Martelly Pas dans la corruption, Just Let Him Expliquer
Tuesday, Avril 03, 2012 21:43';
Cet article se compose de faits, d'informations ou de commentaires Sir Monestime.
La publication de cet article ne reflète pas un endossement par The Sentinel, son personnel ou de défendre Haïti, LLC. Lire A propos de nous.
- Hits: 2527
Documents suivants publiés par dominicaine journaliste d'investigation, Nuria Piera sur son émission de télévision montrant le Président Martelly a reçu plus de 2,5 millions de dollars en pots de vin sans soumission des contrats attribués à des entreprises détenues par dominicaine sénateur Bautista Félix, un proche allié du président Fernandez, les sorties haïtiens médias ont été inondés avec des articles de presse intitulé «Martelly implique in a grave scandale de corruption».
However, this conclusory statement was not what Nuria Peria said, neither was it what the documents she released showed. Instead, she said, and the documents showed, that President Martelly received at least $2,587,100 from companies owned by Dominican Senator Felix Bautista. This is the allegation she made and what the facts she presented showed. Whether receiving money from Dominican companies owned by Dominican Senator Felix Bautista amounts to corruption, is a whole different matter. A matter for the law to decide.
After international newspapers have picked up on the story, in their typical fashion, Martelly's office issued a statement on twitter and facebook, denying any involvement in any corruption, yet he has not made any reference to the allegations that he had received more than two and a half million dollars from companies owned by a close ally of President Fernandez. Could this have been an oversight or an admission buried in words? We all know that failure to deny amounts to an admission. It depends on how one reads the statement from his office.
To be sure, there is absolutely nothing per se wrong with Martelly accepting money from those companies. There is nothing legally wrong with a sitting president receiving money from companies with which he might have had previous business dealings. Therefore it would be imprudent to rush into concluding that he had a corrupted mind when he accepted those payments. While he never denied receiving the more than two and a half million dollars from those companies, he said that he was not involved in any corruption whatsoever. We need to take his word for it and let him come out and explain the reason for the payments. After all, there are two sides to every story. On one side, we have a reputable investigative reporter who stands by her work saying that the money the president received was kickback for the no-bid contracts awarded to the Senator's companies, on the other, we have the President denying any corruption on his part and that the reporter is simply on a campaign to tarnish his squeaky clean reputation.
For my part, I suppose that as an artist, he could have, for example, sold all of his records to Bautista for $2.5 Million to be paid out in installments. Or he could have been receiving advance payments on his upcoming memoir. As a popular president, I assume that he would be soon writing one and Bautista as an astute businessman could have been cashing in on it before the big international publishers come aknockin'. Who knows? We don't know and he has not given any explanation for the money that he has been getting. So we must wait for his explanation!
Although there is a presumption of impropriety whenever a sitting president gets money directly deposited to his personal bank account by foreign companies with huge financial interests in his country, whether the $2.5 Million that Nuria Peria showed that Martelly has received so far amount to corruption is and remains a matter of law that he is free to deny. Even a murderer pleads innocent, why shouldn't he? In corruption crimes, just as in any other crime, there is a presumption of innocence, however because Martelly is a sitting president, the impropriety of those transactions and their surrounding circumstances necessarily shifts the burden to him to rebut the presumption of corruption. And I believe that is one burden that cannot be discharged by a simple tweet or facebook note denying everything, especially after the story has made two rounds of the universe and back. You must come out stronger than that.
So Mr. President, you said you're not involved in any corruption and you are right to deny that because you are presumed innocent under the law. However, we are only interested in the facts. As the facts now stand you have received at least $2.5 million from those Dominican companies owned by Dominican Senator Felix Bautista, a close ally of someone you call your friend - President Fernandez. We need an explanation on these moneys. That's all. We wouldn't dare doubt your squeaky clean reputation for righteousness. No one would doubt that you are the most unbendingly honest Haitian president of modern days. You must rebut facts with facts and let the Haitian Penal Code decide whether the fact that you accepted those funds amount to corruption or not later. Good luck cleaning that mess.