward to HRW taking steps to remedy the
problem of the politicization of its reporting, evident in the Release, and
to its returning to the same standards that characterize HRW reporting
elesewhere.



Very truly yours,


Brian Concannon Jr.



CC: Kenneth Roth
Executive Director
Human Rights Watch


_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com