Cheat Sheet
The Best In Brief
Mr. Zelaya Goes to Washington
Freshly turned away from the Tegucigalpa airport runway, where military forces prevented his plane from landing, recently deposed Honduran President Manuel Zelaya will next meet with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. The talks, scheduled for Tuesday, will represent the American administration's highest-level contact yet with Zelaya since he was ousted eight days ago in a coup. Prior to this planned meeting, the Obama administration had taken little public action regarding the political upheaval. Large protests have been continuing in Honduras since the coup, with about 2,000 peaceful demonstrators acting near the presidential palace on Monday.
Partner Sites: Expedia| Hotels| Hotwire| Urbanspoon| Vimeo
This is like something out of the bad old days in Latin America, and should definitely be discouraged, or there will be military regimes in power again all the way to Antartica.
These countries would all do well to follow the example of Costa Rica, which abolished in army in 1948. That would remove the danger of coups like these forever, and free up more money for social and economic development--which should be the primary goal everywhere in Latin America.
We should be heavily promoting this in Mexico and other countries, to reduce the number of illegal immigrants coming here.
This was from a comment from a Honduran named Paz ont he WSJ site. It might give you perspective from a honduran and he was responding to an American named Ed, who was speaking in general terms for Zelaya.
"Ed, this is not simply an issue of class conflict or the rise of the left. It is about the RULE OF LAW, something very fragile in Latin America that must be preserved at all costs. If you still don't see how Zelaya violated the rule of law I have pasted an explanation by a Honduran lawyer and Harvard Law School graduate:
"If you are not familiar with the country's history and the Honduran constitution it is almost impossible that you would understand what happened here this past weekend. In 1982 my country adopted a new Constitution to allow our ordered return to democracy. After 19 previous constitutions -two Spanish ones, three as part of the Republic of Central America, and 14 as an independent nation- this one, at 28, has been the longest lasting one. It has lasted for so long because it responds and adapts to our changing reality, as seen in the fact that out of its original 379 articles, 7 of them have been completely or partially repealed, 18 have been interpreted, and 121 have been reformed.
It also includes 7 articles that cannot be repealed or amended because they address issues that are critical for us. Those unchangeable articles deal with the form of government, the extent of our borders, the number of years of the presidential term, two prohibitions -one to reelect presidents and another one to change the article that states who can't run for president- and one article that penalizes the abrogation of the Constitution.
In these 28 years, Honduras has found legal ways to deal with its own problems. Each and every successful country around the world lived similar trial and error processes until they were able to find legal vehicles that adapt to their reality. France had 13 Constitutions between 1789 and the adoption of the current one in 1958 which has passed 22 constitutional revisions. The USA had one before this one which has been amended 27 times since 1789 and the British -pragmatic as they are- in 900 years have change it so many times that they have never taken the time to compile their Constitution into a single body of law.
Having explained that, under our Constitution, what happened in Honduras this last Sunday? Soldiers arrested and took out of the country a Honduran citizen that, the day before, through his actions had stripped himself of the presidency of Honduras.
These are the hard facts. Last Friday Mister Zelaya, with his cabinet, issued a decree ordering all government employees to take part in the "Public Opinion Poll to convene a National Constitutional Assembly" (Presidential Decree PCM-020). The decree was published on Saturday on the official newspaper. With this event, Mister Zelaya triggered a constitutional protection that automatically removed him from office.
The key legal elements for that constitutional protection to be triggered are the following ones. Constitutional assemblies are convened to write new constitutions. In Honduras, you have 365 articles that can be changed by Congress. When Zelaya published that decree to regulate an "opinion poll" about the possibility of convening a national assembly he acted against the unchangeable articles of the constitution that deal with the prohibition of reelecting a president and of extending his term. His actions showed intent.
How is that kind of intent sanctioned in our Constitution? With the immediate removal of those involved in the action as stated in Article 239 of the Constitution which reads: "No citizen that has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President. Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years." Notice that the rule speaks about intent and that it also says immediately -as in instant, as in no trial required, as in no impeachment needed.
This immediate sanction might sound draconian, but every country knows its own enemies. Requiring no previous trial might be crazy, but in Latin America a President is no ordinary citizen, it is the most powerful figure of the land and historically the figure has been above the law. To prevent that officer from using its power to stay in office Honduras has constitutional rules such as the mentioned one.
