Political Pragmatism?

It was surreal to read an Agence France-Presse interview with Adolfo Facussé, one of the vocal supporters of the coup against Manuel Zelaya Rosales in 2009, saying Xiomara Castro could represent real change in Honduras, whereas none of the other candidates does.

Facussé, who is president of the Asociación Nacional de Industriales (ANDI), said:

We have businessmen from all the parties.  Libre has something that appeals to me and that is the promise of change. The country definitely needs to change.

How exactly the nation needs to change is pretty clear: Facussé went on to characterize the Lobo Sosa government, and especially its economic policies, as a disaster.  Of Juan Orlando Hernandez, the National Party candidate for President, Facussé said "he has the characteristics to become an autocratic president."

Aline Flores, president of the other leading business group in Honduras, Consejo Hondureño de la Empresa Privada (Cohep), made it clear she didn't agree with Facussé about LIBRE.  She said:

He (Facussé) has always had his own opinion and I respect him a lot, but we don't share some ideas.

Facussé did get support in his criticism of the Lobo Sosa government. Oscar Galeano, a former president of COHEP, said

Some businessmen will prefer the right, some the center, and others the left.  What is certain is that Honduras cannot continue depending on irresponsible governments that don't promote investment and development, because (with Lobo), we have lost much time; we have a high rate of unemployment.

Facussé said he was not afraid of leftist ideas, though he's not enchanted with Castro's call for a Constitutional Assembly:

I'm not afraid of the ideas of the left, the intelligent left (....) they have not done badly in El Salvador; in Nicaragua the businessmen are content.  We, without having a leftist government, have an idiotic government.  For businessmen it is not good to have a populace dying of hunger, poor people.

That seems to fly in the face of Facussé's support for the 2009 coup, but he clearly thinks that political intervention made a point that will limit what even a LIBRE president does:

If Doña Xiomara is elected, Don Mel Zelaya will have the intelligence to manage things [the government] without confronting the rest of society.

It is shocking to see a Honduran businessman call the government "idiotic". But increasing social inequality, impoverishing the populace, is exactly what the last two National Party presidencies have done.

A recent study by The Center for Economic Policy Research , "Honduras Since the Coup: Economic and Social Outcomes", authored by Jake Johnston and Stephan Lefebvre, points out that

Economic inequality, which decreased for four consecutive years starting in 2006, began trending upward in 2010. Honduras now has the most unequal distribution of income in Latin America.

Only three countries in Latin America have seen their GINI coefficient, a measure of how unequal the distribution of income is in the country, increase since 2009.  The rest have seen decreases of 1 to 7 percent.  Honduras had a 12.5% increase in its GINI coefficient, from .50 in 2009, to .59 in 2011, the latest year for which there are records.  That's the greatest increase of any country in Latin America, and the highest absolute value for a GINI coefficient in Latin America.

In fact, since 2001, inequality has consistently increased under Nationalist governments, declining only during the four years of the Zelaya administration. Under Zelaya, Honduras had about the same level of economic inequality as Costa Rica in 2009.

And as the Honduran businessmen speaking out note, poverty is bad for business. The rich may get richer while the poor get poorer, but eventually, you run out of customers.

Business Organizations At Odds Over Security, Minimum Wage

The Asociación Nacional de Industriales (ANDI) decided last week to stop participating for a while in the main business association of Honduras, the Consejo Hondureño de la Empresa Privada (COHEP).

Why?

Because ANDI's president, Adolfo Facussé, was kicked out of the Consejo Nacional de Seguridad Interior (CONASIN) for proposing a candidate for president of that body, intended to deal with cleaning up corruption in the police. CONASIN has existed for a while, but scholars have noted that even in the first half of the 2000s, it "rarely convened". In 2010, Julia Schünemann reported in a study for the EU-funded think tank FRIDE that

in recent years the functions of CONASIN have been severely cut, turning it into a toothless, “ornamental” body, and ultimately reducing civilian oversight and participation.

CONASIN was essentially moribund. Now, with police corruption the story of the hour, it is being reactivated.

COHEP chose to remove Facussé as its representative to CONASIN because they did not approve of his suggesting a candidate of his own. Facussé was replaced by the president of COHEP, Santiago Ruiz.

Adolfo Facussé reacted to this as a personal affront:

How can I go to a place where they expelled me and ignored my representations.... I don't want a bigger mess. If I bothered them, I won't attend, I don't need them....I won't attend, but ANDI will continue to be a member.

