LE VÉTO DE LA MAJORITÉ

I was a member of the ICIO (International Coalition of Independent Observers) for the November 26 elections. I was invited by Global Exchange and Quixote Center to participate as a group leader. I believe that the reason for this invitation was due to my work on Windows on Haiti. Others were also invited, though most simply volunteered their services to one of four organizations: the two aforementioned, and Witness for Peace, and Pax Christi USA.

I was not asked to subscribe to the ideology of those organizations. There was no attempt at indoctrination. I do consider myself an independent, though I prefer to be associated with progressive organizations than reactionary ones, as the evidence of a reactionary agenda continues to accumulate every day in Haiti, in the so-called "International Community", in the Haitian media (airwaves, newsprint, and web), and the foreign press.

Here's a tantalizing fact: The International observers (the ICIO, not the five CARICOM members who stayed only in Port-au-Prince), the largest contingent of national observers, KOZEPEP (a Haitian National Peasant Leadership organization largely dedicated to the development of an agricultural policy that favors the interests of the peasants), and the CEP (Provisional Election Council) all arrived at a "national projection" of 60% participation of registered voters (not a percentage of the general population!) Did the ICIO, KOZEPEP, and CEP meet for lunch, generously catered by Jean-Bertrand Aristide, and conspire with his political arm, Fanmi Lavalas, to arrive at a common pre-determined figure of 60% (in opposition to the various 1%, 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20% figures cooked up by the Opposition and the news media), and they forgot to invite me? Now, I am mad...

But what does "Independent" mean? This is a charged word that can signify different things to different people. But, as I was a willing participant in this group of independent observers, I should tell you what the word meant to me.

First and foremost, we were self-financed volunteers. We did not receive a dime from the U.S. or Canadian governments, or any other member of the "International Community". Ditto with respect to the Haitian government, whose expenses were considerable, but considered it a necessary investment for the nation's peaceful, democratic, and constitutional transfer of power. We sacrificed our time, day to day means of livelihood, and personal savings to participate in this effort.

Furthermore, we were not stooges of any political party. We did meet with the CEP, and we did meet with the leaders of some popular organizations such as Batay Ouvriye (who did not endorse the Nov. 26 elections). We attempted to meet with some members of the vaunted opposition, but we were rebuked for our effort, as they were not at all happy with our presence in the country, since it appeared to validate an electoral process which they were boycotting. Their position was respectfully understood, and because of it we did not attempt to meet with Fanmi Lavalas prior to the elections either.

After the elections, a session with the President-elect was arranged however, and he graciously answered many of our questions and concerns. I, for one, wish the President-elect the political will necessary for a strong government which will be able to put into action the ideas that he formulated for us. President Aristide will be rightfully judged on the success of his policies. I wish him the best of luck, though luck has very little play in politics. Contrary to the fancy of most of the foreign press, the diplomatic members of the "International Community" and several opposition leaders in Haiti, Jean-Bertrand Aristide was popularly elected by a majority of the Haitian people (most of whom reside outside of Port-au-Prince, and beyond the turf of the vast majority of journalists and embassy personnel). He was not appointed by the Supreme Court nor is he the leader of a shadow government [in parallel or in convergence, and no electoral suffrage].

The people of Haiti did vote for Jean-Bertrand Aristide. JBA is not a Messiah, and need not be treated as such. He should be held accountable, like every public servant. He should also be given a fair chance to govern. To attempt to deny him the legitimacy that he deserves is not only hypocritical, it is a course of action that is far more likely to lead to rigidity, intolerance, mistrust, resentment, and violence from those who will feel betrayed by such intransigence and the resulting administrative paralysis.

I certainly hope that the current political situation will not continue to degenerate. In Haiti, we desperately need a political opposition that is mature enough to understand its historical responsibility to support the people of Haiti and receive from them a mandate for change, through the electoral process and not through the sympathies of a certain "International Community".

I hope that the new government will understand the necessity of developing relations primarily with its own constituency, then with its opposition at home and abroad, and most significantly the rest of the world... and not simply with the United States, Canada, and France. Our concept of "International Community" needs to be broadened.

Most importantly, we should not spend the next few years chasing the elusive American dollar. If we have to go through hell, let it be a redemptive hell, one with an exit door... making sure that we do not end up in worse shape than we are today, while we are wagging our tail in anticipation of the almighty dollar. There may not be much that we can do without it, but it's certainly possible to achieve something through sheer political will, and any measure of success is preferable to a complete surrender of one's ideals and soul for the promise of foreign aid. We need true partners, wherever we can find them, and not overseers that continually threaten to cut off our blood supply for not blindly accepting their dictates.

