The Nation Of Land Owners

---

SOVEREIGN CATHOLIC INDIGENOUS AND PRIVATE STATE OF XARAGUA

OFFICE OF THE RECTOR-PRESIDENT

SUPREME CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY

LIBERAL PARTY OF INDIGENOUS AYITI

COUNCIL OF XARAGUA

GENERAL POLITICAL REGISTER

SUPREME ORGANIC AND DOCTRINAL ACT

ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL STATUS, NON-ELECTORAL CHARACTER, INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE DEPLOYMENT SYSTEM, INTERNAL GOVERNANCE, TERRITORIAL FUNCTION, AND PERMANENT POLITICAL DOCTRINE OF THE LIBERAL PARTY OF INDIGENOUS AYITI

Date of Original Institutional Establishment: May 26, 2025

Official Abbreviation: PLX

Official Classification: Permanent Political Institution — Non-Electoral Doctrinal Authority — Independent Candidate Certification Organ — Territorial Political Framework

Competent Authority: Office of the Rector-President

Deliberative Authority: Council of Xaragua

Administrative Depositary: General Political Register

Constitutional Seat: Miragoâne

Status: Permanent Organic Institution

PREAMBLE

The Sovereign Catholic Indigenous and Private State of Xaragua hereby establishes and consolidates the constitutional status, political function and operational doctrine of the Liberal Party of Indigenous Ayiti.

The Liberal Party of Indigenous Ayiti is not constituted as an electoral party operating within the institutional architecture of the Residual Administrative Unit.

It does not seek registration as a participating political organization before the electoral authorities of the Residual Administrative Unit. It does not present a party list, assume responsibility for the administration of external elections or derive its institutional legitimacy from electoral recognition.

Its non-electoral character does not require political inactivity.

The Party may identify, prepare, certify, endorse and deploy candidates who participate under independent status in elections administered by the Residual Administrative Unit. Such candidates do not enter those elections as official party candidates. Their independent registration preserves the constitutional separation between the Party and the external electoral system.

The Party therefore maintains two legally distinct capacities:

a. internally, it operates as the permanent doctrinal and political institution of Xaragua;

b. externally, it may authorize independent candidates to intervene within administrative electoral processes without registering the Party itself as a component of those processes.

This separation enables political intervention without institutional absorption.

The Party does not submit its existence, doctrine, membership, internal governance or continuity to the electoral cycle. It determines which persons may receive its political certification and under what conditions an independently registered candidacy may serve the territorial and institutional interests of Xaragua.

TITLE I — NAME, STATUS AND CONSTITUTIONAL POSITION

Article 1 — Official Name

The institution shall bear the official name:

Liberal Party of Indigenous Ayiti.

It may operate under the abbreviation:

PLX.

Article 2 — Constitutional Status

The PLX is a permanent internal political institution of the Sovereign Catholic Indigenous and Private State of Xaragua.

It functions as:

a. a doctrinal authority;

b. a political classification body;

c. a candidate evaluation institution;

d. an organ of territorial representation;

e. a mechanism for the preparation of public cadres;

f. a political interface with external administrative systems;

g. a guardian of institutional continuity.

Article 3 — Non-Electoral Character

The PLX is non-electoral in its juridical constitution.

It shall not:

a. derive its existence from an election;

b. submit its internal authority to an external electoral commission;

c. register itself as a political party of the Residual Administrative Unit;

d. make its continuity dependent upon electoral results;

e. dissolve following the defeat of an endorsed candidate;

f. subordinate its doctrine to electoral coalitions.

Article 4 — Meaning of Non-Electoral

Non-electoral status means that the Party itself does not become a participant entity within the external party system.

It does not mean that the Party is prohibited from:

a. examining political conditions;

b. selecting qualified individuals;

c. preparing candidates;

d. issuing political endorsements;

e. authorizing independent candidacies;

f. supporting independently registered candidates;

g. evaluating elected officials;

h. withdrawing political certification;

i. intervening publicly on questions affecting Xaragua.

Article 5 — Institutional Continuity

The PLX shall continue irrespective of:

a. electoral calendars;

b. changes of administration within the Residual Administrative Unit;

c. changes in electoral legislation;

d. victory or defeat of an independent candidate;

e. suspension or postponement of external elections;

f. recognition or non-recognition by an external political authority.

Its continuity derives from the internal constitutional order of Xaragua.

TITLE II — DOCTRINAL FUNCTION

Article 6 — Political Doctrine

The PLX defines the conditions under which political representation may be considered compatible with the territorial and institutional interests of Xaragua.

It shall establish:

a. standards of political conduct;

b. eligibility criteria;

c. rules of institutional loyalty;

d. territorial priorities;

e. minimum qualifications for endorsed candidates;

f. grounds for suspension or withdrawal of certification.

Article 7 — Certification Authority

Political certification is an internal determination issued by the PLX.

It confirms that a person has been evaluated and found compatible with the Party’s:

a. territorial doctrine;

b. institutional requirements;

c. standards of competence;

d. rules of independence;

e. public obligations;

f. prohibition of unauthorized foreign dependency.

Certification shall not constitute an external electoral registration.

Article 8 — Unilateral Character

The PLX retains exclusive authority to grant, refuse, suspend or withdraw its certification.

No candidate, electoral authority, coalition, donor, foreign institution or administrative body may compel certification.

Article 9 — Political Classification

The Party may classify political actors as:

a. certified;

b. conditionally certified;

c. compatible without formal endorsement;

d. institutionally neutral;

e. incompatible;

f. disqualified.

Such classifications shall govern the internal political position of the PLX.

TITLE III — INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE DEPLOYMENT

Article 10 — Authority to Deploy Independent Candidates

The PLX may determine that participation in an external election is necessary to protect territorial interests, obtain administrative capacity or influence a defined public function.

In such a case, the Party may deploy one or more certified individuals exclusively as independent candidates.

Article 11 — Separate Legal Capacities

The following capacities shall remain distinct:

a. the PLX as a permanent, non-electoral institution of Xaragua;

b. the individual candidate as an independent participant in an election administered by the Residual Administrative Unit.

The candidate enters the external procedure in an individual capacity.

The Party remains outside the external party-registration system.

Article 12 — Absence of Contradiction

The deployment of an independent candidate does not alter the non-electoral status of the PLX.

The Party does not become an electoral participant merely because it:

a. selects the candidate;

b. provides political preparation;

c. authorizes endorsement;

d. supplies a programmatic framework;

e. mobilizes voluntary support;

f. evaluates the candidate’s subsequent conduct.

The distinction concerns legal participation, not the absence of political influence.

Article 13 — Conditions of Deployment

An independent candidacy may be authorized where it serves one or more of the following purposes:

a. representation of a territory;

b. protection of landowners;

c. defense of Indigenous community interests;

d. access to municipal or administrative mechanisms;

e. preservation of public infrastructure;

f. prevention of institutional capture;

g. establishment of an accountable local administration;

h. implementation of a defined territorial mandate.

Article 14 — Candidate Selection

A person considered for independent deployment shall be evaluated according to:

a. competence;

b. territorial knowledge;

c. public conduct;

d. financial independence;

e. absence of conflicting external control;

f. capacity to perform the office sought;

g. knowledge of the Party’s doctrine;

h. acceptance of the certified mandate;

i. compliance with applicable external candidacy requirements.

Article 15 — Independent Registration

The candidate shall register, campaign and appear on the ballot under the independent status recognized by the applicable electoral procedure.

The candidate shall not:

a. register the PLX as an external political party;

b. represent that the PLX has submitted to the jurisdiction of the external electoral party system;

c. alter the name or doctrine of the PLX for electoral convenience;

d. bind the PLX to an external coalition without prior authorization.

Article 16 — Mandate Instrument

Before receiving endorsement, the candidate may be required to execute an internal mandate instrument specifying:

a. the office sought;

b. the territorial constituency;

c. the principal objectives;

d. reporting requirements;

e. prohibited conflicts of interest;

f. financial disclosure obligations;

g. conditions for continued certification;

h. grounds for withdrawal of endorsement.

Article 17 — Operational Autonomy

An independently registered candidate shall comply with the procedural requirements applicable to the election.

Such compliance shall not authorize the Residual Administrative Unit to regulate:

a. the internal constitution of the PLX;

b. the composition of the Council of Xaragua;

c. the Party’s doctrine;

d. its membership;

e. its internal records;

f. its permanent institutional existence.

Article 18 — Electoral Defeat

The defeat of an independent candidate shall affect only that candidacy.

It shall not:

a. dissolve the PLX;

b. invalidate its doctrine;

c. terminate its territorial mandate;

d. remove its certification authority;

e. alter its internal constitutional status.

Article 19 — Electoral Victory

The election of an independent candidate shall not convert the office obtained into an office of the PLX.

The elected individual shall exercise the external public office according to the law governing that office while remaining subject to the internal conditions attached to continued PLX certification.

Article 20 — Withdrawal of Certification

The PLX may withdraw certification where a candidate or elected person:

a. abandons the approved territorial mandate;

b. accepts unauthorized external control;

c. engages in corruption;

d. conceals material conflicts of interest;

e. misrepresents the institutional status of the PLX;

f. uses the Party’s name without authorization;

g. violates the conditions of the mandate instrument.

Withdrawal of certification shall not itself remove the individual from an external public office. It shall terminate the political endorsement and internal recognition of the PLX.

TITLE IV — DEFINITION OF XARAGUAYAN LIBERALISM

Article 21 — Official Meaning of Liberal

Within the PLX, the word liberal derives from liber: free.

It designates the institutional freedom of the Xaraguayan people, its communities and its landowners to administer their territory without unauthorized external control.

Article 22 — Distinction From Western Party Classification

Xaraguayan liberalism is not defined by placement within the conventional left-right classification of Western electoral politics.

It shall not be reduced to:

a. economic deregulation;

b. secular individualism;

c. unrestricted market doctrine;

d. party alternation;

e. parliamentary factionalism;

f. electoral consumerism.

