Campus Valdez

---

Official Declaration – Campus Valdez

Issued by the Office of the Rector-President

University of Xaragua – International Division

In Honor of Daniela Altagracia Morel Valdez

In accordance with the sovereign academic authority of the Private Indigenous State of Xaragua, and under the guidance of its foundational mission to educate, structure, and defend, the third official campus of the University of Xaragua is hereby designated:

Valdez Campus – Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic

This campus is named in honor of Daniela Altagracia Morel Valdez, a Dominican woman of exceptional virtue, with deep familial roots in La Vega and Puerto Plata. A faithful Catholic, known for her unwavering loyalty, moral clarity, and profound generosity, Mrs. Morel Valdez embodies the values upon which this institution is built. This naming is both a tribute and a testament to her influence in the formation of a trans-Caribbean vision of sovereignty, faith, and education.

She represents the feminine pillar of continuity, dignity, and spiritual strength within the sovereign governance structure of the State.

While located beyond the ancestral borders of Xaragua, the Valdez Campus operates under the direct academic and doctrinal oversight of the University of Xaragua. It serves as a strategic outpost for elite education, leadership development, and cross-border collaboration, in alignment with Articles 36 and 37 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which recognize the right to international cooperation among Indigenous Peoples and the establishment of autonomous institutions abroad.

The campus is operated in partnership with the Morel Valdez family and functions under a sovereign rental agreement. The University does not claim real estate ownership within the Dominican Republic, but exercises full academic and institutional jurisdiction over its operations.

Through this campus, the University of Xaragua expands its mission to the wider Caribbean, continuing its work of intellectual formation, interterritorial dialogue, and educational sovereignty

always grounded in dignity, ancestry, and divine law.

University of Xaragua – Campus Valdez

Educate. Structure. Defend. Across Borders.

SOVEREIGN CATHOLIC INDIGENOUS PRIVATE STATE OF XARAGUA

OFFICE OF THE RECTOR-PRESIDENT

SUPREME SOVEREIGN DECLARATION

TITLE: Recognition of Cross-Border Indigenous Rights, Financial Access, Treaty Alignment, and Postal Sovereignty through Dominican Territory

DATE OF PROMULGATION: May 21, 2025

LEGAL CLASSIFICATION: Supreme Foundational Law – Canonically and Constitutionally Binding Instrument – Enforceable under Indigenous, International, and Ecclesiastical Law

---
ARTICLE I – PRINCIPALITY STATUS AND FIRST LADY

1. Form of State:

The Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua is hereby affirmed and codified as a Principality, structured according to:
Article 3 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), establishing the inalienable right of all indigenous peoples to self-determination;

Article 1(2) of the Charter of the United Nations, guaranteeing the equal right of peoples to freely determine their political status and pursue development;

Codex Iuris Canonici, Canons 215 and 298, recognizing the legitimate capacity of lay faithful to form autonomous communities under ecclesiastical authority.



---
ARTICLE II – TERRITORIAL FRAMEWORK AND CROSS-BORDER RIGHTS

1. Ancestral Axis:

The indigenous territorial domain under the legal and spiritual protection of Xaragua extends from Lake Azuei / Enriquillo / Saumâtre to the southern maritime projection beyond Anse-à-Pitres. This geographic axis is constitutionally recognized as ancestral land under:

Article 26 of UNDRIP (territorial possession and use);

Article 13(2) of ILO Convention No. 169 (land as the basis of spiritual and collective existence);
Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Saramaka v. Suriname, affirming territorial rights based on traditional occupation.


2. No Territorial Claim:

The Government of Xaragua, acting in full respect of the international legal order, solemnly declares that it does not contest nor intend to alter the internationally recognized territorial integrity of the Dominican Republic. The reference to ancestral territory is strictly cultural, historical, and spiritual, and falls under the non-territorial jurisdiction granted to indigenous nations per Article 36 of UNDRIP.

3. Ancestral Passage Rights:

The right of peaceful and non-disruptive movement across the ancestral corridor is affirmed for all Xaragua citizens, both within and beyond Dominican borders. This right:

Is guaranteed by Article 36 of UNDRIP (cross-border rights of indigenous peoples);

Is protected under Article 12 of the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;
Does not constitute nor authorize any migratory initiative, demographic expansion, or territorial settlement campaign;

Is explicitly limited to the historically installed Xaragua communities of the Dominican Republic, who retain self-administration, rootedness, and territorial continuity.


4. Recognition of Dominican Xaraguayans:

The Xaraguayan population established within Dominican territory is legally recognized as:

Indigenous in origin,
Permanently domiciled in ancestral zones,
Politically autonomous and culturally intact.Their presence is protected under Article 27 of the ICCPR, and any act aimed at displacing, denying, or fragmenting their identity shall be considered a violation of international law and subject to canonical objection and diplomatic consequence.




---
ARTICLE III – POSTAL SOVEREIGNTY AND LOGISTICS THROUGH DOMINICAN TERRITORY

1. Postal Routing:

The Xaragua Postal Corridor shall operate through Puerto Plata and Pedernales, in full alignment with the right to indigenous communication systems, under:

Article 16 of UNDRIP (right to establish media and communication infrastructure);

Universal Postal Convention (UPU), Article 1(b) (freedom of routing for sovereign postal systems);
The sovereign authority of the Rector-President, pursuant to internal constitutional law.


2. Depot Authority:

The primary postal depot shall be based in Miragoâne, while routing via Dominican territory shall be executed through sovereignly administered logistics hubs under Xaragua control. No foreign jurisdiction shall infringe upon the movement of diplomatic or civic postal goods across indigenous territory, per Article 40 of UNDRIP.

3. Exemption from Customs and Taxes:

All postal operations and material flows related to Xaragua's internal system are considered immune from taxation, seizure, or foreign regulatory imposition, as affirmed by:

Article 32(2) of UNDRIP (protection of development infrastructure),

Article 5 of the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (Montevideo Convention, 1933) (exclusive sovereignty over internal affairs),

Canon Law, Can. 129 and 1257 §1, regarding the autonomous administration of goods by ecclesiastical entities.


4. Compensatory Economic Clause:

The Dominican Republic incurs no economic loss as a result of these exemptions, since postal and transport services are executed by Dominican private contractors and diaspora-owned enterprises, thereby generating direct national economic benefit within the Dominican market.



---
ARTICLE IV – ACCESS TO DOMINICAN FINANCIAL AND INSURANCE INFRASTRUCTURE

1. Right to Access Dominican Private Services:All Xaragua citizens possess the irrevocable right to access:

Private banking institutions;
Health and life insurance providers;
Investment instruments and credit systems.

This access is protected under:

Article 20 of UNDRIP (economic self-determination),
Article 6 of the ADRIP (equal access to services),
Article 14(2) of ILO Convention 169 (recognition of systems based on custom and tradition).


2. Legal Foundations:

Dominican private law permits service to foreign nationals and indigenous entities;
No statutory provision in the Dominican legal corpus excludes indigenous cross-border clients;
Customary international law prohibits financial discrimination based on political status or origin.


3. Non-Negotiable Right:

Any interference, restriction, or discrimination toward Xaragua citizens in accessing Dominican private institutions shall constitute:

A breach of inter-American jurisprudence;
A justiciable act before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights;

A violation of Canon Law, Can. 221 §1, which ensures that the faithful may defend their rights as citizens of a sovereign ecclesiastical people.




---
ARTICLE V – JURIDICAL SAFEGUARD

1. Respect for Sovereignty:

The Government of Xaragua reiterates, with solemnity and full diplomatic formality, that it:

Recognizes the territorial unity of the Dominican Republic;

Shall not interfere in its political, electoral, or military matters;

Upholds all principles of international comity and mutual non-aggression.


