REPORT OF THE SECRETARY GENERAL IN RESPONSE TO CP/INF. 4724/02

By CP/doc.3632/02 dated July 31, 2002, the Permanent Mission of Haiti transmitted to the Chair of the Permanent Council a draft resolution for consideration at a Regular Meeting of the Council scheduled for July 31, 2002. Consideration of the draft resolution was referred to a meeting of the General Committee of the Permanent Council held on August 2, 2002.

In document CP/INF. 4724/02 dated August 7, 2002 (reproduced at Annex I) the Permanent Mission of the United States sought clarification from the Secretary General on three issues to which reference is made in the draft resolution submitted by the Delegation of Haiti.

This report therefore addresses the status of:

The Draft Initial Accord under negotiation since April 2001;

Implementation of CP/RES. 806 (1303/02) corr.1; and

The Secretary General’s good offices with International Financial Institutions in keeping with AG/RES. 1841 (XXXII-O/02)

The second of these three issues, the assessment of the implementation of CP/RES. 806 presents complex problems of both fact and judgment that have critical policy implications. The Secretariat is responding to this request to the best of its ability, but wishes to make clear that the OAS does not now possess what it would need on the ground in Haiti to respond in greater detail to all aspects of what might be considered relevant to such a request. The report therefore also ends with some considerations on the role of the OAS Special Mission for Strengthening Democracy in Haiti (Special Mission).

This report is to be considered as a follow up to CP/doc.3625/02 corr.3 “Sixth Report of the Mission of the Organization of American States to Haiti” (hereafter referred to as the Sixth Report) as well as the earlier CP/doc. 3609/02 corr.1 “Situation in Haiti: Report of the Secretary General on the Application of Resolutions CP/RES. 806 (1303/02) corr.1 and AG/RES. 1831 (XXXI-O/01)” dated May 21, 2002.

I. THE DRAFT INITIAL ACCORD

The U.S. Mission’s request for clarification on the Draft Initial Accord Rev. 9 is at Annex I. The pertinent section reads:

OAS Draft Initial Accord: The July 9 letter from President Aristide states that 'Fanmi Lavalas has already accepted the (OAS Initial Draft) Accord and agreed to sign it.' We note, however, that the Accord attached in Appendix I of the Government of Haiti's document is specifically titled "Counterproposal by Fanmi Lavalas to the Draft Initial Accord, Rev. 9 of June 12, 2002." The Delegation of Haiti has submitted a draft resolution commending the GOH for endorsing the Accord, but it is unclear whether this endorsement refers to an endorsement of the counterproposal of Fanmi Lavalas, which we understand differs significantly from the OAS compromise proposal, or if it is an endorsement of the actual OAS Draft Initial Accord. If the latter, we believe it essential for this to be made clear in writing by both the Government of Haiti and the OAS. If the former, the Secretariat should clarify this ambiguity and point out all discrepancies between the Fanmi Lavalas counterproposal and the OAS Initial Draft Accord.

As stated in the Sixth Report, Rev. 9 of the Draft Initial Accord was presented to the political parties, Fanmi Lavalas and the Convergence Démocratique on June 12, 2002.

Fanmi Lavalas responded in writing on June 15 suggesting two changes and one addition. Perhaps the key change is that the counterproposal of Fanmi Lavalas introduced a general procedure linked to the Constitution of Haiti to replace the calendar of departure identified in Rev 9, the OAS compromise proposal. Depending on its implementation, particularly with regard to territorial authorities, the calendar of departure could have a substantial effect on the conduct of the electoral campaign. This counterproposal was later annexed to President Aristide’s more comprehensive letter of July 9, which supplemented the conditions agreed upon in the Draft Initial Accord (including provisions for constituting a Provisional Electoral Council and for electoral security), with a series of other commitments on human rights, press freedoms, and disarmament.

In response to the request for clarification, the Government of Haiti affirms, inter alia, that it sees itself as the guarantor of points agreed to in the Draft Initial Accord. The Government’s response stresses the need to respect the impact of any agreement on the Constitutionality and stability of Haitian institutions.

The Convergence Démocratique responses to the Draft Initial Accord Rev. 9 are far more numerous. Their original position, which was presented on July 11^th, 2002, was reproduced in the Sixth Report. Subsequently, following an initial exchange of correspondence over the period July 23-26, 2002 with the Chair of the Permanent Council (CP/INF. 4712/02), the Convergence again wrote to the Chairman of the Permanent Council on July 30, 2002 and presented a Modified Proposal, dated July 29, 2002, in response to the Draft Initial Accord Rev. 9. Although some evolution is registered, the proposed Convergence modifications reopen the November 26, 2000 elections, which have never been the subject of an OAS or Summit of the Americas mandate.

The text of the Draft Initial Accord Rev. 9 along with the positions of the Government of Haiti, the July 29 modified proposal of the Convergence Démocratique and comments by the Secretariat have been included in a comparative table which is attached to this report at Annex III.

II. IMPLEMENTATION OF CP/RES. 806 (1303/02) corr.1

CP/RES. 806 (1303/02) corr.1 contains a number of commitments assumed by the Government of Haiti (paragraphs (4) and (12); by the Government of Haiti and the Opposition (paragraphs (2) and (7); by the Government of Haiti and the OAS (paragraph (3); by the OAS (paragraphs (8), (9), (10), (11) and (14) and by the International Community (paragraphs (6) and (13)). The table at Annex IV lists all the commitments, their status and the identification of the OAS documentary source of information thereon.

Attention is also drawn to a document circulated at the request of the Permanent Mission of Haiti as document CP/INF. 4720/02 corr.1 entitled: “Actions Taken by the Government of Haiti to Comply with OAS Resolutions 806, 1841 and 1831 (as of July 18, 2002).”

The effectiveness of action taken by the Government of Haiti in keeping with its commitments under CP/RES. 806 has been a contentious issue between the opposition and the government.

· The opposition contends that only cosmetic actions have been taken by the government and that the government must itself be changed to reassure the actors of its willingness to create a climate of security that is conducive to a consensual solution to the current political and electoral crisis.

· The government indicates that it is fully committed to CP/RES. 806, is in the process of implementing it, and that full implementation will require both time and resources.

· OAS and CARICOM negotiators, and the Secretary General’s Group of Friends in Haiti have consistently stressed the importance of fully implementing CP/RES. 806, but have avoided making that a prerequisite for conclusion of the Initial Accord.

Section II a) below, provides the Secretariat’s update on the status of implementation of the resolution by the Government of Haiti, outlines action taken and identifies matters which affect implementation and thus could be said to be still outstanding. As noted earlier, it must be understood that this update is neither fully complete nor an authoritative guide to what remains to be done.

COMMITMENTS ASSUMED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF HAITI UNDER CP/RES. 806

a. 4(a): “The completion of a thorough, independent inquiry into the events related to December 17, 2001.”

Actions taken

· An independent inquiry was conducted by a special OAS-appointed Commission of Inquiry, consisting of three independent and distinguished international jurists. The Commission completed its investigation and issued its report in CP/INF. 4702/02 on July 1, 2002.

· In its communication of July 9, the Government of Haiti stated its readiness to implement the recommendations in the report.

b. 4(b): « The prosecution of any person, and dismissal, when appropriate, of any person found to be complicit in the violence of December 17, 2001 and subsequent days;»