FIRST REPORT OF THE SECRETARY GENERAL TO THE PERMANENT COUNCIL

ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF RESOLUTION CP/RES. 822

September 4 – November 4, 2002

In August 2000, at the invitation of the Government of Haiti, the OAS agreed to facilitate a process of negotiation/dialogue among Haitian political parties and other political actors to resolve a post-electoral crisis caused by contested legislative, municipal and local elections in May 2000. The process which continued over almost two years was impeded by violent incidents on July 28, 2001, on December 3, 2001, and again on December 17, 2001 when heavily armed individuals attacked the National Palace in Port-au-Prince followed by attacks on the headquarters of the opposition and the residences of its leadership and others.

On January 16, 2002 the Permanent Council of the OAS approved CP/RES.806 which aimed in paragraph 4 to foster a climate conducive to the resumption of the negotiations to end what by that time had broadened into a political crisis. The Resolution also established a Special Mission to Strengthen Democracy in Haiti.

The OAS mediating team experienced difficulties in its efforts to encourage a solution to the crisis. Meanwhile the country faced a deterioration in the climate of security and a possible humanitarian disaster. The exigencies of the situation led to a decision, based on those practical considerations, to refer the matter to the Permanent Council. On September 4, 2002 the Council approved CP/RES.822 which encapsulated elements of the Draft Initial Accord [1]^/and gave an opening to the Government of Haiti to establish a more secure and enabling environment to hold credible elections in 2003 and to normalize the country’s relations with the international financial institutions.

Paragraphs 3 to 8 of the Resolution relate to obligations or commitments assumed by the Government of Haiti, regarding inter alia: (a) implementation of the recommendations of a Commission of Inquiry into the violent incidents in the country on December 17, 2001 and the recommendations of an Advisory Council on Reparations for victims of the violence; (b) disarmament, (c) implementation of Resolution 806 and (d) establishment, in collaboration with a number of other sectors, of a credible Provisional Electoral Council to organize and manage “free, fair and technically feasible legislative and local elections, on a date in 2003 to be established by the Provisional Electoral Council (CEP) in which all political parties can participate freely and securely”.

Paragraphs 9 – 16 relate to obligations assumed by the Special Mission, the OAS and the wider international community, including: (a) provision of technical assistance to the Government of Haiti in a range of areas; (b) normalization of economic relations with the international financial institutions and (c) supporting, monitoring and reporting on the implementation of the Resolution.

An essential constituent of the Resolution is the creation of a credible, neutral and independent Provisional Electoral Council. The basis for the focus on that institution lay in the belief that a new one formed in accordance with the formula outlined in the Draft Initial Accord would offer the opportunity to overcome the serious deficiencies which called into question the credibility of the legislative and local elections of 2000.

The extensive consultations on the formation of the CEP since approval of Resolution 822 yielded an emerging coincidence of views on the importance of constituting the institution and a need to take action on a number of key issues relating to security that would facilitate the achievement of this objective. However, as a matter of practice, up to November 4 the Government has focused most of its attention since the adoption of Resolution 822 on the formation of the CEP and the matter of reparations, rather than also on its obligations in relation to other key provisions of the Resolution, such as implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, including in cases where the Commission of Inquiry provided the legal basis or laid some evidential foundation to proceed.

This report provides the status of the implementation of Resolution 822 over the period September 4 – November 4, 2002. The italicized portions quote the paragraphs and provisions of the Resolution. It includes the following annexes:

Annex A: Letter dated October 29 from the Prime Minister to the Special Mission, and the Mission’s October 31 response, regarding the provision of technical assistance to Haiti in all areas of the mandate of the Special Mission.

Annex B: Letter dated November 4 from the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Haiti to the Head of the Special Mission, transmitting the Report “Implementation of OAS Resolutions CP/RES.806 (1303/02) and CP/RES.822 (1331/02), as of November 4, 2002”

Annex C: Letter dated November 4 to the Head of the Special Mission from the leaders of the Convergence Démocratique, providing their assessment of the implementation of Resolution 822 by the government.

Annex D: Letter dated November 4, requesting a fifteen day extension in the time frame for naming the Provisional Electoral Council, to the President of Haiti from five of the entities which are to name members of that Council in accordance with the Draft Initial Accord (Revision 9 dated June 12, 2002).

OBLIGATIONS/COMMITMENTS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF HAITI

The Resolution outlines with much specificity, a number of fundamental commitments and obligations assumed by the Government of Haiti.

Paragraph 3 To welcome the Government of Haiti’s expressed commitment to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry as well as the recommendations of the Advisory Council on Reparations, as reflected in the Accord signed by the Minister of Justice, Claimants and their Representatives on July 9, 2002, and to call on the Government of Haiti to do so as soon as possible.

The Commission of Inquiry presented its report on June 20, 2002. Discussion of individual elements is provided in the specific sections below.

Reparations: On the basis of the July 9 agreement between the Minister of Justice and the Claimants and their Representatives, reparations have been paid to Mr. Reynold Georges, leader of ALAH, a former coalition partner of MPSN (a constituent of Convergence Démocratique) and were offered to Evans Paul, leader of KID, a coalition partner of Espace de Concertation (another constituent of CD). Partial payment has also been made to Mr. Luc Mésadieu and Pastor Sylvio Dieudonné, leaders of MOCHRENA (a third constituent of CD). The Mission has been advised by the Government, informally, that discussions are ongoing with that party on a number of additional claims. The same government source informed the Mission that negotiations have been completed with Victor Benoit, leader of KONAKOM (a fourth constituent of CD) to settle claims in relation to losses suffered by himself and his party.

The government reports that as of November 4, 34 million gourdes (approximately US$963,719.00[2]^/) have been allocated to satisfy the claims of four of the five political parties and their leaders, all signatory of the July 9 agreement with the Minister of Justice and that US$ 150,000 is available for the French Institute of Haiti.

Disappointingly, however, the matter is not wholly resolved. Negotiations are still ongoing with the OPL which has submitted a claim for all the victims affiliated to it throughout the country. It also appears as of November 4 that matters were not yet fully completed with KONAKOM. Moreover, there appear to be some thirty other individuals who are listed in the Report of the Advisory Council on Reparations and whose cases have not yet received much attention.

The Government has proposed in unspecified terms as of November 4, the creation of a Fund for the victims. To ensure greater transparency and to avoid any charges of manipulation of the process for political advantage, the Special Mission has suggested to the government that a mechanism could be devised to handle the matter neutrally and at arms length, for example by assigning it to a reputable international accounting firm to settle claims on the basis of the recommendations of the Advisory Council on Reparations, within a specified, short, time frame.

Paragraph 4.a To publish within 60 days of receipt of the Commission of Inquiry Report a report by the Minister of Justice on actions taken with respect to persons found to be implicated in the events of December 17, 2001 and subsequent days;

On September 11, 2002 the Government of Haiti published a report characterized as “preliminary” from the Minister of Justice. The report demonstrated that very little had been done to carry out the Government’s obligations. The Special Mission advised the President of Haiti on October 3 that the Report was inadequate. The President emphasized that it was preliminary and that the Government intended to follow up soon. The Mission underlined to the President the importance of action on this front, both in its own right and in view of its relevance for the formation of a credible CEP.

At the beginning of November, the Ministry of Justice published another report (see Annex B) which demonstrated that some further steps have been taken since in Port-au-Prince. Overall, action on this front has been slow and weak, especially outside Port au Prince, and no cases have been concluded.

Paragraph 4.b To strengthen its disarmament policies and programs and, in this regard, invite the active cooperation of the International Community, through the OAS Special Mission, in the development and implementation of a comprehensive disarmament program;

On October 3, 2002 the Special Mission, while recognizing that the primary responsibility on disarmament rested with the government, proposed to the President the creation of a mixed team (Government/Special Mission) to devise a National Plan on Disarmament, and to implement the resulting national disarmament program.

Since then, efforts have been underway to facilitate a dialogue between the Government and other sectors of the Haitian society to deal with this critical issue. A seminar on disarmament was conducted by the Special Mission on October 28-29, 2002 in Port-au-Prince, with the cooperation and assistance of the UNDP, to raise awareness of the effects of the proliferation of arms in Haiti and how the attendant rise in violence contributed to insecurity and lawlessness in the country. The event also provided an opportunity for Haitians to hear lessons learned and experiences from international experts who have managed disarmament programs in other countries such as Brazil, Bosnia, Albania and El Salvador. A number of recommendations emanated from the discussions which will be considered when developing a National Disarmament Plan for Haiti.

The November 4 Report of the Government (Annex B) outlines actions taken by the government in its campaigns against illegal arms and against drug trafficking. As receipt of this document coincided with the end of the reporting period, the Mission has not been able to conduct an independent verification of the information reported in the document regarding collection of arms, including the sharp variations in the numbers reported. The report regarding drug matters broadly coincides with information available to the Mission.

Paragraph 4c. To implement, to the fullest extent of its lawful authority, all the Recommendations on Human Rights and the Press set forth in the Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Events of December 17, 2001, and all other Recommendations in the Report that are, in whole or in part, directed to it.

The Government has not yet discharged its extensive obligations under this provision.

Meanwhile, the human rights picture over the period has been mixed. On the one hand, a September 19 student demonstration over governance at the State University took place without incident and with appropriate police accompaniment, contrary to earlier attempts. There were several signs of increased government support for the prison system, including the pressing issue of pre-trial detainees.

On the other hand, there were a worrying number of disappearances, so far unexplained by the police, including local leaders in Martissant in September, two members of an opposition political party in October, and a senior police officer from the Palace security detail in late October, among others. There have been several high profile cases of difficulty over exercise of the habeas corpus provision of the constitution, e.g. former president Prosper Avril and Rosemond Jean (spokesman for victims in the ongoing savings and loan cooperatives financial crash), both of whom remained in prison as of November 4 despite protests regarding their detention and legal efforts on their behalf.

