April 22, 2025
The corruption scandal involving 100 million gourdes from the National Credit Bank (NCB) continues to shake the Transitional Presidential Council (TPC). Indicted in this case, advisors Louis Gérald Gilles, Emmanuel Vertilaire, and Smith Augustin have refused to respond to summonses from investigating judge Benjamin Félismé, scheduled for December 9, 10, and 11. Their refusal could lead to arrest warrants being issued, increasing judicial pressure on these controversial political figures.
Despite the allegations and calls from both national and international communities, the TPC remains silent regarding its indicted members. The Council appears unified, with all nine members, including the three accused, continuing their duties as if nothing had happened. This collective stance contrasts with the severity of the accusations and has fueled criticism of the lack of transparency within this institution tasked with overseeing the transition.
Each of the implicated advisors has invoked constitutional arguments to challenge the investigating judge’s authority. Louis Gérald Gilles, who proclaims himself “President of the Republic,” has recused all magistrates of the Court of First Instance in Port-au-Prince, citing “legitimate suspicion.” He contends that sitting presidents can only be tried by the High Court of Justice, in accordance with Article 185 of the 1987 amended Constitution.
Emmanuel Vertilaire, on the other hand, has opted to petition the Court of Appeals to challenge the investigating judge’s jurisdiction. In a statement, he asserts his respect for justice while requesting a review of the judge’s order in light of constitutional Articles 185 to 189 and Article 90 of the Penal Code. While less confrontational, his position still reflects a refusal to cooperate directly with the investigation.
Smith Augustin has taken an even more uncompromising stance. Through his attorneys, he has accused Judge Félismé of violating Articles 185 to 190 of the Constitution by summoning him without prior approval from the TPC. A letter addressed to the judge formally demands recognition of his jurisdictional privilege, arguing that he can only be tried by the High Court. Despite threats of arrest warrants, no further coercive measures had been announced as of Wednesday evening, according to the advisors’ attorneys.
This case highlights ongoing tensions between the judiciary and political elites, while public scrutiny intensifies over the TPC’s role in ensuring accountability during a period of national transition.