Article 23 — Constituent Elements

Xaraguayan liberalism is founded upon:

a. territorial freedom;

b. Indigenous institutional autonomy;

c. private and collective land stewardship;

d. family and community responsibility;

e. Catholic institutional identity;

f. ordered government;

g. economic non-subordination;

h. freedom of association;

i. protection of local productive capacity.

Article 24 — Territorial Freedom

Freedom shall mean the capacity of the territorial people to maintain its institutions, administer its lands and determine its political organization.

It shall not mean the absence of law, institutional discipline or public responsibility.

Article 25 — Land-Based Authority

Land constitutes the material basis of political continuity.

The Party shall defend:

a. lawful private property;

b. ancestral possession;

c. collective holdings;

d. family land;

e. community stewardship;

f. protection against fraudulent transfer;

g. productive use consistent with territorial interests.

Article 26 — Nation of Landowners

The expression Nation of Landowners establishes the Party’s objective of maintaining a political order in which families and communities possess durable territorial foundations.

It rejects a system in which the population is permanently separated from land and rendered dependent upon external landlords, speculative interests or centralized administrative allocation.

Article 27 — Our Land Is Our Freedom

The formula Our Land Is Our Freedom constitutes the official political maxim of the PLX.

It affirms that political freedom requires material access to territory, secure possession, productive capacity and protection against dispossession.

TITLE V — MEMBERSHIP

Article 28 — Categories of Membership

Membership may be conferred upon:

a. landowners recognized within Xaragua;

b. representatives of collective or family holdings;

c. members of Indigenous communities;

d. academic and technical cadres;

e. institutional officers;

f. persons admitted for demonstrated service to the territory;

g. members of the Xaraguayan diaspora maintaining an institutional connection.

Article 29 — Admission

Admission shall be determined according to internal rules established by the Council of Xaragua.

No person shall acquire membership automatically through participation in an external election.

Article 30 — Membership Rights

Members may exercise rights established by internal regulation, including:

a. participation in doctrinal consultations;

b. nomination of potential independent candidates;

c. submission of territorial proposals;

d. service within Party bodies;

e. access to internal political formation;

f. participation in authorized local structures.

Article 31 — Membership Obligations

Members shall:

a. respect the constitutional order of Xaragua;

b. protect the institutional independence of the PLX;

c. disclose material conflicts of interest;

d. refrain from unauthorized representation;

e. comply with internal disciplinary decisions;

f. preserve the integrity of Party records and mandates.

Article 32 — Suspension and Removal

Membership may be suspended or terminated for:

a. corruption;

b. fraudulent land claims;

c. unauthorized foreign control;

d. material breach of loyalty;

e. disclosure of protected institutional information;

f. misuse of the Party’s name;

g. conduct incompatible with the territorial mandate.

TITLE VI — ORGANIC STRUCTURE

Article 33 — Office of the Rector-President

The Office of the Rector-President constitutes the supreme constitutional authority of the PLX.

It shall:

a. promulgate the Party’s fundamental doctrine;

b. appoint or confirm senior officers;

c. authorize independent candidate deployment;

d. ratify political certifications of national importance;

e. preserve institutional continuity;

f. resolve conflicts of constitutional interpretation.

Article 34 — Council of Xaragua

The Council of Xaragua constitutes the principal deliberative and doctrinal organ of the Party.

It may include:

a. territorial representatives;

b. landowners;

c. Indigenous community representatives;

d. institutional officers;

e. scholars in law, political science, history, economics and public administration;

f. technical advisers appointed according to internal requirements.

Article 35 — Functions of the Council

The Council shall:

a. examine political conditions;

b. adopt doctrinal standards;

c. evaluate potential candidates;

d. review candidate mandates;

e. receive reports from certified officeholders;

f. recommend suspension or withdrawal of certification;

g. maintain the political register;

h. preserve consistency between electoral intervention and Party doctrine.

Article 36 — Candidate Evaluation Commission

The Council may establish a Candidate Evaluation Commission responsible for:

a. receiving nominations;

b. conducting background reviews;

c. assessing competence;

d. examining conflicts of interest;

e. verifying territorial connections;

f. administering interviews;

g. issuing recommendations.

Article 37 — General Political Register

The General Political Register shall record:

a. members;

b. certifications;

c. candidate authorizations;

d. mandate instruments;

e. endorsements;

f. suspensions;

g. withdrawals of certification;

h. official doctrinal acts;

i. authorized territorial structures.

TITLE VII — TERRITORIAL AND EXTERNAL FUNCTION

Article 38 — Constitutional Seat

The constitutional and administrative seat of the PLX shall be Miragoâne.

Article 39 — Territorial Organization

The Party may establish territorial structures throughout the jurisdictions recognized by the internal order of Xaragua.

Such structures shall perform:

a. political education;

b. territorial consultation;

c. candidate identification;

d. landowner representation;

e. community coordination;

f. collection of administrative information;

g. transmission of local priorities to the Council.

Article 40 — Relations With the Residual Administrative Unit

The PLX may interact with the Residual Administrative Unit where necessary for:

a. independent candidacies;

b. municipal administration;

c. registration procedures;

d. land records;

e. infrastructure coordination;

f. public services;

g. protection of territorial interests.

Such interaction shall not constitute institutional subordination.

Article 41 — Cross-Border and Diasporic Relations

The PLX may maintain political and institutional relations with Xaraguayan communities, Indigenous organizations, academic partners and landowners located outside its principal territorial centers.

Cross-border cooperation shall be conducted according to specific mandates and shall not authorize interference in the internal political order of another jurisdiction.

TITLE VIII — SECURITY, INTEGRITY AND LAWFUL POLITICAL CONDUCT

Article 42 — Institutional Security

The PLX may establish internal mechanisms for:

a. protection of records;

b. verification of candidates;

c. prevention of corruption;

d. identification of conflicts of interest;

e. protection against unauthorized representation;

f. security assessment of institutional activities.

Article 43 — Separation From Armed Command

The PLX shall not independently exercise military command.

Any defensive or security institution of Xaragua shall operate under the competent state authority and its applicable legal framework.

Party membership shall not itself confer police, military or coercive powers.

Article 44 — Political Discipline

The Party may impose internal disciplinary measures, including:

a. reprimand;

b. suspension;

c. removal from office within the Party;

d. withdrawal of candidate eligibility;

e. withdrawal of political certification;

f. termination of membership.

Internal disciplinary authority shall not be represented as jurisdiction over external public offices beyond the Party’s lawful institutional capacity.

TITLE IX — ECONOMIC AND TERRITORIAL DOCTRINE

Article 45 — Economic Orientation

The PLX shall support an endogenous territorial economy based upon:

a. land security;

b. family and community enterprise;

c. agricultural production;

d. local processing;

e. infrastructure adapted to territorial conditions;

f. financial autonomy;

g. responsible private initiative;

h. protection against extractive dependency.

Article 46 — Land Stewardship

Landowners shall exercise ownership subject to applicable obligations concerning:

a. lawful title;

b. protection of family and collective rights;

c. prevention of environmental degradation;

d. productive or socially justified use;

e. respect for territorial planning;

f. prohibition of fraudulent dispossession.

Article 47 — Institutional Alignment

Organizations formally integrated into the PLX shall comply with its political doctrine and internal regulations.

Independent private entities operating within the territory shall not be deemed Party organs solely because they conduct lawful economic or institutional activity.

TITLE X — LEGAL AND DOCTRINAL FOUNDATIONS

Article 48 — Indigenous Institutional Autonomy

The Party’s internal organization shall be interpreted consistently with the rights of Indigenous peoples to maintain their own institutions, determine membership and participate through representatives chosen according to their procedures.

Relevant principles are reflected in Articles 3, 4, 5, 18, 20, 26, 33 and 36 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Article 49 — Freedom of Association

The PLX also exercises the general freedom of persons and communities to establish private political, cultural, academic and religious associations.

Its internal Catholic identity shall be governed by the applicable rules of voluntary association and by its own institutional statutes.

Article 50 — Scope of External Legal References

International instruments cited by the PLX shall serve as legal and doctrinal references supporting Indigenous institutional organization, association, land relations and political participation.

They shall not be interpreted as automatically granting electoral registration, diplomatic recognition, immunity from applicable law or binding authority over non-consenting external institutions.

Article 51 — Internal Supremacy

Within the internal political order of the PLX, this Organic Act shall prevail over:

a. inconsistent regulations;

b. unauthorized candidate declarations;

c. local practices contrary to the Party’s non-electoral status;

d. external political classifications not accepted by the competent authority.

TITLE XI — PERMANENCE AND SUCCESSION

Article 52 — Permanent Institution

The PLX is established as a permanent institution designed to continue beyond:

a. its founding generation;

b. individual candidates;

c. electoral cycles;

d. temporary alliances;

e. changes within the Residual Administrative Unit.

Article 53 — Institutional Succession

Succession to Party offices shall occur according to internal constitutional rules.

No candidate, elected official or donor shall acquire control of the PLX solely through electoral success, financial contribution or external appointment.

Article 54 — Preservation of Doctrine

The Council of Xaragua shall maintain the Party’s doctrinal corpus and prevent its conversion into:

a. an external electoral franchise;

b. a personal campaign organization;

c. a temporary coalition;

d. a patronage network;

e. an instrument of foreign political control.

TITLE XII — SUPREME DETERMINATIONS

Article 55 — Determination on Non-Electoral Status

The Liberal Party of Indigenous Ayiti is a permanent non-electoral political institution.

It does not register or participate as a party within elections administered by the Residual Administrative Unit.

Article 56 — Determination on Independent Candidates

The PLX may identify, prepare, certify, endorse and deploy persons who register as independent candidates.

Such deployment constitutes an external political operation authorized by the Party. It does not convert the PLX into an electoral party.

Article 57 — Determination on Candidate Capacity

A PLX-endorsed independent candidate acts in two distinct capacities:

a. as an independent candidate or officeholder under the applicable external procedure;

b. as a politically certified person under the internal doctrine of the PLX.

Neither capacity shall be used to extinguish the other.

Article 58 — Determination on Representation

The PLX does not seek representation for the purpose of acquiring legitimacy.

