Pepe met by protests in Honduras

The president-elect of Honduras, Porfirio “Pepe” Lobo, has got an earful after his surprise stunt to sign an agreement with the Dominican president, Leonel Fernandez. The network organization UCD, Union Civica Democratica, issued a statement yesterday listing numerous reasons for its illegality (La Gringa’s Blogicito has an English translation). Even abroad it has been criticized, such as in this Guatemalan editorial. Basically it appears to have no legal value, and the democratic institutions in Honduras are not recognizing it. In fact, the attorney general is threatening to prosecute any person who signs an illegal document giving free passage for Zelaya.

It has also struck a very sore nerve in Honduras. Under Micheletti people had started to relax, to feel safe again after the turmoil under Zelaya. However, this action by Pepe has made everyone I know there very nervous. Once again, they put their faith in the checks and balances, since they don’t trust the president. -And he hasn’t even taken office yet! I don’t think I have ever seen a worse start of a new presidency.

The interim president Roberto Micheletti declared yesterday that he would withdraw to leave the public room entirely for the new president. Not so fast, says the ombudsman for human rights, Ramon Custodio.* As the sitting president, Micheletti has an obligation under the constitution to hand off to the new Congress at their inaugural session on Monday, January 25th, he points out. If some congressmen object they are free to walk out, but the constitution must be followed to the letter, he insists.

Also yesterday, the case started for real against the military leadership (for having allowed Zelaya to leave the country, instead of holding him on the arrest warrant they had been issued). Until late at night the prosecutor and defense were in session with the Supreme Court, but the defendants were not required to appear. The verdict will be given on Tuesday, possibly in an oral and public statement. It may be one of those times when it is worth tuning in to Honduran TV online.

Finally, there are rumbles in the blogosphere about U.S. diplomats being at risk for scrutiny by the Congress, as soon as the Republicans manage to regain control over at least one chamber. The midterm elections are on November 2. It seems inevitable that the Obama administration will be accused of supporting a coup d’état, from both left and right, both Zelaya’s “autogolpe” and Congress’s “antigolpe”. From a politico point of view it would seem a no-brainer that they should come clean now, when all attention is on Haiti; confess the mistakes, take the consequences, side with their friends and not their enemies, and put this behind them before it becomes an election issue.

*The attitude of the ombudsman would be worthy of an honorable Swedish civil servant, and it might be a relevant observation, since his institution has received aid from Sweden in the areas of Democracy and Human Rights the last few years.

35 thoughts on “Pepe met by protests in Honduras”

  1. This is how I think it’s the Honduras Issue:

    You think that seven months of stubbornness had been of any pride for Honduras while in reality stubbornness is synonymous of stupidity on the part of the Micheletti’s sort of administration.

    Whatever president Zelaya did wrong prior to June 28th, 2009, does not stand after the brutal military coup that truncated his responsibilities while the Supreme Court did not order his return to Honduras to face trial for his sins. I honestly believe that the International Community does not believe a word of what Mr. Micheletti and his fanatics say.

    The first thing to do is to openly accept that there was an evident and irrefutable military coup. To finish a government by military means and expatriating the president is a military coup anywhere in the world. It’s a military coup that facilitated a civil government against Mr. Zelaya, but still a military coup. Without the military coup Mr. Zelaya would be still the president and without the military coup no other government, totally contrary to the former, would be in place. The military coup is the only explanation to both new situations: the expatriation of the president and a new totally opposed government to Mr. Zelaya. If fail to understand this fundamental point whatever you say has no credibility, because it’s not founded on a true fact of the events.

    If Mr. Zelaya was at fault with the law two thinks will be known by the world:

    1. The immediate order of the Supreme Court for the immediate return of President Zelaya to face trial.
    2. The immediate trial and exemplary punishment of the military for violating the Constitution and the Court order.

    This two events never happen and the international community concluded that whatever crime Mr. Zelaya committed it was of no gravity due to the fact that the Supreme Court, which gave order of his capture, not his expatriation, did not follow up to demand the immediate return of Mr. Zelaya to face trial, after the Army made decisions they never supposed to make by law neither in connection with logistics from two foreign countries: United States and Costa Rica. To this day the Supreme Court has accepted the expatriation of Mr. Zelaya without demanding his capture neither calling the military to justice.

    It’s incomprehensible the pride and joy of no allowing Mr. Zelaya’s freedom and citizen’s rights in Honduras. While it’s kind of weird that the military has not lost their jobs neither had been incarcerated after openly violating a Court order and the Constitution and crippling Honduras, leaving it without international aid and without majority support of the world. The military did not attend their Court hearing and they claim not to leave Honduras, but Mr. Zelaya came to Honduras on his own merits, so his job and rights must be respected fully.

    The second thing is to accept that expatriating a president is not constitutional; on the contrary, it is anti-constitutional. Therefore, any government after this breach of the law is spurious. It’s founded on an illegitimate action and as long as it exists is extending the illegality of its foundation. That is why United States has insisted in the return of Mr. Zelaya to his post and that is why U.S. is punishing every single actor that had built power on an illegal and anti-constitutional action. It doesn’t matter what wrong Mr. Zelaya did, the wrong made by the army and creating a government under such illegal umbrella takes away whatever Mr. Zelaya had done.

