US embassy cable - 05PORTAUPRINCE2917

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 PORT AU PRINCE 002917 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR WHA/CAR 
DRL 
S/CRS 
SOUTHCOM ALSO FOR POLAD 
STATE PASS AID FOR LAC/CAR 
INR/IAA (BEN-YEHUDA) 
TREASURY FOR MAUREEN WAFER 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/23/2015 
TAGS: PGOV, PREL, KDEM, HA, Elections 
SUBJECT: SUBJECT: NEW CEP BYLAWS GIVE DG MORE POWER 
 
REF: A. PAP 2893 
     B. PAP 2792 
     C. PAP 2870 
 
Classified By: ADCM Erna Kerst, Reasons 1.4 b and d 
 
1. (C) Summary: The Prime Minister November 21 distributed a 
text of an executive order with new bylaws for the 
Provisional Electoral Council (CEP) that were marked in pen 
as published November 17.  The new bylaws rearrange the CEP 
by eliminating the operational and executive committees, the 
CEP Support Committee, and the Electoral Guarantee Committee, 
while giving more power to the Director General.  Sources 
within the CEP say the publication of the bylaws, which 
happened without a CEP vote, raised CEP members, hackles. 
They argued that it was the second time in as many weeks that 
the executive had forced a decision on the nominally 
independent CEP.  End Summary. 
 
2. (C) In a meeting November 21, the Prime Minister 
distributed the text of an executive order amending the 
bylaws of the Provisional Electoral Council (ref A).  The 
bylaws were dated by hand as published in the Moniteur, the 
government newspaper, November 17.  However sources at the 
Moniteur say the government continues to hold publication of 
the edition because the bylaws will appear in the same 
edition of the Moniteur as a decree finalizing political 
party funding, which the IGOH believes it cannot fund. 
 
3. (C) The new order eliminates two CEP sub-committees 
originally suggested by the now defunct CEP Support Committee 
(ref B) and transfers most of the CEP,s decision-making 
authority to the Director General.  The last set of bylaws, 
finalized in mid-October, created a three-tiered 
implementation structure: the CEP members were to act as a 
board of directors over the Director General who was to 
implement elections through two subcommittees.  The new 
bylaws eliminate that mechanism and place the Director 
General in direct control of day-to-day elections operations. 
 
 
4. (C) The new bylaws do not mention either the Support 
Committee to the CEP or the Electoral Guarantee Committee. 
The October bylaws specifically outlined the duties and 
responsibilities of a CEP Support Committee, which was to 
provide global oversight of the entire process.  The Support 
Committee disbanded itself roughly two weeks ago, and all 
mention of it was eliminated from the new bylaws.  The new 
bylaws do not mention the Electoral Guarantee Committee, once 
vaunted by political parties as a mechanism to oversee 
elections, which was sketched out in the previous bylaws. 
 
5. (C) According to CEP sources, publication of the new 
bylaws by executive order and the shifting of authority from 
the members to the Director General angered several CEP 
members who might contest the new bylaws.  (Note: The 
executive also published the last bylaws, but they were only 
made law after the CEP voted to adopt them. End Note)  CEP 
Director General Jacques Bernard said six of the nine CEP 
members supported the new bylaws, but the CEP never voted for 
their adoption.  Instead, the Prime Minister told Bernard 
November 14 he would publish the new bylaws by executive 
order.  Worried that the CEP members would reject bylaws they 
never voted for, Bernard asked CEP President Max Mathurin to 
introduce the bylaws for a vote.  However, Mathurin never 
brought the bylaws to the members.  Some CEP members feel the 
Prime Minister has overstepped his bounds twice in the last 
week by attempting to force electoral dates and the new 
bylaws on the CEP.  They may take action to challenge the new 
bylaws in the coming days. 
 
6. (C) Comment: IGOH moves to push decisions over the CEP may 
produce adverse results.  The CEP, even members loyal to the 
new DG, reacted strongly against the PM's announcement of the 
dates, which were not formally endorsed or publicly announced 
following last week's aborted attempt to announce dates (ref 
C).  Some are reportedly reacting similarly to the new 
bylaws.  In both cases, the fault for not convening the CEP 
for a discussion and vote lies with CEP President Mathurin. 
Mathurin is a poor leader who shies from confrontation with 
the other CEP members.  However, his recent failure on two 
counts raises suspicion of ulterior motives.  Mathurin's 
detractors believe he is aligned with parties that are not 
prepared for elections and seek to delay the process.  Both 
of Mathurin's failures have jeopardized Bernard's position 
with the other members and have caused delays organizing the 
elections, making December 27 a daunting challenge.  (Note: 
The CEP decided November 25 to hold the first round January 
8, the second February 15 and local elections March 5.  The 
CEP delivered its decision to the PM late November 25. 
(septel) End Note) 
CARNEY