I am extremely proud of my compatriots. Finally, we have decided to stand up and become a country of laws, not men. From now on, here, no one will be above the law."
hthe link to the above:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124683595220397927.html#articleTabs=comm ents#comment270108
I have to admit, I was very skeptical of your citation, akcita. I did some digging and found a really cool site. It has A BUNCH of national constitutions!
http://www.constitution.org/cons/natlcons.htm
Unfortunately, it only has the Spanish version of the Honduran constitution.
So I used good ol' Babel fish:
http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_txt
And it says pretty much what Paz (which means peace, BTW) said in his post.
However, I do not believe it provides a justification for immediate exile of that head of state. That's really what makes this whole thing look bad and why people are mad enough to get killed over it.
It's also why our government has weighed in against transfers of power that do not involve people with guns waking up the head of state in the middle of the night and exiling that head of state to another country.
Akcita:
Let's face the facts: What Zelaya was calling for was a completely NON-BINDING referendum. The poll would have itself changed exactly nothing. It's pretty apparent that it would have come out in Zelaya's favor (or else the elite would have stood pat and let him fail at the ballot box and get embarrassed) which means that he would have then had a great deal of moral leverage for pushing for a constitutional convention to discuss ACTUALLY changing the constitution. You can look at it however you want to look at it but it boils down to the Honduran elite being so afraid of the leverage that Zelaya would then have in his case for changing their one-sided right-wing "constitution" written by their oligarchs with the intention of preventing any leftist radical from remaining in office long enough to enact major changes to the social order, a social order that benefits the wealthy elite minority while at least 40% of the Honduran population lives on a dollar a day or less. (By the way, Zelaya wanted to raise the minimum wage by 60% so it's no wonder the rich Honduran oligarchy hates his guts.)
He was ousted on a technicality of their b.s. toilet paper "constitution" that isn't fit to wipe one's ass with, kidnapped at gunpoint in his pajamas rather than let the Honduran electorate even voice completely NON-BINDING support for changing their right-wing "constitution". Anybody claiming that these actions are in the interest of the rule of law has their head up their ass. And you have no way of knowing he's even Honduran. Which itself proves exactly nothing anyway since there is a minority of Hondurans that support the coup, namely the military, the Honduran intelligence agency surely and the Honduran wealthy elite. Which if he is in fact even Honduran at all, that would be the most likely direction "Paz" or whatever his name is coming from. Those arguing for the coup are really arguing for anti-democratic measures that thwart the expression of popular sentiment, for the benefit of the rich oligarchy not the Honduran people at large, but hiding behind technicalities and bulls**t propaganda to try to unconvincingly put lipstick on the pig. The world isn't buying it.
Circumventing the Legislature and taking a mob to a military base to take ballots by force is hardly the method a legitimate president uses. His crimes are sufficient for removal under this constitution, and based on the above, consistent with their constitutional controls.
The class warfare bent you are on is not justification for anarchy, and in fact the kowtowing to Venezuela on this smells of appeasement. As I am not aware of what is happening behind the scenes, I am hoping what appears to be our alignment with a socialist axis in Latin America is not truly the case.
Akcita:
If anything Zelaya did was cause for impeachment then this begs the question "Why wasn't he impeached?" Why did the oligarchy feel it necessary to immediately have him kidnapped at gunpoint? If you used your head you'd be able to figure out it's because it was based on a technicality and wouldn't hold up in court while they still had to get him out of office and into exile before his completely non-binding referendum could be held. That's common sense. It's also common sense to figure out which way the referendum would have gone, for Zelaya's idea of calling a constitutional convention. Otherwise the elite would have let him have his referendum and fail. You can go on about mobs storming military bases but it sounds ridiculous. Please try to use simple reasoning here OK? If he was leading some mob to storm a military base (!) don't you think he would have been arrested THEN? And everyone would be talking about the crazy president of Honduras that tried to storm a military base with a mob? That's asinine. No wonder WorldNetDaily seems to be the place that this bulls**t story originates.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=103299
Why was the president kidnapped at gunpoint while sleeping peacefully in his bed? Instead of while in the act of storming the military base with a mob? And as if he would be able to get away with storming this base, stealing the ballots and then presumably using them to rig this non-binding referendum?? Without the military knowing this happened?? How gullible does someone have to be to fall for that yarn? Really, I would be embarrassed if I were you.
