Honduran Congress puts off vote on Zelaya return

[Joanne98]

Source: Reuters


TEGUCIGALPA (Reuters) - The Honduran Congress on Monday avoided a vote on whether ousted President Manuel Zelaya can return to power after a coup last month, saying it was a matter for the Supreme Court to decide.

Congress head Jose Alfredo Saavedra said deputies could not rule on Zelaya's return, part of a plan by Costa Rican President Oscar Arias to end the Honduras crisis, because it was a constitutional question.

The United States insisted on Monday it wants Zelaya reinstated but made no commitment to tightening sanctions to put pressure on the de facto government that replaced the leftist leader after a June 28 coup.

The coup in Honduras, an impoverished exporter of textiles and coffee, is Central America's worst political crisis in two decades and a test of U.S. President Barack Obama's commitment to improving relations with Latin America.


Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed1/idUSTRE56R3BC20090728

[ProgressiveProfessor]

1. The same court that issued the warrant for his arrest and removed him from office?

[IDFbunny]

7. They issued the arrest warrant,

they can (and should) quash said warrant. Congress could then consider letting him finish his term. Zelaya should promise not to run anymore unconstitutional referendums, take council from the supreme court and congress, or otherwise extend his term beyond this year.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

11. They could, but so far there is no indication they will

15-0 vote to arrest him and remove him from office when the court has 8 of his own party members on it is a pretty strong statement.

[IDFbunny]

21. Had OUR supreme court issued an arrest warrant

for shrub when it would have been timely, would it have been enforceable? Would the Marshal's or the Marines have made the arrest? Just asking.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

23. Not quite how it works in the US, but I have no doubt a court order or warrant would be executed

properly. Any arrest would also have been negotiated and none of the middle of the night nonsense that went on with Zelaya

[bemildred]

2. So everybody wants to punt. nt

[David__77]

3. This is a test being failed by the Obama administration.

The military puts a president on a plane into exile, shuts down media outlets, represses demonstrators, kills people, and yet, this is not being treated as a military coup. The imperialist, bi-partisan "consensus" is emerging yet again, one more time. It's fine ultimately, because Latin America will continue to emerge as an independent pole in the world.

[timeforpeace]

4. We are in enough wars already. US versus Honduras would be over in minutes.

[David__77]

5. I do not want the US to militarily intervene in any way.

I want the US, in fact, to withdraw its troops from Honduras. I do not want an invasion, nor support for insurgency, etc.

I want the US to provide political solidarity for Zelaya, continue recognizing his government, and provide no recognition for elections conducted under conditions of a military coup. I know you do not see things this way.

[iandhr]

6. Why are you guys so quick to defend Zelaya

He was trying to illegally extend his term of power. The court said him serving longer would violate The Honduran constitution. When he refused to give up his illegal bid for another term the court issued a warrant for his arrest.

[Judi Lynn]

8. You should have made an attempt to inform yourself on the facts of this event.

The reason people defend this man is that they are aware of the facts. You should have made the effort yourself. We all knew the details of this illegal filthy situation a month ago. How did you avoid it? Taking your information from freeps? Corporate media? Don't you have a clue, yet?

~snip~
There is no evidence in the form of public statements, printed anywhere, including in the Honduran newspapers that support you, that quotes Mr. Zelaya as ever saying that he was seeking to extend his term of office.

http://machetera.wordpress.com/2009/07/27/otto-reichs-propaganda-factory-still-churning-out-the-goods/

[ProgressiveProfessor]

10. There is enough out there from all sides to indicate neither side is clean in this

The counter story goes something like this (compiled from multiple sources)...

Prior to his removal from office, Zelaya sought to push through a constitutional referendum that might lead to his reelection. The Supreme Court, the National Congress, the president's own attorney general, the human rights ombudsman and the electoral commission all ruled that the referendum violated the constitution, which clearly outlaws even consideration of a presidential reelection.

The constitution expressly states in Article 239 that any president who seeks to amend the constitution and extend his term is automatically disqualified and is no longer president. There is no express provision for an impeachment process in the Honduran constitution. But the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision affirmed that Mr. Zelaya was attempting to extend his term with his illegal referendum. Thus, at the time of his arrest he was no longer—as a matter of law, as far as the Supreme Court was concerned—president of Honduras.

The Supreme Court, by a 15-0 vote, found that Zelaya had acted illegally by proceeding with an unconstitutional “referendum,” and it ordered the Armed Forces to arrest him. The military executed the arrest order of the Supreme Court because it was the appropriate agency to do so under Honduran law. Eight of the 15 votes on the Supreme Court were cast by members of Mr. Zelaya’s own Liberal Party. The Honduran Congress also voted overwhelmingly in support of removing Mr. Zelaya. The vote included a majority of members of Zelaya’s Liberal Party. Zelaya’s arrest was at the direction of Honduran’s constitutional and civilian authorities—not the military.

One thing that was clearly illegal was his expulsion. Honduran law is clear that a citizen can not be exiled. The reasons given are IMO weak.

Not sure I buy all of the above, but it would appear that there is a strong case that Honduran law was followed. At this time whether or not there will be arrests should Zelaya return to Honduras is up to their Supreme Court. The same one that issues the warrant for his arrest and declared him out of office by a vote of 15-0, despite the majority being from his party.

[Judi Lynn]

12. The clear truth remains Zelaya would have been OUT OF OFFICE, gone before any changes

would have been made to the Honduran Constitution, after lengthy discussion,debate, voting to be held well after this initial survey would have been taken, had it concluded the population wanted to move in that direction.

