Which is, of course, much different than being ‘a victim of a coup.’ After carefully and reasonably setting out the chain of events of the Honduran non-coup (something, I am forced to note, that this slapdash administration we have running foreign affairs neglected to do before reflexively supporting Zelaya*), Estrada finishes up:
It cannot be right to call this a “coup.” Micheletti was lawfully made president by the country’s elected Congress. The president is a civilian. The Honduran Congress and courts continue to function as before. The armed forces are under civilian control. The elections scheduled for November are still scheduled for November. Indeed, after reviewing the Constitution and consulting with the Supreme Court, the Congress and the electoral tribunal, respected Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga recently stated that the only possible conclusion is that Zelaya had lawfully been ousted under Article 239 before he was arrested, and that democracy in Honduras continues fully to operate in accordance with law. All Honduran bishops joined Rodriguez in this pronouncement.
True, Zelaya should not have been arbitrarily exiled from his homeland. That, however, does not mean he must be reinstalled as president of Honduras. It merely makes him an indicted private citizen with a meritorious immigration beef against his country.
I don’t know what organization in Honduras handles emigration issues, but Zelaya should probably resolve it by suing them. Assuming that he can get back in the country without being arrested for treason, that is. That has yet to be determined.
Moe Lane
*A position that they have been steadily backing away from. There’s even agitprop claiming that this was all going according to plan; of course, at this point we’d probably be slightly worried if the news media didn’t reflexively do this sort of thing…
Crossposted to Moe Lane.
All of this makes me wonder why Zelaya isn't under house arrest?
Cheetah772 Saturday, July 11th at 10:08AM EDT (link)That is something which baffles me greatly. I think we all can agree that Zelaya was ousted too quickly. Even so, I don’t know if Honduras do have some sort of impeachment process that doesn’t require military under civilian control to oust a sitting president. If not, then putting Zelaya in exile was probably the best course of action.
Zelaya should be thankful that he wasn’t executed on spot, if it were so, then I think we all can safely assume it’s a real military coup. Was his family injured in any way? If not, then he also should be thankful for that, as in most military coups, president’s family is frequently the next target on its list.
At least in this respect, Honduras is not falling apart in a brutal civil war, and that is something we all should be grateful given the past history of region.
Daniel 2:20 And he [God] changeth the times and seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding.
Cheetah, this was NOT a military coup. The legislature
janis Saturday, July 11th at 10:18AM EDT (link)in Honduras made their ruling and gave orders to the military to arrrest and eject Zelaya from the country. From what I understand, the reason for exile was to prevent Chavez from invading Honduras and reinstating Zelaya. No, his family wasn’t injured either.
The point here is that Honduras upheld the rule of their own law by their actions with regard to Zelaya. It’s only dictators and dictator wannabes who have been supporting Zelaya. See “Chavez, Hugo. Castro, Fidel. Obama, Barrack.”
The Honduran Constitution (and Impeachment)
dvdmsr Saturday, July 11th at 11:05AM EDT (link)Their constitution empowers their Congress to determine when there is a case against their President (Art 205, Sec. 15), and it empowers their Supreme Court to hear and decide these cases (Art. 319, sec. 2). Thus their Congress brings cause against their President; charges him with wrongdoing, or as we say: impeaches him, and their Supreme Court tries these cases, much as our Senate does.
Art. 239, says that the current the Presdent can not be a presidential candidate in the election to choose his successor, and more importanly, if he violates this provision or proposes its reform, and support those who directly or indirectly, he shall immediately cease as President, and shall be disqualified for ten years to exercise any public function.
Art. 238 also says Presidents must be Honduran citizens, but as I have said in another reply above, Zelaya lost his citizenship when he incited, ecouraged, ad supported his continuity/re-election as President (Art. 42).
The Honduran Costitution specifies no other list of Impeachable offenses (that I have found), such as high crimes and misdemeanors for which their president can be removed, but there is a list of offenses (Art. 42) that will cause a person to lose his citizeship, and if he is President his position as such too.
Building Bridges Between American Conservatives & Libertarians By Calling For A Return To More Local Control On Social Issues (The Resoration Of Federalism) And To Smaller More Fiscally Responsible Gov’t
The ex pres was violating a court order and the atty general's order by wreaking
Mike gamecock DeVine Saturday, July 11th at 11:21AM EDT (link)havoc in the streets, instigating a mob riot and having foreign ballots flown in. He was committing a crime and was arrested.
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” - Andrew Jackson
A private citizen w/ a mertorious immigration beef?
dvdmsr Saturday, July 11th at 10:19AM EDT (link)A private citizen of what country? Certainly not Honduras, right?
According to the Honduran constitution, which specifies that the quality of citizenship can be lost for certain offenses, Zelaya lost his Honduran citizenship when he incited, encouraged, or supported the continuity or re-election of himself as President of Honduras.
Here’s the relevant provision of the Honduran Constitution:
“ARTICLE 42 .- The quality of citizen is lost:
1. For service in wartime enemies of Honduras or its allies;
2. For assistance with the State of Honduras, an alien or a foreign government in any diplomatic claim or before an international tribunal;
3. To play in the country, without license from the National Congress, employment of foreign nation, or military branch of a political nature;
4. For the freedom to vote, electoral documents adulterate or use fraudulent means to circumvent the popular will;
5. Incite, encourage or support the continuity or re-election of President of the Republic, and”
So Zelaya is no private citizen of Honduras, and as an alien who broke Honduran law, I’d reason that any immigration beef he might have is likely without merit too.
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.honduras.net%2Fhonduras_constitution2.html
Building Bridges Between American Conservatives & Libertarians By Calling For A Return To More Local Control On Social Issues (The Resoration Of Federalism) And To Smaller More Fiscally Responsible Gov’t
The Linked To WaPo Article Is The Biggest Steaming Pile...
IJB Saturday, July 11th at 10:33AM EDT (link)…I’ve seen in ages. And that’s really saying something!
Moe, I suspect that the arbitration that Hillary arranged
Mike gamecock DeVine Saturday, July 11th at 10:44AM EDT (link)with Costa Rica as the arbitrator, may well decide as you suggest. Great story re Estrada analysis.
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” - Andrew Jackson
WaPo says:
daendda Saturday, July 11th at 12:56PM EDT (link)It’s better to have a President who is lucky than to have one that is good.