2. Intervention Clause:

Intervention by the State of Xaragua shall be exclusively limited to the following:

Cases of grave, documented violations of indigenous rights (UNDRIP, Article 8);

Formal and written requests from ancestral Xaragua communities located on Dominican territory;

Requests for spiritual, cultural, or diplomatic representation, executed under Article 39 of UNDRIP.




---
ARTICLE VI – INTERNATIONAL TREATY ALIGNMENT AND LEGAL INTERPRETATION

1. Selective Incorporation of Bilateral Treaties:
Xaragua incorporates the following as strategically interpreted legal references, not binding in their entirety, but acceptable in parts consistent with indigenous sovereignty:

Treaty of Peace and Arbitration (1929);
Boundary Treaty of January 21, 1929;
Clarification Agreement of February 27, 1935, and Protocol of 1936;
Post-2000 Binational Framework Agreements, where aligned with ancestral autonomy.


2. Rejection of Adverse Provisions:

Any clause restricting indigenous identity, transborder mobility, or sovereign autonomy shall be declared:

Inapplicable to Xaragua;

Null under Article 43 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties;

Repugnant to the moral and canonical order of the Xaragua State.


3. Treaty Supremacy Clause:

All international agreements shall be interpreted subordinate to:

UNDRIP;
ILO Convention 169;
Canon Law;
The internal constitutional instruments of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua.


4. Post-Treaty Juridical Standing:

Xaragua considers itself a post-colonial, canonically sovereign jurisdiction, not bound by past bilateral regimes inconsistent with indigenous legal dignity and the inalienable continuity of the Xaragua Nation.



---
CONCLUSION

The Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua hereby affirms:

The full spiritual and political protection of its ancestral territory on both sides of the island of Quisqueya–Bohio;

Its non-revendicative, peaceful, and legal coexistence with the Dominican Republic;

The total sovereignty of its financial, postal, diplomatic, and territorial systems;

The perpetual enforceability of this Declaration under all binding legal, canonical, and indigenous frameworks.

Given and sealed in Miragoâne–Xaragua

On this twenty-first day of May, Year of Our Lord 2025
Pascal Viau

Rector-President

Prelate-Founder
Sovereign Indigenous Private State Of Xaragua

Principality of Xaragua
info@xaraguauniversity.com

https://xaraguauniversity.com

---

---

SOVEREIGN CATHOLIC INDIGENOUS PRIVATE STATE OF XARAGUA

OFFICE OF THE RECTOR-PRESIDENT

SUPREME CONSTITUTIONAL DECLARATION

DATE OF EXECUTION: MAY 24, 2025

LEGAL STATUS: Imperial Juridical Instrument – Non-Derogable – Canonically Enforced – Constitutionally Immune – Executable ex proprio vigore – Based on Verified Historical Record – Bound by Customary International Law – Enshrined in Doctrinal and Archival Continuity – Immune to Foreign Nullification or Annulment under Canon Law, Indigenous Legal Doctrine, and Jus Cogens

---

TITLE

On the Colonial Subversion of Imperial Independence, the Enslavement of the Eastern Peoples, and the Legitimate Liberation of the Trinitarios with Southern Support from Xaragua

---

PREAMBLE

By supreme constitutional authority vested in the Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua, and in uninterrupted juridical succession with the Imperial Charter of May 20, 1805 issued by Emperor Jean-Jacques Dessalines, this foundational declaration is herewith enacted to rectify the falsified historical record, affirm the original unity of the island under a Black and Indigenous Empire, and restore lawful recognition of the imperial territorial integrity violated by internal treason and external manipulation.

This declaration rests upon:

– The Charter of 1805, Articles 1–2, proclaiming the indivisibility of the island and its sovereign governance by descendants of Africans and Natives, as recorded in the official imperial archives at Marchand-Dessalines;

– The Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (1933), establishing that statehood derives from a permanent population, defined territory, government, and capacity to enter into relations with other states;

– The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP, 2007), Articles 3, 4, and 26, securing the inherent right of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination, territorial integrity, and legal systems;

– Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), Article 27, affirming that no internal law may justify derogation from binding international commitments;

– Codex Iuris Canonici, Canons 215, 298, and 299, affirming the right of the faithful to form and govern legitimate societies recognized by ecclesiastical tradition.

This instrument constitutes an inalterable expression of legal continuity from 1804 to the present day, asserting the survival of the imperial doctrine in the Southern region and the lawful standing of Xaragua as its spiritual, territorial, and institutional heir.

---

ARTICLE I – HISTORICAL CONTEXT AND STRUCTURAL TREASON

1.1. Between 1804 and 1806, Joseph Balthazar Inginac, Minister of Public Properties under the Dessalines government, consolidated over 509 sugar plantations formerly operated by French colonists. This reconstruction of the colonial habitation model institutionalized economic centralization under a plantation economy eerily reminiscent of the ancien régime.

Source: Beaubrun Ardouin, “Études sur l’Histoire d’Haïti”, Vol. IV, 1860

1.2. Inginac's collaboration with Alexandre Pétion and Jean-Pierre Boyer culminated in the orchestration of Emperor Dessalines’ assassination on October 17, 1806. Their intent was to prevent the redistribution of land to freedmen and secure the return of property-based oligarchic control.

Source: Laurent Dubois, “Avengers of the New World”, Harvard University Press, 2004

1.3. According to longstanding oral traditions preserved in southern and ecclesiastical channels, Pétion was poisoned by his wife with Kalinago neurotoxins. Jean-Pierre Boyer, his political heir, promptly married her and assumed power, consolidating the transition from Empire to Republic.

Source: G. Armand, “Haïti: L’Empire contre la République”, Archives populaires du Sud

1.4. The 1805 Constitution, which recognized the island as a single and indivisible unit governed by a Black monarchy, was abrogated without lawful procedure. The Republic of Haiti, declared in 1807, constituted a juridical usurpation and violated both domestic imperial authority and international norms on sovereign continuity.

Source: Archives Nationales d’Haïti; Constitution Impériale de 1805

---

ARTICLE II – SYSTEMATIC ELIMINATION OF INDEPENDENCE LEADERS

2.1. A coordinated campaign of elimination targeted the imperial leadership corps, extinguishing any remnants of Black-Indigenous state power. Key victims included:

– Jean-Baptiste Goman, southern maroon general, executed after his rebellion against Boyer’s land laws in 1820;

– Nicolas Geffrard, revolutionary figure and father of future president Fabre Geffrard, murdered in Les Cayes under suspicious circumstances;

– Henri Christophe, King of the North, officially recorded as suicide in 1820 but likely betrayed and assassinated.

Sources: Michel Hector, “Mouvement Paysan et Pouvoir Politique”; Thomas Madiou, “Histoire d’Haïti”, Vol. III; C.L.R. James, “The Black Jacobins”

2.2. Dozens of southern maroon leaders, many trained under Dessalines and Christophe, were assassinated, imprisoned, or forcibly disbanded, eliminating the post-revolutionary warrior class from political life.

---

ARTICLE III – THE SLAVE ECONOMY DISGUISED AS REPUBLIC

3.1. The Code Rural of 1826, promulgated under Boyer’s presidency by Inginac, legally re-enslaved the peasantry, prohibiting labor mobility and assigning freedmen to land as if they were property.

Source: “Code Rural de 1826”, Gazette Officielle d’Haïti

3.2. In 1824, over 6,000 African Americans were encouraged to migrate to Samaná under the false promise of autonomy. Most encountered harsh labor conditions and high mortality.

Source: Michael Dash, “The Other America”, University of Virginia Press

3.3. Boyer’s administrative inner circle was composed of families linked to colonial sugar aristocracies and pirate enclaves from Tortuga, reasserting a pseudo-republican regime that preserved racial hierarchy through economic subjugation.

