By Rezo Nodwes, Nov. 12, 2025
With each crisis, the political class restructures itself around the same network of politicians. These same actors, under different banners, continue to dominate public decision-making. Claude Joseph and Moïse Jean-Charles now denounce a power of which they themselves helped create, through their influence, their networks, and their internal alliances.
- 2015–2016 : Privert transition
- 2020–2021 : Configuration around the post-Jovenel Moïse era
- 2022–2023 : Montana, PEN, Musseau agreements
- 2023–2024 : Kingston compromise, then nine-member CPT
- 2025 : New proposal known as "national recovery"
A group of Haitian political leaders, several of whom still have allies within the current administration, presented a document Wednesday entitled "Political Consensus for National Recovery and the Reorientation of the Transition." The signatories state their intention to offer an institutional alternative less than three months before the expiration of the mandate of the Transitional Presidential Council (CPT), whose mandate ends on February 7, 2026.
The text is initialed by a dozen leaders from various party structures, including Claude Joseph, Evans Paul, Jonas Coffy, Moïse Jean-Charles, Ronald D'Meza, Philippe Dallas, and other figures already involved in previous, stillborn political accords. Several of them have held public office or wielded direct influence in successive governments for nearly a decade.
The signatories maintain that the CPT cannot, under the terms of the April 3, 2024 Agreement, obtain any extension of its mandate beyond the scheduled date. They call for the establishment of a new transitional configuration, which they deem essential in light of the increasing number of armed attacks, institutional disorganization, and the collapse of the administrative apparatus.
Underestimated medical history and lack of assessment
However, this approach raises questions. Several actors involved in this new initiative participated in the negotiations that led to the creation of the CPT in April 2024. Neither the document nor the signatories offer a critical analysis of this experience, even though the shortcomings of the CPT form the core of their argument against it.
No assessment is provided regarding shared responsibilities, strategies adopted, or shortcomings identified over the past eighteen months. This lack of reflection raises questions about the credibility of the new proposal, particularly given the close political ties between some signatories and current members of the CPT.
Uncertainty surrounds the transition mechanisms and electoral organization
The document also fails to describe the institutional mechanism envisaged to ensure the succession of the CPT. No information was provided regarding the establishment of a transitional body, the appointment of a provisional executive, the composition of a potential government, or the creation of a credible, functional electoral body.
The question of an electoral calendar remains equally unresolved. The signatories mention the need for "credible" elections, but do not specify the minimum security conditions, administrative procedures, financing, or institutional guarantees intended to prevent the irregularities documented during previous election cycles.
Posted Nov. 18, 2025