Concern over press freedom continued during the reporting period. A leading radio station in Port au Prince, Radio Kiskeya, in late September shut down for several days due to what it called highly credible information that the station would be attacked. There was a large mobilization of support, including visits by government leaders, and the threats did not materialize. Other radio stations were also threatened during that period. At the same time, there has been a debate involving the President of Haiti among others, as to the role and responsibility of journalists. The Special Mission spoke out on several occasions in defence of freedom of speech, as had the OAS Special Rapporteur on September 4 following his August visit to the country.

Paragraph 5a. The restoration of a climate of security;

This commitment has been an essential element of every Resolution on Haiti, expressly or by implication, since August 2000. Nevertheless, the security situation overall has not changed significantly in recent months, including since the approval of Resolution 822. For example, police figures available to the Mission indicate that during the period June through September 2002 total cases handled remained roughly stable (varying between some 480 and 580 per month), assassinations tended to rise (to 38 in September), other assaults and kidnappings declined, but armed robbery was stable.

The problems arise out of: (a) the activities of gangs and of armed groups, officials and individuals, in some cases with political affiliations; (b) an increase in the number of private security agents because of the widespread perception that the government is unable to assure the security and protection of all its citizens; (c) high level of delinquency on account of the socio-economic conditions; (d) impunity due to the weakness of the judicial system; (e) weakness of the Haitian National Police which is attributed to gaps at the leadership and management levels, insufficient and inadequately trained manpower, alleged political manipulation and corruption, and lack of materiel and equipment.

There have been a significant number of serious incidents over the recent months in Port-au-Prince and its suburbs, and in other cities and towns. Tire burnings, local clashes, including deaths and other disruptions, occur often enough to cause understandable concern to ordinary citizens. Major confrontations have occurred in Gonaives, Cité Soleil, and Martissant. Individuals have disappeared or been threatened. The police have not re-arrested Amiot Métayer or most of the others who escaped jail with him on August 2 (see impunity in paragraph 6 below).

Paragraph 5b. The effective prosecution of any person, and dismissal, when appropriate, of any person found to be author of or accomplice in the violence of December 17, 2001, and subsequent days;

As indicated in paragraph 4 (a) above there has not been much action pursuant to this provision. The Port au Prince government prosecutor’s office has sought further information from the investigating judge. The Government’s report of November 4 could lead a reader to think that gaps in the handling of this matter may cause additional delays in the future. Beyond Port-au-Prince there are no activities worthy of mention during this reporting period.

Since the adoption of Resolution 822, there is no evidence known to the Mission that there have so far been any actual arrests or prosecution of persons mentioned in the Commission of Inquiry report for having taken part in the violence on December 17, 2001 and subsequent days.

Paragraph 5c. The completion of a thorough inquiry into all politically-motivated crimes;

There has been some action in the Brignol Lindor case: it reached the end of the investigative stage of the proceedings, and ten individuals were charged for commission of the crime. However, Lindor’s representatives have lodged an appeal against the indictment report of the investigating judge. If progress thus far is any indication, it seems that the case is far from being resolved.

The investigating judge, Bernard St-Vil, now in charge of the case of Jean Dominique and Jean Claude Louissaint, has conducted some judicial proceedings since September 4 and, as stated in the Government’s report of November 4, is understood to plan to complete his investigation by the end of 2002. The case thus remains unresolved, two and a half years after the journalist was murdered.[3]^/

Except for the case of Marc André Diogène (a former Fanmi Lavalas Deputy of Gonaive Circonscription) in which there appears to have some activities by the investigative judge, there is no evidence of any concrete action since the adoption of Resolution 822 on almost all the similar cases in this category, such as those on the following non-exhaustive list which the opposition leaders raised with President Aristide in a face-to-face meeting on June 15, 2002 at the residence of the Papal Nuncio:Remy Darant, Mireille Durocher Bertin, Pasteur Antoine Leroy, Jacques Florival, Deputy Jean Hubert Feuillé, Senator Yvon Toussaint, Father Jean Pierre-Louis, Colonel Jean Lamy, Colonel Max Mayard. The list was forwarded to the Ministry of Justice on June 17, 2002.

Paragraph 5d. Prompt reparation for organizations and individuals who suffered damages as a direct result of the violence of December 17, 2001.

This matter has been dealt with under resolutive paragraph 3 above.

Paragraph 6. To urge the Government of Haiti that, with a view to establishing the conditions for elections to be held in 2003, it renew efforts to ensure a climate of security and confidence within the parameters established in operative paragraph 5 of AG/RES. 1841 (XXXII-O/02), bearing in mind the need to strengthen independent police and judicial institutions as part of its renewed efforts to combat impunity as called for in paragraph 6 of AG/RES. 1841 (XXXII-O/02).

Regarding a climate of security, see section 5.a.

Police: Regarding the Police, see also section 5.a. The Special Mission is contributing substantially toward the training of the 14^th Promotion of new recruits, which should add over 800 new officers to the manpower level of the Haitian National Police. However, much more needs to be done to improve the institution to deal with a climate of insecurity which has been aggravated by violence linked in part to gang activity, drug trafficking and politically motivated thuggery and criminality. Some of these problems have surfaced within the past weeks in Martissant, Cité Soleil, Gonaives, Cap-Haitien and other parts of the country.

The weakness of the police has been demonstrated further by its failure to deal with or to at least offer some explanation for the disappearance of a number of persons, a matter which has caused considerable disquiet among the population.

Judiciary: The Minister of Justice resigned on September 25, apparently due to various difficulties. The frequently diagnosed problems of the judiciary remain, despite a promising reform plan prepared by the last Minister of Justice. Those problems include lack of independence of the Judiciary, impunity, limited access to the justice system, inadequate training and lack of resources.

Impunity: The incidence of impunity has been cited as a major deficiency in the administration of justice in Haiti, especially as it relates to a number of high profile, apparently politically motivated killings in recent years (cf. the non-exhaustive list included in paragraph 5 (c) above). The issue has been aggravated by the violent escape of Amiot Metayer from the Gonaives prison in August 2002. The Commission of Inquiry alleged that he was a principal perpetrator of violent activities on December 17, 2001. He appears now to be living quietly but openly in Gonaives, reinforcing the impression of a pattern of weakness by the police compounded by indications of appeasement of high profile criminals.

Paragraph 7a. The formation of an autonomous, independent, credible and neutral CEP no later than two months after adoption of this resolution;

Under the terms of Part IV of the Draft Interim Accord (DIA), which was incorporated by reference into resolution 822, nine Haitian entities were each to propose one candidate to be named to the Council by the President of the Republic.

Apparently two of these entities – the governing party, Fanmi Lavalas, and the judiciary – have sent the President names, which are uncontested within their ranks. The major opposition group, Convergence démocratique, contends as of November 4 that the government has not met its obligations under resolution 822 and, hence, is not presenting a candidate.

The grouping of the other political parties, which are neither Fanmi Lavalas nor Convergence Democratique, but which covers about 60 to 80 political parties, is badly split: one subgroup has sent in a name; another subgroup claims to be the only proper representative but says this is not the time. A third group contests the propriety of the second group, and there may be further division.

The other five entities that have generally worked together in recent weeks comprise three religious groupings – Catholic, Episcopal, and Protestant – the grouping of human rights non-governmental organizations (NGOs) coordinated by Justice et Paix, and the business community coordinated by the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Haiti (CCIH). They first insisted that the government ask the Organization of American States, through the Special Mission, for technical assistance to provide security for elections and for disarmament. The government did so on October 29 and the Special Mission responded positively in the name of the Organization, but the five are seeking additional information and details from the government prior to providing the names, which they state they have selected already. To this end, with the deadline of November 4, 2002 upon them, they proposed in a letter dated November 4, 2002 an extension of the time period for 15 days (see Annex D). As of November 4 further discussions were in prospect.

Paragraph 7b. The establishment by the CEP, within the parameters of Haitian law and no later than 30 days after the formation of the CEP, of a Electoral Guarantees Commission (CGE), which shall be comprised of, inter alia, representatives of a national coordination body formed on the basis of experience of coordinating electoral observation in Haiti and of civil society organizations, and witnessed by representatives of electoral observation mission and the OAS Special Mission to Strengthen Democracy in Haiti;

Awaits formation of the CEP.

Paragraph 7c. The monitoring by the CEP of the activities of the police in connection with the electoral process.

Awaits formation of the CEP.

Paragraph 8. To further recognize the urgency of forming the CEP, in accordance with the process proposed by the OAS in the Draft Initial Accord (Rev. 9) of June 12, 2002, no later than two months after adoption of this resolution.

This paragraph should be read in conjunction with paragraph 9.

Over the period October 3 to 21, 2002 the Head and Deputy Chief of the Special Mission held meetings with President Aristide (October 3), Representatives of Convergence Démocratique (October 7), Mr. Maurice Lafortune, President of the Chamber of Industry and Commerce (October 10), Pastor Edouard Paultre, Fédération Protestante d’Haiti (October 11, Mgr. Jean Zaché Duracin, Chef des Eglises Anglicanes (October 11) and Maitre Boniface Alexandre, President of the Cour de Cassation (October 14), Father Jean Hanssens of Justice et Paix (human rights organizations) – October 16 and the Other Political Parties (October 21). The purpose of the meetings was to discuss the role of those institutions in the formation of the new CEP, in accordance with the formula agreed upon in the Draft Initial Accord (Rev. 9).

The delegation emphasized to the representatives the importance of putting a credible CEP in place to manage the electoral process. It advised that the principal role in implementation of Resolution 822 was assigned to the government but in relation to the CEP the nine institutions – the churches, FL, CD etc. had a major role to play and that the Special Mission was using its good offices as facilitator to consult and assist as they

pursued their internal processes to play the critical role assigned to them.

