The Removal of Balaclavas: Transparency or Endangering Police Officers?
, February 17, 2026 —In a video that went viral on social media, Jacques Ader, head of DDO1 (Departmental Directorate West 1), is seen demanding the removal of balaclavas from a group of CIMO unit police officers stationed on Christophe Avenue in Port-au-Prince, not far from the
By Jean Wesley Pierre · Port-au-Prince · · 4 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
Port-au-Prince, February 17, 2026 —
In a video that went viral on social media, Jacques Ader, head of DDO1 (Departmental Directorate West 1), is seen demanding the removal of balaclavas from a group of CIMO unit police officers stationed on Christophe Avenue in Port-au-Prince, not far from the General Directorate of Taxes (DGI). The scene quickly ignited public debate. This video sparked much discussion among police officers and within the population, reviving the sensitive question of the balance between institutional transparency and officer safety. A Contrasting Perception Among the Population Some citizens believe the measure could improve trust in the police. “I noticed that when police officers wear balaclavas, they behave like wild animals,” says Michel, a resident of Christophe Avenue who was participating in the carnival festivities. Thus reflecting persistent distrust towards law enforcement. For a segment of the population, showing police officers' faces would be a step towards greater accountability and proximity. However, this view is not unanimous. Other citizens also recognize the risks police officers are exposed to in a context marked by gang violence and chronic insecurity. The Critical Viewpoint of an USGPN Officer On the police side, reactions are often cautious, even critical. An officer 2 from the USGPN (General Security Unit of the National Palace) believes that: “those who make decisions are almost never in contact with the reality they are deciding upon.” According to him, removing the balaclava is more about symbolic logic than an effective operational strategy. He also insists on the protective function of this equipment: “The balaclava is a means that police officers use to protect themselves,” especially against possible reprisals. In a context where social media facilitates rapid identification of officers, he openly questions: “How would removing it make the police more effective?” The officer also mentions internal frustrations that are often not very visible: “For the police to be effective, police officers must not be frustrated,” he says, recalling problems with working conditions, inadequate dormitories, insufficient food, and salary delays. According to him, “the life of the police officer within the institution must first be improved so that they can do a better job.” Finally, he insists on the concrete danger: “A bandit can identify you and memorize your face, which makes the police officer an easier target,” a fear shared by many officers. A Nuanced Position from a Traffic Police Officer An officer A1 from the DCPR (Traffic and Road Police Directorate) adopts a more nuanced position. He first recalls his love, his passion for his work: “Because I love this profession,” he says to explain his entry into the police force. For him, the professional ideal remains clear: “To serve everyone without bias and protect everyone equally.” Regarding the balaclava, he acknowledges some advantages to the decision: “The good side is to prevent some police officers from abusing the balaclava,” he admits. But he immediately highlights the limitations: “Police officers engaged in fighting gangs do not even have private means of transport,” which can increase their exposure to risks. He also insists on the lack of material resources: “Police officers do not even have vehicles to get around,” a structural problem that, according to him, should be a priority. The officer advocates for concrete measures: access to a vehicle on credit, salary increases, and equity in the application of disciplinary sanctions between officers and high-ranking officials. Security Concerns Expressed in Other Units Within the UDMO (Departmental Law Enforcement Unit), the concern is even more direct: “When bandits see our faces, it is our families, our parents who will pay the price. Before imposing order, appropriate solutions must first be found.” This statement summarizes the dominant perception among some police officers: transparency must not come at the expense of their personal and family security. A Debate Beyond a Simple Dress Code Issue Beyond the balaclava, these testimonies reveal a broader issue: difficult working conditions, lack of equipment, internal frustrations, and a deficit of dialogue between hierarchy and field officers. Several police officers believe that without structural improvements — salaries, logistics, legal and social protection — any symbolic reform risks being poorly perceived and ineffective. At the same time, the population demands a more accountable, identifiable, and citizen-friendly police force. This tension between officer safety and the demand for transparency constitutes one of the major challenges of the current police reform. Between Institutional Reform and Security Reality The controversy surrounding the removal of balaclavas ultimately illustrates a classic dilemma: how to reconcile the need for a visible and accountable police force with the need to protect officers operating in a high-risk environment? Without in-depth dialogue between command, field officers, and the population, the measure could remain perceived as symbolic rather than transformative. For many observers, the key lies less in the appearance of police officers than in the overall improvement of their working conditions and the gradual rebuilding of trust between the police and citizens. Jean Wesley Pierre / Le Relief
