Multiple rounds of political negotiations aimed at building consensus around a transitional governance arrangement for Haiti took place in 2022, involving various combinations of political parties, civil society organizations, business sector representatives, and international facilitators. The negotiations reflected recognition across the political spectrum that the current situation was unsustainable and that some form of political agreement was necessary, even as the specific terms of that agreement remained deeply contested.
The central fault line in the negotiations remained the question of Ariel Henry’s role. The Montana Accord coalition and many civil society organizations insisted that Henry could not lead any credible transitional arrangement, pointing to the assassination investigation cloud and his lack of constitutional legitimacy. Henry and his supporters argued that replacing him with an alternative transitional figure without elections would itself be undemocratic and would set a dangerous precedent.
International facilitators attempted to find creative formulations that might bridge the gap — arrangements that nominally kept Henry in some role while genuinely sharing power with a broader coalition, or timelines that committed to specific election dates as conditions for international support. None of these formulations found sufficient buy-in from all parties to produce a durable agreement.
The negotiations also struggled with the question of what elections could realistically be organized given the security situation. Even parties that agreed on the principle of elections differed fundamentally on whether elections could be held in conditions where gang control prevented voter registration, campaign activities, and polling in large portions of the territory. The security problem was not just a background condition but a direct constraint on what political solutions were actually feasible.