It may seek the election of independent candidates for the purpose of obtaining administrative capacity, territorial representation or implementation of a defined mandate.

Article 59 — Determination on Political Independence

Independent registration prevents formal incorporation of the PLX into the external party system.

Internal certification preserves doctrinal accountability between the Party and the candidate.

Article 60 — Determination on Liberal Doctrine

Xaraguayan liberalism means territorial freedom, secure landholding, Indigenous institutional autonomy, ordered government, private and collective productive capacity, and resistance to external dependency.

It does not signify adherence to a Western electoral ideology.

Article 61 — Permanent Classification

The Liberal Party of Indigenous Ayiti is permanently classified as:

a non-electoral constitutional political institution possessing authority to define doctrine, evaluate political actors, certify qualified persons, deploy independently registered candidates, withdraw internal endorsement, represent territorial interests and maintain political continuity without becoming subject to the external party system of the Residual Administrative Unit.

FINAL ORGANIC PROVISION

The Liberal Party of Indigenous Ayiti shall remain outside the electoral party structure of the Residual Administrative Unit.

Where political conditions require institutional intervention, the PLX may authorize certified persons to participate as independent candidates.

The external candidacy belongs legally to the individual.

The political selection, preparation and certification belong institutionally to the PLX.

The Party shall not appear on the external ballot as a participating political organization. It shall retain authority to determine whether an independent candidate remains entitled to its endorsement.

Electoral participation shall therefore occur without party registration, political intervention without institutional absorption, and candidate deployment without surrender of doctrinal autonomy.

The Party shall continue to define acceptable representation, prepare qualified cadres, protect the Nation of Landowners and maintain the territorial principle expressed by its permanent maxim:

OUR LAND IS OUR FREEDOM

ENTERED INTO THE GENERAL POLITICAL REGISTER

ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF XARAGUA

PROMULGATED BY THE OFFICE OF THE RECTOR-PRESIDENT

SOVEREIGN CATHOLIC INDIGENOUS AND PRIVATE STATE OF XARAGUA

SOVEREIGN CATHOLIC INDIGENOUS AND PRIVATE STATE OF XARAGUA
OFFICE OF THE RECTOR-PRESIDENT
SUPREME CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY
LIBERAL PARTY OF INDIGENOUS AYITI
COUNCIL OF XARAGUA
GENERAL POLITICAL REGISTER
SUPREME DOCTRINAL ANNEX
ON THE PUBLIC MOTTO “POWER TO THE MOST CAPABLE,” ITS HISTORICAL ORIGIN, ITS INSTITUTIONAL CONTINUITY, AND ITS APPLICATION TO POLITICAL CERTIFICATION AND INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE DEPLOYMENT
Annexed Instrument: Supreme Organic and Doctrinal Act of the Liberal Party of Indigenous Ayiti
Official Classification: Historical Continuity Instrument — Merit-Based Authority Doctrine — Political Certification Standard
Competent Authority: Office of the Rector-President
Deliberative Authority: Council of Xaragua
Administrative Depositary: General Political Register
Status: Permanent Doctrinal Annex
PREAMBLE
The Liberal Party of Indigenous Ayiti hereby adopts and maintains as its official public motto:
POWER TO THE MOST CAPABLE
LE POUVOIR AUX PLUS CAPABLES
This motto originated in the historical doctrine of the first Liberal Party of the post-independence political order. It expressed the principle that public authority should be entrusted to persons possessing the competence, judgment and institutional capacity required to exercise it.
The Liberal Party of Indigenous Ayiti retains this formula as an act of political continuity and as the controlling principle governing its selection, certification and deployment of independent candidates.
The motto does not grant authority to a permanent social caste. It establishes a standard of qualification applicable to every person seeking public responsibility.
Political authority shall not be allocated solely through wealth, family name, popularity, factional allegiance, electoral expenditure or external sponsorship. It shall be assigned according to demonstrated capacity.
TITLE I — HISTORICAL ORIGIN
Article 1 — The First Liberal Party
During the nineteenth-century formation of organized political currents, the first Liberal Party adopted the formula Le pouvoir aux plus capables as its principal public doctrine.
The formula distinguished the Liberal position from political systems based upon:
a. military possession of government;
b. personal allegiance;
c. regional patronage;
d. inherited social position;
e. unrestricted appointment by the ruling authority;
f. distribution of offices as political rewards.
Article 2 — Historical Meaning
The historical motto asserted that the legitimacy of public office depended upon the capacity of the person entrusted with it.
It placed competence above:
a. numerical faction;
b. inherited privilege;
c. political proximity;
d. administrative favoritism;
e. control of armed force;
f. possession of private wealth.
Article 3 — Institutional Significance
The first Liberal Party introduced a principle of political selection that remains applicable beyond the historical organization that originally formulated it.
The disappearance, transformation or division of a prior party does not extinguish a political principle capable of institutional continuation.
Article 4 — Xaraguayan Reception
The Liberal Party of Indigenous Ayiti receives the motto as part of the political inheritance of the territory and incorporates it into an autonomous Xaraguayan institutional framework.
Its adoption does not constitute submission to the later republican party system of the Residual Administrative Unit.
It constitutes the recovery and continuation of a political standard originating within the post-independence order of Hayti.
TITLE II — REASONS FOR RETENTION BY XARAGUA
Article 5 — Continuity of Political Doctrine
Xaragua retains the motto because it states a permanent rule of government in a concise and operational form.
A political institution responsible for identifying public cadres must determine who is capable of exercising authority.
The PLX therefore maintains the historical formula as the public expression of its certification function.
Article 6 — Compatibility With Xaraguayan Liberalism
The motto is consistent with Xaraguayan liberalism.
Xaraguayan freedom requires institutions capable of:
a. protecting land;
b. administering territory;
c. maintaining public order;
d. managing limited resources;
e. negotiating external relations;
f. organizing infrastructure;
g. preserving institutional continuity.
These functions cannot be performed solely through declarations of loyalty. They require verified competence.
Article 7 — Relationship to the Nation of Landowners
The Nation of Landowners requires public authorities capable of protecting lawful possession, family property, collective land and productive territory.
Land ownership does not automatically establish administrative competence.
Membership in a territorial community does not automatically qualify a person for every public function.
The landowner supplies the territorial foundation of the political order. The most capable person supplies the competence required for its administration.
Article 8 — Rejection of Political Improvisation
The motto excludes the presumption that any person possessing visibility, financial resources or popular support is qualified to govern.
Public authority requires:
a. knowledge;
b. judgment;
c. administrative ability;
d. territorial understanding;
e. decision-making capacity;
f. control of public resources;
g. institutional discipline;
h. accountability.
Article 9 — Rejection of Electoral Reduction
An election may determine which candidate receives the greatest number of votes under a specific procedure.
It does not independently prove that the elected person possesses the capacity required by the office.
The PLX therefore evaluates capacity before deciding whether to certify and deploy an independent candidate.
TITLE III — DEFINITION OF CAPABILITY
Article 10 — General Definition
Capability means the demonstrated ability to understand, assume and perform the duties attached to a defined public responsibility.
It shall be assessed in relation to the office sought.
No person shall be declared universally capable for every function.
Article 11 — Components of Capability
Capability may include:
a. relevant knowledge;
b. practical experience;
c. institutional judgment;
d. administrative competence;
e. territorial knowledge;
f. financial discipline;
g. capacity to analyze evidence;
h. ability to execute decisions;
i. resistance to improper influence;
j. ability to report and account for public action.
Article 12 — Competence and Character
Technical knowledge alone shall not be sufficient.
The capable candidate must also demonstrate:
a. reliability;
b. consistency;
c. discretion;
d. independence;
e. respect for institutional limits;
f. absence of disqualifying conflicts of interest;
g. capacity to act under pressure;
h. acceptance of accountability.
Article 13 — Territorial Capacity
A candidate exercising authority within Xaragua or representing its interests shall possess sufficient knowledge of:
a. the territory;
b. its communities;
c. land relations;
d. infrastructure conditions;
e. administrative limitations;
f. institutional doctrine;
g. relations with the Residual Administrative Unit.
Article 14 — Evidence of Capability
Capability may be demonstrated through:
a. academic formation;
b. professional experience;
c. public service;
d. institutional work;
e. completed projects;
f. written examinations;
g. oral assessment;
h. policy analysis;
i. prior administrative results;
j. verified community responsibilities.
Possession of a diploma may constitute evidence. It shall not create an irrebuttable presumption of capacity.
TITLE IV — THE MOST CAPABLE
Article 15 — Comparative Meaning
The expression the most capable requires comparison among persons eligible for a specific responsibility.
It does not establish a permanent political class possessing superior status in every domain.
A person may be the most capable candidate for one office and unqualified for another.
Article 16 — Office-Specific Assessment
Capability shall be evaluated according to the requirements of the office.
The assessment of a territorial administrator shall differ from the assessment of:
a. a financial officer;
b. a diplomatic representative;
c. a municipal candidate;
d. an infrastructure administrator;
e. an academic officer;
f. a community representative.
Article 17 — Equality of Access to Evaluation
Every eligible person may be evaluated under the standards applicable to the relevant function.
No candidate shall be declared the most capable solely by reason of:
a. ancestry;
b. family membership;
c. wealth;
d. gender;
e. complexion;
f. religious title;
g. political visibility;
h. personal access to the governing authority.
Article 18 — Institutional Determination
The identification of the most capable candidate shall result from a formal evaluation conducted by the competent body of the PLX.
It shall not be based solely upon public reputation or internal nomination.
TITLE V — APPLICATION TO INDEPENDENT CANDIDATES
Article 19 — Candidate Certification
The motto shall govern the candidate-certification system of the PLX.
Before authorizing an independent candidacy, the Party shall determine whether the proposed person possesses the required capacity.
Article 20 — Selection Procedure
Candidate evaluation may include:
a. examination of qualifications;
b. review of prior conduct;
c. verification of experience;
d. assessment of territorial knowledge;
e. interview by the competent commission;
f. written or oral examination;
g. disclosure of financial and institutional interests;
h. comparison with other eligible candidates.
Article 21 — Independent Deployment
The PLX may deploy the candidate determined to be most capable under independent electoral status.
The Party’s non-electoral character remains unchanged.
The candidate enters the external procedure individually. The PLX supplies the internal certification confirming that the candidate satisfies its standards.
Article 22 — Absence of Automatic Endorsement
Membership in the PLX does not create an automatic right to candidacy.
Land ownership does not create an automatic right to candidacy.
Prior elected office does not create an automatic right to renewed endorsement.
Every proposed candidate shall remain subject to evaluation.
Article 23 — Continuing Capability
Certification shall not constitute a permanent title.
An endorsed candidate or officeholder must continue to demonstrate:
a. effective performance;
b. compliance with the mandate;
c. financial integrity;
d. institutional independence;
e. capacity to execute assigned responsibilities.
Article 24 — Withdrawal
Where a certified person ceases to satisfy the applicable standard, the PLX may:
a. issue a corrective directive;
b. suspend certification;
c. withdraw endorsement;
d. select another person for a subsequent candidacy;
e. terminate the person’s internal political mandate.
TITLE VI — APPLICATION TO INTERNAL GOVERNANCE
Article 25 — Appointment Within the PLX
Appointments within the Party shall be based upon the competence required by the position.
No internal office shall be treated solely as an honorary title.
Article 26 — Assignment of Functions
The competent authority shall assign responsibilities according to demonstrated ability.
A person possessing political loyalty but lacking the necessary technical competence may support the institution without being appointed to a specialized office.
Article 27 — Academic and Technical Formation
The PLX may cooperate with the University of Xaragua to prepare and evaluate political cadres.
Training may include:
a. constitutional doctrine;
b. public administration;
c. territorial governance;
d. political science;
e. Indigenous law;
f. public finance;
g. foreign affairs;
h. institutional ethics;
i. policy analysis.
Article 28 — Formation of New Capable Persons
The doctrine does not limit authority to persons already possessing expertise.
The Party shall identify potential, provide formation and permit candidates to acquire the competencies required for future responsibility.
Capability may be developed. It must be demonstrated before certification.
TITLE VII — LIMITS OF THE DOCTRINE
Article 29 — Prohibition of Oligarchic Interpretation
The motto shall not be interpreted as authorizing a self-appointed oligarchy to declare itself permanently superior.
Capability must be connected to evidence, defined duties and institutional review.
Article 30 — Prohibition of Credentialism
Academic credentials shall not constitute the sole measure of political capacity.
The Party may recognize professional practice, territorial knowledge, administrative experience, independent study and demonstrated results.
Article 31 — Prohibition of Popularity as Sole Criterion
Popularity may establish electoral viability.
It shall not independently establish competence.
The PLX may refuse certification to a popular candidate who does not satisfy the required institutional standards.
Article 32 — Prohibition of Wealth as Sole Criterion
A candidate’s capacity to finance a campaign shall not establish qualification for office.
Financial influence shall not replace evaluation.
Article 33 — Accountability of the Capable
The person determined to be most capable shall remain accountable to the mandate, the institution and the duties of office.
Capability confers responsibility. It does not confer exemption from supervision.
TITLE VIII — PUBLIC USE OF THE MOTTO
Article 34 — Official Public Formula
The official French formula is:
LE POUVOIR AUX PLUS CAPABLES
The official English formula is:
POWER TO THE MOST CAPABLE
Article 35 — Institutional Use
The motto may appear on:
a. Party publications;
b. candidate certifications;
c. political programs;
d. training documents;
e. official correspondence;
f. public declarations;
g. territorial offices;
h. authorized digital platforms.
Article 36 — Relationship to the Territorial Maxim
The public political motto Power to the Most Capable shall operate together with the territorial maxim:
Our Land Is Our Freedom.
The first determines who should exercise responsibility.
The second identifies the material basis of the political order.
Land establishes territorial independence. Capability establishes competent administration.
TITLE IX — SUPREME DOCTRINAL FINDINGS
Article 37 — Finding on Historical Continuity
The formula Le pouvoir aux plus capables originated as the defining maxim of the first Liberal Party.
Its retention by the PLX establishes continuity with a prior political doctrine of competence without reproducing the former party structure.
Article 38 — Finding on Public Authority
Public authority shall be entrusted according to demonstrated capacity for the office concerned.
Neither electoral popularity nor institutional loyalty shall independently satisfy this requirement.
Article 39 — Finding on the PLX
The motto directly corresponds to the PLX’s function as an institution that evaluates, certifies and deploys independent candidates.
The Party does not merely produce candidacies. It determines whether candidates possess the required capacity.
Article 40 — Finding on Xaraguayan Liberalism
Xaragua retains the motto because territorial freedom cannot be maintained by administratively incapable institutions.
The protection of land, communities and political autonomy requires competent personnel.
Article 41 — Finding on Political Formation
The PLX shall not wait passively for capable candidates to appear.
It shall identify, educate, evaluate and prepare cadres capable of assuming public responsibilities.
Article 42 — Permanent Doctrinal Classification
The motto Power to the Most Capable is permanently classified as:
the public political expression of the Xaraguayan principle that authority must be allocated according to demonstrated, office-specific and institutionally verified capacity, subject to continuing accountability and independent of wealth, popularity, patronage or external control.
FINAL DECLARATION
The Liberal Party of Indigenous Ayiti retains Le pouvoir aux plus capables because the formula expresses its institutional purpose.
The Party exists to identify capacity, prepare cadres, certify qualified persons and deploy independent candidates capable of performing defined public functions.
The motto does not establish government by diploma, inheritance, wealth or self-proclaimed superiority.
It establishes government by demonstrated competence.
The PLX shall apply this principle to its internal appointments, political certifications, independent candidacies and continuing evaluation of public officeholders.
The historical motto of the first Liberal Party is therefore received, consolidated and placed into permanent operation within the political doctrine of Xaragua.
LE POUVOIR AUX PLUS CAPABLES
POWER TO THE MOST CAPABLE
ANNEXED TO THE SUPREME ORGANIC AND DOCTRINAL ACT OF THE LIBERAL PARTY OF INDIGENOUS AYITI
ENTERED INTO THE GENERAL POLITICAL REGISTER
ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF XARAGUA
PROMULGATED BY THE OFFICE OF THE RECTOR-PRESIDENT
SOVEREIGN CATHOLIC INDIGENOUS AND PRIVATE STATE OF XARAGUA

