"Coup d'etat" in Honduras

[Sacrilege]

Superb CNN Link

"This was a brutal kidnapping of me with no justification," Zelaya said of the military-led coup. He was speaking from Costa Rica where a military plane had taken him after he was held Sunday morning.

Zelaya, a leftist elected in 2005, had found himself recently pitted against other branches of government and military leaders over a referendum planned for Sunday that could have allowed the president to run for another term.

It appears the military didn't want the nation to go the path of Venezuela. I can't say I blame them. Although a military coup is a very un-democratic action, the supreme court and legislature of Honduras were opposed to the president's "referendum."

The poor of Central and South American nations may like the populist rhetoric of leftist leaders, but a moderate, capitalist/European socialist government would provide the best life for them. We just need to look at Europe and the US to see the benefits of moderate, mixed economy societies.

 

[ZeGermans]

aahahahaha yes those ignorant browns don't know what's best for them.


------------------------------------------------------------------
You need to curb your racial remarks if you wish to continue to post here.

Senior Anandtech Moderator
Common Courtesy

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
aahahahaha yes those ignorant browns don't know what's best for them

Well, it appears the Honduran Supreme Court ordered the "coup." They deemed the President as violating their country's consitution and disobeying their rulings. In addition he was trying to continue with his plan to subvert the constitutional term limits.

Terms limits are a good thing. Without them you get the Chavez's and Mugabe's of the world.

 

[sandorski]

Wow, Term Limits are not a "good thing" at all. Certainly not good enough to warrant a Coup. As long as the proper procedures are followed regarding changing of a Constitution, removing Term Limits should not result in Military Coups.

 

[Lemon law]

Since this is largely a US forum, the real question is, what the the USA's foreign relations response to a surprising event? My guess, threat it as an internal Honduran matter, work withing the various other neighboring countries also affected so there is a uniform and a united policy, and also respect the response of the UN.

There is always something undemocratic about a military coup. And as an American, I hope I will not be later ashamed to learn our CIA was in the coup planning up to its eyeballs.

But everything is at its early stages now, its hard to say much without more facts.

 

[StageLeft]

My poignant addition to this thread is: South American sucks.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Wow, Term Limits are not a "good thing" at all. Certainly not good enough to warrant a Coup. As long as the proper procedures are followed regarding changing of a Constitution, removing Term Limits should not result in Military Coups.

They werent and thats why the Honduran Supreme Court reportedly ordered their presidents removal. The Honduran President continued to defy the Honduran Congress and Honduran Supreme Court. He tried to call an unauthorized(by Honduran law) referendum. It appears every other part of government got fed up with him.

Military coups usually install military leaders. Thats not the case here. The highest ranking person in the Honduran Congress appears to be appointed as President until new elections take place.

And yes TERM LIMITS ARE A GOOD THING. They prevent power from being consolidated in a few people for decades. People who often use that power to stay in power. Power conslidation is a very bad thing when it comes to democracy.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Since this is largely a US forum, the real question is, what the the USA's foreign relations response to a surprising event? My guess, threat it as an internal Honduran matter, work withing the various other neighboring countries also affected so there is a uniform and a united policy, and also respect the response of the UN.

There is always something undemocratic about a military coup. And as an American, I hope I will not be later ashamed to learn our CIA was in the coup planning up to its eyeballs.

But everything is at its early stages now, its hard to say much without more facts.

No, it appears there was no US involvement. It was done at the behest of the Honduran Supreme Court.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: sandorski
Wow, Term Limits are not a "good thing" at all. Certainly not good enough to warrant a Coup. As long as the proper procedures are followed regarding changing of a Constitution, removing Term Limits should not result in Military Coups.

They werent and thats why the Honduran Supreme Court reportedly ordered their presidents removal. The Honduran President continued to defy the Honduran Congress and Honduran Supreme Court. He tried to call an unauthorized(by Honduran law) referendum. It appears every other part of government got fed up with him.