    U.S. did not count with the stupidity of the ruling Honduras government in not getting by law the return of Mr. Zelaya to power. To do so was the core of the Guaymura talks and Tegucigalpa – San José agreement. United States wants to correct what Mr. Micheletti stubbornness, or stupidity, could not accomplish as vital for the future of Honduras. Mr. Micheletti and his fanatics are too involved in the personal vendetta against Mr. Zelaya and forgave totally about the interests and well being of Honduras.

    Luckily, Mr. Lobo is not that kind of provincial politics and has a notion of what benefits Honduras not what damnages Mr. Zerlaya.

    For Mr. Lobo, Honduras is first and Zelaya must serve to the interests of Honduras, not to be the toy of childish fanatic anti-communists.

    Mr. Chavez, an international leader, is not affected by Honduras provincial politics. Venezuela, ALBA and his energy and financial global business remain unaffected without Zelaya. The full power of his enemies in Honduras did not bring the country anywhere. Mr. Micheletti, a local super-hero, was unable to bring the world economies to his side and was incapable of gaining the world support. Besides humiliating Mr. Zelaya, the anti-Chavez government of Honduras brought nothing to the benefit of Honduras. Instead of correcting Mr. Zelaya’s economy it brought a worst economy to Mr. Lobo. Mr. Micheletti cannot show that his short government corrected any of the economical problems of Honduras, on the contrary proudly presents a country in worst economically situation than the one prior to June 28th, 2009.

    Mr. Micheletti simply proved Mr. Chavez correct.

    I doubt these seven months had been of any importance or benefit to Honduras.

    1. This is a repeat post that you have already posted elsewhere, and it has been thoroughly rebuked. However, I will allow it here to get the opportunity to rebuke it again. I’ll limit myself to a couple of things for lack of time.
      A) You write that what Zelaya did does not stand after the “military coup”. First, if you wish to argue that it was a military coup, you have to present the arguments for it. Second, even if it had been a military coup, which all legal instances say it wasn’t, the crimes of Zelaya would still be crimes. He would still have to respond to the accusation of High Treason, theft of millions of dollars, and so on.
      B) You list two things that would happen if I was right, point 1 and 2. Well guess what, both HAVE happened. There is an international arrest warrant for Zelaya since early July (which is why the coward does not dare return to Honduras), and the militaries have been prosecuted and tried. Their sentence will come on Tuesday, possibly in front of the TV cameras. If so, may I suggest you turn it in, you may learn something, something that Radio Globo “forgot” to tell you, since it is a propaganda channel wanting to start a revolution.

  2. Thank you for your intent to answer my concerns.

    For your information my post had not been rebuked, neither that is what I look for.

    A) 1. I’m not presenting any arguments; I’m only repeating the facts that are in the worldwide public domain. It is a fact that the military expatriated Mr. Zelaya and that by such action Honduras was left without a president. This is an indisputable fact and that is a genuine military coup.
    2. There is no Constitutional article neither any Honduran law that justifies a military expatriation of the Constitutional president as a legal procedure to change governments in Honduras. Therefore, it does not exist any legal instance to deny the military coup against Honduras democracy and legal institutional standing.
    A criminal military coup ipso-facto breaks any legal course to follow whatever “crimes” Mr. Zelaya committed. As a matter of fact, by expatriating Mr. Zelaya the Army exonerated him from any responsibility to face the Honduran justice. The Army itself concluded that leaving Mr. Zelaya free was the best decision instead of bringing him to justice and have a negative people response. The order giving to the Army was to arrest Mr. Zelaya not to free him.

    B) Point 1 and 2, as I clearly said it, were immediate measures, but the Supreme Court and the sort of new government neglected and failed to follow up on them. In order to hold an absolute absence Mr. Zelaya was not permitted, officially, to enter Honduras. Mr. Zelaya did several intents to enter Honduras but he was not allowed by the goverment, filling the airport runway with cars or militarizing the borders.
    The latter international arrest warrant had no validity if the Supreme Court did not fire and punished the military that committed the military coup and disobeyed the high Court orders. In other words, the Supreme Court accepted the expatriation and at the same time wanted Mr. Zelaya, which is a contradiction unacceptable in international law. In addition to that the government made every effort to avoid that Mr. Zelaya enter Honduras.
    I’m sorry to learn that you are misinformed: The military had not been prosecuted neither tried, you didn’t know that last Thursday they supposed to be present for their first hearing, but all of them refused to assist. You should not listen to Radio Globo, but instead read La Prensa, La Tribuna or El Heraldo. If you read these papers you will know that they verify the news I’m bringing to you. If there is a sentence on Tuesday it will be unacceptable and only will serve as a new ground to corroborate government complicity with violation of the Supreme Court order by the military and their violation of art. 102 of the Honduran Constitution.

    1. You have to separate between facts and conclusions. It is a fact that the military allowed Zelaya to escape justice by sending him to Costa Rica, but it is your conclusion that this act amounted to a military coup. Furthermore, the term military coup is not a legal one. It is a political term used for political purposes.
      It was not Zelaya leaving the country that terminated his being a president, as far as I know. But that’s for the Supreme Court to judge.
      Just as it is for them to judge the militaries. All the articles I have read about the court hearings say that it was not deemed necessary for the military to attend the proceedings. As you know, the militaries have refused amnesty and requested that they be allowed to defend themselves in court.
      Those who try to paint the court as lacking authority just reveal that they are not men of their word.