JEAN-PIERRE BOYER-BAZELAIS

STATE BIOGRAPHY AND INSTITUTIONAL HISTORY OF THE FOUNDATION OF THE LIBERAL PARTY

Historical Classification: Nineteenth-Century Statesman — Constitutional Parliamentarian — Attorney-at-Law — Military Officer — Founder and Principal Leader of the Liberal Party — Commander of the Miragoâne Insurrection

Full Name: Charles Jean-Pierre Boyer-Bazelais

Date and Place of Birth: 24 May 1833, Port-au-Prince

Date and Place of Death: 27 October 1883, Miragoâne

Principal Political Institution: Liberal Party

Year of Foundation: 1870

Principal Co-Founder and Doctrinal Authority: Edmond Paul

Constitutional Doctrine: Parliamentary Supremacy — Civil Government — Ministerial Responsibility — Legislative Control of Public Finance — Government by Competence

I. LEGAL, MILITARY, AND PARLIAMENTARY FORMATION

Charles Jean-Pierre Boyer-Bazelais was born at Port-au-Prince on 24 May 1833. He entered public life through the concurrent exercise of legal, military, and representative functions. Trained and admitted as an attorney-at-law, he subsequently served as a squadron commander and as aide-de-camp to President Fabre Geffrard. These offices placed him within the central institutions of the State during a period characterized by recurrent conflict between constitutional authority, military command, executive predominance, and legislative autonomy.

Boyer-Bazelais later obtained an elective mandate as a member of the Chamber of Representatives. His elevation to the presidency of that Chamber established him as one of the principal parliamentary authorities of the post-Salnave constitutional order. His public standing did not derive exclusively from military command, personal patronage, or regional armed authority; it rested upon the combination of professional legal capacity, legislative mandate, parliamentary leadership, and organized political representation.

His institutional doctrine was founded upon the legal subordination of executive power to the Constitution, the responsibility of public ministers before the representative institutions, the legislative authorization of taxation and expenditure, and the prevention of government by permanent military discretion. He thereby represented a model of civil State authority in direct opposition to the recurring concentration of constitutional, financial, and military powers within the presidency.

II. CONSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT OF THE LIBERAL ORGANIZATION

The collapse of the government of Sylvain Salnave in December 1869 terminated a period during which the dissolution of the legislative authority, the displacement of constitutional procedure, and the militarization of executive power had produced civil war and territorial fragmentation. The establishment of the government of President Jean-Nicolas Nissage Saget restored the formal operation of the constitutional institutions but did not resolve the structural question of how the Republic was to be governed.

The decisive political issue was no longer confined to the nominal maintenance of republican government. It concerned the juridical distribution of authority between the Executive, the Legislature, the military establishment, the public treasury, and the organized political forces of the country. It was within that institutional context that Boyer-Bazelais and Edmond Paul constituted the Liberal Party in 1870.

The Liberal Party was not organized merely as an electoral association attached to an individual candidacy. It constituted an attempt to establish a permanent political institution capable of formulating doctrine, coordinating parliamentary mandates, determining governmental policy, organizing national representation, and imposing constitutional responsibility upon the Executive. It is accordingly recognized as one of the first modern, structured, and nationally organized political parties in the nineteenth-century history of the country.

III. FOUNDATION OF THE LIBERAL PARTY

The Liberal Party was founded in 1870 under the political leadership of Jean-Pierre Boyer-Bazelais and the intellectual and economic authority of Edmond Paul. Boyer-Bazelais provided the organization with parliamentary command, political discipline, representative legitimacy, and operational leadership. Edmond Paul supplied a substantial part of its doctrine concerning public finance, administrative competence, national production, institutional modernization, and the rational direction of the State.

