Honduran Democracy -- Central American style ...

[HH-60H]

the constitutional succession process worked

Actually, it didn't. The vice president is next in line, not the president of the National Congress.

 

[scoolbubba]

Can we call it a constitutional succession coup? Would that make everyone happy?

The military refused an unlawful order, protected their nation's Constitution, and peacefully handed power over to the rightful authorities once the threat was handled. Seems like checks and balances (something my 11th grade civics teacher used to get a chubby over) worked for the Hondurans at least as well as it's supposed to work here. He didn't get a bullet in his head, he's not rotting in an Honduran prison cell, and he didn't have an unfortunate accident on the plane ride.

It seems pretty cut and dry that the guy was hoping to become little Hugo, a pain in our ass at best, and a Narco-Quasi-Socialist (see, I can make big words up and try to prove a point too!) dictator at worst. I don't know that coming out in support of the guy was the best course of action for the leader of the free world. This might have been one of those times to keep quiet and see how it plays out, but hey, maybe that whole saying about birds of a feather fits.

 

[red_ryder]

Kind of like if you don't break the law you have nothing to worry about, but every now and then you get those overzealous cops.

So you're saying that although it worked in this case, it could easily be abused in other circumstances?

 

[squorch2]

The military is not the way to handle domestic political disputes. The courts and law enforcement are. That's what makes this a coup.

 

[tyrone]

I'll confess too, I'm no expert on Honduran Politics. Here's my rant.

But it seems to me that although the action of extending his term may have been illegal at the time, the means he was using to achieve this weren't. So he hadn't done anything illegal, yet.

Were the military's actions illegal? Basing a removal from office on pre-emptive grounds provide a weak justification. His term runs till January so that should be honored.

 

[exhelodrvr]

I'll confess too, I'm no expert on Honduran Politics. Here's my rant.

But it seems to me that although the action of extending his term may have been illegal at the time, the means he was using to achieve this weren't. So he hadn't done anything illegal, yet.

Were the military's actions illegal? Basing a removal from office on pre-emptive grounds provide a weak justification. His term runs till January so that should be honored.

No; he was not following the proper process for making a change to their constitution. So the means were also illegal.

 

[NUFO06]

This is kind of interesting. This is the democratic way of becomming president for life. There is a long time effort by this congressman (even before Obama was on the political landscape) Jose Serrano.
http://www.end22.com/

 

[SkywardET]

Is there an ongoing war? Check.
Is there an economic depression? Check.
Is it legal? Working on that...

I am naive, but I would think that once part two of Great Depression II kicks off in full swing that, politically speaking, re-election of the present administration would be inconceivable. I genuinely believe that more and more Americans will become more and more interested in civics in the coming years because that has happened to me as a result of the combination of the election cycle last year and the "financial crisis." I see the rise in popularity of anything relating to the Freedom Movement as positive indications of this general broadening of the public awareness.

However, this thread was about Honduran Democracy. Orange you glad you live in a real democracy? I would hate for a socialist to declare himself "President for life" in my country.

 

[Flash]

I'm curious (can't dig into it right now) as to what our diplomatic responses have been over the years with Turkey when the General Staff decided to "relieve" the civilian government of their authority on several occasions. The Turkish General Staff has historically been the most pro-American power group in Turkey, so I'm interested in how DoS handled that. Flash?

Brett

The last change of power instigated by the military was the 'soft coup' in 1997, they forced the ruling government to resign but took little overt action, and I can't find anything about our reaction to it. I would think it was rather muted and probably did not make much ado about it if I can't find much. The ones previous to that, including the last 'real' coup in 1980, were not protested much by us.

No; he was not following the proper process for making a change to their constitution. So the means were also illegal.

Didn't your mother tell you two wrongs don't make a right? While the President was pushing the limits of what was legal the actions taken by the military and his opposition certainly were not. Even in a place like Honduras they have a 'legal' way to remove a president, and shoving him on a plane in his pj's ain't legal, even there.

 

[Brett327]

The last change of power instigated by the military was the 'soft coup' in 1997, they forced the ruling government to resign but took little overt action, and I can't find anything about our reaction to it. I would think it was rather muted and probably did not make much ado about it if I can't find much. The ones previous to that, including the last 'real' coup in 1980, were not protested much by us.



Didn't your mother tell you two wrongs don't make a right? While the President was pushing the limits of what was legal the actions taken by the military and his opposition certainly were not. Even in a place like Honduras they have a 'legal' way to remove a president, and shoving him on a plane in his pj's ain't legal, even there.

