UCD Condemns Lobo Sosa

The right-wing, coup-supporting Unión Civica Democratica (UCD) has awakened from its deep sleep (tired, no doubt, from all that marching to support Micheletti) only to condemn Porfirio Lobo Sosa for interfering in the Public Prosecutor's office and with the Supreme Court's autonomy.

It seems they don't like Lobo Sosa's announcement that he is willing to go to the Dominican Republic and bring Manuel Zelaya Rosales back, and to guarantee he will not be arrested on the spot once he returns to Honduras. After all, Jimmy Dacaret, the UCD president, reminds us, there are 3, count them 3, separate arrest orders for Zelaya; one for political crimes, and two for corruption.

Lobo's announcement caused an emergency meeting of the UCD governance. Dacaret, a rotary member, member of the administrative council of ANDI, and a bread magnate, complained that Lobo Sosa was interfering in the institutional independence of the Supreme Court and the Public Prosecutor since he was going to guarantee Zelaya would not be arrested.

"It would appear as if there is a pact or arrangement between the people related to the case of Zelaya, to give him freedom without him presenting himself to the corresponding courts."

Dacaret continued

"The statements of the President leave a great preoccupation in the society because the primordial reason for the founding of the UCD is to protect the Constitution of the Republic, the respect for the laws in all senses."

The UCD is funded in part by the US State Department.

The UCD also requested that the Supreme Court hand over its decision on the four judges and one magistrate dismissed for anti-coup activity to the Inspector General of the government so that the international community can see the basis on which the court dismissed those individuals.

"With this we can determine if they proceeded on the basis of law, or if there was some kind of mistake that the Court could rectify, but not with pressure from the Executive branch or interference from foreigners because Honduras needs to proceed on the basis of respect for its laws."

With that, the UCD rolled over and went back to sleep. This was something it could not get excited enough about to put on its white shirts and march in the streets!

Will Zelaya Return? Will the Supreme Court cooperate with Lobo Sosa?

(we are both traveling so short posts only)

Its hard, in the best of times, to know what's going on in Honduras. We've seen that the newspapers cannot be trusted to present the facts, that broadcast reporters make things up. The whisper campaigns can drown out the real stories.

So it's really hard to know what exactly is going on in the struggle between Porfirio Lobo Sosa and the Supreme Court. The one thing Lobo Sosa must know is that he's got the worst job in Honduras, trying to regain international recognition while the clowns in the Supreme Court continue to thumb their noses at him.

So amid whisper campaigns and rumor mills comes word that the Supreme Court will meet as a whole on Monday to consider again its decision to dismiss four judges and a magistrate, solely for anti-coup activity. There was much bravado from the court earlier in the week saying they would not take up the topic again, so Friday's report that they would, at the request of a group of justices, came as a surprise. Still, I don't expect them to reverse themselves.

Also on Friday, El Heraldo reported that the Supreme Court had vacated its order to capture Manuel Zelaya Rosales. This is the arrest order for Zelaya that chief prosecutor Luis Rubí requested so that if Zelaya returns to Honduras he will be thrown in jail to await a trial. Ramon Custodio, the golpista Human Rights commissioner, today contradicted El Heraldo and said the arrest order had not been vacated. Custodio added that it was Lobo Sosa's intention to bring Zelaya back and assassinate him.

Today court spokesperson Daniel Izaguirre said the court was "willing to suspend the arrest warrant against Zelaya, if a judge orders it [emphasis mine]." He added that Zelaya's attorney would have to request the suspension and a judge would have to hold hearings and find the request had merit. Zelaya would have to present himself before the court and agree to be judged. More nose thumbing.

Meanwhile, Luis Rubí said he won't resign. Clearly someone is pressuring him or this topic wouldn't be coming up. Perhaps he should consider it. He's batting 0-3 against former Zelaya cabinet ministers in court. All have been declared not guilty of the crimes he charged them with, and in one case the court chastised Rubí for not investigating the case before charging one of them.Rubí alleged that this person's signature was on an order to rent an ENEE (national electrical company) building when it wasn't. Latest to be acquitted was Rebeca Santos.

Finally on Friday, Porfirio Lobo Sosa telephoned Dominican President Leonel Fernandez and proposed that if Fernandez had some free time to come and visit Honduras, that he, Lobo Sosa, would fly to the Dominican Republic, and the two of them could then escort Manuel Zelaya Rosales to Honduras as guarantees of his safety and freedom from arrest.

Will Manuel Zelaya Rosales accept the word of Porfirio Lobo Sosa that he will not be arrested, and return to Honduras? Zelaya says he is studying the proposal.

"I take the word of Porfirio Lobo Sosa, whom I thank for his good intentions; we will have to analyze what the proposal consists of."

US response in Honduras as part of a pattern...

