NEWS DAY | Honduras still in trouble

Mary Turck's reports on Honduras are disturbingly biased. The Honduras Constitution prohibits a President seeking a second term, and also prohibits a President campaigning to change that part of the Constitution. It also provides that a President who tries to change the provision forfeits their office. Zelaya expressly defied court orders, and tried to coerce the military to help him run an illegal referendum. He had ballots sent in illegally from Venezuela, and when they were impounded, he went at the head of a mob and seized the ballots. The military carried out orders of the courts and decisions of the Honduras Congress when they ousted Zelaya and replaced him with the speaker of the Congress, who was next in line of succession. This was all done legally, arguably in defense of the Honduras Constitution. Yet Mary Turck presents this as an illegal military coup, refers to the ousted President as the President, and makes no mention of the provisions in the Honduras Constitution, the court orders and Zelaya's defiance of court orders.

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.

UN is an organization with no teeth and no practical power.

UN can not make real change. As in other cases, even if the UN Mlhtcilo are positive, The damageb is more of the benefit. Tom