It's the first time I've been expelled from an organization, and that's why I resent it. If it was the second or third time, I'd be used to it.

ANDI also has decided not to participate in minimum wage negotiations, while COHEP will be participating. According to Facussé, that is a change from a position the business associations had agreed on, to not participate with Lobo Sosa in this exercise (which, readers will remember, was one of the presidential functions that polarized the business community against Manuel Zelaya Rosales during his term as president). Facussé said

In the last meeting of presidents of business organizations carried out by COHEP it was decided that we were not going to participate, I don't know if that organization changed its opinion, I am not attending the meetings now since they expelled me as a member of the Consejo Nacional de Seguridad Interior.

Regardless of whether they participate or not, ANDI member businesses will be bound by any agreements that come out of wage negotiations.

The ANDI-COHEP conflict, which Facussé makes seem very personal, represents a fragmentation in what until now was a united front in the business community.

Wiretapping

Despite rampant police corruption in Honduras, for which Porfirio Lobo Sosa just approved a law to give the Armed Forces policing powers, now Juan Orlando Hernandez wants to give the police permission to wiretap.

Not only does he want a law to let them wiretap, but he wants it now.

Hernandez says they're wiretapping anyway, so the government might as well give them a legal way of doing it.

In other words, solve the illegality by making it nice and legal.

Some in Congress think this is a bad idea. PINU party member German Leitzelar said:

"It would be a delicate thing to put into the hands of agents in the judicial branch infiltrated by organized crime a weapon so powerful as wiretapping."

Analysts pointed out that such laws have failed in other Central American countries, where they've been used for political blackmail more than they've been used against organized crime.

The Minister of Justice and Human Rights, Ana Pineda, has come out against this law as unconstitutional because it violates the right to privacy.

Even the Commissioner of Human Rights, Ramon Custodio, who sees crime as the most serious human rights issue in Honduras, has come out against the proposed new law.

Still, Hernandez intends to fast-track it.

There already is a law in Honduras that governs wiretapping. Article 223 of the Codigo Procesal Penal spells out the conditions that must be fulfilled to authorize the interception of communications. It reads, in full:

A Judge, at the petition of the Public Prosecutor or other lawyer in his office, may order via a well founded resolution, the recording of the telephone, computer, or other kinds of analogous signals made by the accused or any other person directly or indirectly related to the crime being investigated.

The Judge should weigh in his resolution the gravity of the crime being investigated, the utility and proportionality of the measure.

The intervention in communications treated in this Article might be the identification and recording of the origin, the destination, or both or in the knowing and recording of the content.

In the act which authorizes the intervention, the Judge shall determine who carries out the intervention.

The intervention may not last more than 15 days, but may be extended by the Judge, at the request of the Public Prosecutor or lawyer in his office, for additional 15 day periods, by founded acts, as long as the conditions which initially justified the adoption of the measure remain true.

The recordings, once made, will be given only to the Judge who ordered them, within five days of the termination of the intervention, and every one of the successive extensions. In the case of extensions, the recordings will be turned over to the Judge within sufficient time for the Judge to consider them before reaching a conclusion about extension. Only the Judge may know the contents of the recordings. If they are related to the crime under investigation, the Judge may order transcripts prepared so they can be used in the legal process.

The people charged with making the recordings or the transcriptions must keep secret the contents of the recordings and if they leak the information, will incur legal responsibility.

The recording of a communication by one of the parties without fulfilling the requirements outlined in this Article will lack all probative value.

Juan Orlando Hernandez argues that, because this Article lacks specific procedures for how the recording will be made, his new law is necessary.

In fact, the current law contains what Hernandez's law lacks: judicial protection of the Honduran populace's right to privacy under the constitution. Currently, no wiretapping intercepts can legally occur without a judge's review and approval. Hernandez's law would eliminate judicial review.

Mario Perez, the Congress member Hernandez commissioned to write the new law, says that it will create a Unit for Communications Interception which will both determine when intercepts are necessary and authorize them.

Let me emphasize that this leaves judges out of the loop. The new wiretapping Unit will both determine an intercept is necessary and carry it out, all without the review of a judge, according to Perez.

Mario Perez is getting into a pattern here. He was also part of the committee that wrote the unconstitutional interpretation of Article 274 of the constitution, twisting it to grant full policing powers to the military. Constitutional guarantees seems to mean little to him, other than being obstacles.

