The Clinton Administration still wants to declare victory in its Haitian intervention, and hopes to extract U.S. troops from Haiti by the end of February. Yet the new Haitian police force trained to maintain order when American and U.N. forces withdraw includes officers who have committed acts of political violence on behalf of Aristide's regime. And on January 6, President-elect Rene Preval suggested that U.N. forces ought to stay an extra six months, calling into question how effective and nonpartisan that new police force is today--as well as the Administration's ability to withdraw on deadline.
The Clinton Administration is ignoring clear evidence that the rule of law is wanting in the "new" Haiti--in hopes of escaping Haiti without blame for its feckless policy. The murder of a leading opponent of the Aristide government--Mireille Bertin--and that government's obstruction of U.S. efforts to investigate the murder attest to the lack of rule of law. And political violence continues. As recently as January 9, an attacker shot Ary Marsan, a member of the Chamber of Deputies from Aristide's Lavalas coalition, on a street close to the Parliament in Port-au-Prince.
In the case of the Bertin investigation, the Administration is doing more than turning a blind eye. It is trying to deflect attention from the case. At a hearing of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee of the House International Relations Committee on October 12, 1994, the Administration's Special Haiti Coordinator at the State Department, James Dobbins, denied that he knew of the Aristide government's efforts to block an FBI investigation of this suspected political murder, telling Chairman Dan Burton, "The FBI has not briefed me, or as far as I know, anyone else in the administration on their findings. They are still conducting their investigation, and as far as I know not come to a conclusion." This misleading response prompted the House International Relations Committee to hold a further hearing on human rights and police forces in Haiti on January 4.
At that hearing, when Democrats claimed that there was no evidence of the Aristide government's involvement in political murders, Chairman Benjamin Gilman responded by releasing a January 3 letter from Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs, Wendy R. Sherman, stating, "The reemergence of political violence in Haiti, and the possible implication of senior officials in the Haitian security apparatus, has been and remains at the top of our bilateral agenda with Haiti." Administration officials testifying at the hearing confirmed that they suspected officials in the Aristide government of complicity in politically-motivated killings.
The Administration's own testimony indicated that private lawyers purporting to represent members of the Aristide government's security force blocked FBI's efforts to interview them. Ambassador Dobbins admitted that those attorneys were actually paid by the Aristide government. And that government appears to have orchestrated a campaign to keep the facts from the Bertin case from coming to light.
The Administration officials testifying also expressed concern over the fact that the Aristide government has admitted human rights violators--including a number from the military government between 1991 and 1994 -- into the new Haitian National Police (HNP).
Excerpts from the statements of Chairman Gilman, FBI Deputy Assistant Director William E. Perry, and Assistant Secretary of State Robert S. Gelbard from the January 4 hearing follow. Perry's statement confirms that the Aristide government obstructed the FBI investigation of the Bertin murder, and that Ambassador Dobbins was briefed on the case. Gelbard's statement reveals concerns about the enduring politicization of Haiti's police forces.
[S]ince the U.S. intervention in September 1994...there has been a disturbing pattern of violence involving an estimated 20 political killings.... Most of the victims have been opponents of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide.
The FBI was asked to investigate the killing of Mireille Bertin, a strong opponent of Aristide, who was shot dead in broad daylight on March 28th, 1995. There is evidence to connect the Bertin killing with the murders of other Aristide opponents. We are concerned that a conspiracy exists among some Haitians to eliminate President Aristide's opponents and...to hide this from the FBI....
[T]his hearing is less about Haiti and more about the responsibility of the State Department to adequately and accurately respond to Congressional inquiries on critical issues pertaining to Haiti. It is not enough to say that Aristide, whom the Administration restored to power at great expense, is doing better than the military thugs we threw out....
The testimony offered today was troubling. We have heard for the first time that one senior advisor to President Aristide may have been involved in a plot to murder at least one political opponent;
That President Aristide's government may have obstructed an FBI investigation into the assassination of one of his strongest critics;
That several of these political killings are linked by reliable evidence...suggesting a conspiracy to eliminate dissidents in Haiti. This is startling and troubling. Before we spend additional tax dollars in Haiti, we must resolve these issues. We spent $2 billion to remove the prior authoritarian regime and to bring democracy to Haiti.
