|
Haiti The Legal Framework
Haiti's legal system reflected its colonial origins. It
had a
French structure superimposed on a traditional
African-Caribbean
society. Although Haiti was founded by former slaves, it
lacked
the parallel or indigenous legal system often found in
modern
Africa. The legal framework followed the structures and
the
procedures of French and Roman legal systems. It included
local
courts, justice of the peace courts, courts of first
instance,
courts of appeal, and the Court of Cassation (Supreme
Court). But
the system had little relevance for most of the
population. The
more senior members of the court system catered to a small
urbanized business clientele. The lower echelons of the
judicial
system employed poorly trained individuals who were likely
to be
influenced by political and financial pressures at the
local
level.
Because Haiti was a rural nation, land law and local
civil
and criminal procedures were of much greater relevance to
the
majority of the population than were decisions posted by
the
senior courts in Port-au-Prince and a few larger towns.
French
was the official language of the legal system, however,
even
though most people living in rural areas spoke only Creole
(see French and Creole
, ch. 7).
Judges in Haiti were often subject to intimidation, and
the
entire legal system suffered from a lack of administrative
and
financial capabilities. Many local courthouses were
destroyed
during or after the 1986 collapse of the Duvalier regime.
Few
facilities have been rebuilt.
The Duvalier regimes had selected most of the country's
judges. Post-Duvalier governments faced the daunting task
of
selecting credible judges to preside over courts at all
levels.
This process had barely begun as of 1989.
Except for brief periods in Haiti's history, military
officials controlled the country's legal system
(see Army Politics: Force and Counterforce
, ch. 9). As a
consequence, an
equitable and functioning judicial system was still
largely an
abstraction for most Haitians. The army or paramilitary
groups,
with political or personal motivations, arbitrarily
fulfilled
law-enforcement functions.
Problems in the country's legal system originated in
Haiti's
skewed experience with its constitutions. One of the first
goals
of Haiti's early leaders was to establish law and order
while
organizing a new government. The solution adopted by
figures such
as François-Dominique Toussaint Louverture, Jean-Jacques
Dessalines, Henri (Henry) Christophe, and many of their
successors emphasized executive authority along with
limited
civil or technical administration. A judicial system and
municipal powers became extensions of central authority.
This
arrangement ensured military presence at all levels and
branches
of government. Incompetence, graft, and violence
complicated this
structure. One observer, writing at the turn of the
century,
noted that "Haiti is governed by generals in all sizes."
In 1936, two years after the departure of the United
States
Marines, Haitian president Sténio Vincent drew up a new
constitution that provided a legislature and a judiciary
wholly
dependent upon the whims of the executive branch
(see Politics and the Military, 1934-57
, ch. 6). The new constitution
stated
that "the government makes the constitution, the laws, the
regulations and agreements."
Haitian law required that detainees appear before a
judge
within forty-eight hours, except when they were arrested
in the
act of committing a crime or when they were detained
pursuant to
a judicial warrant. In practice, however, prisoners
frequently
spent long periods in jail while they awaited trial. The
absence
of a bail system also led to lengthy pretrial detentions.
The law
further required officials formally to file charges
against the
accused at least two weeks before trial. The accused had
the
right to meet with an attorney before trial, but had to
pay for
it. The state provided no free counsel to the indigent.
Arraignments and trials took place in public, and
defendants
had the right to be present at their trials. Overall, the
criminal justice system suffered from backlogs, the
intimidation
and influencing of jurists, and the population's
widespread
reluctance to serve as jurors.
Data as of December 1989
|
