Rule of Law in Honduras

[zaimoni]

(Note: tracking this as background study for my science fantasy.)

There are no good solutions by the point that the military gets involved in deciding which branch of government is legal. (This could happen in the U.S. The conditions for invoking martial law as denotated in the Insurrection Act of 1807, border on a logic paradox when the threat

Comments

[goodluckfox]

If their Supreme Court is like ours, then if they say it's okay, then it's okay. They aren't final because they are infallible, they are infallible because they are final.

[zaimoni]

Agreed; now if only U.S. foreign policy could have respect for rule of law.

Both polarities agree that the military had a direct order from the Honduras Supreme Court to remove Zelaya.

(They may, or may not, have had the legal option to simply extradite to Costa Rica rather than a trial. I'm not certain I trust the latest military PR statement that it was illegal to extradite without a trial.)

[jordan179]

I think they were trying to be merciful to Zelaya. There is a long-standing Latin American tradition that, when you play politics and don't want to start a bloody feud, you exile rather than kill your opponents.

[jordan179]

If the Supreme Court were bucking the Presidency and Congress, I'd say that there'd be the possibility that the Supreme Court was attempting judicial tyranny. But that's not what happened in Honduras. The odd man out is Zelaya, who was doing something that his own country's Constitution clearly said disqualified his continuation in the Presidency, and both the Supreme Court and Congress agreed on this. And if you read the details of what happened, you'll note that they gave him chances -- the countercoup was clearly a last resort.

I'm Sorry...

[publius_aelius]

...but I think their Constitution is itself absurd and un-democratic, with its provision that somebody be removed from office and banned from public service merely for PROPOSING a reform of it. And I think they know full well how absurd and undemocratic it is, and that that's why they deported him, rather than give him a public trial for PROPOSING a reform. I don't think that the U.S. or the OAS would have a problem with the Hondurans if they were conducting a public trial, based on this supposed abrogation of their Constitution. The world is TIRED of Latin American and other coups--which are ALWAYS "illegal."

Re: I'm Sorry...

[zaimoni]

There are other provisions not ideal for a democracy as well :(

In particular, I'm tempted to call Articulo 3 the "civil war article". I'm surprised this is getting absolutely no media coverage; it makes a lot of what's going on down there more intelligible.

With hearsay that the local population split of pro-Zelaya/pro-Michelleti is 25%/75%, it would seem that a civil war is actively mandated as the regimes are mutually illegitimate. (It would be consistent for the Zelaya regime to not recognize the authority of the current Honduras Supreme Court either. There is a report on the U.K. Telegraph that they had access to the text of the direct order to the military, and that it did not mention extradition to anywhere as an option.)

This strikes me as a destabilizing flaw.

[rowyn]

It's fascinating to look at in detail. I wish the Hondurans luck with it, and admit that I'm rooting for Zelaya not to be in office in 2010, at the least. It's still not clear to me that the military/judiciary could legally deport him, even if the arrest itself was legal.