Manuel Zelaya's return stumps Honduran coup leaders

[Agnapostate]

Manuel Zelaya's return stumps Honduran coup leaders | World news | The Guardian

It was the type of journey Latino illegal immigrants know all too well: a clandestine border crossing, remote mountain roads, hiding in a car boot, dodging police checkpoints.

But Manuel Zelaya was no impoverished job-seeker smuggling himself into the United States. He was president of Honduras and he was returning home to reclaim power.

The leftist leader apparently traversed valleys and rivers and used a variety of vehicles, including a tractor, to wrongfoot coup leaders who banished him into exile three months ago.

Honduran security forces had orders to arrest Zelaya if he crossed the border. But somehow the tall, moustachioed president evaded checkpoints and on Monday made it to the Brazilian embassy in the capital, Tegucigalpa.

Today troops surrounded the compound and used batons and tear gas to disperse thousands of Zelaya supporters gathered outside. They made no move to storm the embassy.

The deposed president has not regained power but he has outfoxed his foes and seized the initiative ? and the spotlight ? in the week the UN general assembly is meeting in New York. The homecoming opened a new, volatile phase in a crisis that has divided Hondurans and confronted central America with its gravest diplomatic dispute since the cold war.

The Post - Honduras police break up pro-Zelaya protest

TEGUCIGALPA (Reuters) - Honduran troops and police clashed on Tuesday with hundreds of supporters of ousted President Manuel Zelaya outside Brazil's embassy where he took refuge after slipping back into the country in a bid to return to power.

Police fired tear gas at the demonstrators, who threw rocks back at security forces, and a Reuters photographer said at least two gas canisters landed inside the embassy compound.

Soldiers patrolled streets around the embassy and enforced an all-day curfew called by Honduras' de facto government to dampen the protests in support of the leftist Zelaya, who was toppled in a June 28 coup.

Zelaya ended almost three months of exile by sneaking back into Honduras on Monday. He sought refuge at the Brazilian embassy to avoid being arrested, and accused security forces on Tuesday of preparing an attack.

"The embassy is surrounded by police and the military ... I foresee bigger acts of aggression and violence, that they could be capable of even invading the Brazilian embassy," Zelaya said in an interview with Venezuelan broadcaster Telesur.

A police spokesman said all the protesters had been dispersed.

There's also this report of a protester killed by the army today. Considering the status of the present regime as an authoritarian military administration, we can expect little respect for the rights of protesters and perhaps even the possibility of violent and brutal repression if they are seriously threatened by the restoration of the prior administration.

 

[deanhills]

There's also this report of a protester killed by the army today. Considering the status of the present regime as an authoritarian military administration, we can expect little respect for the rights of protesters and perhaps even the possibility of violent and brutal repression if they are seriously threatened by the restoration of the prior administration.

Right, this has to be a number of steps backwards for the country, into the direction of dark ages. Wonder how it was allowed to happen?

 

[David]

The 'coup' was no such thing. However the capitalist regime is quickly exhausting the legitimacy granted it by it's legal takeover and an attack on the embassy will be a de facto DoW on Brazil, something they and I suspect their Iberian counterparts, will not look on too kindly. Now if they want the EU (which holds a sizable chunk of territory in SA) and a Brazilian/Venezuelan lead coalition to invade...

 

[Dirk]

What exactly does he expect to achieve?

Or is it just to sow seeds of discord in the nation in general?

 

[deanhills]

What exactly does he expect to achieve?

Or is it just to sow seeds of discord in the nation in general?

I would have imagined it would have been the need for (1) power, need for (2) getting even, and (3) working on his pension package.

 

[Dirk]

Media restrictions as daily clashes occur between the military regime and Zelaya's supporters.

 

[Agnapostate]

The 'coup' was no such thing.

Yeah...I'm afraid I don't buy that one. Evidence of the illegitimacy of the rightist assertions is apparent through analysis of this aforementioned reference to Article 239 of the Honduran Constitution:

Article 239 ? No citizen that has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President. Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.