Military coups usually install military leaders. Thats not the case here. The highest ranking person in the Honduran Congress appears to be appointed as President until new elections take place.

And yes TERM LIMITS ARE A GOOD THING. They prevent power from being consolidated in a few people for decades. People who often use that power to stay in power. Power conslidation is a very bad thing when it comes to democracy.

Ok, good to hear that the Courts ordered it.

We'll have to just agree to disagree on Term Limits.

 

[Sacrilege]

There will be a summit in Nicaragua tomorrow, and Zelaya will attend, with Chavez providing him with transportation.

Expect much huffing and puffing from El Presidente from Venezuela about the Yankee Imperialist CIA coup. What he won't admit is that there are actually people in South America who prefer not to have the same president for life.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Sacrilege
There will be a summit in Nicaragua tomorrow, and Zelaya will attend, with Chavez providing him with transportation.

Expect much huffing and puffing from El Presidente from Venezuela about the Yankee Imperialist CIA coup. What he won't admit is that there are actually people in South America who prefer not to have the same president for life.

That's what Elections are for.

 

[cubeless]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
aahahahaha yes those ignorant browns don't know what's best for them

Well, it appears the Honduran Supreme Court ordered the "coup." They deemed the President as violating their country's consitution and disobeying their rulings. In addition he was trying to continue with his plan to subvert the constitutional term limits.

Terms limits are a good thing. Without them you get the Chavez's and Mugabe's of the world.

and the us congress...

 

[Craig234]

I'd like to see more on the Honduran legal system in terms of the legitimacy of the ruling against the President's referendum, and what the measures they're allowed to take are.

Is there an impeachment system, as we have?

Taking him out by the military choosing to remove him is wrong.

Out righties will predictably continue to be the enemies of democracy, excusing and rationalizing the act against democracy with justifications irrelevant to the issue.

The Honduras has a problematic history - a 70% poverty rate and the military ruled for 25 years, with the US treating them like a client state for actions against Cuba, Nicaragua etc.

Democracy needs to be respected here. If the President was doing wrong - and it a problem for him to be doing something the Supreme Court said he can't (though I've little doubt that if Bush had defied some Supreme Court orders on issues like detainee treatment we'd have had plenty of righties defending him) - then follow the law for removing him from office.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: Craig234
I'd like to see more on the Honduran legal system in terms of the legitimacy of the ruling against the President's referendum, and what the measures they're allowed to take are.

Is there an impeachment system, as we have?

Taking him out by the military choosing to remove him is wrong.

Out righties will predictably continue to be the enemies of democracy, excusing and rationalizing the act against democracy with justifications irrelevant to the issue.

The Honduras has a problematic history - a 70% poverty rate and the military ruled for 25 years, with the US treating them like a client state for actions against Cuba, Nicaragua etc.

Democracy needs to be respected here. If the President was doing wrong - and it a problem for him to be doing something the Supreme Court said he can't (though I've little doubt that if Bush had defied some Supreme Court orders on issues like detainee treatment we'd have had plenty of righties defending him) - then follow the law for removing him from office.

There also issue/fact he "fired" the leader of the military for not following his(the presidents) orders to defy the Supreme Court. Other military leaders "resigned" as well.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Wreckem
There also issue/fact he "fired" the leader of the military for not following his(the presidents) orders to defy the Supreme Court. Other military leaders "resigned" as well.

Not exactly. The military leader told him the military would not support his referendum, and the President said he'd be fired - but backed off that and left him in his position.

I repeat what I said, that while this is a constitutional crisis, the way to resolve it is the legal system, not the military using force against the elected President unnecessarily.

If the President were imepeached and tried to get the military to help him ignore the rule of law, that'd be another matter, I'd support the military following the law on that.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Wreckem
There also issue/fact he "fired" the leader of the military for not following his(the presidents) orders to defy the Supreme Court. Other military leaders "resigned" as well.

Not exactly. The military leader told him the military would not support his referendum, and the President said he'd be fired - but backed off that and left him in his position.

