1.
The
Haiti
File
By
MARY
ANASTASIA
O'GRADY
February
12,
2007;
Page
A14The
Wall
Street
Journal
A
government
file
pertinent
to
two
civil
law
suits
alleging
bribery
doesn't
just
get
up
and
walk
out
of
a
supposedly
secure
federal-­‐agency
record
rooming
Washington.
When
said
bribery
allegations
involve
politically
influential
individuals
on
both
sides
of
the
aisle
and
a
notoriously
corrupt
former
Haitian
president
that
the
U.S.
supported
for
a
decade,
it's
even
more
troubling.
In
a
December
email
to
a
lawyer
in
one
of
the
lawsuits,
the
Federal
Communications
Commission
said
that
its
"Haiti
file"
was
missing.
The
file
is
the
record
of
which
U.S.
telecom
companies
that
did
business
with
the
government
of
former
Haitian
President
Jean
Bertrand
Aristide
actually
complied
with
U.S.
law
by
submitting
their
contracts
to
the
FCC.
An
official
at
the
commission
told
me
on
Friday
that
"we
don't
have
the
file
but
we
are
continuing
our
active
efforts
to
locate
it.
"I'm
not
sure
whether
the
missing
file
would
fit
into
Sandy
Berger's
socks.
But
given
the
number
of
political
heavyweights
-­‐-­‐
both
Republican
and
Democrat
-­‐-­‐
who
might
welcome
the
disappearance
of
these
documents,
it's
a
bit
difficult
to
write
the
whole
thing
off
as
an
accident.
Since
2000
I
have
followed
allegations
that
Haiti's
Mr.
Aristide
took
bribes
from
U.S.
telecom
carriers
doing
business
in
his
country.
These
charges
arose
first
in
conversations
with
Haitians
familiar
with
operations
at
the
state-­‐owned
phone
company,
Teleco.
More
recently
they
have
been
aired
in
two
separate
civil
suits
filed
in
two
different
U.S.
federal
courts.
The
alleged
quid
pro
quo
for
the
U.S.
companies
that
agreed
to
pay
the
bribes
was
access
to
the
Teleco
network
at
rates
below
the
uniform
"international
settlement
rate"
set
by
the
FCC.
During
the
course
of
my
investigations,
two
different
long-­‐distance
suppliers
told
me
that
Teleco
officials
offered
them
just
such
a
special
rate
in
exchange
for
payment
made
to
specially
designated
accounts.
If
the
allegations
are
true,
it
would
mean
that
the
Foreign
Corrupt
Practices
Act
was
violated,
right
under
the
nose
of
the
FCC
and
the
Department
of
Justice,
during
Democratic
and
Republican
administrations.
It
would
also
mean
that
while
Haitians
were
placing
their
trust
in
Uncle
Sam
to
help
them
construct
a
democracy,
millions
of
dollars
that
might
have
gone
to
building
an
infrastructure
were
siphoned
off
by
a
corrupt
tyrant
and
U.S.
business
partners
with
friends
in
high
places.
In
2000,
questions
arose
about
Fusion
Telecommunications,
which
had
a
concession
to
terminate
calls
in
Haiti
and
which,
according
to
sources,
had
an
office
inside
Teleco.
Marvin
Rosen
(finance
chairman
for
the
Democratic
National
Committee
from
September
1995
until
January
1997),
former
Democratic
Congressman
Joseph
P.
Kennedy
II,
and
Bill
Clinton
confidante
Thomas
(Mack)
McLarty
III
were
all
on
the
board
of
Fusion.
Mr.
Rosen
was
Fusion
chief
executive
officer.
Rumors
abounded
in
Haiti
that
Fusion
had
a
sweetheart
deal
with
Mr.
Aristide
that
gave
the
U.S.
firm
rates
well
below
the
international
settlement
rate.
When
I
inquired
about
the
company's
Haiti
business
while
preparing
a
Jan.2001
op-­‐ed,
I
was
immediately
referred
to
a
company
lawyer
who
refused
to
either
confirm
or
deny
that
the

2.
company
was
even
doing
business
in
Haiti.
In
September
2005,
Fusion
told
me
it
had
always
filed
what
was
required
at
the
FCC
and
denied
making
any
illegal
payments
to
Teleco.
In
2001
Mr.