    2. The fact is conclusive: expatriating Mr. Zelaya is leaving Honduras without president.

      It’s required and proper to use political terms for political situations.

      At no point the Supreme Court ever judged that Mr. Zelaya was not the Honduras president.

      Your sources are untruthful. The hearings they talk about do not exist. The first and only hearing was not attended by the military. Why would you bother scheduling a hearing to listen to someone’s innocence, which everyone wants to legally know from their own lips and accounts, if that hearing is unnecessary?
      It makes no sense to claim to defend themselves and not attending hearings (?). Wouldn’t Hondurans deserve to listen to their innocence precisely in these hearings that negate amnesty?

    3. You seem to live under the misguided principle that “Two wrongs make one right”. Zelaya was as guilty June 29 as he was June 27. The constitution declares what he did illegal.
      He committed an act that in popular vocabulary is called “coup d’état”. Zelaya attempted to do a golpe de estado – not Roberto Micheletti. Zelaya!
      Finally, you keep arguing against the authority of the Supreme Court of Justice. You are free to your opinion, but it is not you, but the Supreme Court of Justice, that has the last word in interpreting the constitution and laws. You are free to your opinion, but you must submit to the CSJ. If you don’t, you are an insurrectionist, just like Zelaya.
      And BTW, he didn’t try to return on two occasions as you say. He tried to start an insurrection on two occasions. That is not the same as to return and face the rule of law. The man is both a coupster and a revolutionary. He needs to be prosecuted a hundred times more than the military leadership, because he has done much more harm to the country.

    4. In my reply below I didn’t comment that Mr. Zelaya did everything possible to enter Honduras until he finally succeeded getting into Honduras.

      I also didn’t say that Mr. Zelaya never succeeded in calling for an insurrection, because his followers are too peaceful, they are true believers of Gandhi and avoid to use violence at any cost, they do not carry a name of revolutionaries, but one of Resistance, which means to resist violence and attacks, to be at the defensive never at the offensive. In Honduras there are mobsters and gangs that use any opportunity for their crimes, but because they are isolated criminals without any political goals they never can lead any insurrection.

      The “coup d’etat” criminals caused tremendous harm to Honduras, let me just mention the drop of international aid to Honduras and the lost of worldwide support for the Honduran government.

      Raising salaries is just part of the economical cycle and with new economical ventures with exports to several new countries the Honduran economy was on its way to broader options and resources that at the end would benefit all Hondurans. Whatever damages Mr. Zelaya did they cannot compare to loosing business, income and aid in the scale that Honduras lived currently, and loosing friends worldwide was never the situation while Mr. Zelaya was Honduras leader, on the contrary new friends were being added to the ones Honduras already had.

      I think that it was a big mistake to even think in overthrowing Mr. Zelaya from government. His popularity was very low and whatever ambition projects he could have they would not work if the majority of Honduras opposed him democratically. Today the situation of Honduras would be the opposite: a worldwide support for the opposition to take power and abundant money pouring into Honduras to succeed, the Zelaya’s opposition would have overwhelming power by now from the previous elections.

      Because the ultra-right pushed the most stupid idea of moving Mr. Zelaya from government instead of gaining almost hegemonic power what is left is a weak government dealing with the hardest time trying to recover part of the money and friendships Honduras lost and dealing with two oppositions fueling against the government: the Resistance as a new socialist force and the ultra-right as a revenge force that does not accept any of Mr. Lobo’s necessary concessions. This is the loosing situation that created the “coup d’état”.

    5. Now you shift focus to economy. Remember that Zelaya lost foreign aid due to reckless government. He raised government employee salaries to a level that the government couldn’t afford to pay (which may in itself be criminal) since many wages are a multiple of the minimum salary. Zelaya disobeyed the law by not passing a budget. He emptied the coffers and ruined the country. Zelaya did all that. Micheletti had budget past the first week in office. I think you have to check your sources better. However, Zelaya was not deposed for any of those reasons. He was deposed for violent acts against the government, such as storming a military base and taking material impounded by Supreme Court. Just like you throw a thief in jail they had to throw him in jail.

    6. What you mentioned were economical moves to force a political situation. According to your account Micheletti didn’t have much budget to pass, and it wasn’t in the first week. Exaggerations take you away from truth and credibility.

      Mr. Zelaya is the Army Chief Commander and as such constitutionally he can decide what the Army holds or not. According to the Constitution no citizen is bond to a Court order that is in error and confusing poll with election is a humongous error.

      My sources show the vote on a fourth urn for the November elections as the core of Court papers. Something you not even mention.

  3. You are trying to use your clichés to see the Honduras situation and I’m trying to help you see a reality outside those clichés.

    You talk of a “coup d’état’ that Zelaya was attempting to make, but you try to put aside that Mr. Zelaya is the president and holds government power, and therefore “coup d’état” makes no sense. For your information a “coup d’état” is the action of taking power not holding it.

    Consolidation of power is the opposite of “coup d’état”.

    Are you trying to say that Mr. Zelaya did not want to consolidate his power, but instead he wanted to substitute his power with an opposite government?

    The accurate use of legal and political terms and concepts are very important or you end up saying the opposite of what you intended to say.

    One of your mistakes is to believe that Mr. Zelaya situation was the same on June 29th as it was on June 27th.

