Comments on: Miguel Estrada: Zelaya has “a meritorious immigration beef.”

By: daendda

daendda — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 16:56:31 +0000

It’s better to have a President who is lucky than to have one that is good.

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 15:21:47 +0000

havoc in the streets, instigating a mob riot and having foreign ballots flown in. He was committing a crime and was arrested.

By: dvdmsr

dvdmsr — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 15:05:32 +0000

Their constitution empowers their Congress to determine when there is a case against their President (Art 205, Sec. 15), and it empowers their Supreme Court to hear and decide these cases (Art. 319, sec. 2). Thus their Congress brings cause against their President; charges him with wrongdoing, or as we say: impeaches him, and their Supreme Court tries these cases, much as our Senate does.

Art. 239, says that the current the Presdent can not be a presidential candidate in the election to choose his successor, and more importanly, if he violates this provision or proposes its reform, and support those who directly or indirectly, he shall immediately cease as President, and shall be disqualified for ten years to exercise any public function.

Art. 238 also says Presidents must be Honduran citizens, but as I have said in another reply above, Zelaya lost his citizenship when he incited, ecouraged, ad supported his continuity/re-election as President (Art. 42).

The Honduran Costitution specifies no other list of Impeachable offenses (that I have found), such as high crimes and misdemeanors for which their president can be removed, but there is a list of offenses (Art. 42) that will cause a person to lose his citizeship, and if he is President his position as such too.

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:44:16 +0000

with Costa Rica as the arbitrator, may well decide as you suggest. Great story re Estrada analysis.

By: IJB

IJB — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:33:26 +0000

…I’ve seen in ages. And that’s really saying something!

By: dvdmsr

dvdmsr — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:19:53 +0000

A private citizen of what country? Certainly not Honduras, right?

According to the Honduran constitution, which specifies that the quality of citizenship can be lost for certain offenses, Zelaya lost his Honduran citizenship when he incited, encouraged, or supported the continuity or re-election of himself as President of Honduras.

Here’s the relevant provision of the Honduran Constitution:

“ARTICLE 42 .- The quality of citizen is lost:
1. For service in wartime enemies of Honduras or its allies;
2. For assistance with the State of Honduras, an alien or a foreign government in any diplomatic claim or before an international tribunal;
3. To play in the country, without license from the National Congress, employment of foreign nation, or military branch of a political nature;
4. For the freedom to vote, electoral documents adulterate or use fraudulent means to circumvent the popular will;
5. Incite, encourage or support the continuity or re-election of President of the Republic, and”

So Zelaya is no private citizen of Honduras, and as an alien who broke Honduran law, I’d reason that any immigration beef he might have is likely without merit too.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.honduras.net%2Fhonduras_constitution2.html

By: janis

janis — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:18:08 +0000

in Honduras made their ruling and gave orders to the military to arrrest and eject Zelaya from the country. From what I understand, the reason for exile was to prevent Chavez from invading Honduras and reinstating Zelaya. No, his family wasn’t injured either.

The point here is that Honduras upheld the rule of their own law by their actions with regard to Zelaya. It’s only dictators and dictator wannabes who have been supporting Zelaya. See “Chavez, Hugo. Castro, Fidel. Obama, Barrack.”

By: Cheetah772

Cheetah772 — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:08:48 +0000

That is something which baffles me greatly. I think we all can agree that Zelaya was ousted too quickly. Even so, I don’t know if Honduras do have some sort of impeachment process that doesn’t require military under civilian control to oust a sitting president. If not, then putting Zelaya in exile was probably the best course of action.

Zelaya should be thankful that he wasn’t executed on spot, if it were so, then I think we all can safely assume it’s a real military coup. Was his family injured in any way? If not, then he also should be thankful for that, as in most military coups, president’s family is frequently the next target on its list.

At least in this respect, Honduras is not falling apart in a brutal civil war, and that is something we all should be grateful given the past history of region.