Meanwhile, the legislators are ignoring the objections of both the Minister of Justice and Human Rights, Ana Pineda, and the Commissioner of Human Rights, Ramon Custodio. As with the departed Sandra Ponce, events like these make it clear that human rights positions are simply there to satisfy international organizations: the Honduran legislature sees no need to pay attention when these individuals tell them they are acting unconstitutionally.

Canahuati Shamed?

Adolfo Facussé, head of the National Industrial Business Association (Asociación Nacional de Industriales, ANDI), started a rumor Monday that Mario Canahuati was going to resign as Foreign Minister.

Facussé told the press this was because Canahuati was distressed over not being included in the secret meetings between Lobo Sosa, Hugo Chavez, and Juan Manuel Santos. He said it was embarrassing for Canahuati to not be included in the meeting, when the Foreign Ministers of Venezuela and Colombia were. Instead, Arturo Corrales, Lobo Sosa's planning minister, participated.

"Don Mario Canahuati for respect and his own dignity, should resign from his position,"

Facussé told the press.

He further suggested that the Lobo Sosa government should respect Canahuati and if he didn't have the President's confidence as Foreign Minister, perhaps Lobo Sosa would appoint him to manage soliciting foreign investment. Facussé pointed out that Mario Canahuati was the former head of the Honduran Council of Private Business (Consejo Hondureño de la Empresa Privada, COHEP).

Why is Facussé trying to create a breach between Lobo Sosa and Mario Canahuati when there is none?

Perhaps it is because both he and Canahuati were backers of Micheletti, who just warned about the dangers of meeting that supposedly shamed Canahuati. Maybe he's warning Canahuati of business's unhappiness with Lobo Sosa's policies. Maybe its just that they were business buddies. We don't know.

Facussé specifically suggested Canahuati be put in charge of the "Honduras is open for business" conference to be held next week in San Pedro Sula. He took the opportunity to criticize the list of invited companies and individuals saying it was heavy on the industries with things to sell to Honduras and light on investors.

Facussé seemed not to know that Canahuati's Foreign Relations Ministry is in charge of the event and was responsible for the invitations.

In any case, Canahuati said he's not resigning and supports Lobo Sosa.

This Week in Honduras: Money or Human Rights?

The most significant news leads in Honduran papers this weekend concern the impending visit of a delegation from the IMF this coming week.

William Chong Wong, Minister of Finances, is quoted as saying that Honduras does not intend to cover up the real grim financial news simply to give a good impression. Reportedly, Honduras stands to receive $300 million if the visit by the IMF goes well.

The business community, represented by the head of the Asociación Nacional de Industriales (ANDI), Adolfo Facussé, and Aline Flores, director of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Tegucigalpa (CCIT), is reported to be behind the government's efforts to convince the IMF to release funding to Honduras.

FOSDEH, the Foro Social de la Deuda Externa de Honduras (Social Forum on the External Debt of Honduras), publicly called for the government not to cover up the real numbers. Mauricio Díaz Burdeth, coordinator of the forum, is quoted as saying "All the macroeconomic indicators are in the red and it will be very difficult to find a favorable one, owing to the grave financial situation."

Díaz Burdeth added that the visit by IMF, the second this year, is without doubt an important point in the economic agenda of the country.

But that is not, we would argue, the most important visit Honduras is hosting this week.

Instead, we draw attention to the unsigned lead editorial in El Tiempo on Saturday May 15, headlined "The CIDH in Honduras".

The editorial comments on the reported return to Honduras this coming week of a delegation from the Interamerican Commission on Human Rights, "due to the grave and continued violations since the 28th of June 2009 based upon the coup d'Etat." It is a reminder that there is a consciousness in Honduras of the real continuing urgency of confronting the social, legal, and human rights effects of the coup d'Etat:

To prepare its report on Honduras the CIDH made an exhaustive investigation on the ground, which was introduced at its opportunity to the de facto government and the international community.

Nonetheless, this work, of high legal quality in its specialty, did not have, it appears, influence to restrain the abuses and violations of public power against the opposition to the coup d'Etat and their tremendous collateral consequences, as evidenced by the series of assassinations of journalists under the current regime.

Thanks to this lamentable situation, the CIDH included Honduras in the ominous "black list" of the countries in which human rights are disrespected in an aggressive manner, an odious position that never before had stained the history of our country.

