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 criticizing 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 criticize the Haitian government where it finds indications of human rights violations, HRW has been taking full advantage of opportunities to criticize, 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 elsewhere.
Very truly yours,
Brian Concannon Jr.
CC: Kenneth Roth
Executive Director
Human Rights Watch