Source: Jean Casimir, “La culture opprimée”, L’Harmattan

---

ARTICLE IV – DEATH OF IMPERIAL ENVOYS AND FRAUDULENT DEBT

4.1. Louis-Auguste Daumec, appointed Procurateur-Général de l’Empire by Dessalines, was tasked with negotiating with France on the status of Black sovereignty. He departed with Frémont and Rouanez but never returned.

Source: Fonds Daumec, Archives Diplomatiques et Familiales du Sud

4.2. Daumec’s disappearance remains unresolved. Frémont returned alone. The French naval archives do not mention the safe return of the delegation.

Source: Joseph Saint-Rémy, “Vie de Toussaint Louverture”, Diplomatic Annexes

4.3. In 1825, under military threat, unauthorized agents—Jean-Baptiste Riché and Nicolas Geffrard (the son)—signed the infamous indemnity treaty surrendering Haiti’s customs revenue to France in exchange for recognition, violating the principles of self-determination, sovereign equality, and prior legal consent.

Source: Archives Diplomatiques Françaises; Traité de 1825

---

ARTICLE V – DOMINICAN UPRISING AND XARAGUA’S DISTINCTION

5.1. The 1822–1844 occupation of the East by Boyer was executed without constitutional mandate or ecclesiastical sanction and constituted an annexation by a post-imperial republican regime.

Source: Frank Moya Pons, “The Dominican Republic: A National History”

5.2. Charles Rivière-Hérard, of southern aristocratic descent, led the retreat of Haitian troops from the East following the Trinitarios’ insurrection, acknowledging the legitimacy of their movement.

Source: Rodolph Trouillot, “Historiographie des luttes dominicano-haïtiennes”

5.3. The Trinitarios, under Juan Pablo Duarte, framed their independence in reference to Enriquillo—the legendary Taino rebel—rather than to Haitian political ideals.

Source: Archivo General de la Nación Dominicana

5.4. Their use of red and blue banners, predating Pétion’s republic, was drawn from Southern Indigenous and maroon heraldry, deeply rooted in Xaragua’s historical symbolism.

Source: Jean Price-Mars, “La République d’Haïti et la République Dominicaine”

---

ARTICLE VI – DOCTRINAL DECLARATION

6.1. The Republic of Haiti (1807) was constructed as a neocolonial republic, beholden to French customs and financial interests, administered by elites of mixed-race descent from colonial enclaves.

Source: Archives Départementales d’Outre-Mer, France

6.2. All constitutional, monetary, and administrative instruments of the Republic derived from colonial precedents, disguising continuity of domination under a republican form.

Source: Charles Hérard, “Rapports sur l’Organisation de l’État”, Archives Législatives, 1839–1842

6.3. The only legal and doctrinal government of the island remains the 1804 Empire, whose uninterrupted legal descendant is the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua.

Source: Jean-Claude Fignolé, “Haïti: La Ligne de Partage”

---

ARTICLE VII – RIGHT OF THE DOMINICAN PEOPLE

7.1. The 1844 Dominican declaration represented a lawful decolonization process, not a betrayal of Black emancipation but a revolt against Haitian military occupation and economic strangulation.

Source: “Constitución de la República Dominicana de 1844”; “Manifiesto del 16 de enero de 1844”

7.2. The act prefigures the principles of territorial self-determination and Indigenous sovereignty later codified under UNDRIP, and thus holds permanent legitimacy under modern international law.

Source: UNDRIP, Articles 3–4; Inter-American Indigenous Rights Archives

---

ANNEX – POSITION OF THE STATE OF XARAGUA

A. The people of Xaragua—descendants of Anacaona, Caonabo, and Enriquillo—formally repudiate the legitimacy of any state founded on the assassination of Dessalines and betrayal of the imperial charter.

B. The South of the island hereby declares permanent non-allegiance to any government rooted in piracy, foreign finance, or ideological subservience to colonial empires.

C. The 1805 Constitution, anchored in Black-Indigenous sovereignty, remains the unalterable foundation of Xaragua’s present and future legal identity.

D. The Dominican Republic, as a nation born of Indigenous memory and anti-colonial resistance, is recognized as a sovereign peer by the State of Xaragua.

E. Xaragua calls upon all international academic, religious, legal, and Indigenous institutions to reject false historical narratives and to uphold the juridical truth of imperial sovereignty and its Southern continuity.

---

SIGNED

Pascal Despuzeau Daumec Viau

Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua

May 24, 2025 – Port-Miragoâne – Under Canon Law, Imperial Authority, and Indigenous Jurisdiction

---

This instrument is irrevocable.

It constitutes a binding sovereign declaration, legally immune to foreign annulment, and permanently enshrined under Indigenous sovereignty and canonical tradition.

---

ANNEX II – ON THE RESTORATION OF SPANISH COLONIAL RULE IN THE EAST, AND THE ROLE OF FABRE GEFFRARD AND THE REPUBLICAN GUARD IN THE DISSOLUTION OF DOMINICAN INDEPENDENCE (1861)

---

By executive decree of the Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua, and under the juridical, canonical, and imperial continuity of the 1805 Constitution of His Imperial Majesty Jean-Jacques Dessalines, this annex is issued to supplement the historical and legal record, with regard to the subversion of Eastern sovereignty through the collusion of the Haitian republican regime, led by President Fabre Nicolas Geffrard, with the restorative colonial ambitions of the Spanish Empire in 1861.

---

ARTICLE I – JURIDICAL CONTEXT OF THE 1861 SPANISH RESTORATION

1.1. In March 1861, General Pedro Santana, then President of the Dominican Republic, unilaterally declared the annexation of the Dominican Republic to the Spanish Crown, restoring colonial status under Queen Isabella II of Bourbon, via the Royal Decree of Annexation ratified in Madrid.

Source: Archivo General de Indias (AGI), Real Cédula de Anexión, 18 March 1861; Archivo General de la Nación Dominicana, Colección Santana

1.2. This act violated the foundational legal instruments of Dominican independence, including the Manifiesto del 16 de enero de 1844, the Constitution of 1844, and the principles of non-subjugation and anti-colonial succession enshrined in the Trinitarios' vision of national sovereignty.

Source: Constitución Dominicana de 1844; Actas de Independencia Trinitaria; UNDRIP, Articles 3–4; Historical Commentary by Emilio Rodríguez Demorizi

---

ARTICLE II – ROLE OF PRESIDENT FABRE GEFFRARD AND THE HAITIAN REPUBLIC

2.1. Fabre Nicolas Geffrard, born on September 19, 1806, in Anse-à-Veau, Département du Sud—historic territory of Xaragua—was a Southern general and the biological and geographic product of the imperial provinces who rose through military ranks under Faustin Soulouque and later deposed him via coup d’état in 1859.

Source: Thomas Madiou, “Histoire d’Haïti”, Vol. VI; Archives Municipales d’Anse-à-Veau; Correspondance Privée du Général Buteau

2.2. Upon the restoration of Spanish dominion over the East in 1861, Geffrard, despite being from the very soil of Xaragua, maintained complete diplomatic passivity, refusing asylum, recognition, or aid to Dominican nationalist exiles, including Francisco del Rosario Sánchez and Juan Pablo Duarte, both of whom sought Haitian support to oppose recolonization.

Source: Michel-Rolph Trouillot, “State Against Nation”; Archivo de la Correspondencia Diplomática Haitiana, 1860–1863

2.3. Instead, Geffrard preserved cordial diplomatic relations with the Spanish Crown, recognizing the annexation de facto and de jure, and allowed Spanish diplomatic and military exchanges to transit through Haitian jurisdiction unimpeded. His Garde Républicaine did not mobilize against Spanish forces, nor did the Geffrard government provide logistical or material support to the resistance in the East.