You should really try to think these things through before you commit to believing in some crock of s**t story as that. Here's the bottom line Akcita: The referendum was never allowed to be held as the elected president of Honduras was kidnapped beforehand. Not taken into custody leading your imaginary b.s. "storming of a military base" but in his bed. The military shot up his house. Kidnapped him at gunpoint. Didn't even give him time to put his effing clothes on. Can you please figure out why they acted in such haste instead of pursuing some legal means of impeachment if he was such a supposedly tyrannical a-hole? The answer is staring you in the face: The reason for the haste is because they were overthrowing him before his NON-binding poll could be held. This poll would have legally changed nothing but was a huge threat to the elite by the presumed outcome giving Zelaya leverage, showing that the public is in agreement with changing their "constitution". Rather than allow that intolerable situation, he was kidnapped.
Regarding Venezuela, they actually have a real choice in their elections unlike in the U.S. where "democracy" equals choosing your favorite conservative to be the next president.
mcmchugh99 -- Zelaya disobeyed a Court ruling, was told to obey the Court by his Congress and he still would not budge. This is not a military takeover. Congress asked the military to send him packing.
Zelaya is one more of H. Chavez acolytes. Do not cry a tear for this unconstitutional usurper.
Thank you very much and this was not a coup! They threw him out because he was going to force his will and not follow the law! All parts of the government worked cohesively within the law except this Zelaya! Let him run to Obama. Honduras has been thrown out of he OAS because of this and now Obama has no "organizational" say in the matter. If I were Honduras I would glad to be rid of any org which tried to dictate rather than follow the constitutional process!
Yep, that's how I read it.
Squiggy:
I explained this to you on a thread from yesterday. Here it is again:
You are arguing on behalf of the small, unpopular Honduran wealthy oligarchy when at least 40% of their country's population lives on a dollar or less per day. Zelaya wanted to raise the minimum wage by 60%! No wonder the Honduran wealthy class hated him!
You are arguing for the kidnapping at gunpoint of the democratically elected president of Honduras based on a technicality in their ridiculous fascist "constitution" which was written by the Honduran elite with the intention of preventing any leftist radical from being in office long enough to enact meaningful changes to the social order. What Zelaya was calling for was a completely NON-BINDING POLL to be held to test public support for amending the constitution. This poll would have legally changed exactly NOTHING. It wouldn't have let him run for reelection, wouldn't have crowned him king of Honduras or president for life or whatever insane b.s. propaganda the Honduran elite is putting out to try to justify their COUP against their elected president.
The reason it so frightened the Honduran wealthy class is because it would have given Zelaya a great deal of MORAL LEVERAGE for his case for actually amending their "constitution" by showing he has the backing of a majority of the Honduran electorate. Simple deductive reasoning should tell you Squiggy that the outcome of the referendum would have been one of support for amending it or else the elite would have let him hold the referendum and fail, embarrassing himself, instead of taking the jackbooted fascist route of a military coup just beforehand, preventing it from being held. Think about it. So in sum: This was most definitely a coup and you are defending the anti-democratic Honduran yacht club set in their illegal move to militarily depose their elected president rather than even allow their own people to express non-binding support for amending their one-sided b.s. "constitution".
Thank you, Slave, from bringing reason and some facts to this argument. Certain people would have us believe Zelaya was attempting to change the Hondouran Constitution, which is patently untrue.
When democracies believe their leader has overstepped the law, he or she is impeached, not exiled at gunpoint by the military.
Slave Revolt;
The Honduran Constitution has numerous avenues for a President to act. You seem to be ignoring these. Political parties can pursue agendas, and a popular President can have his policies outlive his presidency all within the confines of a constitution.
Zelaya, comes off as a desperate man trying to hold on to power, and you seem intent on justifying his illegal activities based on class warfare.
Akcita:
If Zelaya was acting in an unconstitutional manner then they could have held an impeachment trial. If that was in fact the reason he was ousted which it plainly was not. No, instead of a trial for his supposed violation of the constitution he gets kidnapped by the military which shoots up his house and flies him into exile before his completely non-binding poll can be held. If he was doing anything worth being impeached over he would have been impeached. Not overthrown in a coup. This should be self-explanatory.
squiggy,you bet.This is communism stepping in thru their doors.Im not sure people really understand his ties with Chavez.etc.etc.Not only do the people of Honduras should be comended,throw the bum out.And not let him land in the country.All this should have been done to Chavez..Do you know how Chavez got his votes.??If you went for medical ,medicines,you signed you supported him.Slowly getting all his votes,Thats Democracy for you.We should be backing the people.Impeach,overthere?.
Piktor:
Read my response to Squiggy. The usurper is the coup-installed "president", not Zelaya. You're arguing against letting the Honduran electorate even express non-binding support for a measure's discussion and for the elected president of Honduras to be kidnapped at gunpoint in a coup rather than let this non-binding poll go forward, based on a technicality.