    Allow me to explain it to you. Let’s imagine you are in jail and there is a fire in the facility. As soon as the fire happens you stop being the punished criminal you have been until that moment to start being a victim of a tragedy in a facility that needs to be saved before the fire consumes it. Saving you and the prison is the priority, not your crimes neither the conditions of the facility. If we do not stop the fire then we’ll be responsible for your life and the cost of making a new prison and people we’ll see us as inefficient and inept in our response. That was exactly the mistake that the Supreme Court and congressi made for seven months.

    Only if there weren’t not “coup d’état” then Mr. Zelaya’s situation would be the same on the 27th and the 29th. The “coup d’état” changes everything, it converted Mr. Zelaya in a victim of a crime himself, and this crime takes immediate priority over any other one, because also all Hondurans are now victims of the same crime and serious and bad consequences, national and international, would fall over Honduras. Therefore this crime must be resolve first than any other.

    The authority of the Supreme Court is indisputable, and again you show that you don’t read what is written, but instead put over some sort of pre-fabricated reading that has nothing to do with what is being said. My points 1 and 2 are facts of negligence and complicity committed by the Honduran Supreme Court and it has nothing to do with its authority. United States and everyone else had follow whatever the Honduran Supreme Court says, and United States took the visas from members of the Honduran Supreme Court for their negligence and complicity I talked about earlier. What astonishes me is the lack of authority of the Supreme Court on dealing as required with the alleged Constitutional violations and what I want to see is more authority on the part of the Supreme Court.

    On the other hand to disagree with a Supreme Court decision does not make anyone an insurrectionist. As I can see there many things you don’t know about law, politics and the situation in Honduras, so please allow me to inform you that in many Supreme Court decisions their judges can have opposite opinions to the decision and the fact that a Supreme Court decision have opposite opinions it does not make any of those judges insurrectionists. It’s very shortsighted, a poor judgment and a lack of understanding democracy to loudly have such confusion.

    Mr. Zelaya can call for insurrection as many times as he wants, it does not make any insurrection. And the facts corroborate my statement. Calling for insurrection in Honduras is not only harmless, but in addition is constitutional.

    Twisting words like saying that Mr. Zelaya is a coupster only makes a fool of yourself. By the way, Revolutionary is one of the most honored titles you can give to someone. We wouldn’t be here if it’s not for the people who revolutionized science, politics, technology and civilization.

    Thank you for respecting my opinion.

    1. Zelaya fulfilled the criteria of the Criminal Code of my country for Treason – doing something that in popular vocabulary is called a coup d’état. And yes, even a King can do a coup d’état. I will suppose that you are just historically ignorant in believing that the sitting president cannot do a coup. Since Zelaya got aid from a foreign power he in fact prima facie committed High Treason, the worst of all crimes against the state. This consolidation of power _is_ the coup. You seem to have your democratic bearing all crazy and confused. For that reason I will not comment on the rest, as it appears meaningless, since we obviously no not subscribe to the same basic human value set.

    2. I’m sorry you are so angry. Anger blind people and make them violent. I didn’t mean to make you angry.

      In my modest opinion the phrase “coup d’état” can be used for anything even for a cup of decaffeinated coffee. I don’t think that such a weird thesis of self-coup d’etat like self-kidnapping or self-mugging is the case here. Besides, it’s normal and frequent that a lot of presidents and governments get aid from foreign powers, but that had never been called “coup d’état” neither high treason. United States provide that kind of aid all over the world and this is the first time that I hear that their recipients are self-coup d’états.

      I want to thank you for your replies and the time and effort you put writing them. If we wouldn’t have a different level of knowledge and a different set of criteria we wouldn’t be dialoguing. Thank you again.

    3. You have obviously never seen me angry.

      As I have said repeatedly, coup d’état is not a legal term. To discuss its legal meaning is meaningless. All it does is for you to avoid acknowledging that you are wrong, and that there is prima facie evidence that Zelaya violated the constitution.

      To say that others break the law all the time is not an excuse. It is still a crime and punishable.

      And on another note, what date do you consider that the budget was passed, if I may ask?

    4. Hunger is not a legal term, so you cannot feel hungry?
      Legal = Criminal breaking of Honduras Constitutionality by expatriating the Honduran president by military force = June 28th 2009 criminal military coup in Honduras.

      Committing a crime against Mr. Zelaya calls immediate attention on this crime not on his.

      July 16, 2009. You were off one week and a half.
      Please, stop pretending you know what you’re saying neither you’re credible.

    5. It was presented July 14th according to La Prensa’s article, and given that they had hardly had time to get established by then, I think it is fair to characterize it as first week in office. The very first week was just a mess trying to prevent a total collapse of the country.
      If you want to argue seriously about the legality, I propose you make your case seriously, too. As a prosecutor would. I still have not seen any serious attempt by you to make the case that the deposing of Zelaya was a coup d’état. Of course, you have the complication that he is charged with a bunch of crimes, and that it was the judicial system that initiated proceedings against him. So until they are resolved, it is hard for you to even get a hearing.

    6. There is no complication, because whatever bunch of crimes Zelaya committed have nothing to do with the real crime of the military coup, that scandalized the world.

  4. There’s no excuse for Luis Perez or anybody else to keep on with this harangue. He should talk to one of the 85 percent of Hondurans who understand what happened and hold up Roberto Micheletti as national hero. Manuel Zelaya was the golpista.

