Comments on: Reporting on the Honduran Coup http://www.bloggernews.net/121529 High-quality English language analysis and editorial writing on the news. Thu, 26 Nov 2009 04:51:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: A. Jay Adler http://www.bloggernews.net/121529#comment-1337922 A. Jay Adler Fri, 10 Jul 2009 23:15:21 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/121529#comment-1337922 Thanks for your contribution. I've seen reference to these articles. Thorensen's slick argument is that Zelaya wasn't seeking "amendment" of the constitution but a complete rewriting of it - and that he had said nothing about seeking reelection. And, of course, if you're suspicious of Zelaya, the lack of legality would not have been a problem if his true aim was to stoke populist resentment and pressure against the existing government. Now, since Giordano is currently accusing the interim government of planning a narco state, it would be valuable to have information from other, more balanced authoritative sources on the nature of their careers and persons. Thanks for your contribution. I’ve seen reference to these articles. Thorensen’s slick argument is that Zelaya wasn’t seeking “amendment” of the constitution but a complete rewriting of it - and that he had said nothing about seeking reelection. And, of course, if you’re suspicious of Zelaya, the lack of legality would not have been a problem if his true aim was to stoke populist resentment and pressure against the existing government.

Now, since Giordano is currently accusing the interim government of planning a narco state, it would be valuable to have information from other, more balanced authoritative sources on the nature of their careers and persons.

]]> By: brainfood http://www.bloggernews.net/121529#comment-1337795 brainfood Fri, 10 Jul 2009 21:07:55 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/121529#comment-1337795 Interestingly, the Honduran Constitution of 1982 does provide for loss of citizenship for those who “incite, promote or aid in the continuation or re-election of the President” http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Honduras/hond05.html (article 42): ARTICULO 42.- La calidad de ciudadano se pierde: 5. Por incitar, promover o apoyar el continuismo o la reelección del Presidente de la República. Further, Article 239 indicates that anyone who has held the office of chief executive cannot be president or vice president and anyone who proposes reform to that prohibition can be barred from holding public office for ten years: ARTICULO 239.- El ciudadano que haya desempeñado la titularidad del Poder Ejecutivo no podrá ser Presidente o Vicepresidente de la República. El que quebrante esta disposición o proponga su reforma, así como aquellos que lo apoyen directa o indirectamente, cesarán de inmediato en el desempeño de sus respectivos cargos y quedarán inhabilitados por diez años para el ejercicio de toda función pública. My educated guess on that provision is that it is aimed move at banning past military dictators from pursuing the office than it is a stricture contra re-election, per se. Additionally, Article 374 bars any amendments regarding the length of the presidential term (amongst other things: ARTICULO 374.- No podrán reformarse, en ningún caso, el artículo anterior, el presente artículo, los artículos constitucionales que se refieren a la forma de gobierno, al territorio nacional, al período presidencial, a la prohibición para ser nuevamente Presidente de la República, el ciudadano que lo haya desempeñado bajo cualquier título y el referente a quienes no pueden ser Presidentes de la República por el período subsiguiente. As such, it is pretty clear why the Supreme Court of Justice ruled against Zelaya’s plebiscite proposal in the first place. It also means that if the vote had been allowed to happen it would have had no legal standing. Interestingly, the Honduran Constitution of 1982 does provide for loss of citizenship for those who “incite, promote or aid in the continuation or re-election of the President” http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Honduras/hond05.html (article 42):
ARTICULO 42.- La calidad de ciudadano se pierde: 5. Por incitar, promover o apoyar el continuismo o la reelección del Presidente de la República.
Further, Article 239 indicates that anyone who has held the office of chief executive cannot be president or vice president and anyone who proposes reform to that prohibition can be barred from holding public office for ten years: ARTICULO 239.- El ciudadano que haya desempeñado la titularidad del Poder Ejecutivo no podrá ser Presidente o Vicepresidente de la República. El que quebrante esta disposición o proponga su reforma, así como aquellos que lo apoyen directa o indirectamente, cesarán de inmediato en el desempeño de sus respectivos cargos y quedarán inhabilitados por diez años para el ejercicio de toda función pública.
My educated guess on that provision is that it is aimed move at banning past military dictators from pursuing the office than it is a stricture contra re-election, per se.
Additionally, Article 374 bars any amendments regarding the length of the presidential term (amongst other things:
ARTICULO 374.- No podrán reformarse, en ningún caso, el artículo anterior, el presente artículo, los artículos constitucionales que se refieren a la forma de gobierno, al territorio nacional, al período presidencial, a la prohibición para ser nuevamente Presidente de la República, el ciudadano que lo haya desempeñado bajo cualquier título y el referente a quienes no pueden ser Presidentes de la República por el período subsiguiente.
As such, it is pretty clear why the Supreme Court of Justice ruled against Zelaya’s plebiscite proposal in the first place. It also means that if the vote had been allowed to happen it would have had no legal standing.

]]>