Why was it so urgent to get him out of there instead of, had he done something that truly was worthy of impeachment, impeaching him? Because it had to be before the referendum and they couldn't allow even this non-binding referendum to take place because they knew Zelaya's side of the argument would win it and then have a huge amount of leverage for ACTUALLY changing their "constitution" which was written by the Honduran elite to prevent leftist radicals from being president long enough to enact real, meaningful changes to the social order. A social order that has at least 40% of Hondurans living in abject poverty on a dollar or less per day. So he was overthrown and kidnapped rather than let him get this kind of leverage to eventually work on ACTUALLY changing the constitution.
When a President starts exhorting Mobs to attack Military Facilities, is it time for the Leglature, Military, and Judiciary to be alarmed?
Your apologism for Zelaya is ridiculous. Have him anoint a successor in his party and have them continue his reforms. He comes off as man desperate to retain power just as you indicate the Bourgeois rest of the government is.
Akcita:
If Zelaya was acting in an unconstitutional manner then they could have held an impeachment trial. If that was in fact the reason he was ousted which it plainly was not. No, instead of a trial for his supposed violation of the constitution he gets kidnapped by the military which shoots up his house and flies him into exile before his completely non-binding poll can be held. If he was doing anything worth being impeached over he would have been impeached. Not overthrown in a coup. This should be self-explanatory.
I don't see a problem. The military is defending the countries constitution and kicking out a socialist buddy of Hugo Chavez.
I hope we give him the same kind of help we gave the Dali Lama and the Shah of Iran.
Let's hear it for the Hondurans. And may they be the first (or are they the second after Iran) to tell Obama what he can do with it.
By "the Hondurans" who do you mean? The average Honduran in the street? They are not represented by the illegitimate coup-installed government. The Honduran poor and working class largely want Zelaya back. The Honduran rich oligarchy? Now THAT is who the Honduran coupsters are working for and who they speak for.
By the way the Shah of Iran was a piece of s**t who deserved the cancer he got. The U.S. had "helped" him for 26 years by installing him (in a C.I.A.-backed coup) and helped him remain there, even training his secret police in the most effective ways to torture. What do you want them to do in 1979? Invade Iran and re-install him or something?
Soooo, i guess the Legislators in the Congress their are hereditary titles or something? I guess those People can't vote for reformist legislators? You ignore any fact that threatens your argument.
You act as if there is no democracy in Honduras, ( but there is) and then argue that the installation of this man and enabling him to be a President for longer is the only way to help the people.
This is untrue, and there are many methods for the people's voice to be heard.
Akcita:
Where is the support for the coup coming from? From the Honduran working class and poor? Or from the upper class? Is it from the people living on less than a dollar a day? Of course not. Zelaya wanted to raise the minimum wage by 60%. Can you see how the moneyed class in Honduras would loathe him?
The democracy in Honduras is a joke if their constitution is so neutered that no president can be allowed to run for more than a single term. Why do you think this is Akcita? Because the oligarchs who wrote their "constitution", written during a time when leftists were being brutalized in Honduras, wanted to make sure that no radical could be in office long enough to enact real, meaningful changes to the status quo. You've got a toilet paper "constitution" written by the wealthy, for the wealthy and an elected president that gets kidnapped by his own military at gunpoint for wanting to hold a completely non-binding poll. None of that is consistent with allowing the voice of the Honduran people to be heard but rather just smacks of a less-sophisticated version of what in America passes for democracy. At least the U.S. constitution allows presidents to run for reelection, not that it would do any good anyway since anybody with any shot at getting elected is already a bought & paid for marionette of the American elite. Honduras is a little more hamfisted about it with their one-term maximum for presidents but more open in the sense that obviously someone can end up elected who is a threat to the Honduran elite. But when he makes them nervous with planning a non-binding plebescite to gauge the public's support for a convention to work on amending the constitution he gets overthrown in a coup by the military. So it's a less-sophisticated method of their elite hanging onto power in Honduras. In any case, respect for democracy wouldn't involve kidnapping elected presidents in their pajamas but if they are accused of wrongdoing impeaching them in an actual trial and then if convicted taking them into custody. Not what happened in Honduras.
There's a reason why the world at large and you are on opposite sides of this matter Akcita and it surely isn't because they're all "leftist sympathizers" or something.
