El Cinquito

The Deadliest Place In The World For A Journalist

2011-10-09T13:58:00.000-07:00

Honduras y la politización de su constitución

2011-01-20T16:38:00.000-08:00

por Lucas Romero
La actual constitución de Honduras, como cualquier documento legal, es un claro reflejo de los tiempos en que fue escrita. Después de décadas de dictaduras militares, la sociedad hondureña a través de la Asamblea Nacional Constituyente creada en 1981, se pronunció en contra del continuismo que había caracterizado los gobiernos militares del siglo 20 en ese país. Como resultado quedaron claramente establecidas en el texto de la carta magna aprobada en 1982 no sólo la prohibición de la reelección presidencial sino también la criminalización de cualquier intento de reforma a los artículos que respaldan esa premisa.
En las últimas tres décadas estos artículos pétreos, llamados así por su carácter inamovible, han permanecido así, anclados en el temor (real o infundido por intereses privados) de un regreso a los tiempos del absolutismo que ahogó a la democracia hondureña durante la mayor parte del siglo 20. Irónicamente, en los últimos años la clase política que domina en Honduras ha utilizado estos “artículos defensores de la democracia” como un arma efectiva en contra de la participación ciudadana cuando las iniciativas que han emanado del pueblo van en contra de los intereses de dicha clase dominante.
El más claro ejemplo de esa manipulación fue el golpe de estado del 2009 perpetrado en contra del presidente Manuel Zelaya a quien se le expulsó ilegalmente del país sin debido proceso. En esa ocasión la Corte Suprema de Justicia, catalogada por Larry Birns del Consejo de Asuntos Hemisféricos de Washington como “una de las instituciones más corruptas en Latinoamérica”, acusó a Zelaya de violar la constitución al intentar llevar a cabo un referéndum o encuesta pública supuestamente con el objetivo de obtener apoyo para su reelección. Dichas acusaciones nunca vieron la luz de una corte competente y Zelaya siempre negó que esa haya sido su intención. Muchos analistas políticos opuestos al golpe sostienen que el fantasma del continuismo fue solo una excusa utilizada por la clase política dominante para evitar incrementos al salario mínimo y revisiones a la ley de reforma agraria promovidas por Zelaya.
A pesar de todo esto, el pasado 11 de enero el Congreso hondureño discutió y aprobó reformas al artículo 5 de la constitución cuyo texto se refiere al concepto de democracia participativa a través de herramientas de consulta popular como le referéndum y el plebiscito. Aparte de facilitar el acceso a dichas herramientas al reducir el número de firmas necesarias para la introducción de una propuesta, las reformas aprobadas no cambian drásticamente lo que se refiere a quien tiene la potestad legal de utilizar las herramientas de consulta. Es decir, la discusión en el seno de la cámara legislativa en 2011 de un instrumento político por cuyo uso un presidente fue expulsado en 2009 es una clara contradicción. A la luz de estos acontecimientos no nos queda otra opción más que preguntar ¿porque ahora sí es legal lo que hace dos años no lo era? La respuesta es simple, la legalidad de la figura del referéndum no ha cambiado, lo que ha cambiado es quien se estará beneficiando al utilizarla.
La falta de pronunciamiento público de algunos de los sectores de la sociedad hondureña a favor o en contra de las reformas no es sorpresiva. Es probable que hasta que la ley se ratifique en marzo, los sindicatos, las organizaciones sociales y grupos religiosos procederán con cautela y no expresarán su apoyo u oposición.
Entretanto esperamos este desenlace, nos es fácil suponer que mientras estas o cualquieras otras reformas constitucionales no amenacen con afectar económicamente a la clase política dominante, los fantasmas del continuismo permanecerán tranquilos. Tranquilos pero no dormidos, siempre atentos al llamado para “defender la constitución.”

A año y medio del Golpe de Estado en Honduras

2010-12-17T08:48:00.000-08:00

A 18 meses del golpe de estado que derrocó al presidente hondureño Manuel Zelaya, la crisis política en ese país sigue vigente.

La falta de liderazgo y voluntad política del gobierno del presidente Porfirio Lobo han hecho que la problemática en materia socioeconómica y de seguridad que afecta a la mayoría de los hondureños, lejos de resolverse, siga empeorando.

Desafortunadamente, un vistazo a la raquítica cobertura por parte de los medios de comunicación internacionales de lo que está aconteciendo en Honduras deja evidente que el enfoque primordial no son las constantes violaciones a los derechos humanos a manos de los militares, a pesar de haber sido documentadas por la Comisión Interamericana de los Derechos Humanos.