The Mission continued to meet with various actors and institutions up to November 4.

OBLIGATIONS OF THE OAS

Paragraph 9. To offer the Government of Haiti, political parties, and civil society the support and technical assistance of the Organization of American States that is required to facilitate the process of forming the CEP and preparing for and holding these elections.

All the institutions designated in the Draft Initial Accord to nominate candidates for the formation of the CEP, with the exception of the Fanmi Lavalas and the judiciary expressed serious concerns about the climate of insecurity in the country and its implications for an electoral campaign.

Those concerns were raised in letters dated October 10, 2002 to the President of Haiti and October 26, 2002 to the Head of the Special Mission respectively from the five institutions cited in paragraph 7 (a).

The institutions indicated that they had selected their candidates for the Electoral Council but before formally presenting them they called on the government to request of the OAS, technical assistance to help implement the provisions of Resolutions 806 and 822. They advised that such request was necessary to have assurances that international assistance would be forthcoming for elections security and on disarmament.

Following discussions begun much earlier between the government and the Special Mission with a view to overcoming the slow rate of progress in the cooperation envisaged when the Special Mission was established in April 2002, by a letter dated October 29, 2002 the Prime Minister officially requested, and in his response of October 31, 2002 the Head of the Special Mission agreed to provide, technical assistance to the government of Haiti in all the areas covered in the Resolutions, i.e. elections including election security, professionalization of the police, disarmament, justice, human rights, and governance. The letters are attached at Annex A to this report. Work is underway to prepare the terms of reference for the technical assistance in each area and to establish joint committees to carry out the work involved.

Paragraph 10. To encourage all Haitian parties to participate in all relevant aspects of those elections and in the electoral process leading up to it.

The Special Mission has repeatedly encouraged all parties concerned, in public and private, to play their full role. It has emphasized that no one is excluded and all must participate in order to ensure a credible process.

In late October the Group of Friends of the OAS Secretary General for Haiti met with President Aristide to stress their concern that the necessary steps be taken pursuant to the government’s obligations under Resolution 822 in order to facilitate the formation of a credible CEP by November 4, thus paving the way for the holding of satisfactory elections in 2003. The President took advantage of the opportunity to underline the importance of resumption of international assistance for Haiti, in order to assist it to meet those undertakings in accordance with Resolution 822.

Paragraph 11. To support normalization of economic cooperation between the Government of Haiti and the international financial institutions and urge those parties to resolve the technical and financial obstacles that preclude such normalization.

Pursuant to paragraph 11 of resolution 822, discussions have taken place between Haiti and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) in particular, which sent a mission to Haiti, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Bank. Informal consultations among donors have been scheduled by the World Bank for December 9, 2002 in Washington, D.C.

The Government of Haiti has been critical of the international community for, in its view, not responding more actively or quickly enough to Haiti’s needs. It should be noted that there are serious absorptive capacity problems and donor concerns about the use and application of resources exist and should be met. Resolution 822 urged all concerned to resolve these problems, and it is therefore imperative that the IFIs must work harder with the Government of Haiti to find creative ways to overcome technical obstacles and enable multilateral flows to resume.

On September 30, 2002, the Haitian Delegation to the IMF and World Bank Annual meetings met with the Vice President for Latin America and the Caribbean and the Country Director or the Caribbean. At the meeting, the Bank informed the delegation that a resumption of IDA grants and loans will be contingent on the clearance of arrears. The Bank encouraged the government to reach an agreement with the IMF on a Staff Monitored Program. At the government's request, the World Bank agreed to send a mission to Haiti, at a date to be determined, to discuss the government's development priorities, consult the authorities on the Bank's proposed Transitional Support Strategy, and discuss options for the clearance of arrears.

The World Bank has been in discussions with the IMF and IDB to evaluate options for a coordinated and comprehensive plan for the clearance of arrears. The World Bank will be chairing an informal donors meeting in Washington D.C. in early December 2002. During this meeting, donors are expected to discuss developments in Haiti and the feasibility of organizing a Consultative Group meeting for early 2003.

Further to the information provided in CP/doc. 3643/02 corr.1 of 28 August 2002, concerning the Interamerican Development Bank, the Bank has advised that on the basis of Resolution. 822, it has received instructions from its Board to advance on the necessary technical work with the Government of Haiti with a view to reactivate lending. At the time of the preparation of this report, the Bank’s second technical mission to Haiti was being prepared and was scheduled for the third week of November, 2002.

Paragraph 12. To reaffirm the mandates of the Secretary General and the OAS Special Mission in accordance with AG/RES. 1841 (XXXII-O/02), AG/RES. 1831 (XXXI-O/01), and CP/RES.806 (1303/02 corr.1) and to instruct the Secretary General to strengthen further the Special OAS Mission to Haiti in order for it to support, monitor, and report on implementation of this and all other pertinent OAS resolutions and on commitments of the Government of Haiti, as set forth in these resolutions and in accordance with the agreement between the Government of Haiti and the OAS on the Special Mission to Strengthen Democracy in Haiti. These commitments include:

a. Strengthening of democratic institutions, including political parties, in order to guarantee a pluralistic political party system;

b. Formation of a new Provisional Electoral Council (CEP), in accordance with the process proposed by the OAS in the Draft Initial Accord (Rev. 9) of June 12, 2002, and all of the CEP’s activities;

c. Establishment by the CEP of an Electoral Guarantees Commission (CGE);

d. Development and implementation of a comprehensive disarmament program;

e. Promotion of a National Dialogue and Consensus Building between the Government of Haiti, all political parties, and Haitian civil society;

f. Professional development of an independent police institution, development of a security plan and creation of a climate of security for the 2003 elections;

The General Secretariat of the OAS has drawn up a work program for the Special Mission which includes an outline of its resource requirements until early fall 2003, after presumed elections and in the light of Resolutions 806 and 822. The document will facilitate the task of the Secretary General to strengthen the Mission, to enable it to discharge more effectively the responsibilities mandated to it by Resolution 806 and to enhance its capacity to assume and discharge the additional commitments in the substantive areas added by Resolution 822, as well as responsibility for coordination, monitoring and reporting on elections as stipulated in resolutive paragraph 13 below.

Paragraph 13. The OAS Special Mission will also:

a. Support, monitor, and report on provision by the international community and the OAS of technical electoral assistance prior to and following the 2003 elections and on deployment of an electoral observation mission to observe all aspects of the electoral process;

b. Coordinate efforts of the international community to provide technical and financial electoral assistance, including electoral planning, technical assistance, security, and observation of the elections in 2003.

In preparation for the elections, the Special Mission has consulted, among others: UNDP, in New York and Port-au-Prince; the Unit for the Promotion of Democracy at OAS headquarters; and nongovernmental bodies including the International Foundation for Electoral Systems, National Democratic Institute and others. It is anticipated that once the CEP is formed a team of experts will join with the Special Mission to work with Haiti to assess the requirements for technical and financial assistance and electoral observation.

The Mission is also preparing a series of briefings and suggestions to present to the CEP, when constituted, to assist it to discharge its over-arching and decision-making responsibilities expeditiously.

Paragraph 14. To call on the Secretary General to remain engaged in efforts to resolve the political crisis in Haiti, to follow the evolution of the situation, and to submit to the Permanent Council every two months detailed reports regarding the implementation of the present resolution.

The Secretary General and Assistant Secretary General have followed closely the situation in Haiti and have assisted where and when appropriate. This report is submitted in fulfillment of the Secretary General’s responsibilities under this provision.

Both the Secretary General and the Assistant Secretary General have remained in regular contact with the Permanent Mission of Haiti to the OAS and, through the OAS Special Mission, they have engaged in dialogue with key players in Haiti, both in the search for a solution to the country's political difficulties and on the issues mentioned in previous sections of this report. They have also continued to have periodic discussions with members of the Group of Friends of the Secretary General on Haiti in Washington, D.C. Further, the Assistant Secretary General has maintained outreach with the Haitian diaspora in the Washington, D.C. area at speaking events. Additionally, regular contact has been maintained with the Political Affairs Section of the United Nations Secretariat on the evolution of the situation in Haiti.

OBLIGATIONS OF THE WIDER INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

Paragraph 15. To call on the international community to provide as a matter of urgency additional funds to the OAS Special Mission in order to help finance its economic, social and institutional strengthening programs for Haiti, with a view to discharging its additional responsibilities under this resolution.

Following the adoption of Resolution 822, the United States made a contribution of $1,000,000 to the Special Mission, in order to facilitate its work in the area of security. It has pledged an additional $1 million.

The Resource document mentioned under resolutive paragraph 12 will serve as the basis for an appeal to Member States and Observers for additional funds for the purposes stated.

Paragraph 16. To further call on the international community to provide technical and financial support for the elections in 2003, particularly by observing the pre-electoral formation and operation of the CEP and post-electoral operations, as well as the elections themselves.

The Special Mission has started a process of consultations in pursuance of the coordinating role envisaged under this paragraph. The findings/conclusions of the assessment team cited under resolutive paragraph 13 will inform the appeal to the international community for support in fulfillment of this mandate.

CONCLUSION

Given the level of mutual suspicion which exists among the various Haitian political actors, Resolution 822 offers them the opportunity to overcome the political crisis inter alia by working together for the formation of a new Provisional Electoral Council. This would in itself be an important achievement and serve to strengthen democracy in Haiti. It is hoped that key actors would advance that process by rising above entrenched personal positions to develop cooperation and to stabilize the political situation on terms allowing for an end to the fragmentation and political paralysis that have beset Haiti for too long. It is encouraging that contacts among various players on the ground continue actively and it is certainly to be hoped that they would permit the formation of a credible CEP within the 15 days extension.