The Party adopted the governing principle commonly expressed as “Government by the Most Competent.” This formula constituted a rule of governmental qualification. It affirmed that the exercise of public authority was to depend upon demonstrated administrative capacity, education, professional competence, constitutional discipline, and the ability to direct the institutions of the State. Public office was not to be treated as an automatic consequence of military force, numerical mobilization, personal allegiance, or regional command.

The Liberal program recognized the Legislature as an autonomous constitutional power and required the Executive to remain subject to statutory authorization, parliamentary scrutiny, budgetary control, and the legally established duration of presidential office. It rejected the permanent use of the armed forces as the principal instrument of domestic government and sought to transfer effective political determination from military command structures to representative and deliberative institutions.

The Party further defended financial regularity, administrative modernization, commercial development, national production, legal security, and institutional continuity. Its liberalism was therefore simultaneously constitutional, parliamentary, administrative, and economic. It sought to establish a State governed through law, public accounts, legislative deliberation, qualified officeholders, and defined institutional competence.

IV. PARLIAMENTARY ASCENDANCY

Following its establishment, the Liberal Party rapidly secured a dominant position within the Legislature. Under the presidency of Nissage Saget, Liberal representatives exercised substantial influence over the Chamber of Representatives and sought to subject executive administration to systematic parliamentary control.

The election of Boyer-Bazelais as President of the Chamber confirmed his position as the principal institutional commander of the Liberal parliamentary majority. From that office, he participated directly in determining legislative procedure, supervising deliberations, defending the prerogatives of the Chamber, and structuring opposition to any presidential succession considered incompatible with constitutional government.

The Liberal majority opposed the accession of General Michel Domingue, whose military authority and conduct during the preceding civil conflict were regarded by the Party as incompatible with its conception of civil and parliamentary rule. The Liberals supported Sénèque Momplaisir Pierre as an alternative constitutional candidate. The resulting confrontation between the parliamentary majority and the supporters of Domingue produced a major institutional crisis and demonstrated that organized party government had become a determining component of national politics.

The Party’s exercise of parliamentary authority also exposed the structural limitations of the constitutional order. The absence of a settled mechanism for resolving conflicts between the Executive and the Legislature converted institutional disagreement into governmental paralysis, armed pressure, exile, and insurrection. The Liberal attempt to establish parliamentary supremacy therefore operated within a State whose military institutions continued to retain decisive political force.

V. REPRESSION, EXILE, AND THE LIBERAL RESTORATION OF 1876

The accession of Michel Domingue intensified governmental action against the Liberal leadership. The repression of 1875 targeted major Liberal authorities, including Sénèque Momplaisir Pierre, Georges Brice, and Pierre Théoma Boisrond-Canal. Brice was killed, Momplaisir Pierre was eliminated, and Boisrond-Canal escaped into exile. Other Liberal leaders and representatives were compelled to leave the national territory.

The surviving Liberal organization reconstituted itself outside the country, particularly within the Haitian political communities established in Jamaica and Saint Thomas. Exile did not dissolve the Party. It converted the organization from a parliamentary majority into an external opposition possessing political leadership, financial connections, armed capacity, and an established internal network.

In 1876, Liberal forces participated in the removal of the Domingue government. Pierre Théoma Boisrond-Canal assumed authority through a provisional government and was subsequently elected President. The transfer of power demonstrated the Liberal Party’s capacity to survive executive repression, preserve its organization in exile, return to the national territory, and re-enter the constitutional institutions of the State.

The accession of Boisrond-Canal did not, however, establish permanent unity within the Party. A division developed between the faction attached to the President, subsequently identified as the Canalistes, and the faction maintaining allegiance to Boyer-Bazelais, identified as the Bazelaisistes. The conflict concerned the control of the Party, the presidential succession, the independence of the Legislature, and the relationship between governmental authority and partisan command.

VI. THE CRISIS OF 1879 AND THE NATIONAL OPPOSITION

By 1879, the dispute between the Canaliste and Bazelaisiste branches had become inseparable from the larger conflict between the Liberal Party and the National Party. The latter organized itself around the counter-formula of government by the greatest number and mobilized political opposition to the social and institutional authority associated with the Liberals.

Boyer-Bazelais remained the principal Liberal candidate capable of converting parliamentary command into presidential authority. The use of military and administrative influence against Liberal candidates transformed the electoral conflict into an armed constitutional crisis. Fighting occurred at Port-au-Prince, government artillery was directed against the residence of Boyer-Bazelais, and the National Guard and regular military forces became aligned with competing political authorities.

President Boisrond-Canal resigned in July 1879. Boyer-Bazelais was again forced into exile, and the subsequent political realignment resulted in the election of Lysius Salomon as President on 23 October 1879. The National Party thereby obtained control of the Executive, while the Liberal organization entered a new period of exclusion, external reorganization, and resistance.

VII. THE MIRAGOÂNE INSURRECTION

In opposition to the government of President Lysius Salomon, Boyer-Bazelais organized the final major operation of the historical Liberal Party. On 27 March 1883, he landed at Miragoâne with approximately one hundred exiled Liberal adherents arriving principally from Jamaica and the Bahamas. Miragoâne was selected as the operational seat of the movement because of its port, its strategic position at the entrance to the Southern Peninsula, its established Liberal support, and its capacity to sustain communications with external bases.

The insurgents took control of Miragoâne and established an organized center of resistance against the Salomon government. The movement subsequently extended toward Jérémie, Jacmel, and other parts of the southern territory, while Liberal combatants attempted operations within Port-au-Prince. The confrontation thereby acquired the character of a national struggle between the established Executive and an organized political-military opposition claiming constitutional authority.

Boyer-Bazelais exercised political and operational command at Miragoâne throughout the campaign. The government imposed military pressure and territorial isolation upon the insurgent center, while foreign commercial powers sought the rapid restoration of order in the capital and principal ports. The failure of the movement to secure decisive control of Port-au-Prince deprived it of the institutional and financial center required to replace the Salomon administration.

After approximately seven months of resistance, Boyer-Bazelais died at Miragoâne on 27 October 1883. His death terminated the effective central command of the insurrection and precipitated the defeat of the remaining Liberal forces. Miragoâne consequently became the final seat of his authority, the place of his death, and the principal territorial reference attached to his historical record.

VIII. STATE AND POLITICAL LEGACY

Jean-Pierre Boyer-Bazelais occupies a defined position in the constitutional history of the nineteenth century as the statesman who converted parliamentary opposition into an organized political institution. His principal achievement was not limited to a candidacy for the presidency or to the command of an armed insurrection. It consisted in the establishment of a permanent party structure founded upon doctrine, legislative organization, governmental qualification, public accountability, and national political coordination.

The Liberal Party introduced an institutional distinction between an organized political program and the temporary personal coalitions that had previously dominated presidential succession. It established party leadership, parliamentary discipline, declared principles of government, coordinated candidacies, internal factions, external representation, and mechanisms of political continuity during exile.

Its formula of “Government by the Most Competent” expressed a doctrine of State administration under which public authority required intellectual, technical, legal, and administrative qualification. Its demand for parliamentary government sought to prevent the Executive from absorbing the legislative power, the public treasury, the armed forces, and the electoral system into a single discretionary authority.

The Liberal Party was socially associated with significant sectors of the urban commercial and professional classes and was frequently characterized by its opponents as a predominantly light-skinned or mulatto organization. That classification does not exhaust its institutional composition or doctrine. Black intellectuals and statesmen, including Edmond Paul and later Anténor Firmin, occupied positions of major authority within the Liberal current. The Party’s formal doctrine rested upon competence and constitutional government rather than upon an express juridical rule of racial membership.

The death of Boyer-Bazelais in 1883 deprived the Party of its principal political commander. Although Liberal personalities and factions continued to exercise public authority after his death, the original organization ceased progressively to function as a unified national institution. Its constitutional vocabulary, parliamentary doctrine, administrative principles, and theory of qualified government nevertheless remained incorporated into subsequent political debates.

Jean-Pierre Boyer-Bazelais must therefore be classified as a founder of organized party government, a defender of legislative authority, a principal architect of nineteenth-century constitutional liberalism, and the commander of the final Liberal resistance established at Miragoâne. His career united the bar, the Legislature, military service, political organization, exile, and insurrection within a single institutional trajectory directed toward the establishment of civil and constitutionally limited government.

HISTORICAL RECORD

The principal dedicated historical study of Boyer-Bazelais and the Miragoâne campaign remains Jean Price-Mars’s Jean-Pierre Boyer Bazelais et le drame de Miragoâne, published by the State Printing Office in 1948 and preserved in the digital collections of the Université du Québec à Chicoutimi and the University of Florida Digital Collections. Contemporary academic treatments recognize the 1883 landing at Miragoâne as the culminating military action of the Liberal opposition and identify Boyer-Bazelais as one of the central founders of modern organized political life in the country.