Tampoco han tenido un alto nivel de cobertura los asesinatos de campesinos a mano de grupos armados contratados por empresarios terratenientes en el Bajo Aguan, zona donde cientos de hectáreas de las mejores tierras se encuentran en disputa. En los últimos meses el enfoque se ha concentrado casi exclusivamente en torno a lo relacionado a la reintegración de esa nación centroamericana a los distintos organismos y grupos internacionales como la OEA y a su participación en cumbres regionales.

Es preocupante que la prensa internacional no dedique más espacio en los medios al hecho de que en los primeros siete meses del 2010 se registró en Honduras una cifra record de asesinatos de periodistas, según un reporte emitido a finales de julio por el Comité para la Protección de los Periodistas. Mientras nos preparamos para recibir el año 2011, el periodismo en Honduras sigue siendo amenazado por actos de violencia y censura y por el monopolio de los medios de comunicación por parte de la clase social y política que no sólo impulsó el golpe de estado, sino que también se ha visto económicamente favorecida por el derrocamiento de Zelaya.

Es por ello que ahora es más importante que nunca que el periodismo internacional llene el vacío dejado en estos momentos de crisis por su contraparte en Honduras. Ahora que la posición de Honduras en el continente está siendo analizada, los gobiernos de los países latinoamericanos tienen una excelente oportunidad de promover la restitución del orden democrático y el cese a las violaciones de los derechos humanos en Honduras, pero para ello la información debe fluir con más libertad.

La reintegración de Honduras a la OEA, por ejemplo, debe reunir ciertos requisitos. Es aquí donde los hondureños esperamos que el periodismo internacional juegue un papel decisivo.

The Honduran Dam Controversy and Micheletti’s Legacy

2010-02-26T10:40:00.000-08:00

February 20, 2010
by Daniel Altschuler

Roberto Micheletti’s de facto government is back in the news. Last week, news broke in Honduras that the official newspaper, La Gaceta, published two different versions with the same number and date in the last days of Micheletti’s time in the Presidential Palace. The major difference? One version contained a controversial dam contract. After many months of Micheletti promoting his de facto government as the clean and honest side of the Liberal Party, the gacetazo (as the Honduran media has deemed the scandal) will further mar the legacy of Micheletti and his supporters.

In their last days in office, presidents often sign controversial decrees that would have proved too controversial earlier in their term. In the United States, for instance, recent presidents have extended pardons to convicts and established vast natural reserves. Presidents must be careful, however, not to over-step in their last days, or else their legacy will be stained by controversy. President Clinton, for instance, went too far when he pardoned Mark Rich, sparking allegations that the wealthy Rich had purchased his freedom with political contributions.

In Honduras, it seems that Roberto Micheletti’s de facto government, with the Congress his party controlled, could not resist the temptations of the last days in office, either. Just before relinquishing power, Micheletti and the Congress rushed to approve a $160 million contract to operate and improve the José Cecilio del Valle Dam (better known as the Nacaome Dam). In January, the Honduran Congress sped through the process of granting the contract to a Honduran-Italian consortium. Then-President of the Congress, José Alfredo Saavedra, argued that Congress had recently fast-tracked laws, including the general amnesty passed in January, so the contract should not raise concerns. After the congressional vote, Roberto Micheletti signed the contract into law in his last cabinet meeting.

Almost immediately after Micheletti left power and Congress changed hands, however, the contract came into question. Only days after President Porfirio Lobo took office, the new government placed a hold on the publication of the decree in the country’s official newspaper, La Gaceta. Two weeks later, however, it became clear that La Gaceta had published two versions for January 22, 2010, with the same issue number. One version contained 16 pages, with no mention of the dam contract; the other included an additional 16 pages covering the dam contract and the creation of a new government office of criminal investigation. To make matters worse, the office in charge of publishing La Gaceta, Empresa Nacional de Artes Gráficas (ENAG), apparently only published 20 copies of the second version, and then denied publishing them at all once these copies had disappeared.

While the country awaits the results of an initial investigation by the Ministerio Público, all eyes are on the ENAG and the dam consortium for foul play. Saavedra, no longer president of Congress since the National Party took control, has backtracked and agreed to support the derogation of the contract. Questions remain, however, about the complicity of Saavedra, Micheletti and other powerful figures within the Liberal Party who pushed this contract through without sufficient public scrutiny.

Of course, this issue raises important issues about the transparency of the Honduran political process, long plagued by corruption. But, perhaps more importantly, it further undermines the reputation of honesty and integrity that Roberto Micheletti and his supporters in Congress sought to fashion for themselves after standing by the coup that overthrew Manuel Zelaya. Throughout his time in office, Micheletti presented himself as a humble public servant thrust into an unenviable but necessary position. His supporters (in Congress and the mainstream Honduran media) repeatedly contrasted his behavior with the innumerable accusations of corruption they leveled against Manuel Zelaya.

