Written by: Jean Rodlet Jean Baptiste, engaged citizen
The recent episode of forceful execution led by the Government Commissioner at the Court of First Instance of Cap-Haïtien, accompanied by the departmental delegate, against entrepreneurs' installations on the Boulevard, raises serious legal, institutional, and social questions.
- On the Legality of the Intervention: Role of the Government Commissioner
According to Haitian law, particularly the Code of Criminal Procedure and the law of August 6, 1997, on judicial organization, the Government Commissioner is the body responsible for ensuring the proper application of the law on behalf of society. He is the head of criminal prosecution, representing the State in judicial matters.
However, no legal provision grants him a role as an administrative enforcer or an agent for executing decisions in civil or urban planning matters, much less a public demolition mission without prior judgment and without the assistance of the competent administrative authority, in this case, the city hall or the Ministry of Public Works.
- Territorial Jurisdiction: Delegate vs. Commissioner vs. City Hall.
The Departmental Delegate, representing the Executive in the department, does not have direct authority to conduct demolitions, except by legal delegation, based on a land use plan and under judicial decision.
Similarly, mayors, although present, seem marginalized, whereas Article 74 of the law on local authorities grants them responsibility for municipal police, urban planning, and the protection of local public domain. Their marginalization raises questions about a structural dysfunction in local governance.
- Rights of Defense and Alleged Abuses.
If the young entrepreneur, thus known to be brutalized, had a valid administrative authorization, any decision to destroy his property should have been preceded by an adversarial court decision or, at a minimum, a proper notification followed by a reasonable period to comply with the order.
Regarding the Commissioner's physical intervention, testimonies of brutality (slap, kick, violent gestures) pose a serious problem of authoritarian drift. According to Article 25 of the Haitian Constitution, no one may be subjected to inhuman, cruel, or degrading treatment. Similarly, the police—the only entity authorized to question a citizen within a legal framework—were on site. The Commissioner, even in his role, has no right to beat, mistreat, or strike a citizen, much less if they pose no danger.
- On State Responsibility and Possible Recourses
- The aggrieved citizen can file a legal appeal for damage to private property and excessive use of public force.
- He can also refer the matter to the Office for the Protection of Citizens (OPC) and national and international human rights bodies.
- He is entitled to claim compensation from the Haitian State for abusive execution without due process.
- An administrative inquiry can be requested from the Ministry of Justice regarding the Commissioner's conduct.
- Hypothesis of a Conflict of Interest or a Hidden Agenda?
The brutality, exceeding of authority, and lack of coordination with legitimate local authorities suggest a possible conflict of interest or political instrumentalization. However, Article 24-2 of the Constitution requires transparency, proportionality, and legality in all State actions.
Conclusion and Call to the Central State.
We commend the will to restore order in urban planning and protect public space, but no reform can justify brutality, illegality, or the humiliation of a citizen. The central government must intervene to:
- clarify institutional responsibilities,
- reprimand its representatives,
- and guarantee the rule of law and respect for human dignity.
“The rule of law begins where arbitrariness ends.”