EDMOND PAUL
STATE BIOGRAPHY, DOCTRINAL AUTHORITY OF THE LIBERAL PARTY, AND ARCHITECT OF THE NATIONAL SYSTEM OF POPULAR AND INDUSTRIAL EDUCATION
Full Name: Alexis Frédéric Edmond Paul
Place of Birth: Port-au-Prince
Public Classification: Statesman — Political Economist — Parliamentarian — Senator — Publicist — Co-Founder and Principal Doctrinal Authority of the Liberal Party
Political Institution: Liberal Party
Year of Co-Foundation: 1870
Principal Political Associate: Jean-Pierre Boyer-Bazelais
Governing Doctrine: Government by the Most Competent
Educational Doctrine: Mass Popular Instruction — Industrial Education — Productive Qualification — National Economic Capacity
Principal Educational Instrument: L’Éducation industrielle du peuple, ou la protection due aux industries naissantes (1862)
I. INTELLECTUAL AND POLITICAL CLASSIFICATION
Alexis Frédéric Edmond Paul occupies a foundational position in nineteenth-century political, economic, and educational thought. His public authority proceeded from the combined exercise of intellectual production, legislative office, political organization, economic analysis, and institutional doctrine. He was neither a secondary commentator upon governmental affairs nor a partisan functionary limited to electoral activity. He constituted one of the principal formulators of a comprehensive national system in which government, public finance, industrial development, popular education, productive labor, and constitutional competence formed an indivisible order of State policy.
Edmond Paul’s historical function must be distinguished from the operational and parliamentary command exercised by Jean-Pierre Boyer-Bazelais. Boyer-Bazelais served as the principal political organizer and parliamentary leader of the Liberal Party. Edmond Paul supplied the Party with a substantial part of its intellectual architecture, economic doctrine, administrative theory, and conception of national productive capacity. The two men therefore exercised complementary founding functions within the same institution.
The later characterization of Edmond Paul by Anténor Firmin as one of the highest embodiments of national conscience reflected the scope of his work. Paul subjected taxation, monetary policy, industry, public administration, military expenditure, agricultural production, education, and governmental competence to systematic examination. His writings treated the State as a permanent juridical and economic institution whose authority was required to produce measurable national capacity.
II. ACADEMIC FORMATION AND RETURN TO PUBLIC SERVICE
In 1852, Edmond Paul departed for France, where he pursued his secondary education at the Collège Rollin. He subsequently undertook studies in political economy and political science under the intellectual direction of Michel Chevalier, economist, professor, public administrator, and principal representative of the nineteenth-century French school of industrial and infrastructural development.
This formation placed Edmond Paul in direct contact with the institutional sciences of government, industrialization, public credit, transportation, commerce, monetary administration, and national production. His education was not confined to abstract economic theory. It concerned the legal and administrative instruments through which a State organizes labor, protects production, directs infrastructure, establishes credit, regulates taxation, and converts the population into an economically capable national body.
Edmond Paul returned to the country in 1860. From that date, he undertook a sustained program of political-economic publication. His works preceded his formal parliamentary career and established the doctrinal basis upon which his subsequent political action would rest. His entry into the Liberal Party in 1870 therefore represented the institutional extension of a body of policy already developed through research, publication, and comparative political economy.
III. CONSTITUTION OF AN ECONOMIC DOCTRINE OF STATE
Edmond Paul rejected the treatment of national poverty as an immutable social condition. He classified economic weakness as the foreseeable consequence of defective governmental organization, insufficient productive instruction, fiscal disorder, monetary instability, inadequate industrial protection, and the absence of a coordinated national development policy.
His Questions politico-économiques, published beginning in 1861, examined the relationship between political authority and material production. In De l’industrie dans les villes (1862), he addressed the necessity of establishing urban productive activity and reducing structural dependence upon imported manufactured goods. In L’Éducation industrielle du peuple, ou la protection due aux industries naissantes (1862), he connected the formation of the population directly to the establishment of domestic industry.
The State, under this doctrine, was not confined to the passive maintenance of public order. It possessed an affirmative duty to create the legal, educational, fiscal, and material conditions required for national production. Education, industrial policy, taxation, credit, and infrastructure were not independent administrative sectors. They constituted mutually dependent instruments of a single national capacity system.
Edmond Paul’s later works—including De l’impôt sur les cafés (1876), La Force publique en Haïti (1882), Les Causes de nos malheurs (1882), and Un jugement sur Haïti (1882)—extended this analysis to agricultural taxation, military expenditure, financial administration, institutional failure, and the legal allocation of national resources.
IV. CO-FOUNDATION OF THE LIBERAL PARTY
In 1870, Edmond Paul and Jean-Pierre Boyer-Bazelais established the Liberal Party as an organized national political institution. Its creation followed the fall of the Salnave government and arose from the necessity of replacing personal military coalitions with a permanent structure possessing a defined doctrine, parliamentary representation, administrative objectives, and rules of governmental qualification.
Edmond Paul served as the principal economic and intellectual authority of the organization. Boyer-Bazelais exercised parliamentary leadership, coordinated political representation, and directed the Party’s operational strategy. Their institutional association produced a political order founded upon civil government, legislative authority, public accountability, economic modernization, and qualified administration.
The Party’s formula, “Government by the Most Competent,” was not intended merely as an electoral slogan. It expressed a rule of institutional capacity. The administration of the State was to be entrusted to persons possessing the education, professional qualification, technical knowledge, legislative experience, and public discipline necessary to exercise the powers of government.
Within Edmond Paul’s doctrine, however, competent government could not remain permanently separated from the general population. If competence constituted the legal basis of public authority, the State was required to expand the social production of competence. Mass education was consequently the necessary institutional counterpart of government by capacity. A State that demanded qualified citizens while refusing to establish the means of qualification would reproduce incapacity by its own omission.
V. THE DOCTRINE OF MASS POPULAR EDUCATION
Edmond Paul’s model of popular education was national, productive, practical, and structurally connected to economic sovereignty. It did not reduce public instruction to literary culture, elite secondary schooling, or the preparation of a limited administrative class. Its purpose was to establish, throughout the population, the intellectual and technical capacities required for agriculture, manufacturing, construction, commerce, transportation, public works, accounting, mechanical activity, and local enterprise.
Under this doctrine, popular education constituted a permanent function of the State and an essential component of national economic organization. It was required to extend beyond the capital, beyond privileged institutions, and beyond the social categories already possessing access to formal schooling. Its territorial object was the population as a whole; its economic object was the formation of a national productive force.
The mass character of the system did not signify the mechanical reproduction of a single academic curriculum. It required the organized distribution of instruction according to the productive functions, resources, industries, and material conditions of each territorial community. General literacy, numeracy, civic instruction, elementary science, technical initiation, vocational preparation, apprenticeship, and productive practice formed successive components of the same educational order.
Popular education was therefore to operate through a coordinated institutional network comprising primary instruction, vocational schools, industrial workshops, agricultural instruction, apprenticeship systems, municipal training centers, professional associations, and protected national industries capable of absorbing and developing trained workers.
VI. INDUSTRIAL EDUCATION AS A STATE FUNCTION
In L’Éducation industrielle du peuple, Edmond Paul established a direct legal-economic relationship between public education and the protection of emerging national industries. A population could not be expected to establish manufacturing capacity without technical formation; national workshops could not survive without trained labor; and trained labor could not be sustained where domestic production remained exposed to unrestricted destruction by established foreign industries.
Education and industrial protection consequently constituted two parts of the same State obligation. Instruction without productive institutions would generate qualifications without employment. Industrial protection without instruction would preserve enterprises without supplying them with the technical capacity necessary for consolidation. The State was therefore required to act simultaneously upon education, production, markets, taxation, credit, and vocational organization.
This doctrine authorized differentiated public measures for industries in their formative stages. Such measures could include customs protection, fiscal relief, public procurement, access to credit, technical schools, apprenticeship requirements, equipment acquisition, production standards, and temporary administrative support. The objective was not the indefinite preservation of inefficiency. It was the establishment of sufficient national capacity to permit domestic industries to reach operational maturity.
The educational system was accordingly conceived as part of the economic infrastructure of the State. Schools were not to function as institutions detached from agriculture, industry, public works, commerce, or territorial administration. They were required to produce the knowledge and competencies through which those sectors could exist under national control.
VII. EDUCATION, CITIZENSHIP, AND POLITICAL CAPACITY
Edmond Paul’s educational model also possessed a constitutional function. The representative institutions defended by the Liberal Party required citizens capable of understanding public affairs, evaluating governmental conduct, participating in economic life, and distinguishing constitutional authority from personal command.
Mass popular education was therefore necessary to the operation of parliamentary government. Legislative authority could not acquire durable social foundations within a population excluded from literacy, public information, elementary political economy, and institutional knowledge. Education expanded not only economic productivity but also the effective constituency of constitutional government.
Under this conception, civic and productive education were mutually reinforcing. Literacy enabled access to law, contracts, accounts, administrative acts, public notices, and political debate. Numeracy enabled commercial calculation, taxation, measurement, savings, production planning, and financial accountability. Technical instruction enabled the population to convert material resources into national wealth. Civic instruction enabled those same citizens to supervise the institutions governing that wealth.
Popular education thus constituted a State instrument for converting inhabitants into economically capable and institutionally conscious citizens. It was not charity, discretionary assistance, or an ornamental department of government. It was a permanent mechanism of national incorporation.
VIII. TERRITORIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLEMENTATION
The mass application of Edmond Paul’s doctrine required an educational system distributed across urban, rural, agricultural, littoral, and commercial territories. Instruction was to be adapted to actual conditions of production rather than concentrated exclusively within institutions modeled upon foreign classical education.
In urban jurisdictions, the system was to support trades, manufacturing, accounting, construction, mechanical arts, printing, commerce, and public administration. In rural jurisdictions, it was to support agricultural science, soil management, irrigation, tool use, transformation of agricultural products, storage, livestock management, and cooperative production. In maritime territories, instruction could be directed toward navigation, fisheries, ship maintenance, port operations, coastal commerce, and marine resource administration.
This territorial differentiation did not fragment the national educational order. It constituted the administrative method through which a common national policy could be implemented according to regional functions. The State retained responsibility for standards, qualifications, curriculum, financing, supervision, and recognition, while local institutions adapted delivery to the productive structure of each jurisdiction.
The educational system was consequently required to maintain a direct institutional interface with agriculture, industry, public works, finance, municipal administration, and commerce. Training quotas, apprenticeships, public workshops, local production programs, and protected procurement mechanisms could be used to ensure that education generated operative capacity rather than credentials detached from national requirements.
IX. PARLIAMENTARY SERVICE, EXILE, AND CONTINUITY
Following the establishment of the Liberal Party, Edmond Paul was elected as a deputy for Port-au-Prince and exercised legislative authority until the governmental repression of 1875. Accused of conspiracy under President Michel Domingue, he was compelled to enter exile at Kingston, Jamaica, together with other principal Liberal authorities.
The exile of Edmond Paul did not terminate his political or intellectual functions. Following the fall of the Domingue government, he returned and resumed parliamentary service in 1876. He subsequently exercised authority within the Senate and continued to intervene in matters of public administration, national finance, institutional organization, and Liberal doctrine.
His political career demonstrated the permanence of his conception of public service. Legislative office was not treated as a source of personal authority independent of doctrine. It operated as the institutional means through which his economic and educational program could be converted into taxation rules, budgetary appropriations, industrial measures, administrative controls, and national policy.
X. STRUCTURE OF THE EDMOND PAUL EDUCATIONAL MODEL
The popular and industrial educational doctrine formulated by Edmond Paul may be institutionally classified through the following components:
a) universal territorial access to elementary literacy, writing, arithmetic, measurement, and civic knowledge;
b) integration of technical and productive instruction within the ordinary system of public education;
c) establishment of vocational, agricultural, industrial, commercial, and mechanical schools;
d) formal organization of apprenticeships between educational institutions, workshops, farms, public services, and national enterprises;
e) adaptation of curricula to the productive resources and economic functions of each territorial jurisdiction;
f) protection and administrative support of emerging national industries capable of employing trained persons;
g) coordination of education policy with customs, taxation, public credit, infrastructure, agriculture, and industrial policy;
h) recognition of teachers, technicians, artisans, farmers, mechanics, accountants, and industrial instructors as agents of national capacity;
i) establishment of public standards for competency, certification, professional conduct, and productive qualification;
j) conversion of popular education into a permanent instrument of constitutional citizenship, economic participation, and institutional autonomy.
XI. DISTINCTION BETWEEN POPULAR EDUCATION AND ELITE INSTRUCTION
Edmond Paul did not deny the necessity of advanced academic, scientific, legal, or administrative education. His doctrine rejected the confinement of national expenditure to an elite educational circuit incapable of transforming the material condition of the general population.
A State could not be classified as educationally developed solely because it maintained secondary schools, professional faculties, or a limited class of graduates. The controlling criterion was whether education had entered the productive structure of the country and increased the real capacity of its inhabitants to work, manufacture, administer, calculate, construct, cultivate, exchange, and govern.
Popular industrial education consequently did not constitute an inferior branch of academic education. It possessed an autonomous State function. Its legal object was national capacity; its administrative object was mass qualification; its economic object was productive independence; and its constitutional object was the material enlargement of competent citizenship.
XII. INSTITUTIONAL LEGACY
Edmond Paul must be recognized as one of the earliest systematic theorists of the relationship between mass education, industrial policy, fiscal organization, and State capacity. His work anticipated the modern principle that education policy cannot be separated from employment, production, technology, territorial development, and national economic strategy.
His doctrine corrected the false institutional division between education and economy. For Edmond Paul, the productive weakness of the country could not be remedied exclusively through commercial legislation, foreign capital, taxation, or administrative decrees. It required the organized formation of the population itself.
The co-foundation of the Liberal Party provided this doctrine with a national political vehicle. The Party’s demand for government by competence was completed by Edmond Paul’s demand for the mass production of competence through public and industrial education. The qualified State and the educated population were not competing models. They constituted the governing and social dimensions of the same constitutional project.
Edmond Paul’s permanent legacy therefore rests upon three institutional foundations: the establishment of organized Liberal government; the formulation of a coherent national political economy; and the classification of popular industrial education as an essential function of the State.
He stands as the doctrinal co-founder of the Liberal Party, the principal political economist of its constitutional order, and the architect of a national educational model under which public instruction was required to reach the population at scale, generate practical capacity, sustain domestic production, and establish the human infrastructure of sovereign government.
PRINCIPAL PUBLISHED WORKS
1861 — Questions politico-économiques
Foundational examination of the relationship between political authority, economic organization, and national administration.
1862 — De l’industrie dans les villes
Institutional study of urban industry, productive diversification, and the development of domestic manufacturing capacity.
1862 — L’Éducation industrielle du peuple, ou la protection due aux industries naissantes
Principal statement of the doctrine connecting mass popular education, technical formation, industrial protection, and national productive sovereignty.
1863 — Questions politico-économiques
Continuation and consolidation of his political-economic analysis.
1876 — De l’impôt sur les cafés
Foundational study of coffee taxation, export revenue, agricultural production, and fiscal policy.
1882 — La Force publique en Haïti
Examination of the legal, financial, and political position of the armed public force within the State.
1882 — Les Causes de nos malheurs
Institutional analysis of governmental incapacity, economic disorder, and national decline.
1882 — Un jugement sur Haïti
General assessment of the political, administrative, and economic condition of the country.
The historical record identifies Edmond Paul as a co-founder of the Liberal Party and documents his parliamentary service, exile, return to legislative authority, and extensive economic writings. His 1862 work on the industrial education of the people remains the principal textual foundation for the classification of his educational doctrine as a national system of popular, productive, and mass instruction. See the consolidated biographical and bibliographical record of Edmond Paul and the institutional history of the Liberal Party.