Interesting point, and I don't know the answer, but we're assuming a lot of things about the Honduran government based on our own system. Now, I'm personally not necessarily against the military taking extraordinary action should the situation warrant it, but I'd be interested in the specific and detailed process to address presidential misconduct per the Honduran constitution. What were the constitutional options available to the rest of the government institutions and the reasons they didn't act, etc.

Brett

 

[skidkid]

Does the Honduran military have an express constitutional responsibility to step in like the Turkish military does?

-Too lazy to look it up and I dont habla.

 

[A4sForever]

This from one Octavio Sánchez, a lawyer and former presidential adviser (2002-05) and minister of culture (2005-06) of the Republic of Honduras:

A 'coup' in Honduras? Nonsense.

Quote: " .... Don't believe the myth. The arrest of President Zelaya represents the triumph of the rule of law ...."

 

[Brett327]

This from one Octavio Sánchez, a lawyer and former presidential adviser (2002-05) and minister of culture (2005-06) of the Republic of Honduras:

A 'coup' in Honduras? Nonsense.

Quote: " .... Don't believe the myth. The arrest of President Zelaya represents the triumph of the rule of law ...."

Now THAT is exactly what I'm talking about - great Op Ed piece. Assuming what the author says is true WRT the Honduran constitution and the provision for immediate removal from office, it would seem as though what went down there was completely within the bounds of their established constitutional law. I understand that this is just one side's opinion, but this further goes to show us that we can't apply the specifics of our own system to other nations because they're clearly designed to work in different ways, given their unique histories.

Everyone should read the linked CSM piece (including members of the White House staff)! Thanks A4s!

Brett

 

[A4sForever]

.... this further goes to show us that we can't apply the specifics of our own system to other nations .....Thanks A4s!

Brett

Roger that; especially roger "that" .... we never should -- yet we usually do. Traveling around the world, over and over and over ... one thing I've noticed: different things work differently in different places. Some work mo' bettah' ... but usually not as well as the intent of the 'original'.

But we just keep on makin' that same mistake over and over and over ...

Gracias también ...

 

[Flash]

This from one Octavio Sánchez, a lawyer and former presidential adviser (2002-05) and minister of culture (2005-06) of the Republic of Honduras:

A 'coup' in Honduras? Nonsense.

Quote:" .... Don't believe the myth. The arrest of President Zelaya represents the triumph of the rule of law ...."

Now THAT is exactly what I'm talking about - great Op Ed piece. Assuming what the author says is true WRT the Honduran constitution and the provision for immediate removal from office, it would seem as though what went down there was completely within the bounds of their established constitutional law. I understand that this is just one side's opinion, but this further goes to show us that we can't apply the specifics of our own system to other nations because they're clearly designed to work in different ways, given their unique histories.

Everyone should read the linked CSM piece (including members of the White House staff)! Thanks A4s!

Brett

.....different things work differently in different places. Some work mo' bettah' ... but usually not as well as the intent of the 'original'.

But we just keep on makin' that same mistake over and over and over ...

The aurthor of the op-ed piece happens to be a member of the National Party of Honduras and the rivals to Zelaya's Liberal Party of Honduras. For those who are not following everything, the leaders fo the National Party down there just so happened to among the main instigators to his removal. It is kind of like asking Brett's avatar about the 2000 Supreme Court recount decision, you can predict the answer before pen even touches paper.

The author may be right that Zelaya overstepped his bounds and should/could have been removed from office, legally. But the manner of his removal was probably not, no matter how it is portrayed by supporters of the coup. Hustling a guy out of the country in the middle of the night into exile in his pj's is not legal, not even in a Latin American democracy. It didn't help that it happened in a region with a long and sordid history of such actions.

I know that things don't operate around the world like they do here, but the overall reality has changed in the past few years. Coups are no longer tolerated no matter where they happen, whether they are in Fiji or Honduras. While the Honduran opposition might have accomplished their goal in the short term they have made sympathetic a man who was rapidly losing power and support. They badly miscalculated by assuming things had not changed in the last 25 years, but they have and now they have to deal with the results. Everyone, even our close allies in the region and elsewhere, have condemned the coup. That ought to tell you all something.

I am not a fan of Zelaya and was looking forward to seeing him fail, which he certainly would have done. Had he been allowed to shoot himself in the foot like he was going to, he likely would have gone noisily into the night, but he still would have gone since he did not have the support of the military, courts or Congress. Pretty much the only way for him to gain support would have been to unlawfully force him from office, which was done and now he has. Who has shot themselves in the foot now?

If you want a more balanced and nuanced view of what has happened in Honduras [URL="http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/03/hunduran-coup-foreign-policy-opinions-contributors-haber-maurer.html"]this is a much better summary . The authors point out that while Zelaya violated the law the opposition did themselves no favors by also violating the law ousting him in a coup.