In a video that went viral on social media, Jacques Ader, head of DDO1 (Departmental Directorate West 1), is seen demanding the removal of balaclavas from a group of CIMO unit police officers stationed on Christophe Avenue in Port-au-Prince, not far from the General Directorate of Taxes (DGI). The scene quickly ignited public debate. This video sparked much discussion among police officers and within the population, reviving the sensitive question of the balance between institutional transparency and officer safety. A Contrasting Perception Among the Population Some citizens believe the measure could improve trust in the police. “I noticed that when police officers wear balaclavas, they behave like wild animals,” says Michel, a resident of Christophe Avenue who was participating in the carnival festivities. Thus reflecting persistent distrust towards law enforcement. For a segment of the population, showing police officers' faces would be a step towards greater accountability and proximity. However, this view is not unanimous. Other citizens also recognize the risks police officers are exposed to in a context marked by gang violence and chronic insecurity. The Critical Viewpoint of an USGPN Officer On the police side, reactions are often cautious, even critical. An officer 2 from the USGPN (General Security Unit of the National Palace) believes that: “those who make decisions are almost never in contact with the reality they are deciding upon.” According to him, removing the balaclava is more about symbolic logic than an effective operational strategy. He also insists on the protective function of this equipment: “The balaclava is a means that police officers use to protect themselves,” especially against possible reprisals. In a context where social media facilitates rapid identification of officers, he openly questions: “How would removing it make the police more effective?” The officer also mentions internal frustrations that are often not very visible: “For the police to be effective, police officers must not be frustrated,” he says, recalling problems with working conditions, inadequate dormitories, insufficient food, and salary delays. According to him, “the life of the police officer within the institution must first be improved so that they can do a better job.” Finally, he insists on the concrete danger: “A bandit can identify you and memorize your face, which makes the police officer an easier target,” a fear shared by many officers. A Nuanced Position from a Traffic Police Officer An officer A1 from the DCPR (Traffic and Road Police Directorate) adopts a more nuanced position. He first recalls his love, his passion for his work: “Because I love this profession,” he says to explain his entry into the police force. For him, the professional ideal remains clear: “To serve everyone without bias and protect everyone equally.” Regarding the balaclava, he acknowledges some advantages to the decision: “The good side is to prevent some police officers from abusing the balaclava,” he admits. But he immediately highlights the limitations: “Police officers engaged in fighting gangs do not even have private means of transport,” which can increase their exposure to risks. He also insists on the lack of material resources: “Police officers do not even have vehicles to get around,” a structural problem that, according to him, should be a priority. The officer advocates for concrete measures: access to a vehicle on credit, salary increases, and equity in the application of disciplinary sanctions between officers and high-ranking officials. Security Concerns Expressed in Other Units Within the UDMO (Departmental Law Enforcement Unit), the concern is even more direct: “When bandits see our faces, it is our families, our parents who will pay the price. Before imposing order, appropriate solutions must first be found.” This statement summarizes the dominant perception among some police officers: transparency must not come at the expense of their personal and family security. A Debate Beyond a Simple Dress Code Issue Beyond the balaclava, these testimonies reveal a broader issue: difficult working conditions, lack of equipment, internal frustrations, and a deficit of dialogue between hierarchy and field officers. Several police officers believe that without structural improvements — salaries, logistics, legal and social protection — any symbolic reform risks being poorly perceived and ineffective. At the same time, the population demands a more accountable, identifiable, and citizen-friendly police force. This tension between officer safety and the demand for transparency constitutes one of the major challenges of the current police reform. Between Institutional Reform and Security Reality The controversy surrounding the removal of balaclavas ultimately illustrates a classic dilemma: how to reconcile the need for a visible and accountable police force with the need to protect officers operating in a high-risk environment? Without in-depth dialogue between command, field officers, and the population, the measure could remain perceived as symbolic rather than transformative. For many observers, the key lies less in the appearance of police officers than in the overall improvement of their working conditions and the gradual rebuilding of trust between the police and citizens. Jean Wesley Pierre / Le Relief