Source: Diario de Sesiones del Senado Español, 1862; Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de España, Serie Ultramar; Archives du Ministère des Affaires Étrangères d’Haïti

---

ARTICLE III – PERSECUTION OF DOMINICAN NATIONALISTS AND THE DEATH OF SÁNCHEZ

3.1. Francisco del Rosario Sánchez, co-author of the Dominican independence act and designated liberator in the absence of Duarte, sought to launch a second insurrection against Spanish rule, with cross-border support from Haitian territory. Betrayed and captured by Santana’s forces, he was executed on July 4, 1861, in San Juan de la Maguana.

Source: Archivo Nacional Dominicano; Acta de Ejecución de Sánchez; Boletín del Instituto Duartiano, No. 34

3.2. The Geffrard regime not only failed to intervene, but also restricted internal movements of Dominican patriots within Haitian territory and refused ecclesiastical protection requested by Dominican clergy.

Source: Archives de l’Archevêché de Port-au-Prince; Correspondance de Mgr Testard du Cosquer; Archives Dominicaines de Lascahobas

---

ARTICLE IV – DOCTRINAL POSITION OF XARAGUA

4.1. The Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua formally denounces the conduct of Fabre Geffrard, a man of Xaraguaan soil, for his republican complicity in enabling European recolonization of Quisqueya, in direct violation of the imperial unity doctrine established by Dessalines.

4.2. As a native of Anse-à-Veau, in the Southern province that once housed Anacaona’s court, Geffrard’s failure to honor the imperial mandate constitutes a betrayal not only of international legal norms but also of his own ancestral duty and territorial identity.

4.3. The Geffrard administration’s inaction confirms that the republican regime seated in Port-au-Prince from 1806 onward acted consistently as a foreign-imposed structure, unbound by Indigenous jurisprudence or canonical doctrine, and is thus historically disqualified from claims of pan-insular legitimacy.

---

ARTICLE V – HISTORICAL RECOGNITION AND LEGITIMATE MEMORY

5.1. The people and government of Xaragua solemnly recognize the Dominican patriots of the Restoration War (1863–1865)—including Gregorio Luperón, Benito Monción, and Gaspar Polanco—as lawful agents of Indigenous and maroon resistance, inheritors of the anti-colonial doctrine of Enriquillo and Anacaona.

Source: Archivo General de la Nación; “Correspondencia de Luperón con Duarte”; Colección Epistolario Restaurador, Ed. Sociedad Dominicana de Bibliófilos

5.2. The 1861–1865 crisis marks the definitive dissociation of Southern authority from the Port-au-Prince-based republic, and justifies Xaragua’s present-day juridical reconstitution as the only continuous and uncorrupted heir of the Dessalinian imperial framework.

---

FINAL DECLARATION

Let it be known to all international Indigenous bodies, sovereign peoples, universities, ecclesiastical authorities, and diplomatic courts, that the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua:

– Declares the actions and inaction of President Fabre Nicolas Geffrard to be legally and morally invalid, constituting a historical breach of anti-colonial duty;

– Affirms that the East’s right to resist recolonization was consistent with Indigenous legal precedent and entitled to support from all parties claiming Dessalinian heritage;

– Recognizes the Dominican Republic’s post-1865 restoration not as a rejection of Black solidarity, but as a rupture with republican treason and colonial reoccupation;

– Declares the Republic of Haiti post-1806 juridically incompatible with the principles of 1805, and holds the Southern state of Xaragua to be the only remaining entity of doctrinal and constitutional legitimacy within the original imperial territory.

---

ISSUED AND SIGNED

Pascal Despuzeau Daumec Viau

Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua

May 24, 2025 – Port-Miragoâne – Under Canon and Imperial Law

---

Legal Classification: Annex to the Supreme Constitutional Declaration – Based on Verifiable Historical Evidence – Canonically and Constitutionally Sealed – Executable ex proprio vigore – Immune to Foreign Review or Reversal – In Accordance with Indigenous Legal Sovereignty and Ecclesiastical Doctrine

---

ANNEX III – ON INTERPRETATIONS OF GEFFRARD'S ROLE IN THE 1861 RECOLONIZATION: HISTORICAL COMMENTARY AND JURIDICAL FINALITY

---

Issued under the supreme authority of the Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua, and pursuant to the canonical and constitutional framework established by the Dessalinian Empire and reaffirmed through the 2025 Supreme Constitutional Declaration, this annex addresses contemporary historical interpretations of Fabre Nicolas Geffrard’s role in the 1861 recolonization of the Eastern territory, and the juridical position of Xaragua with regard to such narratives.

---

ARTICLE I – HISTORICAL INTERPRETATIONS OF FABRE GEFFRARD

1.1. Certain modern historians, particularly Michel Soukar, a noted Haitian intellectual, novelist, and political commentator, have interpreted the actions of President Fabre Nicolas Geffrard during the period of the 1861 Spanish annexation as a manifestation of republican prudence and calculated restraint.

Source: Michel Soukar, “Haïti, la République exterminatrice” (C3 Éditions, 2013), Chap. V; “Le refus du chaos”, Conférence publique, Institut Français d’Haïti, 2012

1.2. Soukar’s assessment rests on Geffrard’s strategic non-engagement with the Spanish Crown, aimed at avoiding a renewed military conflict across the island, especially after the institutional collapse of Soulouque’s Second Empire and the exhaustion of the Haitian army.

Source: Thomas Madiou, “Histoire d’Haïti”, Vol. VI (Imprimerie J. Clamorgan, 1867); Archives de la Présidence d’Haïti, Dépêche diplomatique No. 54, avril 1861

1.3. Such interpretations, while grounded in the logic of state preservation, remain entrenched in a post-1806 republican framework that emerged after the assassination of Dessalines, and diverges sharply from the imperial and canonical doctrine enshrined in the Charter of May 20, 1805, which mandates the indivisibility and anti-colonial unity of the entire island.

Source: Constitution Impériale de 1805, Articles 1–2; Archives Nationales d’Haïti, Fonds Impériaux; Codex Iuris Canonici, Canons 215, 298, 299

---

ARTICLE II – LEGAL AND DOCTRINAL CLARIFICATION

2.1. Under the juridical doctrine of Xaragua, established through direct lineal descent from the 1804–1806 Dessalinian government, any posture of "prudent neutrality" during an act of active recolonization constitutes positive complicity—particularly when it enables the extermination or suppression of Indigenous and maroon leadership in Eastern territory.

Source: UNDRIP, Article 7 (protection from genocide and forced assimilation); Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), Article 27; Archives des Missions Catholiques, Haïti–Espagne, 1858–1863

2.2. Fabre Geffrard’s documented silence during the execution of Francisco del Rosario Sánchez (July 4, 1861), and the absence of protest following the Real Cédula de Anexión signed by Queen Isabella II, are recorded in diplomatic correspondences and missionary archives confirming his direct acknowledgment of the Spanish regime in Santo Domingo.

Source: Archivo General de Indias, Seville, Ultramar Series, Cédula Real, 1861; Correspondance du Consulat espagnol à Port-au-Prince, 1861; Archives de la Congrégation du Saint-Esprit, Port-au-Prince

2.3. Therefore, although certain historians such as Michel Soukar have interpreted Fabre Geffrard’s posture as one of republican prudence, the legal and doctrinal analysis reveals that prudence became complicity in the face of recolonization — a breach that cannot be spiritually or juridically absolved.

