The constitutional case for Zelaya's ouster

HondurasThisWeek.com ^ | August 12, 2009 | F. W. Blake

[Ebenezer]

The Constitution of Honduras contains 379 articles, all which can be reformed or removed except for seven of them. These seven articles are known in Spanish as “articulos petreos”, meaning that they cannot be altered or reformed in any way; they define the form of government, the national territory, and the extent and limit of presidential terms. So, 372 or 98.15% of the articles in the Constitution of Honduras can be legally reformed. So then, why did Mr. Manuel Zelaya so desperately insist on summoning a National Constituent Assembly to draft a new constitution? The answer is simple; he wanted to change the 7 irreformable articles and extend his presidential term, imitating Presidents such as Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and Rafael Correa of Ecuador. These irreformable articles or “articulos petreos” exist as the necessary consequence of the historical political instability in Latin America, where throughout its history many leaders have sought to stay in power indefinitely.

Now we move on to the question on everyone’s mind. Was Mr. Manuel Zelaya the victim of a coup d’état? Let’s see, contrary to what was first said by the International Media (whose only source of information at the time was Mr. Zelaya himself) the military is not in power in Honduras or controls any of the three branches of government or ever did for that matter, so that discards coups 1, 2, 3 and 5 (breakthrough, veto, guardian, and bloodless coup d’état); as they require that the military at one point control one or more of the branches of government. Next up we have the Pronouncement, which clearly states that after the coup d’état the military must establish a new civil government. In Honduras the Legislative Branch is composed of the same 128 congressmen/ congresswomen elected almost four years ago, and the Judicial Branch is composed of 15 Supreme Court judges elected by Congress on January of 2009, six months before the so called “coup d’état” occurred. So this also discards candidate number 6 the Pronouncement, and that only leaves candidate number 4, a self coup d’état, and this my friends is where the plot gets thicker than grandma’s good old gravy.

We must now proceed to breakdown the definition of a self coup d’état, so the reader may see that it fits like a glove. A Self coup d’état is usually enacted by the country’s democratically elected leaders, usually its Head of State. -In this case President Manuel Zelaya himself.

And aimed at dissolving one or more of the three branches of government (legislative, judicial, and executive).-In this case the Legislative and Judicial branches who opposed his illegal electoral vote. Remember how he refused to approve a National Budget, refused to ratify or veto more than 96 bills over a three year span, and refused to provide the National Congress with the disbursements they were legally entitled to; remember him saying, “I will only give them enough for their cups of coffee.” Remember how he repeatedly chose to ignore and not abide by the rulings and judicial notices issued by the Supreme Court. Surely Mr. Zelaya was not very fond of the two other branches of the government.

Usually by annulling the current constitution, drafting a new one, and granting dictatorial powers to the Head of State.- The famous project for Fourth Ballot Box (Proyecto de la Cuarta Urna), an illegal and unconstitutional electoral vote promoted by President Manuel Zelaya. Its sole purpose was to install a National Constituent Assembly (annulling the current constitution) and drafting a new one (the lawyer from Spain), which would dissolve the existing Legislative and Judicial branches, replace them with new ones to his liking; and extend the presidential term indefinitely. In essence it would change the form of government of Honduras. Thankfully Montesquieu’s checks and balances prevailed. The fourth ballot box was nothing more than a self coup d’état disguised as democracy, a ballot box filled with predetermined votes (remember the 43 computers impounded on June 28).

Indeed there was a coup d’état in Honduras on June 28th, a self coup d’état, one which did not culminate, and one the International Media does not speak of for reasons that truly baffle the bounds of human logic. For after analyzing the facts it is evident and obvious.