Congress granted Micheletti a congressional salary-for-life, and now the dam contract scandal has followed. Those in power since last June have continued to sow doubt regarding their credibility. In particular, recent events make it even more difficult to determine the credence of their claims that Zelaya’s government raided the country’s coffers for personal gain. If solid evidence exists, it will now become more difficult to convince the Honduran public and international observers. (Of course, none of this would change the reality of the coup, but it remains important for how the country remembers Zelaya’s term in office, events since June 28, and the role of Roberto Micheletti and the Congress.)

For now, the Honduran media and public have more questions than answers about the gacetazo. What cannot be refuted, however, is that this controversy will further stain the legacy of the de facto government that assumed power after the illegal ouster of Manuel Zelaya.

*Daniel Altschuler is a contributing blogger to americasquarterly.org conducting research in Guatemala and Honduras. He is a Rhodes Scholar and doctoral candidate in Politics at the University of Oxford, and his research focuses on civic and political participation in Honduras and Guatemala

The field: Electoral Fraud Proved in Honduras: More than 50 Percent Did Not Vote

2009-12-07T07:49:00.000-08:00

While most international news organizations took obedient dictation of the Honduras coup regime's claims of more than 62 percent voter participation in the November 29 "elections," authentic journalist Jesse Freeston did what real reporters are supposed to do: He went directly to the source, asked questions, took notes, and videotaped the evidence.

Freeston today publishes this bombshell report, above, on The Real News that documents definitively that Honduras electoral officials knowingly lied about their claims of more than 60 percent voter turnout. The hard results in possession of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE, in its Spanish initials) demonstrate only 49.2 percent turnout: That means that a majority - more than 50 percent - of Honduran citizens abstained in the "elections" that the National Front Against the Coup d'Etat had called unfair, unfree and placed under boycott.

The hard numbers show that abstention - and by inference, the Resistance - was the winner in the November 29 vote.

Usually, electoral fraud is committed to change the outcome between candidates in an election. It is not yet known whether the stuffing of official results with claims of 62 percent voter turnout (about 25 percent higher than the actual 49 percent participation) was also used to change the results of presidential, congressional or municipal contests.

The real question all along was well known to be: How many Hondurans would vote? And how many Hondurans would not? In the coup regime's zeal to legitimize this electoral farce it invented a number - 62 - and claimed that to be the percent of participation in the November 29 vote. Journalist Freeston walks the viewer, step by step, through the post-electoral claims by presidential candidate Pepe Lobo (declared winner of the mock elections), members of the Honduran Congress, diplomats from the United States, Canada, Costa Rica and other countries, and international corporate newspaper editorials, all of which cited the "more than 60 percent turnout" to label the "elections" as free, fair and transparent.

He then goes inside the vote counting rooms at the Supreme Electoral Tribunal in Tegucigalpa, camera in hand, and videotapes the real numbers from computer screens and paper print-outs: 49.2 percent turnout. He also conducts an interview with Leonardo Ramírez Pareda, the official responsible for counting the votes, who in a moment of frankness (perhaps unaware of what his bosses were claiming outside the room to the press) says, matter of factly, that the participation was at 49 percent. All of this evidence is on camera, and it is now known to the world, thanks to the journalist gumshoe work of Freeston and The Real News.

The 49.2 percent turnout count, Freeston notes, is very close to the independent count of the US-financed "Hagamos Democracía" organization, which works under the auspices of the National Democratic Institute (NDI) of the US State Department's National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Freeston notes that the NDI withheld its own count information from its press release lauding the the "elections" as a success.

The work that Freeston did to bring you, and all Hondurans and citizens of the world, these facts was something that any reporter for AP, Reuters, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal or any other media could have done, but did not do: report the real facts that were available on the ground even as the Supreme Electoral Tribunal still has not - eight days after the "elections" - released the official town by town "results" which make a lie of its chairman's election night claims of 62 percent turnout.

Logic would dictate that the same governments and media organizations that, in the days since, have cited the false turnout numbers as the reason to consider the Honduras "elections" free, fair and transparent, and therefore recognize their "results," now must withdraw that recognition. Some have been played as fools, once again, by an anti-democratic coup regime. Others are willing participants in the dishonest charade.

Freeston's report is a game changer inside Honduras and outside of it as well. It will shortly be translated to Spanish and other languages (as will this written summary of it). The real facts will be distributed far and wide by the Honduran resistance and by pro-democracy voices everywhere on earth. The conclusion is based on hard data and therefore undeniable: The Honduras coup regime cooked the "results" of the November 29 "elections" with knowing falsehood. The real results reveal that abstention and the Resistance-called boycott of the electoral theater won the majority two Sundays ago. The elections are therefore absolutely illegitimate, cannot be recognized, and neither can their "results." And authentically freedom-loving peoples of Honduras and the world will never adhere to them, abide by them, respect them or acknowledge them.