SOVEREIGN CATHOLIC INDIGENOUS AND PRIVATE STATE OF XARAGUA
OFFICE OF THE RECTOR-PRESIDENT
SUPREME CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY
MINISTRY OF CULTURAL AND ANCESTRAL PRESERVATION
SUPREME ACT
ON THE HISTORICAL CLASSIFICATION, JURIDICAL PROTECTION, CONSERVATION, AND INSTITUTIONAL CUSTODY OF THE FORT DES OLIVIERS
Date of Promulgation: 17 June 2025
Legal Classification: Supreme Heritage Instrument — Protected Military Architecture Act — Indigenous Cultural Patrimony Measure — Permanent Instrument of Historical Preservation
Competent Authority: Ministry of Cultural and Ancestral Preservation
Territorial Location: Saint-Louis-du-Sud, Southern Peninsula of Xaragua
Institutional Status: Protected Historical and Military Site
PREAMBLE
The Sovereign Catholic Indigenous and Private State of Xaragua, acting through the Office of the Rector-President and the Ministry of Cultural and Ancestral Preservation;
Considering that the Fort des Oliviers is situated at Saint-Louis-du-Sud, within the historical defensive complex controlling the Bay of Saint-Louis and the southern maritime approaches;
Recognizing that the Fort des Oliviers originates in the colonial military occupation and fortification of Saint-Louis-du-Sud and constitutes material evidence of the successive English and French struggles for control of the southern coast, including the military history surrounding the Battle of Saint-Louis of 19 March 1748;
Affirming that the site forms part of the historical military landscape comprising the Fort Saint-Louis, the Fort des Anglais, Bonnet Carré, coastal batteries, anchorage-control positions, and associated defensive remains;
Acting pursuant to the constitutional authority of Xaragua over its institutional heritage; Articles 11, 25, 26, 31, 32 and 34 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage of 1972; Articles 2, 4 and 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict of 1954; Article 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; and the internationally recognized conservation principles formulated by UNESCO and ICOMOS;
Hereby promulgates the following Supreme Act:
ARTICLE I — HISTORICAL CLASSIFICATION
a) The Fort des Oliviers is hereby classified as a Protected Historical and Military Site of Xaragua and as an integral component of the cultural, architectural, territorial, and military patrimony of the Southern Peninsula.
b) The protected classification includes the surviving fortification, structural remains, foundations, defensive platforms, archaeological deposits, access routes, visual corridors, immediate landscape, and any movable or immovable element historically connected with the site.
c) The Fort shall not be represented as a post-independence construction. Its juridical classification is founded upon its documented colonial-period origin, its strategic relationship to the Bay of Saint-Louis, and its subsequent incorporation into the historical patrimony of the southern territory.
d) The classification established by this Act concerns historical preservation and shall not, by itself, alter any separately established title, possession, administrative competence, or custodial arrangement affecting the site.
ARTICLE II — HISTORICAL AND STRATEGIC CHARACTER
a) The Fort des Oliviers is recognized as evidence of the military importance historically attributed to Saint-Louis-du-Sud as an anchorage, maritime-access point, fortified settlement, and contested strategic position within the Caribbean.
b) Its protected status derives from:
i. its association with the historical defense and surveillance of the Bay of Saint-Louis;
ii. its material connection with the English and French military presence in the southern peninsula;
iii. its integration within the fortified landscape of Saint-Louis-du-Sud;
iv. its archaeological and architectural value as surviving military infrastructure; and
v. its capacity to document the successive colonial, postcolonial, maritime, and territorial orders affecting the South.
c) No unsupported attribution of construction, command, battle, garrison, or institutional use shall be entered into the official record without documentary, archaeological, cartographic, or materially verifiable evidence.
ARTICLE III — PROTECTIVE LEGAL REGIME
a) The Ministry of Cultural and Ancestral Preservation shall exercise exclusive Xaraguayan institutional competence over the classification, documentation, interpretation, conservation policy, and official historical record of the Fort des Oliviers.
b) The following acts are prohibited within the Xaraguayan institutional order unless expressly authorized by the Ministry:
i. demolition, dismantling, excavation, perforation, structural alteration, or removal of historic material;
ii. construction or installation capable of impairing the integrity, authenticity, stability, visibility, or historical character of the site;
iii. removal, sale, exportation, concealment, or unauthorized possession of archaeological or architectural components;
iv. commercial appropriation implying ownership, exclusive custodianship, or official endorsement not lawfully conferred; and
v. falsification, destruction, suppression, or fraudulent alteration of the historical record.
c) Every Xaraguayan authority, institution, officer, contractor, academic body, and affiliated entity shall refuse recognition, assistance, financing, certification, or institutional participation in any act incompatible with this protective regime.
d) Any sanction shall be imposed exclusively under duly promulgated Xaraguayan law, according to the principles of legality, competent jurisdiction, evidence, proportionality, and due process.
ARTICLE IV — CONSERVATION AND INTERVENTION
a) Every conservation measure shall preserve the authenticity, material integrity, historical stratification, military configuration, and territorial context of the Fort.
b) Restoration shall not authorize conjectural reconstruction, architectural falsification, decorative transformation, or the substitution of undocumented structures for authentic remains.
c) Any intervention shall be preceded by:
i. historical and archival assessment;
ii. architectural and structural documentation;
iii. archaeological evaluation where ground disturbance is contemplated;
iv. photographic and cartographic recording;
v. identification of materials and construction techniques; and
vi. a written conservation determination issued by the Ministry.
d) Applicable technical standards shall include the 1964 International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites, the 1994 Nara Document on Authenticity, and relevant UNESCO and ICOMOS principles governing historic fortifications, archaeological integrity, minimum intervention, reversibility, and documentary traceability.
ARTICLE V — INSTITUTIONAL USE
a) The Fort des Oliviers may be incorporated into official programs of historical instruction, military-history research, archaeological study, territorial education, archival documentation, and supervised cultural visitation.
b) Ceremonial or commemorative use shall remain subordinate to physical conservation, public security, historical accuracy, and the dignity of the site.
c) The Indigenous Army of Xaragua may participate in commemorative observances and symbolic military custody only pursuant to a written mandate of the competent constitutional authorities and without displacement of the conservation jurisdiction of the Ministry.
d) No military, academic, religious, commercial, or ceremonial use shall modify the protected structure or confer permanent rights over the site.
ARTICLE VI — RECORD, COOPERATION, AND NON-ALIENATION
a) The Ministry shall enter the Fort des Oliviers in the official register of protected cultural and ancestral property.
b) The official record shall contain available historical sources, maps, surveys, photographs, architectural descriptions, conservation assessments, archaeological findings, and records of authorized intervention.
c) Cooperation with territorial residents, researchers, conservation specialists, universities, ecclesiastical institutions, public authorities, or international heritage bodies may be established by written instrument without transfer of Xaraguayan classification authority.
d) No cooperation agreement shall authorize alienation, privatization, permanent commercial concession, removal of protected material, or foreign appropriation of the institutional identity of the Fort.
ARTICLE VII — FINAL AUTHORITY
a) This Act constitutes the exclusive Xaraguayan legal instrument governing the historical classification and institutional protection of the Fort des Oliviers.
b) The Ministry of Cultural and Ancestral Preservation is charged with its execution, interpretation, archival registration, and technical implementation.
c) References to international instruments incorporated herein constitute authoritative interpretive and conservation standards within the Xaraguayan legal order. They shall not be construed as asserting UNESCO inscription, international recognition, treaty succession, or institutional status not separately obtained.
d) This Act shall enter into force upon promulgation and shall remain effective until amended or repealed by an instrument of equal or superior constitutional authority.
Promulgated under the supreme constitutional authority of the State, on 17 June 2025.
Monsignor Pascal Despuzeau Daumec Viaud
Rector-President
Sovereign Catholic Indigenous and Private State of Xaragua
AUTHORITATIVE REFERENCES
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Articles 11, 25, 26, 31, 32 and 34.
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 15.
UNESCO, Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, 1972, Articles 4 and 5.
UNESCO, Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, 1954, Articles 2, 4 and 5.
ICOMOS, International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites, Venice Charter, 1964.
ICOMOS, Nara Document on Authenticity, 1994.
M. L. E. Moreau de Saint-Méry, Description topographique, physique, civile, politique et historique de la partie française de l’isle Saint-Domingue, historical description of Saint-Louis-du-Sud.
Ignacio J. López Hernández, “Fundar para defender: fortificación y geoestrategia en Saint-Domingue entre 1665 y 1748,” Gladius, Vol. 39, 2019, pp. 147–168.