What's ignored, of course, is that Zelaya did not propose the amendment of the Constitution through commission of an assembly (which would not have necessarily entailed involvement with the term limit issue anyway); he attempted to hold a non-binding poll on the prospect of such amendment rather than attempting to implement either such amendment or even a non-binding version of it when he was told he couldn't.

 

[deanhills]

Yeah...I'm afraid I don't buy that one. Evidence of the illegitimacy of the rightist assertions is apparent through analysis of this aforementioned reference to Article 239 of the Honduran Constitution:



What's ignored, of course, is that Zelaya did not propose the amendment of the Constitution through commission of an assembly (which would not have necessarily entailed involvement with the term limit issue anyway); he attempted to hold a non-binding poll on the prospect of such amendment rather than attempting to implement either such amendment or even a non-binding version of it when he was told he couldn't.

Where is he receiving his sponsorship from? Honduran drug lords, or US Government?

 

[David]

Yeah...I'm afraid I don't buy that one. Evidence of the illegitimacy of the rightist assertions is apparent through analysis of this aforementioned reference to Article 239 of the Honduran Constitution:



What's ignored, of course, is that Zelaya did not propose the amendment of the Constitution through commission of an assembly (which would not have necessarily entailed involvement with the term limit issue anyway); he attempted to hold a non-binding poll on the prospect of such amendment rather than attempting to implement either such amendment or even a non-binding version of it when he was told he couldn't.

No, the referendum was a proposal. The fact that it was non-binding simply underlines this fact. Had it been binding, then he would have actively been changing the Constitution. Ether way his overthrow was legal and ordered by the Supreme Court, not the military. This whole situation is simply a case of a criminal being arrested. Had they used the police rather then the military, nothing would have changed from a practical POV save the fact that the opposition wouldn't have been able to label it a military coup. They still can't and would have been silenced already except American support is granting them false legitimacy.

Disclaimer: I'm a socialist. I still don't support blatantly wrong people regardless of political allegiances.

 

[deanhills]

No, the referendum was a proposal. The fact that it was non-binding simply underlines this fact. Had it been binding, then he would have actively been changing the Constitution. Ether way his overthrow was legal and ordered by the Supreme Court, not the military. This whole situation is simply a case of a criminal being arrested. Had they used the police rather then the military, nothing would have changed from a practical POV save the fact that the opposition wouldn't have been able to label it a military coup. They still can't and would have been silenced already except American support is granting them false legitimacy.

Disclaimer: I'm a socialist. I still don't support blatantly wrong people regardless of political allegiances.

Does any of this matter however? Either he does it by a politically manouvred "coup" or he does it by force. But I get it that American support in the background is probably enough for a "legal" coup.

 

[David]

Does any of this matter however? Either he does it by a politically manouvred "coup" or he does it by force. But I get it that American support in the background is probably enough for a "legal" coup.

I've no issue with what President Zelaya did, I'm opposed to term limits (though not to limitations on term lengths) anyway but the way he did it was blatantly illegal. The correct way to have done it was to have a congressional ally to submit a bill to amend the constitution or else call for a referendum. President Zelaya could have then openly supported and advanced the cause legally has he wouldn't have been the person attempting or proposing a change to term limits but merely advocating the moves of others that legally could do so. It's unconstitutional for him to attempt/propose a change, not to advocate for change after someone else did.

 

[deanhills]

I've no issue with what President Zelaya did, I'm opposed to term limits (though not to limitations on term lengths) anyway but the way he did it was blatantly illegal. The correct way to have done it was to have a congressional ally to submit a bill to amend the constitution or else call for a referendum. President Zelaya could have then openly supported and advanced the cause legally has he wouldn't have been the person attempting or proposing a change to term limits but merely advocating the moves of others that legally could do so. It's unconstitutional for him to attempt/propose a change, not to advocate for change after someone else did.

OK I understand your point, but can only wonder whether previous Presidencies have been "legal"?