The coup d'etat unleashed last June 28 now has led to a situation where the incoming government that is slated to take power on January 27, 2010 enjoys no more legitimacy or legality than the present coup regime. The Honduras people are without a democratically elected government, and will continue to be without one for some time to come. And any other country's government, or media, that continues to claim to recognize them as legitimate reveals itself to be complicit in the theft of democracy.

Now, kind readers, do your part: break the information blockade, distribute Freeston's video report far and wide, translate it into your own languages, and wave it in the faces of any government official or media organization that attempts to repeat the big lie of majority participation in the Honduras vote last week. They are the usurpers of democracy. And you are its last, best hope.

Obama's Magical Surrealism in Honduras

2009-11-12T04:57:00.000-08:00

By Bob Ostertag

"I've heard many in this room say that they will not recognize the elections in Honduras. I'm not trying to be a wiseguy, but what does that mean? What does that mean in the real world, not in the world of magical realism?" - W. Lewis Amselem, Obama administration's representative to the Organization of American States

W-w-w-w-hat?!?! An American diplomat actually said that?!? In a meeting of the Organization of American States? Who is president now? Didn't Ronald Reagan die?

A little context: this was said at the OAS during a discussion of upcoming elections in Honduras. All the Latin American countries were announcing that they will not recognize the elections as valid because the current government, the one that will organize the elections, came to power through a military coup. The United States was isolated as the only government in the Americas ready to recognize the election. And Obama's representative decided that might be a good time to ridicule all the Latin American democracies for thinking that their refusal to recognize a government which come to power through military coups mattered.

Well gee, Mr. Amselem, why would it matter whether elections are recognized by the international community? As I recall, there were just elections in Iran and Afghanistan. What does it really matter whether other countries in the region recognize the regime of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which is widely believed to have won the elections through massive electoral fraud? Does it matter who does and doesn't recognize the elections of the American-backed regime in Afghanistan, which was accused of electoral fraud on a similar scale? How about Zimbabwe, which has been teetering on the edge of catastrophe since similarly questionable elections? What exactly was your point, Mr. Amselem? Was it that democracy doesn't mean anything? Or was it that it doesn't matter what Latin American governments do? Or was it that small countries that have neither oil, nukes or terrorists don't matter? We could use a little clarification here.

Just what in the heck is going on in the Obama-Clinton State Department? As the New York Times reported today, the Obama administration's announcement of its policy regarding the upcoming Honduran elections "was celebrated by Republicans as a "reversal" of the administration's policy [and] ignited a storm of criticism from Mr. Obama's allies at home and across Latin America." Just like Hillary's reversal on the administration's position concerning Jewish settlements in Palestinian territories is being celebrated by the Israeli right wing and may trigger the collapse of the Palestinian Authority.

Mr. President, you have some very urgent work to do. First, you need to demand W. Lewis Amselem's head on a pike, now. Just to show that you are at least paying attention.

Beyond that, it is going to be tough. You have dithered on the Honduras coup for half a year, and the elections are just weeks away. Here's an idea: start over. Announce that you are very sorry, but as a way of preparing your State Department for work in Latin America, you asked your diplomatic corps to take some time off to immerse themselves in magical realist literature, and they became so engrossed they simply lost track of time. No one noticed that a year had gone by since your election. But now everyone is ready to put down their novels and return to the real world, in which no one would ever imagine that a government led by Barack Obama would stand as the only government in the western hemisphere supporting coups in Latin America.

Golpistas' version of democracy: Finger lickin' good

2009-10-29T07:56:00.000-07:00

Since taking power in June, the de facto regime in Honduras has once and again violated the rights of the Honduran citizens who have repudiated the coup. The military and police, also known as the fourth branch of the golpista government, have disregarded the true purpose of their existence by choosing to protect those who demonstrate their support for the ruling class while moving to repress those who don't.

Clashes between anti-coup demonstrators and military and polices forces have left several dead and hundreds injured, media outlets opposing the regime have been shut down, and individual rights have been suspended. A climate of fear and insecurity reigns in the country.

In the meantime, Micheletti and his gang have proceeded to block any kind of agreement that would reinstate Zelaya and are pushing for elections to take place at the end of November. They have called the elections the only solution to take Honduras out of the hole, but when basic freedoms have been taken off the table, it is hard to imagine that the outcome will represent the will of the people, ironically making the ballot box a tool for the demise of democracy. And even though the Carter Center ,the UN, and the EU have determined that conditions have not been met for elections to take place in a fair manner, the golpistas have threatened candidates who have considered withdrawing their candidacy with throwing them in jail.