Kennedy's
office
released
a
statement
that
he
had
no
"joint
venture,
partnership
or
business
arrangement
with
the
president
of
Haiti
or
for
that
matter,
anyone
in
Haiti"
and
that
he
was
not
involved
in
running
Fusion.
Nevertheless,
in
a
Feb.
7,
2001
op-­‐ed
in
the
Boston
Globe,
he
wrote,
"I
was
proud
to
help
bring
more
than
$1
million
in
private
investment
from
Fusion
into
Haiti."
That
was
peanuts
when
you
consider
that
Teleco
once
had
annual
revenues
upwards
of
$60
million.
By
the
time
Mr.
Aristide
was
forced
into
exile
by
a
political
uprising
in
2004,
the
company
was
losing
money.
The
whole
thing
might
have
been
swept
under
the
rug
if
it
weren't
for
Michael
Jewett,
who
in
2003
had
been
an
employee
at
New
Jersey-­‐based
IDT,
headed
by
former
Republican
congressman
Jim
Courter.
Like
Fusion,
IDT
had
a
number
of
seasoned
politicos
on
its
board.
In
March
2004
Mr.
Jewett
filed
suit
in
federal
court
in
Newark,
N.J.
alleging
that
he
was
fired
from
IDT
because
he
objected
to
an
illegal
deal
between
the
company
and
Mr.
Aristide.
Mr.
Jewett's
allegations
seem
to
echo
the
charges
swirling
around
Fusion.
IDT
responded
much
like
Fusion,
insisting
that
its
arrangement
with
Haiti
Teleco
was
a
trade
secret.
In
fact,
IDT
had
a
legal
obligation
to
make
its
arrangement
public
and
the
information
was
unsealed,
revealing
that
IDT
had
been
granted
a
rate
of
nine
cents
per
minute
versus
the
FCC
mandated
rate
of
23
cents.
Mr.
Jewett
also
claims
in
court
documents
that
IDT
agreed
to
make
payments
to
an
offshore
account
in
Turks
and
Caicos
called
"Mount
Salem,"
("Mont
Salem"
in
French)for
the
benefit
of
Mr.
Aristide.
After
Mr.
Aristide
was
driven
from
power
in
February
2004,
the
interim
government
pried
open
Teleco's
books
and
alleged
that
the
company
had
been
looted.
In
November
2005
it
filed
suit
in
U.S.
district
court
in
southern
Florida.
"The
fraudulent
scheme
to
steal
Teleco
revenues
was
carried
out
in
part
through
defendant
Mont
Salem,"
the
government
claimed,
adding
that,
"At
Aristide's
direction,
Inevil,
Duperval
and
Beliard
[Haitian
nationals]
directed
at
least
two
of
the
Class
B
carriers,
IDT
and
Skytel,
to
make
their
payments
for
Teleco's
services
to
Mont
Salem.
At
Aristide's
direction,
Teleco's
then-­‐counsel
also
caused
Teleco
to
request
at
least
one
other
Class
B
carrier,
Fusion,
to
make
payments
through
Mont
Salem."
Mr.
Jewett's
case
has
already
revealed
a
lot,
but
it
won't
tell
Haitians
where
millions
of
dollars
in
lost
Teleco
revenues
went
throughout
the
1990s.That
will
require
a
more
thorough
airing,
such
as
the
civil
suit
Haiti
filed
in
Florida.
Unfortunately,
Haiti
has
had
to
withdraw
its
suit
for
lack
of
funds.
Its
request
for
a
share
of
assets
forfeited
by
Haitian
drug
kingpins-­‐-­‐
which
could
be
used
to
reinstate
the
suit
and
pay
legal
fees
-­‐-­‐
has
been
resisted
by
the
DOJ.
First
DOJ
said
it
couldn't
release
the
assets
because
the
cases
were
on
appeal.
Now
it
says
that
it
doesn't
yet
have
the
forfeited
assets.
Another
way
to
get
at
the
truth
would
be
if
DOJ
used
the
mountain
of
evidence
it
seems
to
be
sitting
on
to
indict
Mr.
Aristide,
since
he
has
often
asserted
that
he
won't
remain
silent
about
his
dealings
with
highly
placed
American
politicians
if
he
is
brought
to
trial.
Why
the
DOJ
would
turn
down
an
offer
like
that
is
a
mystery,
a
little
like
the
missing
file.