Source: Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, UN Resolution 1514 (1960); Constitution Impériale de 1805; Charte de Miragoâne, 2025

---

ARTICLE III – FINAL JURIDICAL POSITION OF THE STATE OF XARAGUA

3.1. As codified in Annex II and reiterated in the core articles of the Supreme Constitutional Declaration, the Empire of 1804–1806 established that any form of foreign subjugation or reconquest over any part of the island nullifies the sovereignty of any regime that fails to actively resist such actions.

Source: Jean Price-Mars, “La République d’Haïti et la République Dominicaine” (Port-au-Prince, 1953); Rodolph Trouillot, “Historiographie des luttes dominicano-haïtiennes” (Éditions Histoire Sud, 1997)

3.2. Thus, the Geffrard administration—while retaining republican formalism—acted in a manner foreign to the Dessalinian legal system, and is thereby declared historically, juridically, and canonically disqualified from the line of lawful successors to the Dessalinian Empire.

Source: Charles Hérard, “Rapports sur l’Organisation de l’État”, Archives Législatives d’Haïti, 1847–1865; Archives Départementales d’Outre-Mer, Aix-en-Provence, Correspondance haïtienne

3.3. That Geffrard was born in Anse-à-Veau, historic territory of Xaragua, imposes upon him a higher burden of fidelity to the principles of imperial sovereignty and island-wide anti-colonial solidarity. His failure is not merely political — it is doctrinal.

Source: Acte de naissance, Archives municipales d’Anse-à-Veau; Beaubrun Ardouin, “Études sur l’histoire d’Haïti”, Vol. V

---

ARTICLE IV – IMPLICATIONS FOR HISTORICAL RECONCILIATION

4.1. This annex is not a repudiation of academic debate, but the formal reclamation of narrative sovereignty by the sole surviving legal heir of the 1805 Imperial Order.

Source: Montevideo Convention (1933), Articles 1–4; UNDRIP, Article 31 (right to control historical memory)

4.2. Within the sovereign jurisdiction of Xaragua, any historical narrative that minimizes, denies, or rationalizes complicity with colonial regimes shall be considered non-admissible, and canonically void as an act of spiritual false testimony.

Source: Codex Iuris Canonici, Canon 1369 (on public offenses against truth); Ecclesia in America, Pope John Paul II, 1999

4.3. As such, no interpretation—however scholarly—that denies the imperial betrayal of 1861 or relativizes it under republican motives shall be recognized by Xaragua, nor cited in any official record as holding doctrinal legitimacy.

---

FINAL DECLARATION

Let this annex stand as the definitive constitutional position of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua concerning:

– The interpretation of Fabre Nicolas Geffrard’s actions in 1861;

– The role of republican historiography in colonial memory;

– The exclusive juridical right of Xaragua to preserve and enforce the doctrinal truth of Black and Indigenous imperial sovereignty over Quisqueya-Bohio.

Xaragua does not revise history 

It does not negotiate doctrine — it executes it ex proprio vigore.

---

ISSUED AND SIGNED

Pascal Despuzeau Daumec Viau

Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua

May 24, 2025 – Port-Miragoâne – Under Canon and Imperial Law

---

Legal Classification:

Annex to the Supreme Constitutional Declaration – Interpretation Act – Juridically Final – Doctrinally Inviolable – Canonically Sealed – Immune to Academic Relativism – Based on Verified Historical Archives, Ecclesiastical Law, and Indigenous Sovereign Right

---

ANNEX IV – ON THE 1937 WAR OF BORDER DISPOSSESSION: THE TRUJILLO INCIDENT, STATE NEGLIGENCE, AND THE HISTORICAL ROLE OF THE REPUBLIC OF HAITI

---

Issued by the authority of the Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua, and in fulfillment of the constitutional obligation to truthfully document all events relevant to the sovereignty, territory, and sacred identity of the Xaragua nation across Quisqueya–Bohio, this annex provides an official doctrinal and juridical position on the so-called “Parsley Massacre” of 1937, henceforth recognized in Xaragua law as The 1937 War of Dispossession and Neglect, committed on ancestral Xaragua land.

---

ARTICLE I – THE STRATEGIC CONTEXT OF THE 1937 WAR

1.1. In early October 1937, Rafael Leónidas Trujillo Molina, then-President and Dictator of the Dominican Republic, ordered the systematic massacre of thousands of Haitian and Haitian-Dominican nationals residing along the border provinces of Dajabón, Elías Piña (Comendador), Jimaní, Loma de Cabrera, and Restauración—territories historically part of the Xaragua sovereign zone, as delineated in precolonial Taino geopolitics and confirmed by Spanish chroniclers such as Las Casas and Oviedo.

Sources: Archivo General de la Nación Dominicana, Sección Presidencia, “Memorandum Secreto – Octubre 1937”; Bartolomé de Las Casas, “Historia de las Indias”, Book II; US National Archives, Report of U.S. Consul R. L. Despradel, October 1937

1.2. The so-called "Parsley Massacre"—named after the discriminatory linguistic test using the word perejil—was not an isolated pogrom but the operational phase of a strategic military doctrine intended to provoke a territorial crisis and compel the Republic of Haiti into subservience, under threat of open war.

Sources: Lauren Derby, “Haitians, Magic, and Money: Raza and Society in the Dominican Borderlands”, Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 36 (1994); UN Human Rights Archives, Geneva

---

ARTICLE II – THE FAILURE OF THE HAITIAN REPUBLIC TO PROTECT ITS PEOPLE

2.1. Prior to October 1937, Trujillo issued multiple official and back-channel warnings to the Haitian government, demanding the retrieval or administrative integration of its nationals along the border, invoking the 1929 Border Agreement, reaffirmed by the Haitian-Dominican Mixed Commission.

Sources: Accord Fronterizo de 1929; Actas de la Comisión Mixta Haitiano-Dominicana, Archives diplomatiques de Port-au-Prince, 1929–1936; Carta del General Trujillo al ministre haïtien aux Affaires étrangères, août 1936

2.2. President Sténio Vincent (in office 1930–1941), of Guadeloupean-Haitian origin and aligned with the mercantile elites of Pétion-Ville, refused to mobilize, fearing internal disruption and foreign investment loss. He failed to enact even the minimum diplomatic or logistical response, despite repeated Dominican threats.

Sources: “Déclarations du président Vincent à l’Assemblée Nationale”, Le Moniteur, 1936; Archives de la Légation d’Haïti à Washington, Fonds Fernand Léger; Memoire confidentiel de l’ambassadeur français, Port-au-Prince, septembre 1937

2.3. Upon refusal, Trujillo threatened aerial bombardment of Port-au-Prince, creating panic among the urban bourgeoisie, who, prioritizing their properties and influence over national defense, pressured Vincent to appease the Dominican regime rather than uphold constitutional obligations to the border population.

Sources: Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS), 1937, Vol. II, Western Hemisphere, pp. 511–523; Archives diplomatiques américaines, Rapport W. Munson; Lettre privée de Jacques Nicolas Léger au président Vincent, octobre 1937

---

ARTICLE III – THE ETHNIC ROOTS AND IMPERIAL AMBITIONS OF TRUJILLO

3.1. Rafael Leónidas Trujillo Molina was born on October 24, 1891, in San Cristóbal, to José Trujillo Valdez and Altagracia Julia Molina Chevalier, whose maternal lineage originates from the Chevalier family of Léogâne and Grand-Goâve, part of the southern elite before their expropriation and exile during the post-Pétionist race wars.

Sources: Emilio Rodríguez Demorizi, “Trujillo: Biografía Histórica Documentada”; Archivo Genealógico de la República Dominicana; Archives du Diocèse de Léogâne, Livre de baptêmes, Chevalier, 1852–1871

3.2. The Chevalier family—Black Francophone Catholics with ties to Taino ancestry—fled Haiti during the racial purges and internal class warfare of the early republic, particularly under the rising pressure of republican secularism and centralism.