    The “International Community” exposed itself as answering to the international oligarchs like George Soros that installed Chavez and Evo Morales.

    Zelaya had already installed his own auto-coup in Honduras. He started his assault on the people as the year 2009 began, because he refused to answer to a Congressional budget, collecting taxes and spending it on whim.

    Then he engineered the fraud of the “cuarta urna”, exposed as lie itself because #1, he didn’t wait till November, and #2, he changed the wording, and planned to dissolve Congress by the force of mobs on June 28.

    There are THREE different issues relating to the events of June 28, 2009.

    One.The constitutional succession of power.
    Two.Criminal charges for the civil, constitutional, political and criminal infractions against the people of Honduras.
    Three.The exiling of Mel Zelaya.

    It’s amazing how many people don’t understand the difference between #1.defense of democracy, and #2.a coup against democracy.

    Honduras in 1982 was fed up, disgusted with presidents who wanted to keep power past their time, so they proofed their constitution against power-hungry dictators like Manuel Zelaya.

    American ecstatically happy to be married to a girl from Honduras…

    1. ¡Congratulations for your wife! You could know her very well, but not the situation on Honduras.

      There is amnesty so a discussion on this issue is sort of useless for now.

      Only for the record I will correct some of your data:

      The international community and the press do not recognize the situation you talk about simply, because it doesn’t exist. Micheletti is clearly a criminal, he is corrupt and his incompetence cannot be wallpapered with any fake hero status.

      The international community knows better than you. We know that Micheletti evaded justice when he converted a national landmark in a toilet just for fun; he manipulated his way out of jail and avoided to pay the fines he supposed to. He harassed and verbally abused one of her fellow female partisans. He maneuvered to take from people’s money 16 million Lempiras to subside monthly, and still ongoing, his corrupt transportation business. These are just few samples of Micheletti’s criminal background. His orchestration of the military coup and his broken government are even more revealing.

      I’m sorry to bring you the news that you won’t be able to ever see the reality of the military coup, because you have no idea what a coup is. To demonstrate my point I just need to show you that failing to respond a Congressional budget is called negligence, not a coup. Also you have no idea that the president does not collect taxes. As homework I leave you the assignment of finding what is the name of the institution that collects taxes in Honduras. It’ll help you to know Honduras.

      There was no Fourth Urn on June 28th and it wouldn’t be any on November either. There was not yet a specific date for the Fourth Urn. If you don’t get the facts straight you make a fool of yourself. Of course, don’t worry about it, your wife will still love you, maybe that is one of the things she loves best about you.

      For your information mobs cannot dissolve any Congress. Ask around and you’ll find out why.

      It does not exist any “Constitutional Succession of Power” If you don’t know the Honduran Constitution you can say so.

      There is no such thing as criminal charges for criminal infractions. You probably mean chargers for infractions. The same correction you can make for constitutional. Civil and political are extremely obscure and they do not appear in any Court papers.

      Again, you continue with your conceptual mess. You confuse exile with expatriation. Mr. Zelaya was expatriated, as defined by the Honduran Constitution, and then the semi Micheletti’s government exiled Mr. Zelaya. Please, don’t be lazy and study about the difference.

      You are amazed like the medieval people who couldn’t believe other people would dear to affirm that the earth is round. I know this is very hard for you, but the defense of democracy is never to allow military coups or as you call them “Constitutional Successions of Power”.

      Democracy has to do with people, with consensus and respect for minorities, not with ideologies.

  5. Zelaya started out as just another corrrupt politician who won the presidency, but mid-term he did an about face and took off his sheepskin and his mask, and started a long list of crimes for which he finally paid.

    #1.Zelaya advocated re-election of presidents, which automatically invokes a clause that says any government officer “immediately” ceases in his functions.

    #2.He condemned democracy as a form of government, saying it never did anything for Hondurans.

    #3.He refused to submit a budget to Congress in November 2008 as required by law, and in 2009 collected taxes and spent them at personal whim,

    #4.Including tens of millions of dollars meant for programs to help the poor and infirm, he robbed for his plan to cover his coup with a fraudulent “referendum”,

    #5.robbed the Congress of its operating funds, because they did not do what he wished,

    #6.threatened Congress with military tanks if they did not accept for his personal pick for the Supreme Court,

    #7.Saying he didn’t have to pay attention to the Congress because they were oligarchs (never mind he IS oligarch, was supported by the US ambassador and the uber-oligarch Hugo Chavez and no doubt George Soros

    #7.ROBBED the Supreme Courts and other courts of operating funds, because they emitted rulings against him,

    #8.ROBBED the operating funds from the Superior Electoral Tribunal because they obeyed the constitution and the law and obeyed Court rulings against his illegal referendum,

    #9.sent his followers against the chief Prosecutor (Fiscal General) of the country to threaten him for bringing charges against him,

    #10.recruited foreign power Venezuela to print his illegal forms for his illegal referendum,

    #11.and led a violent mob on June 25, 2009, to break into the base and the warehouse where they had been confiscated by court order, threatening the military forces there, who stood down in the interest of avoiding bloodshed,

    #12.planned on sending that mob to disrupt Congress and stop all pretense toward his constitutional assembly on June 28,

    #13.and as came out in court earlier this week, had brought in some 900 foreign operatives and special forces from Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Spain to break him out of prison that Sunday, with the cooperation of more mobs, a plan that was frustrated when he left the country instead,

    #14.advocated that his followers die for him from the Brazilian Embassy to carry him back to power in his futile harangues.