To have an idea of the importance of the presence of the CIDH at this time, it is enough to take into account the composition of this delegation, headed by its president Felipe González, in which participates his vice president Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, the general secretary Santiago Cantón, and the special secretary for liberty of expression, Catalina Botero.

The investigation by the CIDH about the situation of human rights in Honduras is key in relation to the work assigned to the Truth Commission, a consequence, at the time, of the diplomatic process orchestrated by the Organization of American States to create an exit from the political crisis derived from the coup d'Etat.

In the same way, this investigation is part of the process for the reinsertion of Honduras in the continental and world community, since to succeed in such a purpose it is indispensable to establish the responsibilities for the offences committed through violation of human rights and political rights, something that, apparently, does not figure in the intentions of the Truth Commission.

Because of the way that political events in Honduras have been developing, in the framework of the political crisis that still remains insoluble, the reticence of the international community to normalize relations with the actual regime, ignoring the breaking of constitutional order, will not disappear nor will it be mediated, except on the part of a few governments inclined-- for their own convenience-- to excuse coups at the hands of oligarchs.

The return of the CIDH to our country in the present circumstances also has the virtue of refreshing the spirit for the defense of human rights, and, very particularly, for the validity of liberty of expression, that needs constant international support in societies, like ours, where the anti-culture of forced silence and of self-censorship is an everyday practice.

Human rights, or international monetary support. Which is, in the end, more important for Honduras at this juncture?

Alternative truth, official truth, or honest disagreement?

An article published by IPS today, written by Thelma Mejía, attests to the widespread skepticism about the newly formed Honduran Truth Commission.

Composed of former Guatemalan vice president Eduardo Stein; Michael Kergin, a Canadian diplomat; María Amadilia, former Peruvian minister of justice; and Honduran members Julieta Castellanos and Jorge Omar Casco, assisted by Sergio Membreño as technical secretary, the Commission will begin its work on May 4.

As Mejía points out, conservative forces in Honduras-- notably the Unión Cívica Democrática (UCD)-- are opposed to including Julieta Castellanos. In addition, Mejía points out, "human rights groups criticised the inclusion of Casco, whom they link with the most radical fringe of the political right". Meanwhile, the Human Rights Platform notes that the Truth Commission has been established without following international norms.

The selection of the international members of the commission appears to have been constrained by the need to avoid participants from countries that have been critical of the coup. Since few governments in the world refrained from expressing outrage about the de facto regime, and many governments have not yet recognized the Lobo Sosa administration, the range of candidates was restricted from the outset. While Mejía cites Minister of Foreign Relations Mario Canahuati as saying the selection was made from a group of 15 competitive candidates, she quotes Reina Rivera of the Human Rights Platform as saying that

We believe that the selection of the international members was made more on the basis of their nationalities than their competence and abilities. The representatives from Canada and Peru are not well looked upon in some sectors, which is why some reject the Commission, while others view it with reservations.

Among those skeptical others: pro-coup businessman and ANDI president Adolfo Facussé, who reportedly said

this Truth Commission is a demand of the international community and we already know what its findings will be.... [These] will be geared to what the world wants to hear, and not to what really happened in Honduras. I don't have very high expectations regarding this question. It won't contribution to reconciliation; on the contrary, it will create greater division.

Finally, something on which both sides can agree! But surely even if it doesn't heal the wounds, finding out the truth will help? well, not so fast:

As we previously pointed out, the fact that the commission will seal records for ten years suggests the search for truth in Honduras is premature, if the committee thinks the country cannot handle hearing what it expects to discover. The report that Stein suggests will be complete in eight months is hard to imagine, if it has to avoid sensitive topics.

On the positive side, Mejía reports plans for an "Alternative Truth Commission", reportedly with the backing of Amnesty International and other human rights organizations, to "monitor the process and the conduct of those who make up the Truth Commission".

So, while we may share the skepticism of the left, right, and pro-business sectors in Honduras about the official Truth Commission, there is a chance that opposition to the proposed whitewash will keep a focus on the actual events of the coup and its aftermath and give human rights groups a chance to call attention to ongoing repression.

Adolfo Facussé to Honduras: Don't Demonize Mining

One of the clear contributing factors to the coup d'etat of 2009 was the abysmal nature of Honduran press coverage of politics. Today's La Tribuna brings an article that so perfectly exemplifies this, while also exposing more of the web of economic interests that distort Honduran society, that it merits commentary.