The Prime Minister’s October 29 request to the Special Mission for technical assistance from the OAS in all the mandated areas of work of the Special Mission, including disarmament and security for the elections, if followed through over the coming weeks, should open the way to faster progress and help provide greater public reassurance in the lead-up to elections.

The Government of Haiti has been critical of the international community for, in its view, not responding more actively or quickly to Haiti’s needs. However, serious problems relating to the absorptive capacity of the country and donor concerns about the use and application of resources exist and should be met. At the same time, resolution 822 urged all concerned to resolve these problems, and the IFIs must work harder with the Government of Haiti to find creative ways to overcome technical obstacles and enable multilateral flows to resume.

Security is the key to progress and, in particular, is a sine qua non for the holding of credible elections next year. Considerable work will be required to strengthen the Haitian National Police and assist it to become a professional and impartial pillar of support for the rule of law and the democratic institutions of Haiti. Devising and implementing a national program of disarmament, with some early confidence-building measures, will contribute toward the creation of a secure and enabling environment for credible elections and social, economic and political development. Assuming appropriate progress in implementing other parts of Resolution 822, the international community will need to address very soon the significant resource requirements for elections and security in the course of 2003.

MINISTRY OF JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY

MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

IMPLEMENTATION OF OAS RESOLUTIONS CP/RES. 806 (1303/02) AND CP/RES. 822 (1331/02), AS OF NOVEMBER 4, 2002

IMPLEMENTATION OF MEASURES TO ENCOURAGE RESPECT FOR DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES

Objective: to establish a climate of peace and security in the country

1. Response to the acts of violence of July 28 and December 17, 2001

1.1. Reparations for victims

1.2. Judicial proceedings

2. Disarmament and drug control

3. Accelerated prosecution of the most highly publicized cases of human rights violations:

3.1. Case of Brignol Lindor

3.2. Case of Jean Dominique

4. Improving conditions of detention and program for rehabilitating prisoners

5. Steps to facilitate the establishment of a credible Provisional Electoral Council for holding peaceful, free, and democratic elections

Rev. 1/5-11-02

INTRODUCTION: A PERSISTENT CRISIS

After a long history of imperial presidents who ruled through dictatorships that were at times openly brutal and at other times artfully disguised, Haiti now finds itself at a crossroads. It has solemnly proclaimed its dedication to a new democratic creed, based on the rule of law, which implies respecting the will of the people as freely expressed through credible and honest elections.

Yet traditions die hard, and it is not easy to move overnight from a long tradition of rigged votes and coups d’état to the transparency of free, open, and honest elections. As a case in point, less than eight months after he was elected, President Jean-Bernard Aristide was forced from office in 1990.

It was in full awareness of this fact that the international community committed itself to the great crusade on behalf of the right to vote, and raised an army of more than 20,000 to help restore democracy to Haiti. Despite this lengthy and costly effort, our political habits have not changed much, and the "technicians" have been doing their best to stage coups without resorting to weapons.

This explains the maneuvering and negotiations that go on whenever it comes time to hold elections. What is at stake, obviously, is control over that electoral process. In the concern to mount safeguards and provide safety valves, the system becomes deadlocked. For example, the 1997 elections were so riddled with irregularities and scandals that the outcome could not be proclaimed, despite the efforts of the Special Commission created for that purpose. Those responsible for the failure of those elections struck again by orchestrating the furor surrounding the senate elections of May 21, 2000. In 1977, what was in fact at issue were the senate elections.

It is universally recognized that justice has failed in Haiti. It is clear that, however willing its leaders may be, a country can have only the justice that is within its means. Cutting off all loans and grants to a country is not the way to reform its justice system or make it more efficient. Access to justice and its administration comes at a price, and that price is high.

The events of December 17, 2001, and those of July 28 of that year are part of a series of recurring crises that have stamped the fabric of Haitian political life.

While not attempting to justify the chronic instability that has afflicted Haiti since its independence, we must recognize that the legacy of two centuries of violence cannot be banished overnight by simply proclaiming the intention to establish the rule of law. Of the 36 heads of state that have governed our country, only six completed their terms in office. These historic circumstances explain why democracy, which is at last on an irreversible forward march, has faltered so often in the past.

From whatever angle one looks at it, establishing the rule of law and a constitutional state is an imperative that Haiti can no longer afford to do without. It implies, on one hand, respecting the citizens’ right to vote regardless of their socioeconomic status and, on the other hand, closing off all undemocratic paths to power. It was defiance of these two conditions that sparked the events of July 28 and December 17, 2001. The difficulties facing the Government of Jean-Bertrand Aristide today in advancing the cause of democracy must be seen as an unavoidable hazard that must be overcome on the way to achieving the rule of law. It is in this light that we must examine the Government's response to the events of July 28 and December 17, 2001.

In the immediate wake of July 28, 2001, an expanded high-level Commission of Inquiry was established to investigate those events. Thanks to the efforts of the public prosecutor of Port-au-Prince, judicial action was initiated against the alleged perpetrators of the coup. Similar activity followed the attack on the National Palace on December 17, 2001.

Resolution CP/RES. 822 (1331/02), which goes hand-in-hand with resolution CP/RES. 806 (1303/02) of the OAS Permanent Council, far from being seen as a constraint to which the Haitian Government must grudgingly submit, in fact calls for measures that the Government would in any case have taken to resolve the political crisis by offering a lasting solution satisfactory to all parties.

It is clear that the Government has not waited for the recommendations of the OAS Permanent Council to adopt the principal elements of those recommendations and make them an integral part of its policy and actions, namely to deal responsibly and appropriately with:

1. The closely interrelated acts of violence of July 28 and December 17, 2001.

2. The assassination of the journalist Brignol Lindor in Petit-Goâve.

3. The assassination of Jean Dominique.

4. Reparations and prosecutions relating to the events of December 17, 2001.

5. Disarmament and drug control.

1. Implementation of resolutions CP/RES. 806 (1303/02) and CP/RES. 822 (1331/02)

Well before September 4, 2002, an inquiry had been opened into the events of December 17, 2001, events that were undoubtedly linked to those of July 28 of the same year, into which a preliminary inquiry had been launched.

Efforts to prosecute those widely accused in public of being the authors and accomplices of the murder of Brignol Lindor have proceeded on course. There is no doubt that excessive media attention has delayed proceedings, but the case is still open.

In terms of reparations for the acts of December 17, it was the Government itself that took the initiative for the agreement concluded in July with the Ministry of Justice and Public Safety (MJSP) and the political parties concerned, two months before resolution CP/RES. 822 (1303/02).

Combating drugs has always been a central concern of the Haitian Government. The same is true for the campaign against the illegal possession of weapons. As to impunity, it goes without saying that it is incompatible with the rule of law.

The recommendations of the OAS Permanent Council, as set forth in resolution CP/RES. 822 (1331/02), are broadly concurrent with the line of action that the Government has been pursuing to ensure a climate of security and to consolidate the rule of law in Haiti.

Moreover, the OAS has explicitly recognized that some elements of resolution CP/RES. 822 (1331/02) can be implemented more expeditiously than others. The setbacks and hesitations experienced in some cases reflect the scarcity of resources available to the Haitian state, as much as the difficulties inherent in these cases and the structural shortcomings of the country's judicial apparatus.

Despite these constraints, the Government has left no stone unturned in its effort to move all of these cases forward.

It was in these circumstances that the President of the Republic agreed to enter into dialogue with the parties concerned, about ways and means of resolving the crisis for the sake of the nation. The OAS initially, and subsequently the OAS together with CARICOM, were selected to act as mediators between the Haitian parties. After several rounds of exchanges, an initial agreement appeared to be within grasp by the middle of July 2001, but the door tentatively opened in that way was quickly shut by the armed violence that shattered the political landscape on two occasions five months apart, July 28 and December 17, 2001, causing deaths among the National Police of Haiti (PNH) and among the general public.

Determined to create a climate that would foster reconciliation and a resolution to the crisis, the Government of Haiti immediately committed itself to repair the wreckage that had been caused to the premises of the political parties and to homes of their members. Acting on the principle that in an organized society no one is allowed to take justice into his or her own hands, the Government initiated proceedings against all the perpetrators of those acts. Once again, the olive branch was refused.

Prosecution proceedings were initiated, following the attack of December 17, 2001, in accordance with Articles 63, 68, 69, 71, 73 and 77 of the Criminal Code. The persons arrested during those proceedings gave statements that were recorded and are available to any investigator. There were many victims of that attack, both among members of the PNH and among the civilian population.

In terms of civil action, an agreement was negotiated and signed on July 9, 2002, between lawyers for the political parties concerned, the victims among the national police, the civilian population, and the Haitian state, to reach a friendly settlement in accordance with a clearly defined process, in the interests of the nation.

1.1. Victim reparations

The events of December 17, 2001, which took place less than six months after the equally bloody events of July 28 of that year, were part of a long history of political struggles and turbulence in our country. The weapons seized and removed during the July 28 attack on the police academy and on the police stations of Pétionville and Belladère were the same weapons used by the attackers of the National Palace on the night of December 17. It must be admitted, then, that there is a close correlation between these two actions. Although there is evidence of these acts, which merit criminal sanctions, the Government took the route of dialogue so as not to compromise the ongoing political negotiations. It was from this perspective that the accord of July 9, 2002, was signed, calling for the reparations referred to in OAS resolution CP/RES. 822 (1331/02).