I repeat what I said, that while this is a constitutional crisis, the way to resolve it is the legal system, not the military using force against the elected President unnecessarily.

If the President were imepeached and tried to get the military to help him ignore the rule of law, that'd be another matter, I'd support the military following the law on that.

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras - President Manuel Zelaya said he won't obey a Honduran Supreme Court order to reinstate the military chief he fired in a power struggle.
The Supreme Court ruling is "an embarrassment for Hondurans," he told 2,000 supporters yesterday in a plaza at his presidential offices.

The Supreme Court reinstated Gen. Romeo Vasquez as head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff a day after Zelaya fired him for refusing to support a referendum Sunday to measure voter support for amending the constitution.

Zelaya's bid to hold the referendum pits him against the Supreme Court, the attorney general, military leaders and even his party, who say the vote is illegal. Critics say he wants to emulate Venezuela's Hugo Chavez by removing a bar on reelection. - AP

The Honduran Congress(both members of his party and the opposition) and the Honduran Supreme Court both ruled his referendum unconstitutional. He then tried to go down the route of an "unofficial" referendum which was also declared unconstitutional. He then ordered the General of the military to have the military to distribute ballot boxes and ballots for the unofficial referendum. The General refused, and DID get relieved of his duties by the President. Others "resigned." The Court ruled that was illegal as well and ordered him to be reinstated. The Presient refused, and went and siezed back the ballot boxes and ballots siezed by the court system. Then this morning, the court ordered his removal from office, backed by the military and the Honduran Congress.

With support of the military, the Supreme Court, and Congress, the President of the Congress is currently the provisional President until new elections are held.

The Honduran Congress stripped Zelaya of his presidency a little bit ago. His own political party voted against him in that measure as well.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
My poignant addition to this thread is: South American sucks.

pssst.... Honduras isn't in South America. It is in North America.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Wreckem
There also issue/fact he "fired" the leader of the military for not following his(the presidents) orders to defy the Supreme Court. Other military leaders "resigned" as well.

Not exactly. The military leader told him the military would not support his referendum, and the President said he'd be fired - but backed off that and left him in his position.

I repeat what I said, that while this is a constitutional crisis, the way to resolve it is the legal system, not the military using force against the elected President unnecessarily.

If the President were imepeached and tried to get the military to help him ignore the rule of law, that'd be another matter, I'd support the military following the law on that.

No. You do not know what you are talking about.

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras - President Manuel Zelaya said he won't obey a Honduran Supreme Court order to reinstate the military chief he fired in a power struggle.
The Supreme Court ruling is "an embarrassment for Hondurans," he told 2,000 supporters yesterday in a plaza at his presidential offices.

The Supreme Court reinstated Gen. Romeo Vasquez as head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff a day after Zelaya fired him for refusing to support a referendum Sunday to measure voter support for amending the constitution.

Zelaya's bid to hold the referendum pits him against the Supreme Court, the attorney general, military leaders and even his party, who say the vote is illegal. Critics say he wants to emulate Venezuela's Hugo Chavez by removing a bar on reelection. - AP

The Honduran Congress(both members of his party and the opposition) and the Honduran Supreme Court both ruled his referendum unconstitutional. He then tried to go down the route of an "unofficial" referendum which was also declared unconstitutional. He then ordered the General of the military to have the military to distribute ballot boxes and ballots for the unofficial referendum. The General refused, and DID get relieved of his duties by the President. Others "resigned." The Court ruled that was illegal as well and ordered him to be reinstated. The Presient refused, and went and siezed back the ballot boxes and ballots siezed by the court system. Then this morning, the court ordered his removal from office, backed by the military and the Honduran Congress.

With support of the military, the Supreme Court, and Congress, the President of the Congress is currently the provisional President until new elections are held.

The Honduran Congress stripped Zelaya of his presidency a little bit ago.