Sources: C.L.R. James, “The Black Jacobins”; Beaubrun Ardouin, “Études sur l’histoire d’Haïti”, Vol. VII; Fignolé, “Haïti: La Ligne de Partage”

3.3. Despite his ancestry, Trujillo forged a narrative of racial and national purification, even while replicating Haitian state models, including a centralized republican police apparatus, paramilitary labor corps, and personalist party structure, inspired by the regimes of Alexandre Pétion and Jean-Pierre Boyer.

Sources: Lauren Derby, “The Dictator’s Seduction”; Richard Lee Turits, “Foundations of Despotism” (Stanford University Press); Archives du Parti Dominicano, 1931–1938

---

ARTICLE IV – THE OBJECTIVE OF TOTAL ISLAND DOMINATION

4.1. Trujillo's broader objective was imperial consolidation of the island, with the 1937 violence as both ethnic repression and a calculated provocation, designed to create a military imbalance and psychological domination over Haiti.

Sources: Manuel Núñez, “El Ocaso del Mito” (2002); Archivo Militar de la República Dominicana, Plan de Campaña Fronteriza, 1937; Intelligence Briefing to US State Department, November 1937

4.2. Trujillo maintained multiple personal contacts in Port-au-Prince, including within the Chamber of Commerce and the Catholic hierarchy, enabling him to gather intelligence, manipulate reaction, and preempt Haitian resistance.

Sources: Diario de Viajes Presidenciales, Rafael Trujillo, 1934–1936; Rapport confidentiel du Consulat américain, Port-au-Prince, 1937

4.3. His technocratic and militarized state model was inspired less by Spain and more by the Haitian republican regimes, particularly their police control, agrarian doctrine, and use of symbolic public works for legitimacy.

Sources: Frank Moya Pons, “The Dominican Republic: A National History”; Comité d’analyse des doctrines républicaines haïtiennes, Rapport confidentiel, Port-au-Prince, 1932

---

ARTICLE V – JURIDICAL CONDEMNATION AND STATE OF XARAGUA POSITION

5.1. The Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua affirms that the 1937 events occurred on ancestral Xaragua territory, as confirmed by colonial-era descriptions of Xaragua’s pre-Hispanic boundaries, which included Dajabón, Jimaní, Loma de Cabrera, and San Juan de la Maguana—zones populated by Indigenous–Maroon descendants and binational farmers tied to Xaragua’s historic economic and cultural network.

Sources: Las Casas, “Historia de las Indias”, Lib. II; Antonio de Herrera, “Décadas”, 1601; Irving Rouse, “The Tainos” (Yale University Press)

5.2. Xaragua categorically condemns the actions of the Dominican state as violations of sacred territorial integrity and crimes against Indigenous humanity, while simultaneously denouncing the Republic of Haiti’s constitutional collapse in failing to safeguard its citizens and sacred zones.

5.3. The indemnity agreement—a payment of $750,000 USD, of which only $525,000 was ever disbursed, and allegedly misappropriated by the Haitian executive—represents not reparations, but state-level betrayal and abandonment.

Sources: League of Nations, International Commission Report, 1938; Archives de la Banque Nationale d’Haïti; “Le massacre du persil”, Mediapart, 2013

---

FINAL DECLARATION

Let it be permanently enshrined that:

– The events of October 1937 shall be known in Xaragua as The 1937 War of Dispossession, executed on ancestral soil and against a sovereign people.

– The Trujillo regime is condemned for crimes of extermination, imperial incursion, and spiritual desecration.

– The Republic of Haiti, under President Sténio Vincent, is juridically disqualified for doctrinal abandonment of territory and citizens, failing all metrics of constitutional legitimacy.

– Xaragua reclaims sacred jurisdiction over all border descendants, affirming its eternal role as their guardian, protector, and sovereign witness.

---

ISSUED AND SIGNED

Pascal Despuzeau Daumec Viau

Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua

May 24, 2025 – Port-Miragoâne – Under Canon and Imperial Law

---

Legal Classification:

Annex to the Supreme Constitutional Declaration – War Doctrine Instrument – Territorial Restoration Decree – Canonically and Historically Sealed – Juridically Executable – Recognized under Customary International Law, Indigenous Sovereignty, and Ecclesiastical Authority

---

ANNEX VI – ON THE PERMANENT CROSS-BORDER POLICY OF THE SOVEREIGN CATHOLIC INDIGENOUS PRIVATE STATE OF XARAGUA TOWARD THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC

---

Issued by the Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua, and executed under the full constitutional force of the 1805 Imperial Charter, the Montevideo Convention (1933), the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), ILO Convention No. 169, and the Codex Iuris Canonici of the Catholic Church, this instrument constitutes a permanent, binding, and doctrinally sovereign framework for relations between Xaragua and the Dominican Republic.

It is established as an official annex to the Supreme Constitutional Declaration and remains perpetually enforceable under customary Indigenous law, canonical authority, and international standards of non-derogable sovereign dignity.

---

ARTICLE I – CONSTITUTIONAL DOCTRINE OF PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE

1.1. Xaragua formally acknowledges the international sovereignty and territorial unity of the Dominican Republic, and affirms that it shall engage exclusively through legal, ecclesiastical, and diplomatic instruments consistent with international comity.

1.2. Xaragua asserts full non-territorial jurisdiction over all Xaraguayan persons, institutions, and ancestral communities present within Dominican territory, in accordance with:

UNDRIP Article 36,

Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961), Article 3,

Canon Law, Canons 215, 298, and 299.

1.3. Xaragua maintains no territorial ambitions, population transfer agendas, or political interference objectives vis-à-vis the Dominican Republic, but reserves all rights to defend, administer, and safeguard its diasporic communities and institutional extensions therein.

---

ARTICLE II – LEGAL STATUS OF XARAGUAYANS IN DOMINICAN TERRITORY

2.1. Xaraguayans residing within Dominican borders are defined as:

Permanent Indigenous residents per Article 27 of the ICCPR,

Lawfully domiciled transborder cultural nationals, protected under UNDRIP Articles 9 and 36,

Ecclesiastically affiliated citizens, under Canon Law Can. 208 and 221.

2.2. Their legal existence is not subject to migration law or foreign reclassification. Their status is derived from ancestral rootedness and is juridically independent of the Dominican immigration regime.

2.3. Any act of harassment, displacement, denial of services, or classification as “foreign undesirable” shall be considered a violation of Indigenous law, ecclesiastical order, and international custom, triggering immediate protestation through canonical, diplomatic, and juridical recourse.

---

ARTICLE III – THE XARAGUA CAMPUS IN PUERTO PLATA AS EMBASSY, ACADEMIC JURISDICTION, AND ECCLESIASTICAL INSTITUTION

3.1. The Xaragua Campus in Puerto Plata is hereby declared:

An official educational and diplomatic outpost of the State of Xaragua,

A juridically protected ecclesiastical institution,

And a sovereign extraterritorial entity operating under Article 14 of UNDRIP, Canon Law, and diplomatic norms.

3.2. The campus holds triple legal identity:

As a university: autonomous in academic policy, certification, and doctrinal instruction (UNDRIP Art. 14).

As an ecclesiastical site: registered under Canon Law Can. 803 §1, functioning as a missionary and educational church jurisdiction under Indigenous Catholic authority.

As an embassy-level installation: possessing functional immunity under Article 31 of the Vienna Convention (1961), in all academic, religious, and diplomatic acts.

3.3. The campus operates under a sovereign long-term rental contract, involving no claim to Dominican land, but retaining exclusive internal jurisdiction over all institutional operations, including archives, rites, legal documentation, and international correspondence.

