By Rezo Nodwes, August 22, 2026
The referendum announced for December 13, 2026, is not starting from scratch legally. Since June 2025, Haitian authorities have had access to Opinion CDL-AD(2025)031 from the Venice Commission on the draft referendum decree, a document requested by the then-president of the Provisional Electoral Council, Patrick Saint-Hilaire, and subsequently adopted on June 13 and 14, 2025. This opinion contains fourteen main recommendations, but above all, it stipulates a prerequisite for their implementation: the restoration of a minimum level of security is a prerequisite for holding the vote . The Commission had already noted that the fundamental principles of electoral law could not be fully guaranteed in the Haitian context and warned that a significant portion of the population could be excluded from voting due to insecurity, logistical deficiencies, and the impossibility of accessing electoral infrastructure.
Reading this opinion now places Laurent Saint-Cyr, Alix Didier Fils-Aimé, and the Provisional Electoral Council (CEP), chaired by Jacques Desrosiers and Uder Antoine, under a political obligation to demonstrate their commitment. The Commission is not simply asking them to provide ballot boxes, ballots, and a timetable; it is linking the credibility of the referendum to the State's actual capacity to guarantee freedom of suffrage throughout the entire territory. It reiterates that voters must be able to cast their ballots without fear of violence, coercion, or reprisals and observes that the free expression of the popular will cannot be guaranteed in territories controlled by armed groups. Furthermore, it asks the authorities, when setting the date for the referendum, to seriously assess their effective control of the territory and their capacity to protect voters' rights. The date of December 13th cannot, therefore, in itself constitute proof that these conditions are met.
The opinion also touches on the heart of the regulatory problem. The Commission is concerned about the considerable discretionary power that could be granted to the Provisional Electoral Council (CEP) to determine which previous electoral provisions remain applicable to the referendum. It considers that such latitude conflicts with the principle of legal certainty , a component of the rule of law, and specifically requests clarification of the applicability of the 2021 electoral decree. The problem therefore goes beyond mere administrative mechanics: the organizer of the vote cannot simultaneously supplement, interpret, and select, at its own discretion, the rules governing the consultation.
The diaspora, internally displaced persons, the secrecy of the ballot, the composition of electoral administrations, campaign financing, observation, dispute resolution, and sanctions are all areas in which Venice demands specific guarantees. This gives particular significance to the CEP's international efforts regarding voting abroad: observing an electoral mechanism in Chile or elsewhere in no way exempts Haiti from building its own legal framework . The opinion specifically requires that the fundamental elements concerning the registration and voting of Haitians living abroad be established within the regulatory framework itself. Importing a foreign electoral technique without a domestic legal basis would amount to confusing technical cooperation with constitutional competence.
With less than four months until December 13, the debate should therefore move beyond mere government pronouncements and into the realm of verification. Can Saint-Cyr, Fils-Aimé, and Desrosiers present, recommendation by recommendation, the legal provisions and practical measures adopted in response to the opinion requested by Haiti itself? If certain provisions have been disregarded, what is the legal justification? If others remain unfulfilled, how can the current timetable be maintained? And if the primary condition—security enabling the universal, equal, free, and secret exercise of suffrage—is not demonstrated throughout the entire territory, what will remain of the referendum but an administratively proclaimed date to which the law and reality will then be expected to conform? The Commission warned as early as 2025 that further restrictions on participation caused by insecurity could compromise the very legitimacy of the referendum's outcome .
The 14 main recommendations of the Venice Commission
- Security of the process — Establish in the decree the outlines of a security framework and the minimum conditions allowing the holding of the vote, with effective protection against gang interference.
- Applicable law — Clarify which prior legislative provisions remain applicable to the referendum, particularly those of the 2021 electoral decree , in order to limit the discretionary power of the CEP and to respect legal certainty.
- Displaced persons — Effectively guarantee their right to vote and, where necessary, provide special arrangements or polling stations accessible to displaced populations.
- Diaspora — To include in the legal framework the fundamental elements concerning the registration and voting of Haitians established abroad , in respect of the equality of suffrage.
- Secrecy of the vote — Introduce explicit material safeguards to effectively ensure the confidentiality of the vote.
- Electoral administration — To ensure a balanced composition of subordinate electoral bodies and to protect their members against arbitrary dismissals.
- Referendum campaign — Complete the campaign rules to ensure they comply with international standards applicable to referendums.
- Public funding — Provide limited public funding for the campaign, without creating a system that could artificially encourage the proliferation of organizations formed solely to obtain these funds.
- Impartiality of litigation — Avoiding a decision taken by the CEP being examined on appeal by a body itself including members of the CEP: the organizing administration cannot participate in the judgment of its own decisions.
- Right of appeal — Guarantee citizens the possibility of directly lodging appeals relating to the referendum and specify the standing of the different parties.
- Litigation deadlines — Extend the excessively short deadlines for filing and examining disputes, so that the right to appeal remains effective.
- Annulment of the vote — Give the body responsible for referendum disputes the power to annul the vote when irregularities were likely to affect the result.
- Sanctions — Revise penal provisions so that punishments respect the principles of necessity and proportionality , particularly when they entail the deprivation of civil and political rights.
- Clarify the scope of the "referendum code of conduct". The draft mentioned this instrument without sufficiently defining its purpose, content, or the authority responsible for its development.
And these fourteen prescriptions do not constitute an exhaustive list. The Commission specifies that other recommendations are included in the body of its opinion. Before asking Haitians to answer "yes" or "no ," the Saint-Cyr-Fils-Aimé administration and the Desrosiers/Uder Antoine Provisional Electoral Council (CEP) therefore have a preliminary question to address: how many of these prescriptions are actually being met today, with supporting documents and evidence?
This opinion, however, is not, legally speaking, a simple statement saying, “The Venice Commission prohibits the referendum .” Its position is more technical and, in some respects, more embarrassing for the authorities: it identifies the legal, security, and procedural deficiencies affecting the organization of such a consultation and formulates minimum guarantees that must be respected. In particular, it calls for a security framework protecting voters, electoral staff, and observers; secure transmission of results; clarification of the applicable legislation; effective mechanisms for voting by internally displaced persons; and precise rules concerning the registration and voting of Haitians residing abroad.
Primary source: Opinion CDL-AD(2025)031 of the Venice Commission . The opinion was requested by Patrick Saint-Hilaire on 6 May 2025 and adopted at the 143rd plenary session of 13-14 June 2025.
Posted Sept. 2, 2026