Tuesday 7 July 2009
Honduras: the Supreme Court's case ☀
The former President of the Honduran Supreme Court lays out her argument about why Zelaya’s removal did not constitute a coup. The logic is as follows:
First, according to Article 239 of the constitution, no one can propose to reform presidential term limits.
Second, according to the same article, anyone who does is immediately relieved of their post.
Third, if you ask whether voters want a constitutional commission, you are automatically saying you want to abolish the constitution.
Fourth, by order of the Supreme Court, Zelaya was no longer president at the time he was detained, and therefore the illegal act of removing him from the country did not happen to a president. Hence there was no coup.
Obviously, number 3 is the stickiest point. As has been noted repeatedly, Zelaya’s proposal never mentioned presidential terms and did not say the constitution would be abolished.