Akcita:
By the way, a Honduran military lawyer has now publicly admitted that overthrowing Zelaya was illegal.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/255/story/71238.html
It does not matter that the propagandists for this coup keep trying to sugar coat it, it is still a bad example and cannot be tolerated. At least I am being consistent in opposing dictatorships in Iran, North Korea, Burma, Zimbabwe and Honduras. I oppose them all, and will not be swayed from that.
I don't understand our government supporting a guy who wants a referendum that is designed to wipe out term limits; one that the Supreme Court of the country and the Attorney General say is illegal.
Maybe I missed something? I don't like our Supreme Court, but until it gets changed to my liking, it is still our Supreme Court and entitled to say "what the law is." Is it different in Honduras? If so, why?
It wasn't supporting "a guy", it was supporting the idea of a head of state not being kicked out of the country in the middle of the night by the army.
Bezvodka:
Like Rapierwits said Obama's tepid and anemic support for the elected government of Honduras is just that, support for the ELECTED government of Honduras versus the idea that anybody can be thrown out in a coup.
And the referendum wasn't "designed to wipe out term limits". It was completely non-binding. The Honduran elite was so scared of this non-binding poll (as they knew that it would show popular support behind Zelaya's intention of forming a constitutional convention to discuss changing their right-wing "constitution") that rather than try to impeach him they had him kidnapped at gunpoint before the referendum could be held.
Sounds a lot different than someone crowning themself emperor for life of Honduras now doesn't it?
Again, a non-binding storming of a military base ( to steal balloting materials). Is this a problem?
I suppose not if you are intent on ignoring such things.
Too many are focusing on his ouster (which is allowed by their constitution), and not focusing on what led to it.
Akcita:
Your "storming of a military base" brings up the question: If this occurred then why wasn't Zelaya arrested for that? The apparent source of your zany tale about this supposed incident is World Net Daily (every other source seems to be copying this article word-for-word) which says: "When the head of the armed forces obeyed the legal authority, the Honduran Supreme Court, rather than President Zelaya, the president fired him and personally led a mob to storm the military base where the Venezuela-made ballots were being safeguarded."
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=103299
So why was he kidnapped from his home? Why not taken into custody while in the act of leading a mob to storm the military base? And why wasn't he removed via being impeached instead of a coup? The answer to people with more than s**t in their head is that he was ousted because of his non-binding referendum which would have given him leverage for having a constitutional convention where ACTUALLY changing the constitution can be discussed. If he did anything worth being impeached over then he wouldn't have been kidnapped while sleeping but arrested and tried. If he led some mob to storm a military base he would have either been killed or arrested at the scene and there would have been no coup. You truly will believe anything won't you Akcita?
"Too many are focusing on his ouster (which is allowed by their constitution), and not focusing on what led to it."
Ah, yes kidnapping the president in his pajamas instead of impeaching him, what a "democratic" course of action. What led to it is the fear of the Honduran wealthy elite of even a NON-binding referendum calling for a constitutional convention.
Akcita:
By the way, a Honduran military lawyer has now publicly admitted that overthrowing Zelaya was illegal.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/255/story/71238.html
akcita, thanks for the post and link. It was very enlightening and informative.
Obama wouldn't speak out for Mousavi and the pro-democracy forces in Iran when the presidency was stolen from Mousavi---- why should he speak out now for the deposed President of Honduras?
Probably the best the deposed president of Honduras can hope for is that Obama will apologize to him for some American sponsored coup that happened 100 years ago.
If we are going to insist on 'The rule of law..." whatever in the hell that is, perhaps we should insist that our own government follow our laws.
The law I'd like to see the Obama Admin follow is the one that says a Military Coup REQUIRES the withholding of all monies to the usurper's, and the denial of recognition [i.e. exchange of Ambassadors etc]
Our Ambassador is still in Tegulcegalpa. ALL the EU countries have recalled theirs, btw. And, while some funds are on hold, not all are. So, it's still business as usual. Our 'advisers' in Honduras admit they knew about the coup in advance, and 'advised against it'.
Oh really? Like we asked them not to toss out the elected President of Honduras in 1984? Or stepped in to aid Allende in Chile in 1973? The military in these Latin American countries are funded and trained by the US. Their 'Advisers' are nice guys like Ollie North, and work for the CIA.
Supposedly, we are not looking backward, but moving forward to a Brave New World. Too bad that new world looks just like the old one, Military Coups and CIA Advisers and all!
Since you are talking about the law. Could you describe the elements that make up a coup that are citations from the US Code? It would help with understanding what crime has been committed.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.