The CPT's Decree on the High Court of Justice, an Act by Guilty Beneficiaries
By La Rédaction · Port-au-Prince · · 8 min read · Updated 24 April 2026
Translated from French — AI-assisted and reviewed by the editorial team. The French version is authoritative. Read the original · About our translation policy
The decree just published by the Transitional Presidential Council (CPT) on the organization and functioning of the High Court of Justice has resolved nothing in terms of strengthening public governance, nor has it advanced Haitian law regarding the fight against corruption in the country. On the contrary. This text is the work of insolent corrupt individuals, devoid of any political and legal intelligence.
Who crafted this decree? Who are the lawyers and jurists who participated in this insolent act? Who are these imposters attempting to manipulate public consciousness? They are certainly not jurists worthy of the name. For the soul of a jurist lies in a blend of intellectual rigor, ethics, and a profound sense of justice and equity. They are a wise counselor. While seeking innovative solutions, they are guided by principles such as integrity, transparency, and respect for the rule of law. They combine law with a moral vision to protect the general interest.
The perversion of law is corruption: therefore, a crime! The distortion of legal principles for petty ends, whether by a judge or a lawyer, is an act of injustice. Stating the law as it is, without deviation, is the social mission of a lawyer. And it is by stating the law as it is, without complacency, that one serves the social body.
Ethically, intellectually, and civically, this decision cannot be the work of someone who grew up with honor and dignity. This decree, in its articles 4 and 11, simply enshrines the moral defeat of the Haitian political elite, who grant themselves total impunity, even as suspicions of corruption weigh on several of these high-ranking state officials. These are the individuals whose record, marked by all sorts of acts of malversation, has damaged public funds, nullified control institutions, and, finally, accelerated the general decomposition of the country.
Everything becomes clear! So, let us stop accusing foreigners of the thefts, acts of corruption, and plundering of public funds for which we are guilty in the management of the state. It is becoming increasingly evident that corruption is the consensus around which the ruling elites rally to thwart Haiti's progress.
The High Court of Justice applicable to legitimate presidents
By enacting this decree, what legal problem are they trying to solve? None! Not having been elected, these de facto leaders cannot, under any circumstances, avail themselves of constitutional mechanisms, such as the High Court of Justice, an exceptional court provided by the Constitution to judge rulers who have committed offenses and crimes in the exercise of their duties. They are, in no case, amenable to the High Court of Justice under the 1987 Constitution. They are subject to the principle of double constitutional obligation and do not have the status of president. The procedure before this Court is political, not judicial. It rules on the failure of rulers to fulfill their duties, incompatible with the exercise of their functions or mandate. In the case of the President of the Republic, this procedure, which aims at their removal, must lead to a new presidential election or the establishment of a provisional president, according to Article 149 of the Constitution. This provision was created in anticipation of any break in the democratic and constitutional order of the country. It is not an invitation to create provisional and ephemeral regimes. It expresses the idea of constitutional continuity. What the drafters of this decree forget, when they refer to the 1987 Constitution, is that the High Court of Justice only judges matters of very high-level political responsibility. The concept of responsibility evoked here is fully meaningful. In constitutional matters, the responsibility of the President of the Republic is engaged upon their oath before the National Assembly, which validates their presidential status and mandate, and that of government members during the Prime Minister's general policy statement before the political authorities of parliament. The members of the CPT have not taken the constitutional oath that obliges them to submit to the principle of double obligation, consisting of observing and ensuring the observance of the Constitution. No Chamber has ratified the general policy statement of the de facto Prime Minister, Alix Didier Fils-Aimé. The current government has not committed itself before any Chamber. Who will grant them discharge for their management, when it is a constitutional formality to be completed at the end of each fiscal year? Discharge is a procedure of accountability release that occurs annually. The accumulation of discharges constitutes a violation of the Constitution, characterized by a lack of control by the legislative chambers. Discharge can only be granted by the Chambers before which the government had committed itself. It is a procedure with a political purpose. All institutions provided for by the Constitution are democratic and republican — presidency, parliament, government, justice, etc. — and organize the State according to the principles of sovereignty (Articles 58 and 59 of the Constitution). Our political system is one where the people elect, directly or indirectly, their representatives to govern in the general interest. The High Court of Justice is reserved only for leaders mandated by the people or designated according to the constitutional procedure provided for this purpose. A transitional government and a democratic government do not sit in the same place: one displaces the other. The High Court of Justice is an ad hoc institution that falls within the oversight mission vested in the legislative power. The CPT amenable to ordinary courts
This double obligation to which I refer here, the President of the Republic contracts before the people because they are elected, either by universal suffrage or by the National Assembly. In case of default, they can be removed. They then incur a double sanction, both political and judicial. If there is no political responsibility, there can be no political sanction. Therefore, the members of the CPT, as well as the members of Alix Fils-Aimé's government, are amenable, at the end of their functions, before the ordinary courts. Alix Didier Fils-Aimé's government lacks governmental ethics. The World Bank, in its considerations on good governance and the rule of law, wrote that a government not subject to any type of control lacks ethics, as it is not accountable for its actions. This eliminates the notion of governmental responsibility. To the question of whether presidential advisors have the status of president, the answer is an emphatic no. For it is the Constitution that defines the conditions for accession to the presidency of the Republic. It is not a law, a decree, much less a court decision, that can confer the status of president on a citizen. The President's status includes the presidential mandate, its duration, role, and powers. In our Constitution, they benefit from jurisdictional status. They do not manage public funds. They are not responsible for the management of state assets and funds. Technically, the High Court of Justice cannot be activated to judge officials who are no longer in a position of political responsibility. Their case should be heard before ordinary courts. The Court of Cassation, in a ruling dated 1904, already decided on this issue during the Consolidation trial. Under the presidency of Nord Alexis, a trial was initiated against high-ranking Haitian officials for embezzlement of public funds. Despite the opposition he faced, this trial was a historic moment. It took place thanks to the courage and civic-mindedness of President Nord Alexis. A civic-mindedness pushed to exaggeration, to use Frédéric Marcelin's expression. Let's denounce this fraud against the nation!
