Forum Haiti : Des Idées et des Débats sur l'Avenir d'Haiti

Forum Haiti : Des Idées et des Débats sur l'Avenir d'Haiti

FOROM AYITI : Tèt Ansanm Pou'n Chanje Ayiti.
 
AccueilAccueil  GalerieGalerie  PortailPortail  CalendrierCalendrier  PublicationsPublications  FAQFAQ  RechercherRechercher  S'enregistrerS'enregistrer  MembresMembres  GroupesGroupes  Connexion  

Partagez | 
 

 HAITI: POLITICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL NONSENSE!

Aller en bas 
AuteurMessage
OBSERVER KEEN
Star
Star


Masculin
Nombre de messages : 966
Localisation : USA
Date d'inscription : 29/08/2006

Feuille de personnage
Jeu de rôle:

MessageSujet: HAITI: POLITICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL NONSENSE!   Jeu 18 Nov 2010 - 14:12

The biggest problem facing our democratic process is a result of a lack of creativity and foresight among our constitutional framers. I would argue that the chaotic constant of our political life, in the last two decades, is a direct consequence of these ANTECEDENT FAILURES.
FOR INSTANCE, as a reaction to HISTORICAL abuse of the Duvalier regime, they wanted to create a bi-cephalic executive branch a la francaise at an attempt of limiting future presidential overreach. but ironically, they end up with parliamentary overreach with potentially a deputy from the commune of Desdunes( this specification is rhetorical) capable of reversing presidential reforms or proposals. what they failed to realize in their excessive emulation of french ideals is that France has a foreign policy that demands the constant vigilance of the president; so it makes sense to have a prime-minister for domestic affairs. such is not the case of Haiti. In addition, bi-cephalic executive system was intentionally designed for the purpose of dealing with imperial political systems to free up the emperor from having to deal directly with domestic affairs; secondly, in cases where it works, it generally is a parliamentary system in which the prime minister himself is a legislator out of a majority block. In fact, it is bi-cephalic in name only. and in addition, in cases where it works, there are strong state institutions that would not crumble as a consequence of an eventual break-down of the government, case in point: Belgium. the executive government was officially non-existent for months, yet the country functioned normally. Such is not the case in Haiti, so break-down leads directly to chaos and administrative uncertainty.
In Haiti, the prime-minster is a non-parliamentarian civilian nominated by the president, yet he is supposed to have more power than the president himself or herself? now, do you expect a president to nominate a non-subservient guy with officially more power than he or she will ever have? what kind of political system that would make a mere nominee more powerful than the highest elected-office-holder? only, NON-CREATIVE THINKERS would come up with such a system; for in countries where the president is a figure-head such as Israel or India, the president is not elected by the people, he or she is nominated with the implicit approval of the prime minister via a non-democratic parliamentary maneuver. such is not the case in Haiti.

Again, as a reaction to a lack of representation during the Duvalier era, our constitutional framers reacted with over-representation: Three senators by department: one for six , 4, and 2 years respectively. so, every two years, there are parliamentary elections throughout the country. but what the authors of our constitution failed to understand is that in country where democracy is in its infancy, these frequent elections are not necessarily optimal. more is not necessarily better in quality or enhancement. ask anyone who deals with constraint mathematics in economics, they will tell you that one does not necessarily make more profit by increasing prices on their commodities. in fact, these frequent elections are not only potential activators of chaos, they are too financially draining.
. again, they our constitutional framers wanted to copy the American electoral calendar of mid-term elections. but America is a rich country that can afford such frequent elections, and their democracy is mature enough to sustain such a frequency.
here is the irony: a big state such as Texas requires no more than two senators, but a small department such as Nippes needs three.

so, our political system was built just as our school system is designed, with many incompatible parts that do not fit together.
let's look our official presidential replacement in case of death or incapacitation or dereliction of duty: the chief of supreme court.
but in all our system of government, the supreme chief is supposed to be the least political position. in fact, his job and demeanor should be ideally apolitical. now, how in the world, COULD the least political person do effectively the most political job? BUT IRONICALLY, in Haiti, they would officially choose the supposedly least politically attuned individual to lead a nation in potential political crisis? that is the supreme chief justice.
in a political crisis after the death of a president, the people MAY get a president that could have been possibly promoted to chief justice by a "Koudetais" government. how?
Imagine, a military junta personally promoted someone to chief justice, and soon after, new elections were organized and won by a popular former political prisoner. the NEW president has cancer and soon dies. he was not killed, but really died due to his metastasized cancer. now, would not the ascendancy of this junta-promoted chief of justice to the presidency fuel conspiracy theories around the death of the president? combine that with the chief justice's political ineptitude, and the result is a potential political explosion.
because to be a good president, it is necessary that one is a good politician. but I recognize that such an attribute is not a sufficient condition; BECAUSE Nixon was a great politician, but a terrible president.

In other words, the supreme court chief is bound to be a bad president because he is a bad politician by demeanor and profession; but a poor country cannot afford to even have a bad president for even six months. here bad does not mean evil, or mean, just POLITICALLY incompetent.
it would make more sense to have the president of the senate take charge in the eventuality of a vacant presidency because he or she has both electoral legitimacy directly from the people ( those that elected him or her from his or department) and indirectly from them( he or she is made president by the entire senate, which collectively represents the entire territory).


P.S: but this lack of foresight is also seen in the electoral laws of run-off elections. In most sensible countries where run-offs are allowed in case of no candidate reaching the 50-percent-plus threshold, there is a secondary clause for differential. that is, candidate B with three percent of the vote will not be able, for instance, to to go to a run-off with a guy with 49 percent of the vote. in fact, differential should have been the primary criterion in a nascent democracy( such a democracy is bound to have an overcrowded field of presidential candidates).



Revenir en haut Aller en bas
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur
 
HAITI: POLITICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL NONSENSE!
Revenir en haut 
Page 1 sur 1
 Sujets similaires
-
» HAITI: POLITICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL NONSENSE!
» Aristide must be part of solution to Haiti crisis
» Jean Claude Duvalier retournera-t-il en Haiti ?
» Haiti - the capital of the diaspora? Selebrasyon Ayiti lan Trinidad
» Mirlande Manigat présente les 3 raisons de la popularité de Titid en Haiti

Permission de ce forum:Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
Forum Haiti : Des Idées et des Débats sur l'Avenir d'Haiti :: Haiti :: Espace Haïti-
Sauter vers: