The CEP’s Calendar: A Deadline That Could Open a New Chapter of Political Instability

The Haitian government, led by Prime Minister Alix Didier Fils-Aimé, is currently steering the transition under the National Pact for Stability and the Organization of Elections. Its fundamental mission is to create the conditions for inclusive, credible and democratic elections, so as to return sovereignty to the people after more than a decade without elections. Such a responsibility requires governance based on inter-institutional consultation and coherent public action.

While the Provisional Electoral Council enjoys independence enshrined in the Constitution, that autonomy should not be confused with a lack of coordination with the executive. In a democratic system, organizing elections is a shared national responsibility. It requires constant coordination between the government, the CEP and international partners. In international relations as in public governance, the legitimacy of a process rests as much on the quality of institutional dialogue as on respect for each party’s powers.

Yet it is clear that this essential synergy is lacking today. The differences that have emerged between the government and the Provisional Electoral Council are weakening the management of the transition and fueling a climate of uncertainty. That is precisely why I have always argued for a reshuffle of the CEP — not to call its independence into question, but to restore trust, strengthen the institution’s credibility and foster better strategic coordination with the government.

In this context, the recent publication of the electoral calendar raises serious questions. The December 13, 2026, deadline appears, at this stage, particularly ambitious given the security, logistical and institutional constraints that remain. In my view, this calendar risks being less a planning tool than a sword of Damocles hanging over the transition.

These concerns are not isolated. Speaking on Gazette Haïti News, Pierre Espérance, president of the National Human Rights Defense Network (RNDDH), also said that holding the first round on December 13, 2026, was unrealistic, suggesting that a date in April 2027 would be more compatible with conditions on the ground. Whether or not one shares that assessment, it shows that there is a legitimate debate over the feasibility of the published calendar.

No one can deny the progress made in the fight against armed groups. However, these gains are still not enough to guarantee an environment fully conducive to holding the vote. This was underscored by the UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative and head of the UN Integrated Office in Haiti (BINUH), Carlos Ruiz Massieu, who recently called for the mandate of the Gang Suppression Force (GSF) to be extended — implicitly acknowledging that the security challenges remain considerable and that the efforts under way must be consolidated before the electoral process can be completed.

The real concern therefore lies elsewhere. If, for whatever reason, the December 13 deadline could not be met, there would be a serious risk of part of the political class exploiting the situation to challenge the legitimacy of the transition and open a new chapter of political instability. An electoral calendar is not measured by its ambition, but by its ability to be carried out in keeping with national realities. By opting for a timetable whose feasibility is now widely disputed, the CEP risks replacing a logic of consultation with a logic of fait accompli, with all the consequences that could have for political and institutional stability.

As former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan put it: “We will not enjoy development without security, we will not enjoy security without development, and we will not enjoy either without respect for human rights.” That reflection remains entirely relevant for Haiti. No transition can produce legitimate institutions unless it rests on a sufficiently secure environment, concerted governance and mutual trust among the main institutional actors.

Closer coordination between the government and the Provisional Electoral Council would probably have made it possible to draw up a more realistic calendar, based on an objective assessment of the state’s operational capacity and better preventive risk management. Time is not the enemy of democracy; it is often its best ally when it is put to work for preparation, transparency and consensus.

After more than ten years without elections, Haiti cannot afford a new crisis. Our country does not need rushed elections; it needs an unimpeachable vote, accepted by the main political actors and recognized by both the national and international communities.

The real challenge is not to meet a date at all costs, but to create the conditions for a lasting democratic transfer of power. Only then will this transition finally give way to legitimately elected authorities and will our country regain the political stability its people long for.