The publication of this decree is a fraud against the nation. A law or a decree, whatever it may be, cannot create legal and constitutional contradictions, ambiguities, or confusions to foster impunity. The objective of law is to sanction offenses and guarantee justice.
These little mice in power in Haiti are deaf and blind. Indeed, we are tired of these incompetents who have governed us for ages. The nation does not need an elite composed of little savages, incapable of understanding, evolving, and adapting, but true politicians, entrepreneurs, and scientists devoted to the common good. As Charles Darwin wrote, the animals that survive are not those that prove to be the most intelligent or the strongest, but those that can adapt to their environment. How can it be explained that leaders have decided to issue a decree to protect themselves against potential prosecution for acts of corruption committed in the management of public affairs? What message is being sent in an international environment marked by the fight against corruption, with global efforts coordinated by the UN, OECD, OAS, and Transparency International, which rely on conventions aimed at suppressing the crime of corruption, to which Haiti is a party? How could ignorant politicians survive without understanding the international environment, shaped by a set of complex and interconnected systems? Corruption is one of the global challenges that mobilize international cooperation and international law. Rulers must know that the fight against corruption and organized crime involves a network of political and legal forces that transcends national borders. The maneuvers of a few corrupt judges to exonerate certain officials involved in acts of corruption are desperate attempts, because the fight against corruption is waged at all scales — national, regional, and global. There is no refuge for the corrupt. Impunity is reprehensible. One wants to change the 1987 Constitution because one does not know it. But how can one change a reality that one does not understand?, rightly emphasized the philosopher Baruch Spinoza, author of Ethics. What should the people, the exclusive repository of national sovereignty, both author and guardian of the 1987 Constitution, do when rulers and their accomplices — jurists, intellectuals, professionals, entrepreneurs, academics, church leaders — shed the blood of the people, show no respect for the nation, and completely overturn its foundations? They must rise, unite, and peacefully but firmly take their destiny into their own hands, demanding justice, accountability, and the re-establishment of constitutional order in the name of the general interest. Sonet Saint-Louis, Esq.
Professor of Constitutional Law and Advanced Legal Research Methodology at the Faculty of Law and Economics of the State University of Haiti.
Professor of Philosophy
Université du Québec à Montréal
Montreal
sonet.saintlouis@gmail.com
By enacting this decree, what legal problem are they trying to solve? None! Not having been elected, these de facto leaders cannot, under any circumstances, avail themselves of constitutional mechanisms, such as the High Court of Justice, an exceptional court provided by the Constitution to judge rulers who have committed offenses and crimes in the exercise of their duties. They are, in no case, amenable to the High Court of Justice under the 1987 Constitution. They are subject to the principle of double constitutional obligation and do not have the status of president. The procedure before this Court is political, not judicial. It rules on the failure of rulers to fulfill their duties, incompatible with the exercise of their functions or mandate. In the case of the President of the Republic, this procedure, which aims at their removal, must lead to a new presidential election or the establishment of a provisional president, according to Article 149 of the Constitution. This provision was created in anticipation of any break in the democratic and constitutional order of the country. It is not an invitation to create provisional and ephemeral regimes. It expresses the idea of constitutional continuity. What the drafters of this decree forget, when they refer to the 1987 Constitution, is that the High Court of Justice only judges matters of very high-level political responsibility. The concept of responsibility evoked here is fully meaningful. In constitutional matters, the responsibility of the President of the Republic is engaged upon their oath before the National Assembly, which validates their presidential status and mandate, and that of government members during the Prime Minister's general policy statement before the political authorities of parliament. The members of the CPT have not taken the constitutional oath that obliges them to submit to the principle of double obligation, consisting of observing and ensuring the observance of the Constitution. No Chamber has ratified the general policy statement of the de facto Prime Minister, Alix Didier Fils-Aimé. The current government has not committed itself before any Chamber. Who will grant them discharge for their management, when it is a constitutional formality to be completed at the end of each fiscal year? Discharge is a procedure of accountability release that occurs annually. The accumulation of discharges constitutes a violation of the Constitution, characterized by a lack of control by the legislative chambers. Discharge can only be granted by the Chambers before which the government had committed itself. It is a procedure with a political purpose. All institutions provided for by the Constitution are democratic and republican — presidency, parliament, government, justice, etc. — and organize the State according to the principles of sovereignty (Articles 58 and 59 of the Constitution). Our political system is one where the people elect, directly or indirectly, their representatives to govern in the general interest. The High Court of Justice is reserved only for leaders mandated by the people or designated according to the constitutional procedure provided for this purpose. A transitional government and a democratic government do not sit in the same place: one displaces the other. The High Court of Justice is an ad hoc institution that falls within the oversight mission vested in the legislative power. The CPT amenable to ordinary courts