But the irony doesn't end there. It lies also in the fact that what the golpistas took as an excuse to remove a democratically elected president was Zelaya's call for Hondurans to express their opinion by polling them on June 28th. Zelaya advocated "democracia participativa" a system that would include all those willing to participate in deciding the fate of the country. The elections on November 29th would be a golpista-engineered version of that. But with the golpista-alligned military controlling the resources allotted for the elections, the new system can only be called "dedocracia manipulativa." Need a translation? Dedo means finger, and that's what the golpistas are giving the Honduran people.

Part 1: 100 days since the coup d'etat that ousted Manuel Zelaya, Fault Lines travels to Honduras and finds resistance and repression in the streets

2009-10-15T16:46:00.001-07:00

Part 2: 100 days since the coup d'etat that ousted Manuel Zelaya, Fault Lines travels to Honduras and finds resistance and repression in the streets

2009-10-15T16:40:00.000-07:00

DeMint's Fashion Sense: sweatshops in, democracy out

2009-10-11T07:34:00.000-07:00

Last week, a group of Republican lawmakers traveled to post-coup Honduras to take part in something they called a "fact-finding mission." Leading the group was South Carolina junior senator, and outspoken critic of official U.S. policy toward the coup, Jim DeMint. Upon his return to the United States, DeMint released the following statement:

"After visiting Tegucigalpa last week and meeting with a cross section of leaders from Honduras's government, business community, and civil society, I can report there is no chaos there."

Even if you don't see eye to eye with the senator on most other things, it would be hard to disagree with DeMint on this one. Micheletti and pals have done a great job at thwarting dissent by suspending civil liberties, closing radio and TV stations critical of the coup, and using military repression to make sure Hondurans, especially those in the capital city, can no longer exercise their freedom of speech.

Obviously that's not the connection DeMint wants you to make. By saying that there's no chaos in Honduras, DeMint wants us to think that democracy has triumphed and that Hondurans are happier with Zelaya gone. The truth of the matter is that if it were truly about democracy, both DeMint's and Micheletti's words would reflect what a recent poll made public by a government certified polling company actually shows: an overwhelming opposition to the coup and even lower support for Micheletti himself. Oh, and that more than half of Hondurans support Zelaya's return to power.

Thus, in lieu of true love for democracy, the real intention behind DeMint's trip has to reside elsewhere. Reading his op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal, it seems like DeMint's journey to Central America had more in common with a PR campaign than with a "fact-finding mission." DeMint pretty much echoed Micheletti's assurance to foreign investors: come back, everything is normal in Honduras. You see, like Micheletti, when DeMint says "let's defend democracy" he really means "business."

So what business interests would be so important to make DeMint defy his Senate committe's leadership by choosing Honduras as his destination in his first trip ever to Latin America? After taking a look at what happened in Honduras it's really hard to miss the connection:

In 2008, after labor unions and international corporations failed to reach an agreement on minimum wage, Zelaya issued a decree that raised it by 60% (from US$1.15 per hour to US$1.85). This cut into the profits of the international corporations that have set shop in Honduras since the implementation of the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), including the infamous sweatshops that rely on cheap labor to turn million-dollar profits. In order to counteract Zelaya's actions, they did what greedy corporations with plenty of cash do to third world country democracies: they staged a coup. In spite of claiming that Zelaya was legally removed because he violated the constitution by trying to extend presidential terms to stay in power, the regime installed after the coup has failed to convince anyone of this nonsense and therefore has not been recognized by any country in the world. In an unprecedented move, both the UN and OAS unanimously condemned the coup. In the face of mounting international pressure, the situation proved too chaotic for the companies (both in Honduras and the U.S.) to deal with the political hot potato (and the ensuing economic loss) on their own, thus raising the need for an political ally in Washington.

So, who in Washington...
1. Has been a staunch supporter of CAFTA,
2. Is the top recipient of campaign contributions by the textile industry,
3. Has been clear in establishing a strong connection between the two, and
4. Has recenlty anounced his bid for reelection?

You got it, James W. DeMint.

You see, even political figures with bad suits can every now and then make true fashion statements.

Hondurans Jailed for Demonstrating

2009-10-08T08:20:00.001-07:00

Golpistas suspend constitutional rights of the Honduran people to "defend" democracy.

Honduras, Who’s Your Papi?

