Haiti after February 7: Precarious Stability or Constitutional Crisis?
, Tuesday, February 10, 2026 —The official end of the mandate of the Transitional Presidential Council (CPT) on February 7, 2026, opens a new phase of institutional uncertainty in Haiti.
By Jean Wesley Pierre · Port-au-Prince
· 3 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, Tuesday, February 10, 2026 —The official end of the mandate of the Transitional Presidential Council (CPT) on February 7, 2026, opens a new phase of institutional uncertainty in Haiti. Executive power is now exercised under the aegis of the Council of Ministers led by Prime Minister Alix Didier Fils-Aimé, in a context marked by the persistent presidential vacancy, the absence of elections, and an ongoing acute security crisis.
Legally, this configuration raises significant questions regarding its legitimacy, duration, and conformity with the Haitian constitutional order.
As former President Jocelerme Privert reminds us during an interview with Gazette,
The amended 1987 Constitution provides for replacement mechanisms in the event of a presidential vacancy. In principle, the President of the Court of Cassation or, failing that, a provisional executive framed by functional institutions must ensure the interim until the rapid organization of elections. However, the absence of an operational Parliament and the weakening of judicial institutions make the orthodox application of these provisions practically impossible today. This situation favors exceptional political solutions, often justified by urgency, but legally debated. The decree entrusting the exercise of executive power to the Council of Ministers falls within this logic of exception. Some jurists see it as an act of necessity aimed at avoiding a total institutional vacuum. According to them, the principle of state continuity, fundamental in public law, temporarily authorizes this type of arrangement when constitutional institutions cannot function normally. This pragmatic interpretation emphasizes the minimal stability essential for the country's administrative functioning. Other constitutional law specialists adopt a more critical interpretation. They believe that this arrangement risks establishing an insufficiently controlled single-headed executive. The fact that the Prime Minister was previously revoked by the CPT by a majority vote fuels doubts about the legal and political solidity of his current authority. The leader of « Pitit Desalin », Moïse Jean Charles, states it clearly: « I am not ready to discuss with Didier. He is a revoked Prime Minister, involved in corruption, who dismembers political parties and needs people who can be trusted. » From this perspective, the prolonged exercise of power without an electoral mandate or parliamentary oversight could constitute a breach of the constitutional spirit. The duration of this presidential vacancy constitutes a major issue. The Constitution never envisioned a prolonged vacancy over several years nor the repeated absence of elections. In theory, the interim must be brief and strictly regulated. Its indefinite prolongation could normalize the exception, weaken institutional credibility, and heighten popular distrust towards the authorities. Political reactions illustrate this polarization. Former Senator Jean-Charles Moïse calls the Prime Minister illegitimate and refuses any dialogue, while other actors, like André Michel, « Avoka Pèp la », attribute the current situation to the persistent inability of the Haitian political class and civil society to find a consensus. These divergent positions reflect a deeper crisis of trust towards institutions and political elites. Internationally, several foreign partners, including the United States of America, have welcomed the administrative continuity ensured by the government, seeing it as a factor of relative stability. However, this diplomatic recognition cannot replace democratic legitimacy derived from the ballot box. In comparative constitutional law, external recognition does not exempt from respecting internal requirements of legality and and legitimacy. Beyond the legal debate, the central question remains that of the effectiveness of power. An executive incapable of restoring security, organizing credible elections, and restoring public trust sees its legitimacy erode, regardless of the constitutional arguments put forward. The current situation thus places Haiti in a legal and political gray area. The decree can be perceived either as a pragmatic measure of continuity or as a risky circumvention of constitutional norms. The outcome will depend on the authorities' ability to transform this transition into a true democratic process with respect for a credible electoral calendar and sufficient security guarantees. Without free elections, strong institutions, and the restoration of state authority, any solution will remain provisional, and the transition could be prolonged to the detriment of Haitian democracy. Jean Wesley Pierre / Le Relief
The amended 1987 Constitution provides for replacement mechanisms in the event of a presidential vacancy. In principle, the President of the Court of Cassation or, failing that, a provisional executive framed by functional institutions must ensure the interim until the rapid organization of elections. However, the absence of an operational Parliament and the weakening of judicial institutions make the orthodox application of these provisions practically impossible today. This situation favors exceptional political solutions, often justified by urgency, but legally debated. The decree entrusting the exercise of executive power to the Council of Ministers falls within this logic of exception. Some jurists see it as an act of necessity aimed at avoiding a total institutional vacuum. According to them, the principle of state continuity, fundamental in public law, temporarily authorizes this type of arrangement when constitutional institutions cannot function normally. This pragmatic interpretation emphasizes the minimal stability essential for the country's administrative functioning. Other constitutional law specialists adopt a more critical interpretation. They believe that this arrangement risks establishing an insufficiently controlled single-headed executive. The fact that the Prime Minister was previously revoked by the CPT by a majority vote fuels doubts about the legal and political solidity of his current authority. The leader of « Pitit Desalin », Moïse Jean Charles, states it clearly: « I am not ready to discuss with Didier. He is a revoked Prime Minister, involved in corruption, who dismembers political parties and needs people who can be trusted. » From this perspective, the prolonged exercise of power without an electoral mandate or parliamentary oversight could constitute a breach of the constitutional spirit. The duration of this presidential vacancy constitutes a major issue. The Constitution never envisioned a prolonged vacancy over several years nor the repeated absence of elections. In theory, the interim must be brief and strictly regulated. Its indefinite prolongation could normalize the exception, weaken institutional credibility, and heighten popular distrust towards the authorities. Political reactions illustrate this polarization. Former Senator Jean-Charles Moïse calls the Prime Minister illegitimate and refuses any dialogue, while other actors, like André Michel, « Avoka Pèp la », attribute the current situation to the persistent inability of the Haitian political class and civil society to find a consensus. These divergent positions reflect a deeper crisis of trust towards institutions and political elites. Internationally, several foreign partners, including the United States of America, have welcomed the administrative continuity ensured by the government, seeing it as a factor of relative stability. However, this diplomatic recognition cannot replace democratic legitimacy derived from the ballot box. In comparative constitutional law, external recognition does not exempt from respecting internal requirements of legality and and legitimacy. Beyond the legal debate, the central question remains that of the effectiveness of power. An executive incapable of restoring security, organizing credible elections, and restoring public trust sees its legitimacy erode, regardless of the constitutional arguments put forward. The current situation thus places Haiti in a legal and political gray area. The decree can be perceived either as a pragmatic measure of continuity or as a risky circumvention of constitutional norms. The outcome will depend on the authorities' ability to transform this transition into a true democratic process with respect for a credible electoral calendar and sufficient security guarantees. Without free elections, strong institutions, and the restoration of state authority, any solution will remain provisional, and the transition could be prolonged to the detriment of Haitian democracy. Jean Wesley Pierre / Le Relief