CBS News has published a thoughtful analysis by Dilip Hiro that examines the foreign policy record of the Obama administration. His conclusion: the bungled handling of the Honduran coup is typical of a pattern of under-estimating opponents, and backing off and assuming a conciliatory posture once other states resist direction.

Lots to think about here; not entirely in agreement, but it does speak to what remains a debate among Honduran colleagues, which is: how to explain the disastrous way the Obama administration responded, with the mixed signals they sent continually undercutting the unified resistance of the rest of the world to legitimating the coup?

(On the road so no analysis-- but note that Hiro manages something most English-language media still cannot: correctly describing the precipitating events of the June 28, 2009 coup.)

"It was a coup": Porfirio Lobo Sosa

Courtesy of Vos el Soberano, readers today can watch clips from a televised interview with Porfirio Lobo Sosa on CNN from his current Spanish tour.

The post there, drawing on reporting on the alternative Honduran news site La Vanguardia, also provides quotations from the interview (the full video is available on CNN México). The key exchange:

José Levy of CNN: Was what happened in Honduras a coup d'Etat?

Lobo Sosa: "Of course, put it how you will but it was a coup."

Remarkably, this puts Lobo Sosa in the position of being more direct and honest-- more truthful, in fact-- than the head of the emasculated "Truth Commission" which has started its task by agreeing not to offend the retrograde forces in Honduras that carried out, supported, and continue to demand a whitewash of the events of June 28, 2009.

Which were, unequivocally, by all international standards, and under Honduran constitution and law, a coup d'Etat.

As the person now occupying the uncomfortable position of intending to lead Honduras with limited legitimacy and constrained authority recognizes.

And attempts to legitimate:

"Democracy did not have sufficient mechanisms to guarantee its maintenance."

Guarantee its maintenance against what? Lobo Sosa goes on to repeat his own previous assertion that he knows that President Zelaya intended to "stay on". This is how the pro-coup elite in Honduras has tried to justify the coup: by predicting that the Cuarta Urna public opinion poll would have passed, and that the existing Constitution would have been immediately suspended, and President Zelaya would have remained in power at the head of the government during the period leading up to the Constituyente, which they further argue could only have been intended to eliminate the presidential term limit.

This is, in the end, the most frightening thing about the 2009 coup and its supporters: they literally believe that disrupting constitutionality was a way to protect the democratic order. And they believe that making this argument justifies the coup. And every time the international community gives way on calling a spade a spade, this argument gains vigor.

Hence we now see Lobo Sosa-- who evaded the same question throughout his presidential campaign and the dictatorship of the Micheletti de facto regime-- happy to admit it was a coup. But not that bad old kind of coup: the good kind. Too bad about the deaths and human rights violations but in order to save the village, we had to destroy it.

Supreme Court to Lobo Sosa: "No Thanks"

The chief justice of the Honduran Supreme Court, Jorge Rivera Avilez, in response to question from the press, said that Porfirio Lobo Sosa, in discussions with him, asked him to postpone the dismissal of judges who opposed the coup d'Etat. But the Supreme Court asserted its independence and specifically claimed it would not "go backwards".

Lobo Sosa said yesterday that he asked the Supreme Court not to "take any actions that were not appropriate for the peace and stability in Honduras."

Daniel Izaguirre, court spokesperson, told reporters that what Lobo Sosa asked of his boss (Rivera Aviles) was that he postpone the dismissal of the judges.

Izaguirre is quoted as saying

"The president of the Court promised that he would make the proposal to the whole court, and in the whole court it was batted around and they said this is a decision which has been made."

Izaguirre indicated that the 10 justices who voted for the firings are not willing to reconsider their decision.

Political Expediency

On May 7 the Honduran Supreme Court dismissed 4 judges and a magistrate allegedly for participating in political activity opposed to the coup. It has taken no action against those judges who marched in favor of the coup. We blogged about their dismissal at the time. At the time, NGO's like the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) denounced the dismissals as "significant reprisals" and as a "clear intimidating message" for other justices in Honduras. No one in Honduras said much of anything about it, except the Frente de Resistencia.

Fast forward to yesterday, when the Inter-American Human Rights Commission (IACHR) released a statement on the state of human rights in Honduras after a fact finding visit to the country. The IACHR release called out the dismissal of the judges as particularly troubling.

"Of particular concern are the acts of harassment directed against judges who participated in activities against the coup d’état. The Commission met with members of the Association of Judges for Democracy who were dismissed from their posts by the Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ). Notwithstanding the formal reasons that could be argued by the Supreme Court, the reasons that motivated the process and the final decision are undoubtedly linked to participation in anti-coup demonstrations or to having expressed an opinion against the coup d’état. The inter-American human rights system has repeatedly underscored the central role of the judiciary in the functioning of a democratic system. It is unacceptable that those persons in charge of administering justice who were opposed to the democratic rupture would face accusations and dismissals for defending democracy. The IACHR urgently calls for a reversal of this situation that seriously undermines the rule of law."