2009-10-03T12:01:00.000-07:00

It has been almost 100 days since the disruption of constitutional order in Honduras. During this time, thousands of people have marched the streets of major cities in the country to protest the illegal removal of Manuel Zelaya from the presidency. Radio and TV stations who have voiced their opposition to the coup have been shut down; hundreds of Hondurans have been arrested, many others injured in clashes with the police and, according to “La Resistencia,” dozens have been killed. Thousands of children have been out of school, there is no work for many; the economy of one of the poorest countries in the hemisphere has now further deteriorated.

The OAS and the UN have both unanimously condemned the actions that put the Central American country in a stalemate. Nevertheless, the diplomatic efforts of these organizations have thus far failed. Sanctions imposed by the United States and the European Union have had very little effect on the grip that the de facto government has on Honduran institutions. Many experts have expressed fears that the crisis could continue for years, especially if the presidential elections scheduled for November are not recognized by the international community.

There have been no real signs of a solution to the conflict. Well, not until a couple of days ago when Nobel Prize winning negotiator Oscar Arias intervened. Oh, no. Sorry, it was actually when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued a statement. Oops, wrong again. No, it wasn’t her or any other diplomat or Honduran government official, or expert in conflict resolution. It was -wait for it- a businessman. Actually it was a group of businessmen, who, as the New York Times rightly pointed, have started to feel the pinch in their pockets of the increasingly isolationist stance of Mr. Micheletti and the golpistas.

Adolfo Facusse, the head of the ANDI, a powerful business conglomerate who have been supportive of the coup (if not its instigators), came forth with a draft resolution. Until this point, any talk of returning Zelaya to power had been met with fierce opposition from Micheletti. Not so when Papi Adolfo Facusse came up with the “new” solution. This new attempt of finding common ground has very similar elements to solutions previously suggested, including the so-called San Jose Accord: Zelaya comes back with limited powers, some sort of amnesty is agreed upon, and elections take place without an option to call for constitutional reforms. The difference now is that Papi Adolfo is looking at a grim Christmas for his kids and grandkids, with no weekend trips to Miami for their holiday shopping (since he has no visa and has been deported from the US) and millions of dollars from his businesses gone.

But this is not the first time he leads the pack. A couple of months ago, Papi Adolfo was the first one to admit that expelling Zelaya from the country had been a “mistake.” Micheletti has since admitted to that and so has a top lawyer for the military. So now, as soon as Papi hints at the need of a solution and presents it, the head of the military (and former car thief) Romeo Vasquez is suddenly optimistic, so is the foreign minister Carlos Lopez Contreras…even the OAS envoy John Biehl can see the light.

So who cares about all the people who have been beaten, arrested and killed? Forget about those who have been raped and those who can’t feed their kids. Papi Adolfo is now feeling a bit of discomfort so the crisis must come to an end. The game is over and if what brings it to an end is Papi Adolfo’s idea, then not only have the last 100 days been a waste of time for the Honduran people, but now they are worse off because of it.

Democracy is nothing if not a tool to reflect the will of the people. In Honduras, the idea of democracy has been used to repress the will of the people. Many have been fooled by constant media attacks to believe that if the coup did not take place Honduras would become a “communist” country with no food and no freedom of speech. It is obvious that the coup has put Honduras there already and that the democratic state in whose defense the constitution was violated is in peril. Adolfo Facusse has never held public office, but why should he? He has the power that no official has. He is, after all, the answer to the question: Honduras, who’s your daddy?

UPDATE: Honduran lawmaker denounces that the National Association of Industrialists, ANDI, headed by Papi Adolfo Facusse received a payment (in English)from the de facto government for over 2.5 million Lempiras (approx. US$130,000). It is not clear why this payment was made but it is suspected that ANDI is paying a PR-Lobbying firm that has facilitated the visit of several U.S. lawmakers.

3-0? No, 5-0.

2009-09-28T03:07:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, 19 year-old Honduran forward Mario Martinez scored twice to give Honduras' national team its first victory in 32 years in a Fifa sanctioned U-20 World Cup. A third goal was scored by Arnold Peralta 6 minutes before the final whistle to round the 3-0 victory over Hungary and give the Honduran squad the group's lead after the first match day in Alexandria, Egypt.

7,000 miles away, another shutout score was registered in Tegucigalpa. In this case, a 5-0 in favor of the coup-mongers, aka the golpistas, led by Roberto Micheletti (seen on the right showing his skills on the pitch) . This score, however, was not settled with goals. Instead, a decree was issued by the de facto government in which 5 individual rights, otherwise guaranteed by the constitution, were restricted: (1-0) freedom of thought, (2-0)freedom of speech, (3-0)freedom of the press, (4-0)freedom of movement and (5-0)freedom of assembly.