Some might still argue that on June 28th Mr. Manuel Zelaya was the victim of a coup d’état, as he was forcefully exiled from Honduras at gunpoint by the military, a version which currently predominates amongst the International Media. It is interesting how Mr. Zelaya cunningly limits himself to only telling a part of the story, and for those who believe him and have chosen not to search for the truth, here is what he will never willingly admit:

Article 239: The citizen, who has served as head of the Executive Branch, shall not serve again as President or Vice-President of the Republic. He who violates this disposition or proposes its reform, as well as all those who support him directly or indirectly, shall immediately cease in the functions of their respective posts, and will be disabled for a period of 10 years to hold any public office.

President Manuel Zelaya proposed and even began to carry out a constitutional reform with his project of a Fourth Ballot Box (Proyecto de la Cuarta Urna) on June 28th. A reform which sought to change the 7 irreformable articles also known as “articulos petreos”, in an attempt to extend his presidential term. Thus he clearly violated article 239, and on June 28th at exactly 5:00 AM when the illegal electoral vote began he removed himself from office through his own unconstitutional actions. The man who was arrested and then exiled was not the President of the Republic of Honduras; he was an ordinary citizen, nothing more nothing less. So if a president was not forcefully removed from office and exiled, how can we have a military coup? We simply cannot, it truly is as simple as that; the truth is enlightening isn’t it?

Article 102: No Honduran citizen can be expatriated or handed over by the authorities to a foreign state.

Many will argue that when Mr. Manuel Zelaya was put on plane and flown to Costa Rica he was exiled, and article 102 of the Constitution of Honduras was violated along with his personal constitutional rights and guarantees. Indeed they have a strong and valid point, but once again they purposely fail to tell the whole story; for the Constitution of Honduras is far wiser in its ways.

Article 42: The status of citizenship is lost when: 4) Restricting the liberty to vote, altering electoral documents, or employing fraudulent means to undermine the will and the vote of the people.

5) Inciting, promoting, or supporting the continuance or reelection of the President of the Republic of Honduras.

It seems that when the story is told in its entirety the situation becomes clearer. Mr. Manuel Zelaya employed fraudulent means to undermine the vote of the people to his own benefit, in this case his own people, his followers (the 43 computers impounded on June 28th). For a period of over six months he publicly and repeatedly incited, promoted and supported his own continuance and his own reelection to the Presidency. The Honduran citizenship of the man who was flown and exiled to Costa Rica is obviously in serious doubt.

The story of Mr. Manuel Zelaya is the story of a man obsessed with power, so obsessed that he believed himself to be superior to the Legislative and Judicial branches of his country and sought recklessly his continuance in power. Currently he has several pending trials in Honduras, and perhaps the best way to resolve the Honduran political crisis is for Mr. Zelaya to turn himself in to the judicial authorities, and to not campaign the Western Hemisphere clamoring “coup d’état”.

In the end the Honduran people have taught us and reminded us something we have taken for granted and forgotten long ago, to defend our Freedom, our Constitution and its Laws; and that no man -not even a President- is above the Law. For this they should be congratulated and applauded, and not condemned by the International Community. I would like to thank you, the reader, for taking the time to read this article. My most sincere thanks.

[Ebenezer]

If Honduras has the courage to defend and abide by her Constitution, why can't America do the same with her own?

[marron]

Some say he was denied his right to a fair trial when they put him on the plane.

Since he’s back in the country, that is easily rectified. All he has to do is step outside the embassy and he’ll get his trial.

That doesn’t seem to interest him much, though. Instead he has allied himself with foreign powers against his own constitution. In most books that is how you define treason.

[PsyOp]

If the UN tries to send troops to Hondo, I hope they fight.

[Mrs. Don-o]

ping

[FreeStateYank]

“The story of Mr. Manuel Zelaya is the story of a man obsessed with power, so obsessed that he believed himself to be superior to the Legislative and Judicial branches of his country and sought recklessly his continuance in power.”

Substitute “Mr. Manuel Zelaya” with Obama and the sentence is still accurate.

[don-o]

ping

Freepmail me to be added to / removed from Honduras ping list. Please ping me to threads of interest.

[TigersEye]

Good article. It adds some meat to the story by citing more of Zelaya's illegal actions leading up his ouster.

bookmarked