This double obligation to which I refer here, the President of the Republic contracts before the people because they are elected, either by universal suffrage or by the National Assembly. In case of default, they can be removed. They then incur a double sanction, both political and judicial. If there is no political responsibility, there can be no political sanction. Therefore, the members of the CPT, as well as the members of Alix Fils-Aimé's government, are amenable, at the end of their functions, before the ordinary courts. Alix Didier Fils-Aimé's government lacks governmental ethics. The World Bank, in its considerations on good governance and the rule of law, wrote that a government not subject to any type of control lacks ethics, as it is not accountable for its actions. This eliminates the notion of governmental responsibility. To the question of whether presidential advisors have the status of president, the answer is an emphatic no. For it is the Constitution that defines the conditions for accession to the presidency of the Republic. It is not a law, a decree, much less a court decision, that can confer the status of president on a citizen. The President's status includes the presidential mandate, its duration, role, and powers. In our Constitution, they benefit from jurisdictional status. They do not manage public funds. They are not responsible for the management of state assets and funds. Technically, the High Court of Justice cannot be activated to judge officials who are no longer in a position of political responsibility. Their case should be heard before ordinary courts. The Court of Cassation, in a ruling dated 1904, already decided on this issue during the Consolidation trial. Under the presidency of Nord Alexis, a trial was initiated against high-ranking Haitian officials for embezzlement of public funds. Despite the opposition he faced, this trial was a historic moment. It took place thanks to the courage and civic-mindedness of President Nord Alexis. A civic-mindedness pushed to exaggeration, to use Frédéric Marcelin's expression. Let's denounce this fraud against the nation!
The publication of this decree is a fraud against the nation. A law or a decree, whatever it may be, cannot create legal and constitutional contradictions, ambiguities, or confusions to foster impunity. The objective of law is to sanction offenses and guarantee justice.
These little mice in power in Haiti are deaf and blind. Indeed, we are tired of these incompetents who have governed us for ages. The nation does not need an elite composed of little savages, incapable of understanding, evolving, and adapting, but true politicians, entrepreneurs, and scientists devoted to the common good. As Charles Darwin wrote, the animals that survive are not those that prove to be the most intelligent or the strongest, but those that can adapt to their environment. How can it be explained that leaders have decided to issue a decree to protect themselves against potential prosecution for acts of corruption committed in the management of public affairs? What message is being sent in an international environment marked by the fight against corruption, with global efforts coordinated by the UN, OECD, OAS, and Transparency International, which rely on conventions aimed at suppressing the crime of corruption, to which Haiti is a party? How could ignorant politicians survive without understanding the international environment, shaped by a set of complex and interconnected systems? Corruption is one of the global challenges that mobilize international cooperation and international law. Rulers must know that the fight against corruption and organized crime involves a network of political and legal forces that transcends national borders. The maneuvers of a few corrupt judges to exonerate certain officials involved in acts of corruption are desperate attempts, because the fight against corruption is waged at all scales — national, regional, and global. There is no refuge for the corrupt. Impunity is reprehensible. One wants to change the 1987 Constitution because one does not know it. But how can one change a reality that one does not understand?, rightly emphasized the philosopher Baruch Spinoza, author of Ethics. What should the people, the exclusive repository of national sovereignty, both author and guardian of the 1987 Constitution, do when rulers and their accomplices — jurists, intellectuals, professionals, entrepreneurs, academics, church leaders — shed the blood of the people, show no respect for the nation, and completely overturn its foundations? They must rise, unite, and peacefully but firmly take their destiny into their own hands, demanding justice, accountability, and the re-establishment of constitutional order in the name of the general interest. Sonet Saint-Louis, Esq.
Professor of Constitutional Law and Advanced Legal Research Methodology at the Faculty of Law and Economics of the State University of Haiti.
Professor of Philosophy
Université du Québec à Montréal
Montreal
sonet.saintlouis@gmail.com