    #15.Was constitutionally deposed in Congressional vote on June 28, 2009, based on constitutional grounds and NOT any letter of resignation,

    #16.Vote and deposing which the Court has judged as valid.

    Amazing how many people seem to think they know what happened, just because international news media leave out some important facts like this.

    These legal entities declared that his removal was completely legal, constitutional, and respectful of all civil rights:

    #a.The Congress, by a vote of 124-4;

    #b.The Supreme Court, voting 15-0;

    #c.The Human Rights Obmundsman,

    #d.The court charged with protecting fiscal responsibility,

    #e.The (constitutionally independent) Electoral Commission,

    #f.His own party,

    #g.The opposition party,

    #h.Two of the three other minor parties,

    #i.The Union Civica Honduren~a, a coalition formed from dozens of civil society entities to preserve representative government by the people in Honduras,

    #j.The Catholic Church,

    #k.All the major Protestant churches,

    #l.Most unions,

    #m.Most media outlets, with some very notable exceptions who were never shut down as claimed,

    #n.The poor, the rich, the middle class, construction workers, domestic workers, big city dwellers, humble farmers, owners of businesses, employees, Hondurans living in other countries, Hondurans in their own country, bakers, candlestick makers.

    Even the rats in the sewers were disgusted with him by the time he was gone.

    What legal entity is left to determine whether Zelaya was properly and legally removed from office?


    1. #1 Zelaya advocated for a Constitutional Assembly. The same the millions of Zelayas in The Resistance advocate for. If the Honduran people advocate for this urgent need, with Zelaya or without him, you must pay attention to it. Of course, only if you defend democracy.

      #2 Zelaya condemned the burocracy, corruption and fossilization of Honduran power brokers. Democracy is people participation.

      #3 U.S. presidents had not submitted a budget to Congress and paralyzed the government, but no one criminalized them, simply because it’s part of a normal political struggle. A senator can block the nomination of an urgent government official, but that is not a crime either. Your ignorance in government dealings is astonishing. Did you finish your homework to find out what institution collects taxes in Honduras?

      #4 To relocate budgets is one thing you have no idea about it and to rob is another that you seem to know better as you mention it so often for things that do not apply to.
      That “referendum” comes from your mind, because Zelaya was promoting an opinion poll as it had been stated in his Presidential Decrees, the only legal documents you can refer to.

      #5 Read my #3 and #4

      #6 That threat shows the great sense of humor Mr. Zelaya always have enjoyed. Did he do it?

      #7 The Honduran Congress is corrupt. Everyone agrees on it. You didn’t know?

      #7 (your careless double #7) Read my #4 and #3, just think in the partial Supreme Court.

      #8 Read #4

      #9 Read #6. Was the Chief Prosecutor O.K. in the Ambulance?

      #10 Read #4. It was quicker than Made in China and cheaper than Made in USA. Nothing wrong with that.

      #11 Your ignorance is something that only your wife can love. For starters, Mr. Zelaya is the Army Chief Commander and he, not the Court, decides what the Army does or don’t. Then you should read Honduran Constitution art. 3 “Nobody owes obedience… neither to whom take functions… or using means and procedures that break or ignore what this Constitution and the law established. The acts by those authorities are null.” And then do your new homework of studying art. 45.

      #12 Read #6 and #9

      #13 You’re very funny, I don’t blame your wife for loving you. You are saying that the Army knew long before of these foreign 900 sanguinary mercenaries and they didn’t do anything to capture them neither to denounce them to the immigration officials instead of the Army violating Art. 102 of the Honduran Constitution and bringing Honduras to its needs without international aid and worldwide isolation? Or you are telling me that this foreign 900 sanguinary mercenaries did not care if Mr. Zelaya was taken out of power, the only thing they care was that he wouldn’t be left in Honduras? You don’t need to answer, just think about it.

      #14 Read #3 and #4. Did they do it?

      #15 You’re so lucky to having that wife, otherwise you will be lost in this world. This is rocket science for you, so I won’t be too demanding, I only going to give you the homework to find out in the Constitution what is Absolute Absence and think if Mr. Zelaya left Honduras on his own with the intention of not returning and if he actually never returned. Your homework is to ponder the information you learn.

      #16 Probably you could provide the press with your discoveries from your homework from #15. The legal entities you mention are a corrupt Congress and a partial Supreme Court. #a. That Congress was expelled from the Central American Association and #b. the Supreme Court are criminals investigated by the International Court as the press announced worldwide. That includes #d. too.

      #c. The Honduran Human Rights Obmunsman is ignored by the all Human Rights organizations in the world for ignoring all the Humnan Rights violations in Honduras. It’s credibility is zero.

      #e. The Electoral Commission, that you call, is an open politicized institution the same one that in front of the world could not distinguish a referendum from an opinion poll.

      #f. The Liberal Party has different tendencies, with strong coupster ones, therefore is not Mr. Zelaya’s party, it’s mostly Mr. Micheletti’s party, which lost past elections to the National Party.

      #g. With opposition party you maybe are referring to the National Party, which is a party of coupsters’ tendencies, not to the UD. In #h. you probably refer to allies of Mr. Micheletti’s coupsters position.

      #i. The Civic Honduran Union is a proxy organization created by coupsters to replace the Honduran people. Nothing unpredictable.

