The idea of process, and Haitian politics
By Hyppolite Pierre
There has been some news circulating in the Haitian press lately, suggesting that the Haitian Government has given away 10 percent of the country territory to its neighbor, the Dominican Republic. Yet, even though some print media like Haiti Progrès (http://www.haitiprogres.com) have been involved in publicizing this "info", no serious piece of evidence has been made available to the Haitian or international public yet.
This has caused many to wonder about the idea of the process in democratic government. Does Haiti adhere to that idea yet, or are we still firmly locked within the opacity of our emotion?
Haitian Politics and the idea of "the process"
In our Haitian political culture, we all tend at times to let down our guard, and let emotions overcome the rational side of us. All of us it seems, at one point or another, have fallen for easy and inaccurate subterfuge to make a point. It is so, even with those of us who are striving for a modern Haiti. In fact, what we should and must always focus on is, first and foremost, the process. Thus our analyses based on facts and not fiction, will have more strength and legitimacy, and will help us build a modern and transparent State, based on democratic rule.
Depending on whether or not one adheres to the values of a market economy, the Government may have, under the present circumstances, stricken the best deal that it could, with the Dominican Republic as a partner, for job creation in Haiti. Yet, because the details of that deal are unavailable to the larger public, it is difficult for us to make a clear determination of such. This happens because the democratic process of transparency in this case has not been completely followed.
Under such circumstances, perhaps concerned citizens should build up an organization that requests answers from the proper authorities. They could do so by respecting the process. By that I mean, using Haitian laws and regulations that first allow them to build such organization, and also compels the government to be more opened about the intricacies of that deal.
By the same token, those, who also seem to think that only the government is to blame, should look at the present reality of Haiti. For instance, how does one justify the call of the opposition to strike for the outright overthrow of a legitimately elected government? This is a complete rejection of the democratic process, by "would-be-democrats", desperate to get to power.
That sector in the opposition has been arguing that only between 5 to 15 percent of the electorate went to the polls on November 26, 2000, and elected Jean-Bertrand Aristide as president of Haiti. Therefore, according to them, he is not legitimate.
This has been such a used and overused argument that finally, about a year or so ago, I called and asked a friend of mine from High School in Haiti who is a university professor in New York, and also who studied and teaches Statistics. I asked him because first of all, I know how he dislikes Lavalas. However, I also know him as a man whose focus has always been on facts whenever he decides on, or explains a situation. He simply answered the following.
"Aristide, for better or worse, is the legitimate president of Haiti. Statistically speaking, regardless of how many more people went to the polls, he would have still won. As a concrete example, when Gallup or other polling organizations take polls in the United States, they only choose a sample of the population to reach a conclusion. That is how they predicted that Bush was ahead, and that the race was tightening by the end, when it indeed was; that Clinton was ahead in the polls when he indeed was. So the opposition's consistent call for the removal of Aristide to power is based on a fallacy which is in direct violation of the democratic process."
Respect of the process, an exercise we must engage in
We must learn to respect the process. We must also learn to analyze, not based on our liking, or disliking, or hatred of a leader or his political party, but on facts and the legal provisions that relate to those facts. After all the 1987, Haitian Constitution was written by Haitian legal experts, and adopted by the great majority of voices from all walks of live, through a normal democratic process called, a referendum.
We could go on and on, with this debate over the lack of respect for the process by all sides, which should be quite a concern to all of us. For instance, on the issue of corruption, everyone talks about it. But yet, some political parties, civic and religious organizations, and politicians who are not in power, may be planting the seeds for corrupt government, if they ever get to power themselves.
If it is indeed true that those parties are paying poor and desperate people from the masses to demonstrate, if they were ever to succeed through such a strategy, they would also be governing over a corrupt state. This is so because after all dusts would be settled, those who would have taken the risks of demonstrating for them not because they believe in the movement, but because they were paid to do a job, would go back and ask them for payment through some kind of a job, which they may not even be qualified for, or more kickbacks, or both. In the process, the corrupted machine which they had set up themselves, would keep on going, and Haiti would continue on that vicious cycle.
What's important in the democratic process? The individual, or the process itself?
Rather than focusing on individuals, we should all focus on the issues, and study how we can resolve them by adhering to the normal process of democratic government used in a modern state. Sad but true, some in the opposition seem oblivious to the fact that everyday that goes by is one less day for Aristide to be president of Haiti, and that they should prepare their party nationally to win victory in the November 2005, presidential elections. Instead, they are desperately disrupting the normal democratic process by trying hard to remove him from power unconstitutionally.
Because of their attitude and political behavior and language, Haiti seems far from effective democratic governance, with the electoral process as the determinant. Again sad but true, some of Haiti's brightest sons and daughters focus so much of their energy on their hatred of one man and the political party that he had helped bring to victory, that they're willing to bypass the normal process to remove him from power. Meanwhile, because their emotions have overcome them, they may not even realize that they are further damaging the very institutions they claim that they wish to protect. The question then becomes, how do they intend to govern, if they are damaging the very institutions and processes that they are supposed to respect and protect?