Suddenly there's a flurry of condemnations of the Supreme Court's action. UD party member Marvin Ponce introduced a bill to form a commission to study the dismissal in Congress, but the President of Congress, Juan Orlando Hernandez suspended discussion saying it needed more time than could be allotted to the discussion yesterday. Also yesterday Porfirio Lobo Sosa, in Spain, said it was hurting his efforts to win recognition for Honduras. Then he said

"This is a subject that I've discussed with the President of the Court (Jorge Rivera Avilez), and I said you should not take any action that is not appropriate for peace and stability in Honduras, and although they suggested that they were not going to do it, they did."

Lobo expressed support for the Congressional investigation.

The question is, where were these people 12 days ago when the Supreme Court acted? Why did it take them this long to express their concerned. Could it be there's only concern now because there's political cover in the IACHR report for being concerned? Only time will tell.

Human rights in Honduras: IAHCR expresses "deep concern"

The Inter-American Human Rights Commission (IAHCR, CIDH in Spanish) has just issued a press release following its visit this week to Honduras. The summary: the news is not good:

In concluding its visit, the Commission expresses its deep concern over the continuation of human rights violations in the context of the coup d’état that took place in Honduras on June 28, 2009.

Especially troubling to the IAHCR were the reprisals against judges who opposed the coup d'Etat, reprisals that have taken place during the administration of Porfirio Lobo Sosa and that demonstrate that his administration has not advanced from the repression of the de facto regime, but continues it:

Of particular concern are the acts of harassment directed against judges who participated in activities against the coup d’état. The Commission met with members of the Association of Judges for Democracy who were dismissed from their posts by the Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ). Notwithstanding the formal reasons that could be argued by the Supreme Court, the reasons that motivated the process and the final decision are undoubtedly linked to participation in anti-coup demonstrations or to having expressed an opinion against the coup d’état. The inter-American human rights system has repeatedly underscored the central role of the judiciary in the functioning of a democratic system. It is unacceptable that those persons in charge of administering justice who were opposed to the democratic rupture would face accusations and dismissals for defending democracy. The IACHR urgently calls for a reversal of this situation that seriously undermines the rule of law [emphasis added].

The Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ) comes in for pointed criticism for its complicity in not pursuing cases against human rights violations, creating impunity for those responsible:

The Commission was able to verify that impunity for human rights violations continues, both in terms of violations verified by the IACHR and the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and those that continue to occur. ... The generalized impunity for human rights violations is facilitated by decisions of the CSJ that weaken the rule of law. In addition to the CSJ’s disputed role during the coup d’état, it subsequently decided, on the one hand, to dismiss charges against the members of the military accused of participating in the coup and, on the other, to fire judges and magistrates who sought to prevent the coup through democratic means. [emphasis added]

The IACHR notes that threats continue under the Lobo Sosa administration against those who are active in protesting the coup and its aftermath:

The IACHR also received information on the threats and acts of harassment that human rights defenders, journalists, communicators, teachers, and members of the Resistance have received. A number of teachers have been subject to threats and harassment because of their activity against the coup d’état. The Commission also received information about threats and attacks directed against journalists to keep them from continuing to do their jobs.

The IAHCR underscored that assassinations of journalists and activists are not credibly explained away as a consequence of some sort of generalized Honduran tendency toward violence:

Without prejudice to the high rate of criminality that in general exists in Honduras, the IACHR believes that the complaints received could correspond to the same pattern of violence that the IACHR reported in Honduras: Human Rights and the Coup d’État, published on January 20, 2010.

The IAHCR noted the continuing pattern of human rights violations against social sectors that have been marginalized since the coup d'Etat, in many cases losing concrete advances made under the Zelaya administration:

Finally, the IACHR would like to state that human rights violations particularly affect those sectors of the population that have been marginalized historically and are most vulnerable, such as children, the LGTB community, women, and indigenous and Garifuna peoples.

The unwarranted dismissals of members of the Association of Judges for Democracy, who are currently staging a hunger strike, have received no attention in the mainstream English language press. The assassinations of journalists have been treated in the English-language press as either an ambiguous case of "violence" by "both sides" in the struggle for Honduran democracy, or even possibly simply due to that generalized Honduran culture of violence that is stated repeatedly and thus presumed. The continuing targeted assassinations of members of the Resistance and their family members, and of environmental activists; threats against anti-mining activists, and slurs against those Roman Catholic clergy who have remained faithful to the call to serve the poor; these incidents are so numerous that even those of us monitoring the situation cannot possibly write about them all.

No, the coup is not behind us. It remains in the hovering shadow of impunity that the authorities in Honduras cast over those who are responsible for the continued violence directed at activists and those who dare to speak out about violations of fundamental rights, and dare to advocate for greater participation in governance by all the people.