      #j. and #k. are coupsters allies, long time ago. Nothing new there.

      #l. Unions manipulated by bosses don’t count either. Unions like the large and strong Teacher’s Union opposed strongly the puppet theater of Congress and Supreme Court.

      #m. Most media outlets belong to the 10 families that bully all Hondurans, they biologically went for the coupsters. The minority opposition media was silenced with boycotts to antennas, installations and raids and constant harassment.

      #n. Those are the same components of The Resistance and they demonstrated daily their disappointment with huge marches all over the Honduras.

      If it’s not by your escapes into the sewers and your good relationships with rats we would be deprived of the valuable opinions of your rats. Thank you. Five for that one.

      In Honduras does not exist those kind of entities, but the International Court is more than sufficient.

      With the amnesty this case is close for now. I just found very cute Mr. Alan’s repetitions and wanted to let him know.

      Thank you all.

    2. Luis Pérez, you concede in point #1 that Zelaya wanted a Constitutional Assembly. Case closed. That is the start and end of it, since it is unconstitutional and ground for immediately loosing his elected position.

    3. A Constitutional Assembly is not illegal neither a crime in Honduras. The Honduran Constitution does not forbid a Constitutional Assembly.

    4. My answers are better knowledge. Perhaps your “knowledge” is just what you were able to say. We can finish it here.

    5. Let me see if you understand if I put it this way instead: It is an established fact that a constitutional assembly is illegal in Honduras. In every country I know it is illegal, but in Honduras a Supreme Court precedent has actually been established. That is why you are arguing against better knowledge: You are not just misinterpreting the law, but you are arguing against an established legal precedent.

    6. To say that a constitutional assembly is illegal in Honduras, as coupsters blindly repeat it, it’s not enough: PROVE IT. A constitutional assembly is not illegal because you ignore all the countries whose Constitutions come from Constituent Assemblies, your ignorance is not the measure to establish if something is legal or not.

      Please be specific, do not talk in general and around the bushes. If you know it say it: Which Supreme Court and what was the precedent? I can’t wait for your answer. When you ask me something I give it to you straight. It’s fair on your part to do the same.

      The International Court and many Constitutional Law experts, including in the USA, do not trust a word from this Honduran Supreme Court. The International Court is investigating their criminality and U.SA. took all their visas away, U.S don’t want any of those liars to touch American soil.

    7. I will comment your three paragraphs in order.
      1. You are insulting a lot of people by using the word coupster. Worse, it is defamation. I expect you to either apologize, or prove that they are coupsters. Like I have shown how Zelaya tried to make a coup, see e.g.
      On the point, I cannot understand how you can believe that a Constituting Assembly can be held once there is a constitution. It is an oxymoron. It can only be held if first the Republic of Honduras ceases to exist, is legally or factually dissolved. And that is why it is illegal.
      2. The Honduran Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ) has declared Zelaya’s attempt at creating a Constitutional Assembly illegal, as I have extensively blogged about here. But it might be easier for you to get the documents directly from the court website.
      3. Those would be irrelevant facts even if true. Honduras is a sovereign nation and it is CSJ that interprets the Constitution. Anyone who does not submit to that is an outlaw, literally.

    8. 1. 2. and 3. That Zelaya was trying to make a self-inflicted coup-d’etat is just bad science fiction. Your speculations are worthless, but you can keep entertaining coupsters.

      Regarding coupsters, it’s not defamation, if you commit a crime and I call you criminal I’m just being fair.

      You are totally confused. You seem to believe that the military was obeying a Court order, but they weren’t. The Order was to arrest the President of the Republic, but the Army disobeyed the Court order, which already was to commit a crime, and added another crime of their own, they expatriated the president to create an Absolute Absence in order to provoke a new civil government. These sort of criminals are called coupsters. When you completely agree with them then you join their club and if you are proud of them and what they have done then you must thank me to call you a coupster. The press, the lawyers, the governments and simple me call them coupsters, because there is no other better word for their crimes.

      The problem with the partial and criminal Honduran Supreme Court is that never took any Zelaya’s issue in its hands. Only a minor Court of really First Letters was dealing with unconstitutional issues that weren’t of its competence. Unless you prove to me that the accusations against Mr. Zelaya have nothing to do with the Constitution then whatever that minor court did could have some validity.

      If art. 239 says that by intending to be reelected the president is out of its job and art. 71 says that no one can be detained without being brought to the authorities for judgment, then the Honduran Constitution has a serious problem and an immediate Constitution Assembly must be arranged. This is only one case out of many regarding solely this point. If the Honduran Constitution is behind all this mess in Honduras, that Constitution definitely needs to be redone.

      Zelaya had the vision of seeing all the Constitution problems the Hondurans will start seeing little by little in time and at the light of real constitutional law.

      The funny thing is that the criminal Honduran Supreme Court never analyzed, discussed and gave their opinion on the conflictive constitutional issues that surrounded Mr. Zelaya’s case, and therefore this deficient Supreme Court is responsible for all the chaos that provoked arresting the president without ever thinking about the national and international consequences of such craziness.

      A needed Constitutional Assembly was never addressed by the Honduran Supreme Court, because the minor Court felt short to send the issue to the Supreme Court. The minor court was limited to concentrating on the procedures surrounding the Fourth Urn. The Supreme Court only opinion was to irresponsibly arrest Mr. Zelaya. All together, just Banana Republic politics.