Under the headline They can't close sources of work with a new Law of Mining the article opens with the news that the San Martin mine, operated by Entre Mares, will be closing, having ended its cycle of production.

Entre Mares, owned by Goldcorp, a Canadian mining company, is well known to activists because of the complaints registered by local residents against the negative environmental impacts of its open-pit gold mine, located in an area of Honduras called the Siria Valley, in the Department of Francisco Morazán. Cyanide leaching processes are alleged to have led to elevated levels of arsenic, lead and mercury in the bodies of residents, contributing to a variety of illnesses. Cattle have died in the vicinity of the mine.

In 2007-- in the midst of the Zelaya administration-- the mine was fined one million lempiras (not quite $60,000) for environmental damage. Deforestation, damage to water sources, and displacement of a rural community are all products of this mining adventure. Reports on investigations by CAFOD (the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development, a branch of CARITAS) makes grim reading. CAFOD has called attention to the danger that Entre Mares and its parent Goldcorp will leave an environmental disaster that Honduras cannot clean up throughout 2009.

So what does Adolfo Facussé, president of the Asociación Nacional de Industriales (ANDI), have to add to the discussion? Well, let's let La Tribuna's objective reporting give us the answer:

Despite the fact that there are small groups in Honduras that demonize the companies, the businesses re-established all the environmental conditions that existed before the exploitation of the land, they even improved them, [Facussé] pointed out.

In the same way they left a tourist center constructed, where there is an hotel; these installations will serve to maintain the economic activity of the residents of the municipality of San Ignacio.

The bizarre notion of transforming a former open pit mine into a tourist center is hard to even take seriously.

I would point out that none of the above is in quotes, nor is the text that follows immediately:

Unfortunately the owners of the mine could not continue investing in Honduras, because some people meddled so that Honduras is the only country in the world where mining should not exist.

They are people inspired by the left and they forget that in Cuba, Peru and Venezuela there is exploitation of mines, only in Honduras they wish to prohibit it.

Ignore for the moment the nonsequitur between saying that the mine is being closed down because it reached the end of its cycle of production, and that the mining company cannot continue because of some meddlesome person. Attacking environmental and social justice groups-- among them, the Association for a More Just Society of Honduras, which published reports on the contamination as early as 2003-- by branding them as leftist, and especially, dragging in Cuba and Venezuela, is dangerous rhetoric in the wake of the coup in Honduras. (Why poor Peru got included I cannot say...)

But remember: the text above is not quoted. It is the body of the news report. It echoes and thus treats as facts assertions by Facussé, who is quoted next as saying

"To prohibit mining exploitation in Honduras damages the national economy, because in these moments gold has achieved extraordinary prices and in our country many mines could be opened to give work to thousands of compatriots, but it changed to thinking negatively."

The paper continues by paraphrasing Facussé further as saying

The enemies of Honduras do not want there to be work for the Hondurans, but they do not close the mines of Cuba and Venezuela, among other countries where there is mining exploitation.

then changes to direct quotes to continue his comments:

“In Honduras there already exists a Law of Mining that was agreed upon some years ago and we are in favor of them applying this law, and in it was established respect for the environment, an increase in the taxes that the mining companies should pay, among other regulations."

“Definitely, we are 100% against the project of Deputy Marvin Ponce, who wants to close the opportunities of work for thousands of Hondurans that need a job in this country.”

The line between reporting on the facts of the issue, and conveying the opinions of Facussé as if they were facts, is not just blurred in this article: it is obliterated.

The target of this thinly veiled piece of propaganda is a proposal Ponce-- congress member of the UD party-- made early in February. An article published on February 12 in Tiempo reports on the facts of the newly proposed law, which regulates, but does not end, mining. The key change to former practice that it would introduce would be the prohibition of open-pit mining like that in the Valle de Siria:

The project proposes the prohibition of open air mining in all the [Honduran] territory as well as the use of cyanide and any other chemical substance that might be manipulated in the processes of recovery and concentration of minerals and metals.

Ponce's proposal also calls for review of existing concessions for environmental impact, including the potential to close those found to be damaging the environment. It is worth recalling that one of the outcomes of last year's coup was a dramatic acceleration in the pace of approvals of petitions for environmental licenses by SERNA, the Secretariat of Natural Resources and Climate. The issue was and remains financial interests that lead some members of Honduran society to promote economic activities shown to be damaging to the common good and the people in general because of the benefits that would accrue to a small group.