Responses to the Coup d'etat in Honduras on Sunday June 28, with special emphasis on producing English-language versions of commentaries by Honduran scholars and editorial writers and addressing the confusion encouraged by lack of basic knowledge about Honduras.

Friday, October 16, 2009

Zelaya Proposal

On the Recognition of the Powers of the State

We respectfully solicit the National Congress that, heading the opinions of the pertinent parts, including the Supreme Court, if you think it necessary, it give a decision corresponding to this point of the San Jose Accord, which says:

"6 On The Return of the Powers to their state prior to June 28.

To achieve reconciliation and strengthen democracy we ask the National Congress that, to effect the recovery of the integration and conformation of the Powers constituted on 28 June 2009, return the situation of the Executive Power, the Legislative Poer, the Judicial Power, and the Election Court to their state prior to 28 June, because they were formed following the articles 202, 205 paragraphs 9 and 11, and 236 of the constitution of the Republic of Honduras. The previous implies the return of José Manuel Zelaya Rosales to the Presidency of the Republic until the conclusion of his actual governing period, 27 January, 2010."


phoenixwoman said...

Legally, this makes sense. The Congress removed Zelaya and installed Micheletti. The Supreme Court was investigating Zelaya when the still-mysterious expulsion took place. So, the Congress can, for example, "discover" that it did not have the power to "interpret" the Constitution and unravel the legal rat's nest it has created. Of course, the Supreme Court could declare that the Congress acted improperly and accomplish the same end, but that would leave the ball in Congress's court, since it would have to either accept the ruling or challenge it.


RAJ said...

Even easier, since Congress never claimed to be interpreting the Constitution. Their Decreto on June 28 was based on the president being permanently unavailable, triggering the article on succession. Originally, they based this claim on the supposed resignation letter.

So all they need to do is rescind that part of their Decreto, noting that the President was not, after all, permanently unavailable (the Spanish term, I believe, was "falta absoluta" but I am in a tiny village in Ohio blogging from my phone).

They can even keep their disapproval of his administrative actions intact. One step restitution.

TITO said...


You believe right...

ARTICULO 242.- En las ausencias temporales del Presidente de la República lo sustituirá en sus funciones el Vicepresidente. Si la falta del Presidente fuera absoluta, el Vicepresidente ejercerá la titularidad del Poder Ejecutivo por el tiempo que le falte para terminar el período constitucional. Pero si también faltare de modo absoluto el Vicepresidente de la República, el Poder Ejecutivo será ejercido por el Presidente del Congreso Nacional y, a falta de éste, por el Presidente de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, por el tiempo que faltare para terminar el período constitucional. ...

isabel. said...

Question (and I apologize because it might seem trivial and unrelated to the subject at hand: Zelaya's Proposal)

Are any of these stories true?



rns said...


A jersey with what purports to be Guevara's signature and dedication was presented to "la Pichu" yesterday. The dedication was to Zelaya and it was signed Guevara. The jersey was presented by Guevara's mother. That much is confirmed by other sources and photos.

The complication is that his mother is a member of the Frente de Resistencia and a Zelaya supporter. Another complicating factor is that the lives of the team are tightly controlled, as are their press contacts, so there's no independent confirmation of the La Tribuna article.

Which account is the "truth"? We don't know. Neither is important.

rns said...

Now there's confirmation that Amado Guevara has denied that he sent the shirt to Zelayaa in other media, in a phone interview.