I am impressed with the number of editorial notes concerning the low voter turnout from the Haitian electorate. I will not spend time arguing with those who heard this or that from trusted friends in Haiti, or those who believe that the elite is representative of the Haitian population at large, or those who believe that Port-au-Prince equals Haiti. I will continue to speak of my own observations, based on the number of people who came to vote at each of the 36 BV's (polling stations) I visited in Jeremie, and externally to my personal observation, the 152 BV's visited by my ICIO colleagues in Cap-Haitien, Milot, Gros Morne, Gonaives, and Port-au-Prince. Such observation consisted of how those who came to vote were being verified and recorded in and against the electoral registers (with a norm of 400 registered per BV).

At the end of the day, we also measured the number of people who came to vote against the number of people who registered to vote at many of those polling stations that fell under our direct observation.

We saw and did the math. We did not rely on what a couple of friends were saying based on no respectable methodology whatsoever. We did not rely on the media, which in Haiti is nothing but aligned. We did not rely on the foreign press. We did not rely on U.S. State department communiqués. Let me lose all measure of politeness here: I do not care whatever the hell others are saying in that matter, I know what I have duly observed and recorded, and will continue to report only the results of my observations. I did not work from 6:00a.m. to 9:00p.m. to satisfy the political or ideological cravings of others!

I do have a few reservations, though. I do not have a great measure of statistical confidence in any national projection that might have been reported by any member of the ICIO. The reason is simple: what I observed in Jeremie (90% turnout of those who had registered to vote) may not at all be representative of the department of Grande Anse. The same logic carries through with the other aforementioned locales for their respective departments, not to mention the 5 other departments we were not deployed in. We simply were not enough observers in enough corners of the country. We did not have the resources to deploy ourselves satisfactorily throughout the country, though we far outnumbered the four or five CARICOM observers who stayed only in Port-au-Prince!

KOZEPEP, however, did have national observers deployed in all nine departments, and reported similar results.

Furthermore, I have no valid reason to disbelieve the results announced by the CEP for the totality of Haiti's territory. Though it is accused of being politically aligned (and unarguably, it should not be), there has not been any serious allegation of wrongdoing in their method of electoral vote gathering both at the local and national levels. No allegation of wrongdoing either, in their compilation of such results, and their statistical projection of a national average. No serious allegation by anyone, as far as I can see, only shameless fingerpointing without any evidence of wrongdoing.

Though I have not personally observed their operations at the national level, I can attest to the great diligence of the BED (Departmental Bureau of Elections) and the BV (Voting Bureau or polling station) officials that I have come into contact with, and it is nothing short of a gratuitous insult to so easily dismiss the work of those Haitian citizens, performed under conditions of work, that the vast majority of people residing in modern societies would consider unfathomable. Many of those workers worked very diligently all day long, well in excess of 12 hours, without food or water, in degraded environmental conditions, and only for the promise of pay. A promise with a questionable history.

My general observation was that the people of Haiti wanted Aristide to be their president, whether anyone else liked the idea or not. They spoke, and if one chooses not to listen, it does not change one bit what they actually said.

My personal observation is that there were legitimate grievances arising from the May 21 elections, and not because the OAS or the United Nations said so. I believe that the calculation of the percentages was unfair, because it basically ended up rejecting many votes for minority candidates and the possibility of second-round elections that were called for by Electoral Law.

Did the CEP have the political authority to make such a decision? Going strictly by the book, they did have such authority. But it was bad policy.

I believe that it would have been wiser for the various political parties to reach a compromise prior to the constitutionally mandated elections of November 26. Why was not a compromise reached -- was it due to the intransigence of Fanmi Lavalas, the intransigence of the opposing political parties, or both? In this case, intransigence equals foolishness, nothing more nothing less. As a result, we are letting the blood flow freely in a sea that is infested with sharks. The nation is the clear loser in that squabble.

Does anyone care? I note the President-elect's invitation to negotiate the results of the May 21 elections. The opposition's answer to that request was to form a "parallel government". Will the so-called "parallel government" receive the support of the so-called "International Community"? In this theater of the absurd, anything is possible. I urge the Political Opposition in Haiti to finally abandon the non-productive Option ZERO, and come to adopt instead Option First Step, a step in the direction of satisfying the nation's needs and not willy-nilly their own political ambitions.

In the end, let us trust that the Haitian people know by themselves and for themselves what is best for them. Only with this trust, can the political parties in Haiti truly evolve.

Sous: http://www.haitiforever.com/