I wouldn't be surprised if the golpistas were expecting the youngsters' victory in Egypt to help them get away with this transgression. After all, Hondurans are known for their passion for soccer and their ability to disconnect from reality after important accomplishments by their national teams. If soccer is an opiate then the goverment has been an effective pusher. In 1982, after qualifying for the first time to a world cup, the Honduran people were under such stupor that what had been a year-long battle over a public transportation fare increase came abruptly to an end. The outcome? It was settled in favor of the bus companies who, in the midst of nationwide celebrations, were awarded a 50% fare-hike, raising "el pasaje" by 5 cents. That event is now known as "el cinquito", the namesake of this blog.

Earlier this year, a similar strategy was used. On August 12, during a world cup qualifying match played in San Pedro Sula, the golpista government again struck with a decree. This time it was decided to reverse a constitutional amendment that 15 years earlier had outlawed compulsory military service. People were celebrating a 4-0 victory over Costa Rica and forgot that in 1994 the people had elected Carlos Roberto Reina as their president largely because Reina's platform included promises to reform the article in the constitution that called for such service. In an ironic twist, Reina had also set the objective to eliminate executive immunity for sitting and former presidents, thus paving the way to prosecute corrupt government officials. Among those targeted for their mishadling of public funds was the former Honduran President and current head of Honduran Soccer Federation, Rafael Leonardo Callejas. In spite of overwhelming evidence against him, the courts have failed to convict Callejas for his alleged crimes. Nevertheless, during a trip to the U.S. with the Honduran national team the immigration authorities in Miami anounced they had revoked his visa because of those charges.

Whether we like it or not, Honduran politics and soccer go hand in hand, a fact that is not likely to change in the near future. If we were to consider inflation a "Cinquito" would now be worth a couple of Lempiras, arguably something the Honduran people can afford. Unfortunately, the suspension of individual rights is not something that is likely to follow that logic.

The Congressional Research Service Report, the Honduran Constitution and a forged letter of resignation

2009-09-25T04:44:00.000-07:00

Earlier this week, Norma Gutierrez, a member of the Congressional Research Service (CRS), issued a legal argument in which she concluded that the removal of Manuel Zelaya from the Honduran presidency had been constitutional while his removal from the country had not. This report provided new talking points to the coup supporters in Honduras who had been running out of reasonable arguments to discredit coup opponents and who were in dire need of one with which to face international pressure.

I first read about the report when Mary O'Grady, a editorial board member of the Wall Street Journal and known supporter of Pinochet-style policies, wrote yet another op-ed piece in which she sided with the golpistas. Since then, a growing number of right-wing pundits and politicians have seized on the report and are now treating it as "proof" that they've been right all along. Having read the report, however, I must point to certain flaws in its conclusion and in the overall treatment of it as "hard evidence" by the coup supporters or golpistas.

First, it must be said that this report, as many others issued by CRS, is merely a legal argument. This means that someone did some research, looked at elements involved in the controversy and reached a conclusion. We've seen hundreds of reports from many sources in the past three months, each one reaching different conclusions. Relying on this report alone is a strategy that is likely to backfire as it fails to address many of the actions taken by Congress in on June 28th.

Second, like most things related to Honduran constitutional law, there is more than meets the eye. While the reports rightfully points to the fact that Congress can disapprove of and replace the president if it finds that he/she cannot perform the duties of the office and that the Congress has the authority to interpret what that means, it fails to mention that Congress cannot interpret the constitution and reach conclusions that are indirect opposition to other articles within the constitution as is stipulated in Article 375. In this case, Congress would have ruled against Article 94 which establishes that ALL citizens accused of a crime have the right to a fair trial and cannot be sentenced without being heard. Those contradictions make the conclusions reached by the report weak at best.

Lastly, and it is at this point that the CRS report completely fails to address a critical issue, the process followed by Congress did not involve a legal path that included the articles mentioned above. They took the shameful and illegal step of declaring Mr. Zelaya unable of performing his duties as president not by presenting evidence to prove this but by forging his signature in a resignation letter dated June 25. In this letter Zelaya declares that health issues prevent him from continuing to hold the office of the president. Zelaya has since denied writing and signing that letter and an analysis of this document proves that the signature is not Zelaya's.

Hondurans woke up on June 28th to the sound of military gunshots in the presidential home and to the news of a military coup. Some have chosen to go back to sleep and dream of a constitutional succession. Many others have been up and fighting for their right to live in a democratic society.

Update: Article with in-depth analysis of CRS report

Police brutality in Honduras not new but definitely worse since the Coup

2009-09-24T05:07:00.000-07:00

The police in Honduras have never been effective in combating crime but now they have found something at which they have proved to be amazing: repressing the masses.