      The illegality of a Constitutional Assembly has no place in the Honduras’ situation.

      Everyone has submitted to the Honduran Supreme Court, but it doesn’t mean that Court is right.

  6. Luis Pérez wrote: “Regarding coupsters, it’s not defamation, if you commit a crime and I call you criminal I’m just being fair.”

    He has apparently never heard of the principle “innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.” (And for his information, Zelaya has been proven guilty since he violated a court order that forbade him to do what he did.)

    People who are so blind to democracy and justice as Luis Pérez, who are so totally ignorant about the fundamental concepts of the rule of law, of the principles of a democratic organization, but still so sure of them being right that they are prepare to – on their own – sentence and condemn other people, they are the ones that end up making the ranks and files of organizations like the Stormtruppen, the SS, Stalin’s murdering bands, Chávez’s redshirts, etc.

    The extreme risks to society that this utter blindness and ignorance poses, is why it is essential for a democracy wishing to survive to have a strong education in public schools, in which the basic principles of democracy and the rule of law is instilled in the backbone of all children. This is something that apparently needs to be done urgently in all of Latin America.

    I also note that Pérez does not reply to my arguments. Instead he reiterates his positions over and over.

    It is a matter of definition that a Constituting Assembly is illegal. It doesn’t have to be in the Constitution, as it is entirely self-evident for anybody with the least bit of insight into the workings of democracy. In fact, it is an oxymoron to have a Constituting Assembly in a country that has a Constitution. Maybe I should write a blog post called Democracy for Dummies to explain it for the resistencia…

    I am not arguing that the Honduran Constitution may not be in need of changes. Every constitution needs to be kept up to date by regular reforms, ever 30 to 100 years. It just has to be done in a constitutional way, or else chaos is likely to result, and quite possibly violence, but at any rate it will be costly in terms of lost confidence in the state.

    In the last paragraph Pérez is right, though: “Everyone has submitted to the Honduran Supreme Court, but it doesn’t mean that Court is right.” Exactly. As long as they do not violate the law, by definition they are right in the eyes of society, since they are the ones to interpret the law. Scholars can then argue if it was right or wrong, and so can bloggers, but that has no bearing on the legal reality.

  7. Dr. Erlingsson is becoming very funny. He thinks that if a Court orders someone’s arrest it proves that the arrested is guilty. I’m sorry to disenchant him, but only a judicial process with full defense of the suspect, in his presence, can prove him guilty in a court of law. Coupster Romeo Vázquez is a car robber, because he was arrested for that crime, just to apply your “knowledge”.

    Who is the ignorant about the fundamental concepts of the rule of law?

    You shouldn’t be making blogs with such low level of knowledge, unless the purpose of your blogs is to misinform people, your readers are fanatics and your aim is propaganda.

    The coupsters did expatriate the President of the Republic, it’s a fact. They have not apologized for it; they cynically made themselves artificial heroes. The evidence and confession is all over the place. Those criminals have no other name than COUPSTERS. Those are facts.

    Who is here condemning other people, who know you know nothing but blah blah blah, to the ranks of Stormtruppen, the SS, Stalin’s murdering bands, Chávez’s redshirts, etc.?

    I respond straight forward every single argument you make, including the ones you’re afraid to make as well. Just read my dialogue and verify it. I limit myself to respond if you reiterate your position over and over again blame you not me. In every answer I give you more than you bargain for. I wish you were able to understand what you read if you read it.

    Did you ever read this: “If art. 239 says that by intending to be reelected the president is out of its job and art. 71 says that no one can be detained without being brought to the authorities for judgment, then the Honduran Constitution has a serious problem and an immediate Constitution Assembly must be arranged. This is only one case out of more than 20 cases regarding solely this point. If the Honduran Constitution is behind all this mess in Honduras, that Constitution definitely needs to be redone.” If you think about that and educate yourself about its meaning and what is telling you directly and between the lines then you wouldn’t fall in the oxymoron of saying that a country that has a constitution doesn’t need a constitution, because then you’ll understand that having it is not all.

    You don’t know anything beyond blah blah-ing in a blog and therefore you think that blogs are solutions for everything. If you want to justify the twisting of the law you just make a blog. That’s your poor mentality. Bloggers do not ever compare neither they are Scholars.

    My previous last paragraph stayed that The Supreme Court has been obeyed, but it does not mean that is right, which for any intelligent person means that they violated the law by twisting it, by selecting what benefit their partial point and disregarding what benefits the suspect, etc. A wrong Court like the partial Honduran Supreme Court had proven to have a catastrophic bearing on the legal reality, nationally and internationally.

    1. Mr. Pérez, you wrote, “I respond straight forward every single argument you make, including the ones you’re afraid to make as well.” [my emphasis]

      Case closed. You have just shown that you have no intention of being more than a cheap demagogue.

      A democracy requires an open and honest debate with relevant arguments. You have disqualified yourself as a participant in a democratic debate. You obviously have no intention of arriving at a consensus, of reconciliation, of progress for your country. You may have good intentions for the poor, but your way of behaving is destructive. Also for them.

      A Constituting Assembly in an existing state is high treason. You are thus arguing for High Treason. No matter how many times you claim otherwise, it does not change the legal reality. You can’t make wrong right by insistence.

      Over and out.

Comments are closed.