CNN reports it a bit differently:

After the Supreme Court ruled the poll illegal, the country's top military commander, Gen. Romeo Vasquez Velasquez, told the president that the military would not support the referendum.

In response, Zelaya on Wednesday said he would fire Vasquez.

The next day, the Supreme Court stepped in again and ruled that the general's dismissal was unconstitutional. Initially, Zelaya referred to the court as the "supreme court of injustice," but later reaffirmed that Vasquez still held his military post.

Also:

the secretary-general of the Organization of American States, Jose Miguel Insulza... strongly condemned the coup in a statement.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a statement that Sunday's action in Honduras "violates the precepts of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, and thus should be condemned by all."

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Wreckem
There also issue/fact he "fired" the leader of the military for not following his(the presidents) orders to defy the Supreme Court. Other military leaders "resigned" as well.

Not exactly. The military leader told him the military would not support his referendum, and the President said he'd be fired - but backed off that and left him in his position.

I repeat what I said, that while this is a constitutional crisis, the way to resolve it is the legal system, not the military using force against the elected President unnecessarily.

If the President were imepeached and tried to get the military to help him ignore the rule of law, that'd be another matter, I'd support the military following the law on that.

No. You do not know what you are talking about.

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras - President Manuel Zelaya said he won't obey a Honduran Supreme Court order to reinstate the military chief he fired in a power struggle.
The Supreme Court ruling is "an embarrassment for Hondurans," he told 2,000 supporters yesterday in a plaza at his presidential offices.

The Supreme Court reinstated Gen. Romeo Vasquez as head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff a day after Zelaya fired him for refusing to support a referendum Sunday to measure voter support for amending the constitution.

Zelaya's bid to hold the referendum pits him against the Supreme Court, the attorney general, military leaders and even his party, who say the vote is illegal. Critics say he wants to emulate Venezuela's Hugo Chavez by removing a bar on reelection. - AP

The Honduran Congress(both members of his party and the opposition) and the Honduran Supreme Court both ruled his referendum unconstitutional. He then tried to go down the route of an "unofficial" referendum which was also declared unconstitutional. He then ordered the General of the military to have the military to distribute ballot boxes and ballots for the unofficial referendum. The General refused, and DID get relieved of his duties by the President. Others "resigned." The Court ruled that was illegal as well and ordered him to be reinstated. The Presient refused, and went and siezed back the ballot boxes and ballots siezed by the court system. Then this morning, the court ordered his removal from office, backed by the military and the Honduran Congress.

With support of the military, the Supreme Court, and Congress, the President of the Congress is currently the provisional President until new elections are held.

The Honduran Congress stripped Zelaya of his presidency a little bit ago.

CNN reports it a bit differently:

After the Supreme Court ruled the poll illegal, the country's top military commander, Gen. Romeo Vasquez Velasquez, told the president that the military would not support the referendum.

In response, Zelaya on Wednesday said he would fire Vasquez.

The next day, the Supreme Court stepped in again and ruled that the general's dismissal was unconstitutional. Initially, Zelaya referred to the court as the "supreme court of injustice," but later reaffirmed that Vasquez still held his military post.

Also:

the secretary-general of the Organization of American States, Jose Miguel Insulza... strongly condemned the coup in a statement.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a statement that Sunday's action in Honduras "violates the precepts of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, and thus should be condemned by all."

Is it really a military coup when the Supreme Court orders the removal and the Congress confirms it by a overwhelming majority?

What it comes down to is, he THOUGHT he had the political support to pull a Chavez. He did not. He did not have the support of his own political party, or anyone outside his Executive Cabinent.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Wreckem
Its no longer a military coup when a countries Congress votes to remove the president. His own party helped oust him.

First, yes it is, if it's done outside the law. What if Republicans had just voted 'let's get rid of Clinton' and ignored the impeachment process and called it 'not a coup'?