It's no wonder, until a few years back, the Honduran police, previously known as FUSEP, was under the control of the military. They were issued M-16 rifles, a brown uniform and black boots. They rode in Toyota LandCruisers and the average "chepo" had a very low educational level. Now that the police is under civilian administration, the only thing that has changed in Honduras is the color of their uniform.The corruption, their tactics and military influence remain the same.

The ineffectiveness of Honduran police is not new, but it has taken a new place in Honduran life since a coup removed Zelaya from the presidency in June. As thousands of people marched in Tegucigalpa, San Pedro Sula and other cities, police forces have acted brutally, killing at least 4 people in broad daylight and perhaps others in the dark. Their most recent victim a 18 year-old kid who called them "Golpistas" (coup-mongers) whikle riding his bike in a poor neighborhood in San Pedro Sula.
A "chepo" in a his gray uniform and black boots stood on the bed of his LandCruiser patrol, aimed his M16 and shot twice at Elvis Jacobo Euceda, making sure the kid would never say Golpistas again, perhaps without realizing that his actions proved that Elvis' last words proved he was right.

Liar, liar, your coup's on fire

2009-09-22T14:27:00.000-07:00

On September 21, the de facto leader of the regime imposed by the military coup on Hondurans, Roberto Micheletti, convened a press conference to deny that any reports of Zelaya entering the country were true. He called the news "terrorismo mediatico", a phrase more often used by his detractors in reference to the coup-mongers-supported media's role in creating a tense political atmosphere during the days before and after the coup. He stood in front of local and international reporters to claim that military inteligence pointed to Zelaya being in a "luxury suite in Managua." Obviously, he was lying.

This is a clear example of the campaign that Micheletti and his supporters have waged during the last three months in a desperate attempt to keep Hondurans in the dark. Unfortunately, to a certain extent, he has succeeded. After all, this all started on June 28th with Zelaya's letter of resignation being forged and read in the Congress as a prelude to Micheletti taking office. Whether by looking at reporters in the eye and lying to them or by censoring radio and TV stations critical of the coup, the golpistas have relied on misinformation to create an environment of fear that allows them to continue disregarding the rule of law in Honduras.

Now, Micheletti wants Hondurans and the world believe that violence erupted because Zelaya's supporters attacked the police. Thousands of Honduras marched to welcome Zelaya from exile but were cornered by a brutal police forces and the imposition of a curfew. They were attacked and imprisioned in a baseball stadium. Beaten and blamed for vandalism conducted by police and the military to justify their repression of civil liberties.

But this week, as the eyes of the world were getting ready to focus on the UN General Assembly, Zelaya's move to return home might prove effective in getting people's attention. Soon it might be more and more difficult for Micheletti and the golpistas to disregard the truth and easier for Hondurans to challenge him.

Samba pa ti

2009-09-22T11:23:00.000-07:00

Tegucigalpa, Honduras/New York, NY- This morning, at around 5AM, Honduran police and military drove tanks and other vehicles toward a crowd of thousands of Hondurans who had gathered in front of the Brazilian embassy in Tegucigalpa to welcome president Zelaya after his return from exile.

My brother, a 26 year old father and husband, has been very vocal in his support, not necessarily for Zelaya, but for policies that will bring change for the millions of people living in poverty in Honduras. It was only natural for him to show up at the Brazilian embassy and make his sentiment of rejection toward the coup known. Here is his account of what happened last night and this morning (9/21-22):

"We got to the embassy in the afternoon, well before the de facto regime imposed a 15-hour curfew (later extended to 26hrs). Men, women and children had slowly made their way to Colonia Palmira, an upper class neighborhood in Tegucigalpa where the embassy is located, holding red and white flags and chanting pro-Zelaya songs. Music was being played and drums beaten. A sort of carnivalesque mood prevailed, and there were no signs of violence. Once dusk hit, we decided to camp on the street in the security of the masses instead of risking a lonesome and dark trip home (electricity had been cut by the authorities).

Around 4:30AM, my wife and I decided to go for a snack in a cafe that had remained open. 15 minutes later, we heard the crowds scream and the tank engines roar. Police had decided to confront the demonstrators, who had thus far been peaceful, with water tanks and tear gas. Shots were fired, people beaten. The crowd was then pushed out, dispersed into the dawn. Instead of running, we decided to lock ourselves in the cafe and hope for the best. Once the majority of protesters was either arrested or kicked out, the police began breaking windows in cars, houses, and commercial property. This to justify their actions, to be able to later claim that the violence originated in the crowd not the instigated by the police and military.”

My brother was not arrested although his name and ID number were taken by the police. Human rights activists, part of the group locked in the café also put up a list of people who'd been there to make sure that what happened was documented. I received a call from my brother telling me about all this. His usually deep and confident voice could not disguise his fear. Repression is not always instantaneous, but once your name is on that list, it should come as no surprise.