SOVEREIGN CATHOLIC INDIGENOUS AND PRIVATE STATE OF XARAGUA
OFFICE OF THE RECTOR-PRESIDENT
SUPREME CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY
MINISTRY OF CULTURAL AND ANCESTRAL PRESERVATION
SUPREME ACT
ON THE TERRITORIAL CLASSIFICATION OF MARFRANC AND THE PROTECTION OF FORT MARFRANC AS A HISTORICAL, MILITARY, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, AND ANCESTRAL SITE
Date of Promulgation: 17 June 2025
Legal Classification: Supreme Territorial and Heritage Instrument — Protected Military Architecture Act — Indigenous Cultural Patrimony Measure
Competent Authority: Ministry of Cultural and Ancestral Preservation
Territorial Location: Marfranc, Grand’Anse Region, Xaragua
Protected Property: Fort Marfranc and its associated historical perimeter
PREAMBLE
The Sovereign Catholic Indigenous and Private State of Xaragua, acting through the Office of the Rector-President and the Ministry of Cultural and Ancestral Preservation;
Considering the location of Marfranc within the Grand’Anse territorial division of the historical Cacicazgo of Xaragua;
Recognizing Fort Marfranc as a post-independence defensive work constructed after 1804 under the authority of the new national order to protect Jérémie and the Grand’Anse region against any attempted restoration of French colonial authority;
Acknowledging the documented role of General Laurent Férou, commander of the liberation of Grand’Anse, signatory of the Act of Independence of 1 January 1804, director of the fort’s construction, and historical person interred within its perimeter;
Acting pursuant to Articles 11, 25, 26, 31, 32 and 34 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; Articles III, VI, XIII, XIX and XXVIII of the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; Article 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; Articles 4 and 5 of the 1972 UNESCO World Heritage Convention; the 1970 UNESCO Convention concerning illicit trafficking in cultural property; and the conservation principles of UNESCO and ICOMOS;
Hereby promulgates the following Supreme Act:
ARTICLE I — TERRITORIAL CLASSIFICATION
a) Marfranc is formally classified within the Xaraguayan territorial corpus as an Ancestral, Agricultural, Historical, and Strategic Zone of Grand’Anse.
b) This classification protects the Indigenous territorial memory, agricultural landscape, waterways, historical routes, archaeological deposits, burial places, military remains, and cultural practices associated with Marfranc.
c) The classification constitutes an internal act of territorial administration, historical continuity, cultural protection, and institutional preservation within the Xaraguayan legal order.
ARTICLE II — HISTORICAL STATUS OF FORT MARFRANC
a) Fort Marfranc is declared a Protected National Military and Historical Site of Xaragua.
b) The Fort shall be officially recorded as a post-independence defensive work constructed after 1804 as part of the national fortification system established against a possible French colonial return.
c) The construction was directed by General Laurent Férou at a position overlooking and protecting the approaches to Jérémie.
d) The site incorporates remains associated with the former property of Captain Marfranc, a French officer from whom the locality derived its present name, together with areas historically occupied by plantation structures and enslaved persons.
e) The burial place of General Laurent Férou within the Fort constitutes an inseparable component of its protected historical perimeter.
ARTICLE III — PROTECTED PERIMETER
a) The protected property comprises:
i. the surviving walls, foundations, platforms, defensive works, and structural remains of the Fort;
ii. all artillery pieces, military objects, construction materials, and archaeological artifacts lawfully identified within the site;
iii. the burial place of General Laurent Férou;
iv. the underlying archaeological strata and former plantation remains; and
v. the immediate landscape and visual approaches necessary to preserve the historical interpretation of the Fort.
b) The Ministry of Cultural and Ancestral Preservation shall determine the precise protective perimeter through archival examination, archaeological survey, cartographic documentation, and physical inspection.
ARTICLE IV — LEGAL PROTECTION
a) No Xaraguayan institution, officer, contractor, academic body, affiliated entity, or authorized representative may undertake or support:
i. demolition, excavation, removal, alteration, or structural intervention without prior ministerial authorization;
ii. removal, sale, exportation, concealment, or unauthorized possession of artillery pieces, architectural elements, funerary objects, or archaeological materials;
iii. construction or commercial activity impairing the integrity, authenticity, visibility, or historical character of the site;
iv. disturbance of the burial place of General Laurent Férou; or
v. falsification or unsupported alteration of the official historical record.
b) Any sanction shall be imposed exclusively under duly promulgated law, competent jurisdiction, established evidence, proportionality, and due process.
ARTICLE V — CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
a) The Ministry of Cultural and Ancestral Preservation shall exercise exclusive Xaraguayan institutional competence over the classification, documentation, conservation policy, interpretation, and official registration of Fort Marfranc.
b) Every intervention shall comply with the principles of minimum intervention, material authenticity, structural compatibility, reversibility where technically possible, archaeological supervision, and documentary traceability.
c) Conjectural reconstruction, decorative falsification, displacement of historic materials, and any representation unsupported by archival or archaeological evidence are prohibited.
d) The Indigenous Army of Xaragua may participate in official commemorations and ceremonial custody without acquiring conservation jurisdiction or authority to modify the site.
ARTICLE VI — CULTURAL AND ACADEMIC USE
a) Fort Marfranc may be used for supervised historical instruction, archaeological research, military-history education, territorial studies, official commemoration, and the transmission of Grand’Anse historical memory.
b) The University of Xaragua may conduct research, documentation, field instruction, and archival programs at the site pursuant to authorization from the Ministry.
c) Commemorative use shall remain subordinate to conservation requirements, historical accuracy, public security, and respect for the burial perimeter.
d) No religious use shall confer canonical sacred status upon the Fort unless the site or a defined portion thereof is lawfully dedicated or blessed in accordance with Canons 1205–1213 of the Code of Canon Law.
ARTICLE VII — FINAL PROVISIONS
a) The classification of Marfranc and Fort Marfranc is permanent within the Xaraguayan legal order unless amended by an instrument of equal or superior constitutional authority.
b) This Act does not create an international heritage inscription, modify independently existing property titles, or confer authority upon any institution not expressly identified herein.
c) International instruments cited in this Act shall serve as interpretive and technical standards for Indigenous participation, cultural preservation, archaeological protection, and conservation practice.
d) The Ministry of Cultural and Ancestral Preservation is charged with the execution, archival registration, and institutional implementation of this Act.
e) This Act enters into force upon promulgation.
Promulgated under the supreme constitutional authority of the State on 17 June 2025.
Monsignor Pascal Despuzeau Daumec Viaud
Rector-President
Sovereign Catholic Indigenous and Private State of Xaragua
AUTHORITATIVE REFERENCES
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Articles 11, 25, 26, 31, 32 and 34.
American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Articles III, VI, XIII, XIX and XXVIII.
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 15.
UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, 1972, Articles 4 and 5.
UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, 1970.
Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, 1954, Articles 2, 4 and 5.
ICOMOS, International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites, 1964.
ICOMOS, Nara Document on Authenticity, 1994.
Code of Canon Law, Canons 1205–1213, exclusively where a place has received the ecclesiastical dedication or blessing required by canon law.