Honduras, popular sovereignty What has really happened the night of June 27 to 28 at the home of President Zelaya? In return, three months later, at home, it undermines the forces coup. An opinion Magasich Jorge, a professor of Latin American history at IHECS.
The return of President Manuel Zelaya in his country on September 21 where he took refuge at the Brazilian embassy, is struggling the coup that seized power on June 28, and has opened possibilities for restoring the rule of law. However, the government formed after the coup is the only one who managed to stay in power in Latin America since the overthrow of Jean-Bertrand Aristide in Haiti in 1991.
elected in late 2005, Manuel Zelaya has taken some urgent decisions to curb the country's breakup, as easy credit to SMEs, regulate logging and legalize the "morning after" pill. He also started four major guidelines:
1) approximation with the Bolivarian Alliance (Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Venezuela), which opens access to medicines Cuban, its medical schools and literacy methods, and which importantly, allows deferred payment Honduras from 17 to 25 years of Venezuelan oil, at an annual interest of 1% to 2% and possible reimbursement of local products;
2) 60% increase in the minimum wage, bringing it to 280 U $.
3) considering the commercial use of the airport in the U.S. military base, the best in the country;
4) steps to give the country a more democratic constitution, as were seven Latin American countries since 1979.
fierce opposition from business involves the breaking of Zelaya with other Liberal leaders, which makes him lose his parliamentary majority. For cons, the President enjoys broad popular support, expressed by a new activity of social movements.
The current Constitution was drafted in 1982 under the dictatorship of généralPolicarpo Paz, when Washington erected the military base in the heart of the war against Nicaragua. This is a fixed charter and any reform requires majorities impossible and some of these items "can not be modified under any circumstances", even if there is consensus. In addition, it provides for the appointment of members of the Supreme Court by Parliament, which promotes political quotas (8 for the Liberal Party, 7 for the National Party) and judges subservient to the parliamentary majority. The Court has thus become the backbone of the conservative opposition, striking often illegal efforts of the Executive.
If the Constitution makes it impracticable a referendum, it does not prohibit consultations, which Zelaya's decision to hold a non-binding on whether to convene a constituent assembly, an idea rejected without reason by the Supreme Court, but supported by 400,000 signatures. June 28, Hondurans were asked the question: "Do you agree that during the 2009 elections a fourth ballot box is installed to enable the people to decide on the convening of a Constituent Assembly?" This process has a precedent in the region: in 1990 elections in Colombia, students were asked to add a newsletter for the convening of a Constituent Assembly. The success of this initiative prompted the then President to organize a referendum in which 87% of Colombians voted "yes", the starting point of the current Constitution.
In one scenario - alas! - Known on the night of June 27 to 28, soldiers stormed the home of President and grow in an airplane. Parliament "accepts" the resignation and elect Mr. Micheletti. The conspirators then spread their version: Zelaya wanted to organize a referendum against the constitution to seek re-election and the Supreme Court was dismissed and the army has arrested and deported.
In reality, such a "dismissal" is impossible in a state of law. Even this rigid Constitution does not give such powers to the courts and provides immunity to the president. A delegation of lawyers from the FIDH noted that "the order of arrest" has been known that 24 hours after the coup. And the letter of resignation presidential proved false. These two texts are also contradictory: why have you accepted the resignation of a president impeached? According to Leticia Salomón, a researcher at the University of Honduras, the coup has been prepared and funded by the employers, including the former president and Mr. M. Facussé Canahuati, owner of two newspapers and several TV.
What is Washington's policy on this issue? It is now established that the Bush administration was involved in the attempted coup in Venezuela in 2002. Six years later, in 2008, Bolivia has expelled the U.S. ambassador, Mr. Goldberg (former Chief of Mission in Kosovo), as it met regularly with governors who were preparing a coup separatist.
Under Obama, the situation remains worrying. Last April, the Air France-Paris-Mexico has been prohibit overflight of the United States and was forced to land in Martinique, because of the presence on board of Mr. Calvo, a collaborator of Le Monde Diplomatique "of Colombian origin, and in August, another flight knew same fate, because at its edge, was the Belgian lawyer, Mr. Dupret, advisor to the left to Parliament. If there are officials who are bent on criminalizing ideas, there are probably others who, despite the condemnation of the coup in Tegucigalpa by Obama, still practice the traditional policy of "big stick" .
Currently, the White House seems to encourage agreement that would restore Zelaya, but with reduced powers and no constituent assembly, which would make it comparable to the return of Jean-Bertrand Aristide in Haiti in 1994.
On site, the Front of resistance to the coup is surprising in its magnitude and persistence: for 120 days, the teachers union, the peasant movement La Via Campesina, indigenous organizations and women develop a constant activity, despite the measures Law enforcement and dozens of deaths.
Moreover, the coup met with widespread international condemnation, even if the United States and Europe have not clearly denounced the "elections" that the coup leaders prepare for November 29 (as did the UN), and that much of aid continues. Belgium, meanwhile, has not ruled out the pro-coup Ambassador, Mr. Custodio, despite demandeformelle President Zelaya.
In an interesting analysis, Mr. Garretón lawyer, former Rapporteur of the UN on Congo, and M. Ruz find that the coup Honduras has a striking resemblance with that of Chile in 1973: in both case, the conspirators have prevented the people to speak. 36 years ago, Pinochet had advanced his coup to prevent Allende's President announces the call for a plebiscite. Three months ago, the Honduran military blocked the organization of democratic consultation. The one and the others were afraid of the expression of popular sovereignty.