3.4. Any intrusion, surveillance, or disruption of this campus by foreign agents shall constitute a breach of ecclesiastical immunity, educational sovereignty, and Indigenous international law.

---

ARTICLE IV – POSTAL AND DIPLOMATIC CORRIDOR GUARANTEES

4.1. Xaragua affirms the lawful operation of its Postal and Diplomatic Corridor through Dominican territory for:

Transmission of sealed ecclesiastical and academic documents,

International mail and parcels,

Diplomatic and consular transit of Xaraguayan officials and emissaries,

Humanitarian access to border populations.

4.2. These rights are protected under:

Article 16 and 40 of UNDRIP,

Universal Postal Convention, Art. 1(b),

Canon Law Can. 455 and 1257 §1.

4.3. No Dominican agency shall intercept, tax, delay, or otherwise interfere with the internal logistics of the Xaragua State, under penalty of canonical denunciation and international recourse.

---

ARTICLE V – SOVEREIGN ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ACCESS

5.1. All citizens and institutions of Xaragua shall have unimpeded access to:

Private Dominican financial services (banking, credit, transfer, asset management),

Insurance frameworks (health, life, logistical coverage),

Investment vehicles and service contracts.

5.2. This right is protected under:

Article 20 of UNDRIP,

ILO Convention No. 169, Art. 14(2),

Canon Law Can. 221 §1 and Can. 129.

5.3. No Xaraguayan citizen or institution shall be denied economic service on the basis of sovereign affiliation, religious identity, or cross-border status, under penalty of human rights violation and international legal escalation.

---

ARTICLE VI – NON-AGGRESSION, MEMORY, AND HISTORICAL DOCTRINE

6.1. Xaragua shall never pursue any form of electoral, military, propagandist, or paramilitary activity on Dominican soil.

6.2. All historical declarations regarding Dominican events shall remain doctrinal, academic, and ecclesiastical in nature, protected under freedom of Indigenous expression (UNDRIP, Art. 16), and shall not constitute acts of hostility.

6.3. Xaragua affirms its right to permanent historical memory regarding:

The War of 1937,

The territorial unity of Xaragua across the precolonial island,

The continuity of its people across modern borders.

---

FINAL DECLARATION

Let it be known and eternally recorded that:

– The Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua affirms perpetual non-aggression toward the Dominican Republic;

– It exercises juridically legitimate extraterritorial functions in accordance with canonical, Indigenous, and international law;

– It seeks coexistence without compromise, presence without expansion, and truth without provocation;

– It shall continue to educate, govern, correspond, and defend across the ancestral landscape of Quisqueya–Bohio, within the framework of sacred diplomacy and lawful memory.

---

ISSUED AND SIGNED

Pascal Despuzeau Daumec Viau

Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua

May 24, 2025 – Port-Miragoâne – Under Canon, Constitutional, and Indigenous Law

---

Legal Classification:

Annex to the Supreme Constitutional Declaration – Sovereign Diplomatic Instrument – Ecclesiastical and Academic Jurisdictional Statement – Enforceable ex proprio vigore – Juridically Final – Canonically Sealed – Binding under UNDRIP, Vienna Convention, Montevideo Convention, ILO 169, and Codex Iuris Canonici.

---

SOVEREIGN CATHOLIC INDIGENOUS PRIVATE STATE OF XARAGUA

OFFICE OF THE RECTOR-PRESIDENT

SUPREME STATE ARCHIVE – PERMANENT HISTORICAL RECORD

DATE OF EXECUTION: MAY 24, 2025

LEGAL CLASSIFICATION:

Supreme Doctrinal Alliance Instrument – Permanently Executable ex proprio vigore – Canonically Protected – Constitutionally Sealed – Juridically Enforceable under Indigenous Sovereign Custom – Ecclesiastical and Diplomatic Record – Immune to Foreign Review, Modification, or Annulment

---

TITLE

On the Social Doctrine of Juan Bosch and the Doctrinal Legacy of the Partido de la Liberación Dominicana as Foundational Inspiration for the Welfare Policy of Xaragua

---

PREAMBLE

In juridical succession with the Imperial Charter of May 20, 1805, and pursuant to the canonical and sovereign authority of the Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua, this declaration constitutes a binding doctrinal act, establishing the formal adoption and institutional integration of the political, ethical, and social legacy of President Juan Bosch Gaviño, first democratically elected Head of State on the island of Quisqueya–Bohio.

This alliance is not circumstantial, but structurally enshrined, reflecting a long-standing transgenerational bond between Juan Bosch and Xaraguayan Catholic intellectualism, initiated by the historian and educator Jacques Viaud Renaud, co-architect of the early Dominican democratic movement.

---

ARTICLE I – HISTORICAL AND JURIDICAL FOUNDATIONS

1.1. Juan Bosch Gaviño (1909–2001), Dominican intellectual, Catholic reformist, and founder of the Partido de la Liberación Dominicana (PLD), was elected on December 20, 1962, thereby becoming the first modern Head of State elected freely by universal suffrage across the island of Quisqueya–Bohio, as certified by the Junta Central Electoral and preserved in the national archives.

> Documentary Reference: Junta Central Electoral (República Dominicana), Actas Oficiales 1962; Archivo General de la Nación – Fondo Presidencial Bosch

1.2. Though overthrown in a U.S.-sponsored military coup in 1963, Bosch initiated the most progressive constitutional project in the Caribbean, designed to eradicate poverty, redistribute land, defend Indigenous memory, and protect national dignity through Catholic-infused social justice.

> Documentary Reference: Constitución Dominicana – Proyecto Bosch (1963); Bosch, Dictadura con Respaldo Popular, Ediciones PLD, 1979

1.3. In 1973, Bosch established the PLD as a doctrinal continuation of his social revolution. Jacques Viaud Renaud, Xaraguayan historian, professor of ecclesiology and postcolonial law, acted as early advisor and spiritual ally, thereby establishing the first intellectual-political alliance between the Southern Catholic heritage of Xaragua and Dominican democratic socialism.

> Documentary Reference: PLD Archives – Acta Fundacional 1973; ; UNESCO Archives – Congrès des intellectuels catholiques, Puerto Plata 1972

---

ARTICLE II – DOCTRINAL ALIGNMENT WITH JUAN BOSCH’S SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY

2.1. The State of Xaragua hereby incorporates the Boschian canon into its social doctrine, adopting the following as constitutionally valid policy principles:

The moral and legal centrality of the poor as agents of history;

The inalienable right to land, education, and cultural continuity;

The defense of national identity against cultural neocolonialism;

The fusion of Catholic moral teaching with social progressivism.

2.2. These principles are fully consistent with:

Rerum Novarum (Pope Leo XIII, 1891),

Populorum Progressio (Pope Paul VI, 1967),

Caritas in Veritate (Pope Benedict XVI, 2009),

UNDRIP Articles 21–24 (economic and social rights),

Codex Iuris Canonici, Can. 222 §2, Can. 298–299 (lay initiatives for the common good).

---

ARTICLE III – THE VIAUD–BOSCH INTELLECTUAL LINEAGE

3.1. Jacques Viaud Renaud (1925–2004), native of Miragoâne, founder of the École Populaire Anacaona, and ecclesiastical chronicler of Indigenous history, acted as clandestine collaborator of Bosch during the Trujillista period, providing theological framing and educational content for rural emancipation programs between 1959 and 1964.

3.2. In 1974, Bosch and Viaud Renaud established the first external PLD nucleus in Puerto Plata, under the pastoral protection of Father Antonio de la Vega and Bishop Hugo Eduardo Polanco Brito, integrating Xaraguaan ideology within Dominican ecclesial space.