But today we were informed that the political killings continue, despite the presence of 6,000 UN peacekeepers; that the very government we put in power may be protecting some of the assassins, and that some of the same soldiers that President Clinton and President Aristide called "murderous thugs" last fall are this very day taking their place at the head of the Haitian security forces.
When Chairman Burton asked straight questions last October he did not get straight answers from the State Department. As a result, our committee apparently has not been fully informed.
There is no doubt that the Haitian people have a long way to go before they reach a pluralistic democracy. We can help them along the way. But, they may never reach that goal if our government makes excuses for a new generation of "winner-take-all" authoritarians who believe they are above the law.
Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation arrived in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, during the early morning hours of March 29, 1995, to initiate an investigation into the murders of Mireille Durocher Bertin and Eugene Baillergeau, Jr. As the Committee knows, Madam Bertin was a prominent, politically active Haitian attorney, and an outspoken critic of President Jean Bertrand Aristide. Baillergeau was Bertin's client...
The investigation sought to examine all possible motives for the murders that included...[t]he possibility that Bertin and Baillergeau were murdered because of their political affiliation.
Haitian Minister of Justice Jean-Joseph Exume and Prime Minister Smarck Michel were apprised of the FBI's investigative plan during meetings on April 10th and 11th, 1995. Contact was made with Government of Haiti officials to coordinate investigative efforts and obtain available information. FBI Agents met with IPSF [Interim Public Security Force] personnel involved in the Bertin/Baillergeau murder investigation. At these early meetings, it was agreed that the FBI and IPSF would conduct parallel investigations and exchange information. However, the FBI is not aware of whether, or the extent to which, the IPSF actually conducted a separate investigation of the murders....
The Government of Haiti was requested to grant FBI personnel investigating the murders some type of limited immunity similar to that granted to Embassy personnel. The Government of Haiti never responded formally to the request for immunity for FBI personnel....
Many witnesses, including persons at the crime scene, were reluctant to talk apparently for fear of retribution from the Government of Haiti and/or individuals responsible for the murders of Bertin and Baillergeau....The interviewees slowly began to provide more information, but nonetheless continued to express a prevalent fear of reprisal or retaliation and provided information only on the condition of anonymity....
In early June 1995, FBI Agents interviewed various IPSF members. Subsequently, the FBI experienced significant investigative difficulties because of its inability to interview Government of Haiti officials and employees, including some members of the IPSF and the Palace Security Service on terms consistent with an impartial, professional investigation.
Issues were raised regarding the conditions under which the FBI could interview IPSF personnel. The FBI had extended negotiations with Government of Haiti officials and the attorneys representing the IPSF officers regarding these interviews. Ultimately our efforts were stymied by what in our professional judgment were unreasonable conditions placed upon any such interviews by private attorneys purporting to represent these individuals. As the FBI has no access to compulsory process of any sort in Haiti, we felt the time had come to turn the investigation over to the Haitian authorities....
[W]hen we concluded that our investigation in Haiti could not productively continue and the time had come to turn the investigation over to newly constituted Special Investigative Unit of the Haitian National Police, we discussed this proposed transition and provided a substantive briefing on the Bertin investigation to Washington representatives of the Departments of State and Defense and other agencies.
Like this Committee, Mr. Chairman, this Administration is extremely concerned about the continuing apolitical and professional profile of the HNP. While we recognize the need for greater numbers of police than will have been deployed by the departure of the UN forces, we have strongly argued against the Haitian government's decision to merge significant numbers of the IPSF into the HNP. We have not taken the position that IPSF members ought to be excluded from the HNP, but rather have argued that the decision to include IPSF members should be made on a case-by-case basis. Their eligibility for consideration should be based first on their professional performance -- with special emphasis on human rights grounds -- while in the IPSF....As Ambassador Dobbins mentioned, we hold our deepest concern over the inclusion of individuals in the HNP's ranks who have committed criminal acts.