Those reparations are applicable to all categories of victims, without distinction as to their political affiliations. Priority for disbursing the first funds that became available was given to the opposition political parties and organizations, in an effort to preserve political pluralism. To date, 34 million gourdes in funding has been made available and discussions are continuing with the Organization of the People in Struggle (OPL) and the Center for Research in Social Studies and Economic Training toward Development (CHRESFED), which have been offered reparations amounting to 35 million gourdes. In addition, the equivalent of US$150,000 has been negotiated for the Institut Français d’Haïti, and will be disbursed very shortly.

By acting in this way, the Government has no intention of evading its commitments to other categories of victims, specifically those in the PNH, the Fanmi Lavalas, and the general public. The Government has now taken steps to constitute a special fund for these victims. This program of reparations must in no way be interpreted as a recognition of culpability on the part of the Government.

1.2. Judicial proceedings

In Port-au-Prince

Testimony has been heard from the following witnesses:

1. Richardson Pierre, on December 17, 2001 and January 4, 2002

2. Patrick Robinson, on December 18, 2001

3. Raphaël Bertin, on December 18, 2001

4. Désir Smith (USP), on December 19, 2001

5. Byron Jean Ferdinand, on January 25, 2002

6. Techlet Elien, on January 29, 2002

7. Miracia Pierre, on January 29, 2002

8. Marie Rose Célimé, on January 29, 2002

9. Fantzo Lahens, on January 29, 2002

10. Jean Petit-Frère, on January 29, 2002

11. Jean Joseph Calixte Adelson, on January 29, 2002

12. Célestin Hébert Moïse, on January 29, 2002

13. Brevil Jean Roma, on February 1, 2002

14. Astrel Jean Guy, on February 1, 2002

15. Paul Denis, on February 21, 2002

16. Jean Raymond Philippe, on March 6, 2002

17. Michelet Bonhomme, March 2002

18. Nazaire Jacques Anthony, on March 8, 2002

19. Victor Benoît, on March 12, 2002

20. Edgard Leblanc Fils, on March 15, 2002

21. Ger Mayn Jean Colson, on March 15, 2002

22. Victor Benoit, on March 15, 2002

23. Edgard Leblanc Fils, on March 19, 2002

24. Onel Jean, on March 28, 2002

25. Frantz Gabriel, on March 28, 2002

26. Evantz Paul, on April 9, 2002

27. Jean Dady Siméon, on April 18, 2002

28. André Jean, on May 16, 2002

29. Jean Claude Dieuveu, on May 16, 2002

30. Olys Céguy, on May 16. 2002

31. Moricette Ednor, on July 3, 2002

32. Duck Jack Ulh, on July 4, 2002

33. Guyler Delva and Telson Fleurismé, on June 10, 2002

34. Guyler Delva and Telson Fleurismé, on June 24, 2002

35. Guyler Delva, on June 28,2002

36. Telson Fleurismé, on June 28, 2002

37. Prince Sonson Pierre, on June 27, 2002

38. Raphael Gérôme, on May 23, 2002

39. Merzine Gracia, on May 14, 2002

The following plaintiffs have been heard:

1. Raynold Georges, on March 27, 2002

2. Evans Paul, on April 4 and 9, 2002

3. Paul Denis, on March 5, 2002

4. Victor Benoît, on March 15, 2002

5. Edgard Leblanc Fils, on April 9, 2002

The following accused have been heard:

1. Richardson Pierre, on January 4, 2002

2. Saati Antoine, on January 11, 2002

3. Guy André François, on January 11, 2002

4. Jean Dumel, on January 3, 2002

5. Jean Max Louis, on January 3, 2002

6. Préval Enéus, on January 3, 2002

7. Jean Baptiste Etienne, on January 16, 2002

Arrest warrants have been issued for:

1. Gardy Registre, on June 3, 2002

2. Désir Micanol, on February 15, 2002

3. Jean Joseph Lacroix, on February 15, 2002

4. Grandin Daryl, on February 15, 2002

5. Salomon Ravick, on February 15, 2002

6. Edmond Jean Désir, on February 15, 2002

7. Gabriel Linaly, on February 15, 2002

8. Dérivière Jean Leccy, on January 17, 2002

9. André Wigline, on January 17, 2002

10. Stanley Prophète, on January 17, 2002

Warrants for imprisonment have been issued for the following, among others:

1 . Saati Antoine, on January 11, 2002

2. Guy André François, on January 11, 2002

3. Richardson Pierre, on January 4, 2002

The file was turned over to the Public Prosecutor for the formulation of definitive charges on July 29, 2002. The Public Prosecutor returned the file to the examining magistrate on September 25, 2002 with additional charges:

· Bel Chrisnor and Jean Dieugrand, two police officers who were treated in Cuba, must be heard by the examining magistrate in criminal matters.

· Mrs. Micheline Compère, who recently filed a complaint, must also be heard by the examining magistrate in criminal matters.

In light of the evidence, the judge in charge of the case decided to proceed as follows:

· Confrontation between Reynold Georges and Gardy Registre

· Confrontation between Reynold Georges and Immacula Joseph

· Confrontation between Senator Prince Pierre Sonson and Professor Victor Benoît

The case is proceeding.

In Les Cayes

Complaint by Mr. Joseph Robert Jeune, on April 15, 2002, against:

- Jean Lamour

- The person known as Djimmy

- Lucien Orgella, alias Tipistol

- Claude Cadet, alias Ti Chif

- The person known as Castel

- Ro Mayn Hilaire

- Joel Pilorge

- Patrick Laguerre

- Jean Robert Marcellin

- Saint-Jean Louis Martial

- Ronald Félix

- Varnel Dulcé

- Bout Tonton

- The person known as Jojo

Proceedings suspended because Mr. Joseph Robert Jeune, the plaintiff, could not produce a taxpayer’s identity card.

Complaint by Messrs Orélien Rémy, Petit-Frère André, Sergent Sony, Etienne Jean Loucène, Cadet Sorel, Pierrot Lindor,Sylius Jude Ketler, Léon Moïse, on April 30, 2002, against:

- Joel Pilorge

- Lucien Orgella

- Sergo Métellus

- Norma Forté

- Jean Lamour

- JeanRobert Marcelin

- Ro Mayn Hilaire

Complaint dismissed by the public prosecutor of Les Cayes, on May 3, 2002 (cf. annexed documentation).

In Petit-Goâve

- Complaint filed by Déus Jean-François, on December 18, 2001, against:

- Yves Jolifis, a.k.a. Jojo

- The person known as Ti Yanyan

- The person known as Harry

- The person known as Mackenzy

- Franzi Samedi

- The person known as Valano

- The person known as Ogou Lindor

- Axel Jean-Louis

- Tataille James

Case submitted to the examining magistrate by the public prosecutor of Petit-Goâve, on January 22, 2002, with a demand for an inquiry into the reported facts.

Minutes of the hearing of Déus Jean-François, on April 18, 2002.

- Complaint by Mr. Jean M. Jasmin against Jolifils and Emmanuel Pascal, on January 5, 2002

Case submitted to the examining magistrate by the public prosecutor of Petit-Goâve, on January 10, 2002, with a demand for an inquiry into the reported facts.

Minutes of the hearing of Mr. Jean M. Jasmin, on January 24, 2002

- Complaint filed by Mrs. Marie-Rose Coicou, on January 7, 2002, against:

Joseph Frantz,

Joseph Raymond

Michel Antoine

Pascal Emmanuel

The person known as Augou

The person known as Renald

The person known as Jojo

Case referred to the examining magistrate by the public prosecutor of Petit-Goâve, on March 19, 2002

Minutes of hearing of Marie-Rose Coicou, on April 18, 2002, by the examining magistrate of Petit-Goâve.

- Complaint by Jean Ednor Cossogu, on December 22, 2001, against:

Pascal Emmanuel

The person known as Ti Yanyan

Case submitted to the examining magistrate by the public prosecutor of Petit-Goâve, on January 22, 2002, with a demand for an inquiry into the reported facts.

Minutes of the hearing of Jean Ednor Cossogu by the examining magistrate

- Complaint of Mrs. Denise Osias, on January 21, 2002, against Joseph Raymond and consorts

Case sent to the examining magistrate by the public prosecutor on January 24, 2002 with a demand for an inquiry into the reported facts

- Complaint of Constael Adrien, on January 23, 2002, against X.

Case sent to the examining magistrate on February 4, 2002, by the public prosecutor of Petit-Goâve.

Minutes of the hearing of Mr. Constael Adrien, on April 18, 2002.

- Complaint of Mrs. Lanette Dérisier against X, on December 29. 2001

Case sent to the examining magistrate on January 22, 2002, by the public prosecutor of Petit-Goâve.

All of these cases are still under investigation.

In Les Gonaïves

Having already been imprisoned in connection with another affair, Amiot Métayer (alias Cubain), was awaiting trial when, on Friday, August 2, 2001, the prison of Gonaïves was attacked by a group of demonstrators, leading to the escape of 159 prisoners and convicts, including Jean Tatoune, sentenced to life imprisonment in November 2000 in connection with the Massacre of Raboteau, and Amiot Métayer himself.

While avoiding measures that would be prejudicial to the people of Raboteau, still traumatized by the bloody events of April 22, 1994, Haitian justice is taking all legal steps to return the fugitive to prison and prosecute him for the acts and deeds of which he is accused.

The examining magistrate of Gonaïves has received a complaint against him concerning the events of December 17, 2001.

THE EVENTS OF DECEMBER 17, 2001

Pursuant to the order to make inquiries issued by the public prosecutor of Port-au-Prince, on December 21, 2001, an investigation was opened by Examining Magistrate Bernard St-Vil of this court, for purposes of identifying and bringing to justice all persons involved in the acts of violence of December 17, 2001, against whom sufficient charges have been made, without distinction as to their membership in any political groups or organizations.

In pursuing this judicial inquiry, several persons have been arrested and are being detained, while several others are actively sought.

Thus, the person known as Gardy Registre has been arrested on suspicion of burning the premises of the political party «ALAH» of Mr. Reynold Georges. Two arrest warrants have been issued against two city delegates of the «Fanmi Lavalas» party: Anolex Obas and Immacula Joseph, also accused of having set fire, together with Registre, to the premises of Mr. Reynold Georges.

Senator Prince Sonson Pierre gave evidence to the examining magistrate in the case of the fire at the home of Gérard Pierre Charles of the OPL.

Police officers, such as Raymond Jean Philippe of the Anti-Gang Investigation Bureau, and Byron Jean Ferdina, chief of the Thomazeau police station, have also testified as witnesses.

The examining magistrate has also heard testimony from victims from the political opposition and the police and authorities. Thus, Messrs. Reynold Georges of ALAH, Evans Paul of KID, Victor Benoît, Paul Denis, and others have appeared before the examining magistrate.

The judge has heard testimony from Jean Nazaire, Durk Jacques ULH, Moriette Ednor, Jean Dieugrand, and Bel Christnor, all police officers, who were victims of the violence of December 17, 2001.

He has also heard from police officer Technet Elien, who was hit by a bullet. Police officer Breville Jean Roma, whose right arm was amputated, as well as Astrel Jean Guy, a member of the CASEC of Thomazeau, Frantzo Lahens, Miracia Pierre, Dieuveut Jean, and Seguy Holly, all of whom were wounded by bullets during the events, have also given testimony.

In July 2002, the case was turned over to the prosecutor of the Civil Court of Port-au-Prince for a definitive indictment with a view to wrapping up the investigation. On September 25, 2002, however, the case was returned to the examining magistrate with a request for additional input from the Government Prosecutor, identifying other persons who should be asked to give testimony. To this end, summonses have been issued to have these persons appear before the examining magistrate, and some have already done so.

According to Judge Bernard St-Vil, who is in charge of the affair, the investigation should be completed by December 2002, and the accused will be brought before the court.

2. DISARMAMENT AND DRUG CONTROL

Since 1986-87, there has been a dangerous proliferation of firearms in the country. Basing their action on Article 268.1 of the Constitution, which declares that "every citizen has the right to armed self-defense within the confines of his home," many individuals have acquired firearms. Without concern for legal niceties governing the bearing of arms, these individuals are in possession not only of defensive weapons but also of weapons of all kinds, most of which are prohibited.

The Government is aware of this situation, which it did not create, and which represents a constant breach of the law. The Government has already taken the necessary steps to enforce adherence to the law and the Constitution. In this spirit, a multifaceted program comprising several components has been established:

An ongoing public awareness campaign using media ad spots.
A weapons buy-back program. The Government has agreed to pay double the price, to encourage holders of illegal weapons to turn them in. Unfortunately, the deadline for this operation expired without conclusive results.
Thorough searches of individuals and dwellings are regularly conducted for the recovery of illegally held weapons, and those not covered by Article 268.1. The following tables provide information on the initial results of the searches, recognizing that much work remains to be done.

Record of weapons seized as of:

July 9, 2002

Place

Conventional weapons

«Creole» weapons

CM-PAP

CM- Delmas

CM-Cité Soleil

CM-Carrefour

CM-Pétion-Ville

Total

August 12, 2002

Type T65 Gallile UZ1 Rifle 12 9 MM

Total 720 980 432 68 300

Statistical summary of weapons seized during «Operation Hurricane II»

Activities

Cocaine

Boats

Houses

Vehicles

Individuals

Weapons

Seized

Inspected

Searched

Interrogated

Arrested

526

1480

Record of weapon seizures under «Operation Hurricane II» by Department

Activities

DDO

DDNO

DDN

DDA

DDNE

DDS

DDC

DDSE

DDGA

c.s

M.s

P.A

P.I

B.I

B.C

1059

137

Abbreviations

C.S = Cocaine seized

M.S = Marijuana seized

P.A = Persons arrested

P.I = Persons interrogated

B.I = Boats inspected

V.I = Vehicles inspected

V.C = Vehicles confiscated

M.P = Houses searched

A.C = Weapons confiscated

Weapon seizures by the PNH in the Département de l’Ouest, during October 2002

Place Conventional weapons Creole weapons

Police station PAP 6 2

Police station Delmas 14 11

Police station Cité Soleil 10 6

Police station Carrefour 1 -

Police station Pétion-Ville 1 -

Total Com/DDO 32 19

Total DDO 2 -

Total DCPJ 5 -

«Hurricane»

Total 39 19

Sources: Département de L’Ouest Division and Central Division of the Judiciary Police of the Haitian National Police (PNH).

The month of October was in fact decisive for the police authorities. Searches in high-risk suburban areas led to the recovery of 22 military weapons of all calibers in Cité Soleil on October 18, and several people were arrested. During a similar operation on October 22 in Saline, 15 weapons were seized and the persons who were arrested have been turned over to the justice authorities.

· Strengthening the legal framework. Legislation is now being prepared to regulate the activities of private security firms.

Definition of a civilian disarmament plan with OAS technical assistance. The Government has requested OAS technical assistance for its disarmament campaign. Senior government and police officials took part in a disarmament training seminar organized by the OAS Special Mission on October 28 and 29, 2002, in Port-au-Prince, at which several international disarmament experts reported on experience in other countries.

It has been found that, in Haiti as elsewhere, weapons are generally used by drug traffickers. Traffickers are highly mobile in Haiti, taking advantage of the country's geographic configuration and the fact that the national police are understaffed and underequipped, to generate a climate of insecurity that facilitates their crimes. It was for this reason that the Government at that time negotiated an agreement with the United States Government in 1997, an agreement that is currently dormant.

It is readily understandable that the groups involved in these criminal activities have an interest in maintaining an atmosphere conducive to their crimes. They use every means, including the most tortuous, to frustrate police efforts. Yet despite the limited resources at the disposal of the police, because of the many constraints affecting the country, the police are gradually exerting control over drug traffic of all kinds. The following table highlights the results of their efforts from January to October 28, 2002.

#	Date and place of seizure	Persons arrested	Quantity of narcotics seized
1	January 15, 2002, Gonaïves	- Belony Ernst - Daniel Zamor - Erick Jérome	1 kilo of powder testing negative for cocaine
2	January 29, 2002, Aquin	N/A	98.6 kilos of marijuana
3	January 20, 2002, Port-au-Prince	Chiron Wesnel	1 kilo of powder testing negative for cocaine
4	February 24, 2002, Port-au-Prince	- Marcelus Jean Wilson - Jérome Julien	4.5 kilos of cocaine
5	March 10, 2002, Port-au-Prince Airport	- Crislow Carlène	5.22 kilos of cocaine
6	March 18, 2002, Port-au-Prince Airport	- Astrude Salomon	1 kilo of cocaine
7	March 22, 2002, Cayes	N/A	50.45 kilos of cocaine
8	April 2, 2002, PAP Airport	MarieLithorne Lezin Dessous Carole Lezin	.03 kilos of cocaine
9	April 17, 2002, PAP Airport	Adolphe Pierre Chancy, Haitian	12 kilos of cocaine
10	May 25, 2002, PAP Airport	Devra Louise Flowers	.06 kilos of cocaine
11	May 26, 2002, PAP Airport	Jerome Marie Medgine	1 kilo of cocaine
12	May 28, 2002, PAP Airport	Michel Dorsainvil	3.63 kilos of cocaine
13	June 1, 2002, PAP Airport	Dorothy Louis	.01 kilo of cocaine
14	July 1, 2002, Saint-Marc	N/A	.04 kilos of cocaine
15	July 23, 2002, Delmas 31	Salim Jean Batrony, Haitian XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX	58 kilos of cocaine
16	August 14, 2002, APN	N-A	165 kilos of cocaine
17	October 16, 2002, PAP Airport	Aballard Carl Junior	.04 pounds of cocaine
18	October 28, 2002, PAP Airport	Petit-Homme Félix, Haitian	3.6 kilos of cocaine

Source: Bureau BLTS de la PNH.

It goes without saying that the Government's efforts to exert more effective control over the proliferation of firearms and drug trafficking have helped significantly to improve the security climate in the country. The efforts of the PNH over the last few months to improve surveillance of high-risk streets and neighborhoods have also contributed to this goal. There has been a sharp decline in instances of assaults, armed robberies, and kidnappings, to the great relief of the citizens, merchants, the police, the authorities, and visitors.

3.1. THE CASE OF BRIGNOL LINDOR

Judge Fritzner Duclair, who is investigating the case of Brignol Lindor on the basis of the order to make inquiries issued by the public prosecutor of Petit-Goâve, has conducted his work in accordance with the law. He had investigated 28 individuals and had heard several witnesses during the investigation proceedings.

In a judgment dated September 16, 2002, the examining magistrate exonerated 18 of these persons from charges, and concluded that there was sufficient evidence to prefer indictments against the following 10 people:

- Joubert Saint-Juste,

- Maxi Zéphyr,

- Fritznel Doudoute alias Nenèl Doudoute,

- Bernard Dessamo,

- Simon Cétoute,

- Tirésias alias Terray,

- Fritzner Duverger,

- The person known as Makenzy,

- The person known as Jean Rémy

- The person known as Bellony.

The 10 persons indicted will be turned over to the criminal courts for trial.

It should be noted that two appeals have been brought against the judgment issued by the examining magistrate, on October 1 and 3, 2002, by Mr. Joseph Guyler C. Delva, Secretary-General of the Haitian Journalists' Association (AJH), special proxy of the Lindor family represented by Mr. Moreno Lindor, the victim's brother, and by Mr. Denis Laguerre, acting as special proxy of Mr. Belosier Lindor and Mr. Moreno Lindor, the father and brother of the assassinated journalist.