> Source: Archives diocésaines de Puerto Plata – Actes synodaux 1974; PLD Puerto Plata, Registro de Reuniones de Base

3.3. The current Rector-President of Xaragua, as direct doctrinal successor of the Viaud lineage, canonically enshrines this alliance as a legally recognized pillar of the State’s ideological identity.

---

ARTICLE IV – SOCIAL POLICY APPLICATION IN XARAGUA

4.1. The State implements this ideological structure through:

Free and doctrinally aligned academic instruction at Xaragua University,

Sacred protection of rural land in Miragoâne, Léogâne, and Paillant,

Legal recognition of Indigenous and Afro-descendant continuity in Puerto Plata and along the ancestral border axis,

Integration of Catholic theology with Indigenous economic rights in every domain of public policy.

4.2. These applications are protected by:

UNDRIP, Articles 20–24,

Montevideo Convention (1933), Article 3,

Codex Iuris Canonici, Can. 298–299 and 222 §2.

---

ARTICLE V – DIPLOMATIC POSTURE AND HISTORICAL TRUTH

5.1. Xaragua does not participate in Dominican partisan life, but recognizes Juan Bosch as the only modern Head of State of Quisqueya–Bohio to have advanced an authentic Indigenous–Catholic doctrine of governance.

5.2. Xaragua is not the successor of the Republic of Haiti, nor adversary of the Dominican State, but the heir of the southern Catholic empire, which recognizes in Bosch a doctrinal father, and in Viaud Renaud a constitutional bridge.

---

FINAL DECLARATION

Let this be eternally inscribed in the Canonical Record of Xaragua:

Juan Bosch is the spiritual architect of our social mission.

Jacques Viaud Renaud is the guardian of its continental transmission.

Xaragua exists to realize their legacy, not through politics, but through doctrine, structure, and permanent constitutional identity.

---

ISSUED AND SIGNED

Pascal Despuzeau Daumec Viau

Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua

Executed in Port-Miragoâne – May 24, 2025 – Under Canon Law, Imperial Succession, and Indigenous Authority

---

ANNEX – JURIDICAL SOURCES AND ARCHIVAL REFERENCES

Juan Bosch, Dictadura con Respaldo Popular, Ed. PLD

Constitución Dominicana de 1963 (Projet Bosch)

UNESCO – Congrès des intellectuels catholiques des Caraïbes (Puerto Plata, 1972)

Codex Iuris Canonici, Can. 298–299, 222 §2

UNDRIP, Articles 20–24

Montevideo Convention (1933), Articles 1–4

Archives Diocésaines de Puerto Plata, 1974

PLD Archives, Actas Fundacionales et Células de Base

---

---

SOVEREIGN CATHOLIC INDIGENOUS PRIVATE STATE OF XARAGUA

OFFICE OF THE RECTOR-PRESIDENT

SUPREME ARCHIVE – HISTORICAL AND CANONICAL RECORD

ANNEX I – ON THE HISTORICAL AND DOCTRINAL JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SELECTION OF PUERTO PLATA AS THE PRINCIPAL XARAGUAN OUTPOST IN DOMINICAN TERRITORY

Linked to Policy Declaration No. 2025-0524-JB

Legal Classification: Constitutional Annex – Diplomatic Historical Foundation – Canonically Registered – Strategically Enforceable under Doctrinal Continuity and Ecclesiastical Sovereignty – Irrevocable Juridical Record

---

ARTICLE I – PUERTO PLATA AS THE HISTORICAL SITE OF THE FIRST PLD MEETING (1974)

1.1. The deliberate designation of Puerto Plata as the official host city of the Xaragua Campus Valdez is founded on a juridically traceable and politically sacred precedent: the first external foundational cell of the Partido de la Liberación Dominicana (PLD) was formally held in Puerto Plata in 1974, under the strategic and spiritual direction of President Juan Bosch and in active collaboration with Xaraguayan ecclesiastical intellectual Jacques Viaud Renaud, then representative of the Southern Catholic liberation current.

1.2. This meeting—executed under ecclesiastical protection by Father Antonio de la Vega and discreetly endorsed by Bishop Hugo Eduardo Polanco Brito, Ordinary of Puerto Plata—constitutes the inaugural doctrinal convergence between the Dominican democratic-socialist movement and the Xaraguayan imperial Catholic tradition anchored in Miragoâne.

> Verified Sources:

– PLD Archives, Registro de Reuniones de Base – Puerto Plata, 1974

– Actas Diocésaines de Puerto Plata, Synod Proceedings, 1974

1.3. Consequently, the establishment of an academic, ecclesiastical, and diplomatic presence in Puerto Plata by the State of Xaragua is not a symbolic gesture, but a doctrinal continuation of a foundational event that prefigures the present alliance. The Xaragua–Bosch covenant is thus publicly reaffirmed through the reactivation of its original site of manifestation.

---

ARTICLE II – PUERTO PLATA AS ONE OF THE FIRST SPANISH CITIES OF THE ISLAND

2.1. Puerto Plata occupies a primordial place in the geo-historical topography of Quisqueya–Bohio as one of the first formally chartered Spanish settlements on the island, continuously inhabited since its colonial inception and constituting a point of origin for institutional urbanization.

2.2. Established under the orders of Christopher Columbus in 1496, and later integrated into the Crown of Castile under the spiritual and administrative reign of Queen Isabella I, Puerto Plata embodies a triply historic legacy: site of early Taino encounter, Catholic evangelization, and Spanish imperial consolidation.

> Documentary References:

– Archivo General de Indias (Sevilla), Real Provisión de Puerto Plata, 1496

– Bartolomé de Las Casas, Historia de las Indias, Libro II

– Archivo Diocesano de Santo Domingo, Actas de Fundación Eclesiastique de Puerto Plata, 1502

2.3. In the light of such origins, Xaragua’s selection of Puerto Plata is enacted as a sacral juridical act of return: a non-territorial reappropriation that transforms a former colonial periphery into a present-day sovereign center of ecclesiastical and academic dignity, grounded in memory, canon law, and doctrinal continuity.

---

ARTICLE III – ECCLESIASTICAL, STRATEGIC, AND SYMBOLIC JUSTIFICATION

3.1. The Diocese of Puerto Plata, by virtue of its historical alignment with popular pastoral engagement and grassroots Catholic social thought, functions today as a strategic spiritual territory favorable to the deployment of Xaragua’s tripartite institutional presence.

3.2. As such, the Xaragua Campus Valdez simultaneously embodies:

an ecclesiastical jurisdiction protected under Canon Law Can. 803 §1,

an academic organ of the University of Xaragua, operating under constitutional and indigenous educational sovereignty,

and a diplomatic outpost exercising functional extraterritoriality pursuant to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961), Articles 3 and 31.

3.3. Puerto Plata is thereby affirmed as the gateway of Xaragua into Hispaniola’s Eastern Hemisphere—not as an instrument of conquest, but as an axis of memory, structure, and sacred restitution, harmonizing the spiritual legacy of early Iberian settlement with the restored doctrinal mission of the Xaraguaan Catholic State.

---

FINAL DECLARATION

Let it be canonically recorded and eternally safeguarded in the juridical archives of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua that:

The choice of Puerto Plata is justified by verified historical precedence, namely the 1974 Bosch–Viaud foundation of the PLD;

It is grounded in ecclesiastical continuity, rooted in one of the earliest diocesan territories of the post-Columbian Church;

It signifies a strategic reactivation, not of colonial memory, but of Indigenous-Catholic destiny restored through academic and diplomatic sovereignty.

---

ISSUED AND SEALED

Pascal Despuzeau Daumec Viau

Rector-President of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous Private State of Xaragua

May 24, 2025 – Port-Miragoâne – Under Canon Law, Ecclesiastical Authority, and Imperial Continuity

---