Second, I haven't seen where their Congress legally removed him from office - the reports suggest he was taken by force, and later Congress voted to strip him of his powers, which I haven't seen confirmation yet whether even that second step was legal. While it's true his own party opposed him on the *issue* of the referendum and he was in trouble politically, that's not justification for a coup.

Hence my original request for details on the specific legal processes.

The Secretary of the OAS and our own Secretary of State both condeming the removal suggests it was not the legal actu you claim.

 

[Beowulf]

Well this is from BBC

Later the Honduran Supreme Court said it had ordered the removal of the president, who had been due to leave office next January.

Then Congress produced what it said was Mr Zelaya's letter of resignation, which it voted to accept. The ousted president dismissed the letter as a fake.

Congress swiftly appointed its speaker Roberto Micheletti - a member of Mr Zelaya's Liberal Party, but an opponent of him - as acting head of state.

The military's dramatic move came after President Zelaya sacked the chief of the army, Gen Romeo Vasquez, on Wednesday for refusing to help him organise the referendum.

A day later, the Honduran Congress approved plans to investigate whether the president should be declared unfit to rule.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Craig234
I'd like to see more on the Honduran legal system in terms of the legitimacy of the ruling against the President's referendum, and what the measures they're allowed to take are.

Is there an impeachment system, as we have?

Taking him out by the military choosing to remove him is wrong.

Out righties will predictably continue to be the enemies of democracy, excusing and rationalizing the act against democracy with justifications irrelevant to the issue.

The Honduras has a problematic history - a 70% poverty rate and the military ruled for 25 years, with the US treating them like a client state for actions against Cuba, Nicaragua etc.

Democracy needs to be respected here. If the President was doing wrong - and it a problem for him to be doing something the Supreme Court said he can't (though I've little doubt that if Bush had defied some Supreme Court orders on issues like detainee treatment we'd have had plenty of righties defending him) - then follow the law for removing him from office.

STRAW MAN TO THE RESCUE!

Leave it to Craig to blame Honduran issues on Republicans.

 

[OCGuy]

Excellent. Something needs to slow the leftist movement. :thumbsup:

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Craig234
I'd like to see more on the Honduran legal system in terms of the legitimacy of the ruling against the President's referendum, and what the measures they're allowed to take are.

Is there an impeachment system, as we have?

Taking him out by the military choosing to remove him is wrong.

Out righties will predictably continue to be the enemies of democracy, excusing and rationalizing the act against democracy with justifications irrelevant to the issue.

The Honduras has a problematic history - a 70% poverty rate and the military ruled for 25 years, with the US treating them like a client state for actions against Cuba, Nicaragua etc.

Democracy needs to be respected here. If the President was doing wrong - and it a problem for him to be doing something the Supreme Court said he can't (though I've little doubt that if Bush had defied some Supreme Court orders on issues like detainee treatment we'd have had plenty of righties defending him) - then follow the law for removing him from office.

STRAW MAN TO THE RESCUE!

Leave it to Craig to blame Honduran issues on Republicans.

Oh man, Bush gets brought up in a honduran coup thread?


:heart: AT P&N

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Wreckem
Its no longer a military coup when a countries Congress votes to remove the president. His own party helped oust him.

First, yes it is, if it's done outside the law. What if Republicans had just voted 'let's get rid of Clinton' and ignored the impeachment process and called it 'not a coup'?

Second, I haven't seen where their Congress legally removed him from office - the reports suggest he was taken by force, and later Congress voted to strip him of his powers, which I haven't seen confirmation yet whether even that second step was legal. While it's true his own party opposed him on the *issue* of the referendum and he was in trouble politically, that's not justification for a coup.

Hence my original request for details on the specific legal processes.

The Secretary of the OAS and our own Secretary of State both condeming the removal suggests it was not the legal actu you claim.

I cannot read spanish so I cannot say. But the Honduran Supreme Court ordered it. I am not going to just say they are completely in the wrong. They should know their constitution better than foreigners. Also most denounced the coup before it was known the Supreme Court was the one that ordered it.


The Honduran Constitution last revised in 2005