Because the appeal had suspensive effect, the court of first instance of Petit-Goâve is awaiting the ruling of the Court of Appeals of Port-au-Prince before deciding how to proceed, depending on whether the ruling of the examining magistrate is confirmed or rejected. Under Haitian law, the decision of the Court of Appeals could open the way to an appeal before the Supreme Court.

It should be noted that two of the 10 persons indicted are currently in prison, and the other eight are being actively sought by the police as fugitives.

Given the independence of the judiciary, the Government is not in a position to short-circuit judicial procedures established by law. All interested parties should know, however, that this case is being actively pursued in a normal way.

3.2. THE CASE OF JEAN DOMINIQUE AND JEAN-CLAUDE LOUISSAINT

The case of Jean Dominique and Jean-Claude Louissaint has suffered delays and setbacks, in part because of the zeal to produce a quick and even spectacular solution, and in part because of the spotlight of domestic and international media attention generated by the high profile of Jean Dominique, a media director who was devoted to the cause of democracy in Haiti. It is normal for a criminal investigation to take time. This is indeed essential, in murder cases, to prevent the passions of the moment from disrupting or distracting the work of judges and juries. The President of the Republic at the time, René Préval, spared no effort on the part of the Government to move the case forward. He agreed to provide the examining magistrate with unusual and special means well beyond those available to other judges in similar circumstances.

Moreover, the course of the investigation was blocked by a number of factors. In the hours following the attack on Jean Dominique and Jean-Claude Louissaint, officers of the Judicial Police, specifically the Justice of the Peace and the Government Prosecutor, failed to visit the scene of the crime or to take statements from witnesses, but instead converged on the hospital where the victims had been taken. It was only much later that the police investigation was launched. This delay deprived the examining magistrate of a number of elements that would have been indispensable for making a judicious choice of paths to be explored.

In addition to this initial negligence, it must be noted that the case was transferred from Judge Jean Sénat Fleury to Judge Claudy Gassant, who essentially turned it into a media event. He has since moved abroad, and has declined to take up his post again, despite the renewal of his term in January 2002. The investigation was therefore assigned to a new judge, Bernard St-Vil.

Since the first week of this drama, the judicial authorities have taken all necessary steps to find the person or persons responsible and to punish them according to law. Thus, between April 2000, when the murder was committed, and today, efforts have been made to allow the successive series of judges involved in the case to complete their investigation.

The latest judge responsible for the case since July 2002 is Judge Bernard St-Vil. He has held hearings and cross-examined witnesses.

Thus, the judge has heard Mrs. Michelle Montas Dominique, as a civil party, as well as Sen. Dany Toussaint, and Messrs Willy Lubin and Mario Joseph. He has again questioned the accused Ralph Léger, Ralph Joseph, Freud Junior Démaratre, Philippe Markenton, and Dominique Fritzner, also imprisoned as part of the investigation.

He also plans to question the former deputy mayor of Port-au-Prince, Harold Sévère, the current Inspector General of the Police, Jean Robert Este, Gadner Belfot, the former director of the judicial police, Mario Andrésol, who is currently outside the country.

Examining Magistrate Bernard St-Vil has let it be known that, in all likelihood, the investigation could be wrapped up and handed to the public prosecutor by December 2002, for the issuance of indictments with a view to the issuance of a final police report.

The case of Jean Dominique / Jean-Claude Louissaint (continued)

The following persons have been questioned in connection with this case:

- Cadner Belfort, witness, in the chambers of examining magistrate Bernard Saint-Vil, on September 24, 2002 ;

- Freud Junior Desmarattes, accused, in the chambers of examining magistrate Pierre Josiard Agnant, on Tuesday, March 12, 2002;

- Freud Junior Desmarattes, accused, in the chambers of examining magistrate Bernard Saint-Vil, on Tuesday, August 27, 2002;

- Jeudi Jean Daniel, accused, in the chambers of examining magistrate Pierre Josiard Agnant, on March 26, 2002;

- Jeudi Jean Daniel, accused, in the chambers of examining magistrate Bernard Saint-Vil, on Wednesday, August 21, 2002;

- Dymsley Millien, accused, in the chambers of examining magistrate Bernard Saint-Vil, on August 21, 2001;

- Mr. Mario Joseph in the chambers of examining magistrate Bernard Saint-Vil, on October 18, 2002;

- Mr. Willy Lubin in the chambers of examining magistrate Bernard Saint-Vil, on September 13, 2002;

- Philippe Markington, accused, on September 5, 2002;

- Confrontation between Mr. Willy Lubin and the accused, Dymsley Millien and Jeudi Jean Daniel, on October 24, 2002;

- Michèle Montas Dominique, victim’s widow, in the chambers of examining magistrate Pierre Josiard Agnant on Monday, February 25, 2002;

- Michèle Montas Dominique, victim’s widow, in the chambers of examining magistrate Bernard Saint-Vil, on Monday, August 19, 2002;

- Ralph Joseph, accused, in the chambers of examining magistrate Pierre Josiard Agnant, on March 12, 2002;

- Ralph Joseph, accused, in the chambers of examining magistrate Bernard Saint-Vil, on September 3, 2002 ;

- Ralph Léger, accused, in the chambers of examining magistrate Pierre Josiard Agnant, on March 13, 2002;

- Ralph Léger, accused, in the chambers of examining magistrate Bernard Saint-Vil, on August 29, 2002;

- Dany Toussaint, accused, in the chambers of examining magistrate Pierre Josiard Agnant, on February 27, 2002;

- Dany Toussaint, accused, in the chambers of examining magistrate Bernard Saint-Vil, on August 22, 2002.

HUMAN RIGHTS

4. THE PRISONER REHABILITATION PROGRAM

October of this year was declared "prisoners' month". Special activities were organized to commemorate International Prisoners' Day on October 27.

On this occasion, the President of the Republic went to the National Penitentiary, to inspect conditions of detention in the country's largest penitentiary.

In addition to the efforts made over the last several months to improve the lot of prisoners (food, hygiene, recreation, etc.), actual rehabilitation activities have also been undertaken: a literacy program has begun; a computer center has been opened; carpentry, metalworking, and painting workshops set up, etc. The prisoners themselves have said that their human contact with prison officers was respectful.

At the end of his visit, the Head of State promised to make still further improvements in the conditions of prisoners. He announced that a program for streamlining the handling of cases would be promptly introduced. The following day, the Minister of Justice set up a special commission of government officials and examining magistrates to seek ways of reducing to a minimum the number of persons held in prolonged preventive detention.

On October 30, just two days after it was established, the Commission had already arranged for the release of 24 prisoners. In this perspective, special correctional and criminal hearings will soon be held, without jury, in Port-au-Prince as well as in the provincial jurisdictions, where the same initiative was taken for the occasion.

5. FORMATION OF THE PROVISIONAL ELECTORAL COUNCIL

With respect to OAS resolution CP/RES. 822 (1331/02), President Aristide has taken a series of steps towards establishment of the Provisional Electoral Council. They may be summarized as follows:

1. The President of the Republic has telephoned several opposition political party leaders, in particular Gérard Pierre Charles and Michard Gaillard of Convergence Démocratique.

2. The President of the Republic has held several working meetings with the main stakeholders involved in the electoral issue: the Conference of Bishops of Haiti, the Episcopal Church of Haiti, the Protestant Federation of Haiti, Justice and Peace, human rights organizations, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Haiti, several other political parties, other Protestant denominations, the Fanmi Lavalas party, and the judiciary.

3. The first five institutions referred to in paragraph 2 above, having completed their designation procedures, wrote a letter to the President of the Republic on October 5, 2002, requesting that, before announcing the name of their representative to the CEP, the Government should ask the OAS for technical assistance for the PNH in order to prepare a security plan for the next elections.

4. On October 29, 2002, the Government submitted a formal request for OAS technical assistance in the area of electoral security. The purpose of this initiative is to meet the needs of institutions involved in establishing the CEP.

5. On October 31, 2002, the Chief of the OAS Special Mission in Haiti, Ambassador David Lee, responded favorably to the Government's request.

6. On October 28, 2002, acting under directives of the President of the Republic, the Haitian Foreign Minister, Joseph Philippe Antonio, sent a letter to the various stakeholders inviting them to appoint their representative to the CEP.

ANNEXES[4]^/

1. Table of amounts paid in reparations to victims.

2. Letter from the Prime Minister of Haiti, Yvon Neptune, dated October 29, 2002, to the Chief of the OAS Special Mission in Haiti, Ambassador David Lee, requesting technical assistance in the area of electoral security.

3. Table illustrating improved security conditions in the metropolitan area for the months June to September 2002.

4. Report of weapons seized under Operation Disarmament.

5. Report on weapons and ammunition seized under Operation Disarmament currently under way.

6. Report on drug seizures by the PNH, 1999-2002.

7. Laws and decrees relating to control and suppression of illegal drug trafficking.

8. The Brignol Lindor case (Petit-Goâve): judicial actions undertaken.

9. The Jean Dominique case: judicial actions undertaken.

ANNEX C: Letter dated November 4 to the Head of the Special Mission from the leaders of the Convergence Démocratique, providing their assessment of the implementation of Resolution 822 by the government.

ANNEX C

CONVERGENCE DÉMOCRATIQUE

105, Avenue Lamartinière – Port-au-Prince, Haïti – Tél (509) 245-3584

Port-au-Prince, November 4, 2002

His Excellency

Ambassador David Lee

Special Representative of the OAS Secretary General and

Chief of the OAS Special Mission in Haiti

Excellency:

Convergence Démocratique has the honor to bring to your attention its evaluation report on implementation of OAS Permanent Council resolution CP/RES. 822 (1331/02) by the de facto Lavalas government.

Convergence Démocratique sincerely hopes that this document will be taken into account in your report to the Permanent Council.

Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of our highest consideration.

Gérard Pierre-Charles Victor Benoit

OPL Espace de Concertation

Huber de Ronceray Luc Mesadieu

MPSN MOCHRENA

CONVERGENCE DEMOCRATIQUE

DECLARATION

November 4, 2002

OAS Permanent Council resolution CP/RES. 822 (1331/02):

A time to take stock and speak out

Reminder: Two years of negotiating under OAS auspices, facilitated by the Civil Society Initiative, did not allow the Lavalas regime and Convergence Démocratique to reach even an adequate consensus on the basis of a political accord. Eight months after the adoption of resolution CP/RES. 806 (1303/02), the OAS Permanent Council passed resolution CP/RES. 822 (1331/02) on September 4, 2002, which brought the negotiating process to an end.

In the latter resolution, the Permanent Council recommended, and the Lavalas government accepted, that:

· All individuals implicated in the criminal acts perpetrated on December 17, 2001, be prosecuted;

· A thorough inquiry be conducted into all politically motivated crimes; and

· The victims of the December 17 violence be compensated.

These three essential points for Convergence Démocratique had already been included in resolution CP/RES. 806 (1303/02), adopted on June 15, 2002.

The Lavalas government agreed:

· To present a detailed report on the recommendations set forth in resolution CP/RES. 806 (1303/02);

· To proceed to general disarmament;

· To observe freedom of expression, individual rights, and freedom of assembly;

· To establish a climate of security conducive to the holding of fair elections;

· To meet all commitments assumed earlier in the context of the Organization of American States;

· To establish a Provisional Electoral Council according to the formula envisaged in the Initial Accord; and

· To organize elections to be held in 2003.

On November 4, 2002, where do we stand?

1. No measures whatsoever have been taken so far to prosecute the individuals implicated in the criminal acts of December 17, individuals identified by the OAS Independent Commission of Inquiry (cf. CEI report).

2. With regard to the thorough inquiry into politically motivated crimes, we submitted about a dozen well-known, typical cases to Ambassador Einaudi in June of this year.

Almost nothing has been done. Although an arrest warrant was issued for about a dozen people in the murder of journalist Brignol Lindor, great pains were taken to spare Mr. Bony, the Lavalas mayor of Petit Goave, who had called for the murder. Moreover, so much was done that most of the gangsters had time to take cover, which is no secret to anyone.

3. As for the Jean Dominique case, it is at a standstill. Not to mention the cases of Father Jean Pierre-Louis, Yvon Toussaint, Mireille Durocher Bertin, Max Mayard, and Reverend Leroy, to name just a few.

4. The issue of reparations is far from being solved, as some would suggest. Approximately 70 cases were considered by the Consultative Council on Reparations.

In fact, how many victims received compensation? The Lavalas authorities have discussed this matter at length but, in reality, this is all pretense and dilatory tactics.

5. The report that the government was to send to the OAS, given the grandiose title of “preliminary report” by its framers, shows, if it were necessary, that the government did absolutely nothing. This is the OAS Permanent Council’s opinion. The report has no substance whatsoever.

6. Disarmament. In recent days, the government has put together a propaganda campaign concerning this matter.

Apart from disruptions to automobile drivers, school children, and students caught up in traffic jams or from the ill treatment of certain inhabitants of Cité Soleil and Carrefour, citizens are very skeptical about the results of these operations. The government seems more interested in disarming citizens with gun licenses than in searching for illegal weapons, if we understand the statement made by the police spokesperson correctly. Under these conditions, one cannot be surprised by this turn of events, especially when we know that it is incumbent on those who provided the weapons to take them away, when we know that the Lavalas regime bases its survival on the violence of its supporters against the opposition.

7. On the matter of observance of freedom of expression, individual freedoms, and freedom of assembly, the government has set itself up as a genuine agent of destruction. We need only cite a few cases that are familiar to everyone:

· The case of the journalist Jackie Cantave;

· The arbitrary arrest and imprisonment of the spokesperson for the victims–the cooperative members–Mr. Jean Rosemond, despite strong protests from his family and all segments of society;

· The events in the case of Professor Josué Merilien;

· The arbitrary arrests of the members of KID, a Convergence member, notwithstanding contacts with the police and protests by the political class;

· At the end of September, participants in a Convergence meeting were attacked in Cerca Carvajal by supporters of Fanmi Lavalas;

· On October 8, the same individuals brutally interrupted another Convergence meeting, once again in Cerca Carvajal; and

· In Liancourt, whenever Convergence members want to meet, they are given the same treatment by members of Fanmi Lavalas.

The deadline set in resolution CP/RES. 822 (1331/02) for the formation of the CEP is today, November 4. Normally Convergence Démocratique should send a representative. After making every effort to choose and appoint its representative, it feels compelled to bring the process to a halt.

Indeed, if elections are to be credible, they should take place in a competitive political environment. Deeply convinced of this, the OAS Council made recommendations to the de facto government, which the latter pledged to carry out. Unfortunately, we must conclude that the Lavalas regime dealt the same fate to resolution CP/RES. 822 (1331/02) as to resolution CP/RES. 806 (1303/02).

How can we reasonably imagine that genuine elections can be organized in the country:

- When the regime in power sends criminals in its pay to pillage and burn the headquarters of opposition political parties and the homes of their leaders.

- When the perpetrators of the criminal acts committed on December 17, 2001, continue to enjoy impunity.

- When the government refuses to compensate victims regardless of its commitments to do so.

- When Mr. Aristide’s supporters attack opposition militants and brutally interrupt their meetings.

- When members of the police arrest and throw Convergence members into prison in the most arbitrary manner possible.

- When weapons of all calibers continue to proliferate in the country and nothing significant is done to track them down.

- When the opposition in the most densely populated neighborhoods of the capital and in a few large provincial cities is prevented by armed hoodlums from expressing itself in any way.

- When individual freedoms and freedom of expression are trampled underfoot.

Once again, Mr. Jean Bertrand Aristide and Fanmi Lavalas want to rewrite the events surrounding the electoral coup d’état of 2000.

We, members of the Convergence Démocratique, consider it untimely under current conditions to appoint our representative to the CEP. As of now, November 4 is no longer a deadline.

In our view, and in the view of all real democrats, resolution CP/RES. 822 (1331/02) is a package deal, a well organized whole, arranged to obtain specific results, namely, to establish a politically competitive environment for organizing genuine elections.

For the time being, this is not the case. Given this situation, Convergence Démocratique openly declares its refusal to support the “no-rights” policy implemented by the Lavalas regime. At this crucial time in the political life of the Haitian people, Convergence Démocratique invites all sectors that are to appoint representatives to guard against becoming accomplices in a policy of pretense, non-fulfillment of commitments, and corruption.

Thank you.

For Convergence Démocratique,

Serge Gilles

Port-au-Prince, November 4, 2000

ANNEX D: Letter dated November 4, requesting a fifteen day extension in the time frame for naming the Provisional Electoral Council, to the President of Haiti from five of the entities which are to name members of that Council in accordance with the Draft Initial Accord (Revision 9 dated June 12, 2002).

ANNEX D

Port-au-Prince, November 4, 2002

His Excellency

Mr. Jean Bertrand Aristide

President of the Republic of Haiti

National Palace

Dear Mr. President,

The undersigned institutions, which have been mandated under OAS Permanent Council resolution CP/RES. 822 (1331/02) and the Initial Draft Accord (Rev. 9) to choose or coordinate the selection of a member of the Provisional Electoral Council (CEP), have the honor to report that the selection of their representative or the representative of their sector on the CEP has been completed. They intend to fulfill their civic duty and contribute to the holding of the next elections.

They were apprised of the letter that the Prime Minister had sent on October 29, 2002, to the Chief of the OAS Special Mission in Haiti to request, inter alia, technical assistance in the areas of

· Professional development of the police,

· Electoral security, and

· Disarmament.

In their view, this is a positive approach that should bring about conditions conducive to the holding of credible elections in a climate of security.

However, the undersigned institutions consider that certain clarifications are warranted before they can officially communicate the names of the persons selected, even if this slows down the establishment of the CEP by about 15 days.

This additional 15-day period would provide the necessary time to draw up the terms of reference for technical assistance to ensure professional development of the police, electoral security, and disarmament and to transmit them to the political parties and civil society for comments.

In the area of security, the institutions believe that the Government, for its part, should give an unequivocal sign of its readiness to contribute to the security of its citizens as a whole by taking steps to ensure that members of Parliament and locally elected officials are no longer escorted by civilians carrying military weapons–a practice that is prohibited by the Constitution of Haiti and its laws.

These measures are essential for restoring confidence among the population and allowing institutions to participate in the formation of the CEP.

The signatories would like to reiterate their desire to cooperate with the Government in holding fair and credible elections.

Sincerely yours,

For the Conference For the Protestant

of Bishops of Haiti Federation of Haiti

CP10545E01

For the Episcopal Church For Justice and Peace

of Haiti

For the Haitian Chamber of

Commerce and Industry

cc: OAS Special Mission in Haiti

The press

[1]. During the process of negotiations the OAS mediating team adopted a two-phased approach to resolve the crisis: an initial accord on a number of key issues to be followed later by a global accord on a wider range of issues. Most of the elements of the Draft Initial Accord were agreed upon; however, consensus was not reached on others when the process came to an end in July 2002.

[2]. According to http://www.oanda.com/convert/classic as of November 26, 2002.

[3]. Although it is understood that the practice in Haiti is to ensure confidentiality in such proceedings, the Government decided to include the investigative report of the former investigating magistrate, Claudy Gassant, delivered on June 8, 2001, in its published Report of November 4.

[4] . To consult the annexes mentioned in this document, please refer to CP/doc.3666/02.