This is the second proposal submitted in less than a month by the signatories of the Montana agreement in reaction to the counter-proposal of the de facto Prime Minister Ariel Henry inviting them to join his single-headed executive power.
The de facto Prime Minister, following two meetings with the representative of the Montana Accord Monitoring Office, former Minister Magalie Comeau Denis, had proposed to reform the government by introducing important members of the August 30 Accord, including economist Fritz Alphonse Jean and former senator Steven Irvenson Benoit, respectively president and prime minister-elect of the so-called Montana Accord
In a document entitled “Proposals of the political consensus Montana expanded, PEN modified and GREH for the effective implementation of the elements submitted by the power in place and move forward with the political dialogue”, which Zoomhaitinews has learned, the actors of Montana and their allies have proposed four points “essential” for the conduct of negotiations.
The enlarged Montana group proposes “a common front of patriots united against insecurity and corruption, a sufficient consensus on the essential modifications to be made to the constitution to make our democratic institutions more functional, the establishment of transparent and credible structures for the realization of elections in a peaceful environment promoting a high rate of participation guaranteeing a certain legitimacy to future elected officials and a program of social appeasement to alleviate the suffering of the poorest,” reads the 7-page document, which has already been submitted to the Prime Minister who has not yet reacted, according to our sources.
These points, according to what is written in the new agenda of discussion ”meet the concerns of the representatives of the Political Consensus Montana extended who do not emit any reserve, as for their objectives, that they are part of the menu of the political dialogue having to lead to this indispensable national consensus to take out the country of the crisis in which it gets stuck”.
Moreover, the actors of Montana enlarged plead for the implementation of these elements, that the various measures to be taken to ensure their effectiveness and their durability, are discussed and defined so that they do not remain simple wishes.
For a national solution to the crisis
Concerning the national character of the solution to the crisis, the members of the enlarged Montana group want to be firm while specifying that they have maintained the permanent dialogue with the different social and political entities to reach a national compromise. To do so, they propose a step by step approach. First to “build a consensus with the power in place and then to work on the integration of the different major entities of the civil and political society not belonging to any agreement underlining that “this method allowed the obtaining of the Montana-PEN Modified-GREH Political Consensus”.
Towards the establishment of a mediation committee to arbitrate the negotiations
This is the wish of both parties, if we are to believe the document of the enlarged Montana group indicating that the two protagonists seem to be in favour of the formation of this committee, which should be made up of 3 members in order to facilitate the smooth running of the negotiations.
On this point “it remains understood that the supporters of the enlarged Montana Political Consensus, while remaining attached to a direct political dialogue, do not exclude in any way the recourse to a national, international or mixed mediation if their good will and their availability to put a stop to this unbearable suffering should come up against insurmountable obstacles. In this case, the parties agree that this mediation will develop and respect the rules necessary for its success,” the document added.
On the assessment of the provisional government in place and the need for a consensus
The extended Montana group also returned in its document to the “disastrous” record of the administration of the de facto Prime Minister Ariel Henry characterized by “the increase in the cost of living, corruption, impunity, the extension of the territories controlled by the gangs, kidnappings, gang rapes of women and children, heinous massacres and thousands of internally displaced persons, mass migration, increased despair, burning of corpses, and simply horror, could not be allowed to continue. Hence the urgency of this necessary consensus in order to “break with this degeneration” […] “where fear and despicable crimes are commonplace”, say Montana’s supporters.
Consensus is one of the necessary conditions for resolving the crisis in order to re-establish the functioning of the institutions that make up the republican order, facilitate a return to democratic order and promote the culture of legality, and thus prevent the government that emerges from the elections from being itself a transitional government that will be handicapped. This, say the members of the Montana group, can contribute to establishing on a transitional basis the functioning of the judiciary; to take into account the mandate of the only remaining elected officials and to articulate it with the oversight body of the transition in order to create the legislative power of the transition with an effective power of control over governmental action; to re-establish, on a consensual and transitional basis, the structure of the executive power and to install a government of consensus, according to established criteria
Further on in this document, the enlarged Montana group pleads for the creation of an environment conducive to the success of the political dialogue process with clearly defined objectives in order to unblock the situation of crisis of governability and governance to restore social peace and political stability; to agree on the main lines of a program, to constitute, on the basis of a realistic program and consequent criteria, a legitimate consensual power with competent, credible and honest personalities able to inspire confidence in the population and to restore the regular functioning of the two other powers of the State (Judiciary and Legislative) during the transition period.
Finally, the enlarged Montana group proposes that the negotiations take place in an appropriate setting and in a neutral place, which could be a hotel in the capital, the costs of which will be borne equally by the two parties with a view to reaching an agreement within a period of 15 days.
This agreement must, among other things, create the political conditions for the drastic reduction of armed violence and insecurity and the dismantling of armed gangs, the holding of a national dialogue on the fundamental problems of the nation, including issues related to the Constitution and political parties within its framework of reference, the systematic fight against corruption and impunity, and the implementation of accountability mechanisms….
These negotiations, to which both parties will have to designate participants, must take place in the presence of national and international observers in a respectful manner, without any form of verbal violence, with a methodology facilitating the progress of the discussions. This new proposal of the actors of the enlarged Montana group also recommends a democratic and serious management of the discussion sessions, the holding of a regular press briefing on the progress of the process.
It remains to be seen what the reaction of Prime Minister Ariel Henry and his allies will be to this new proposal for negotiations to resolve the Haitian political crisis, which has already gone on too long.