Zelaya's Presidency would not have been affected. That is a clear, conspicuous distortion used by the right-wing oligarchs, designed to serve as cover by the fascists who need an excuse to justify illegally removing the LEGALLY ELECTED president.

You're simply barking up the wrong tree. Drop it.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

13. Different views on about that from many sources.

But his removal does appear to be constitutional under Honduran law and done with the active participation of his majority party.

[Judi Lynn]

9. Amnesty statement: Human Rights Flashpoints - July 28, 2009

Human Rights Flashpoints - July 28, 2009
Africa, Americas | Posted by: Christoph Koettl, July 28, 2009 at 12:52 PM
HONDURAS

Ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya attempted to return to Honduras for the second time on Friday, July 24, 2009. After a brief moment in his home country, Zelaya retreated back into Nicaragua, setting up camp on Saturday to demand his return home and to power.

Since then, Zelaya has refrained from making another attempt to enter the country for fear of attacks against his supporters, as reported by the BBC. Curfews remain in place in southern Honduras, while supporters of Mr. Zelaya have blocked main roads.

The Honduran armed forces endorsed the San José Accord, an agreement that was forged in Costa Rica between delegates representing President Zelaya and Roberto Micheletti, the leader of the de facto government. According to the New York Times, the accord is supported by most governments in the hemisphere and it would allow the return of Mr. Zelaya as president with limited powers.

There are currently no further talks scheduled to take place between the de facto government and Zelaya.

Honduran President Manuel Zelaya was detained by Honduran military personnel and forced into exile at the end of June. Several government ministers are also reported to have been detained. Roberto Micheletti, Congress speaker, has been sworn in as “Interim President.” Micheletti has imposed a curfew.

Recent reports also suggest that journalists who have published news stories on the crisis or covering the issue of protests and scores of detentions have been intimidated. Prosecutors have also reported threats on account of their attempts to verify human rights abuses during protests.

http://blog.amnestyusa.org/americas/human-rights-flashpoints-july-28-2009/

[fascisthunter]

14. Judi,

do you ever listen to Guy James on Head-on radio?

[Judi Lynn]

15. Used to, but lost track of him when he went off the air for a while. He's back?

Same link as before? From "behind enemy lines" in Florida?

He's wonderful!

[fascisthunter]

16. are you familiar with Robert Amsterdam?

[Judi Lynn]

17. Oh, jeez! More than I'd like! What a complete a-hole. n/t

[fascisthunter]

18. Ok... good! That Dick is running the circuit

he's been on Bob Kincaid's show, Montel William's show and now Guy James show. Now I didn't listen to Kincaid's show but I know he's been on there spouting his anti-leftist crap because a caller called in after the interview and told Guy James. We really need people like you to call these folks up and tell them who this man is...

[Judi Lynn]

19. Going to look for a link on his nasty Latin American blather, found this, instead:

hthttp://www.nowpublic.com/world/yukos-case-robert-amsterdam-soviet-style-propagandist

~snip~
Their counter-offensive was similar to that of Belkovsky and was (and still is) shaped by an American-Canadian lawyer, Robert Amsterdam. Although he is not a communication professional, Amsterdam has, in just a few years’ time, proved that he is a PR genius – though his skills as a lawyer have so far proven to be sub-par.

Indeed, since being recruited by Khodorkovsky, Amsterdam has acted more as a lobbyist than as an actual lawyer. Amsterdam was even described by the Wall Street Journal (surely not a fan of the Russian government jailing Khodorkovsky) as a “Soviet-style propagandist” with respect to the methods he has used to defend his client.

One of those consists of animating a blog, robertamsterdam.com, launched in 2006 and initially dedicated to the Yukos case. Now this blog has expanded to broader issues concerning Russian politics: Amsterdam’s site publishes any piece that is negative toward Russia or Vladimir Putin.

This blog, as well as half a dozen of mirror blogs linked to Amsterdam but where he does not officially appear, are run by the New York-based online communication firm K Social Media Consulting, a leader in viral communication (they have also worked with Rolls Royce and Lockheed Martin).

Amsterdam’s team systematically generates excellent web rankings to any article negative toward Russian government, therefore offering them an enhanced visibility and accessibility.

As a matter of fact, anyone searching the web on Russian politics has a great chance to come across Amsterdam blog pages first, therefore ensuring a rather partisan view of Russia.

This is a smart way to communicate, using the most the internet has to offer. Yet it is also a bit problematic from a moral point of view.

Let us be honest, in another time or place this would have been called straight-up propaganda or mass manipulation. A lot of people even wonder if his intrusive blogging and lobbying activities do not breach his legal duties as a lawyer– but so far this has not stopped him.

The worst part is that this strategy is, to me, exceptionally counter-productive (at least if you have your client’s interest in mind).

Indeed, so long as Amsterdam’s team keeps raising Khodorkovsky as a symbol, Russia will keep him jailed… as a symbol.

From my perspective, it seems that Amsterdam is less concerned about getting his client out of jail than by turning him into a cause célèbre, thus ensuring his own fame. If I were Khodorkovsky, I would fire Amsterdam– but perhaps Khodorkovsky is being misled.

There are also many rumours on Amsterdam’s possible links to the CIA, which would take advantage of Amsterdam’s position to broadcast discriminative information about the Russian government. I do not know if these rumours are true, but they would certainly explain a lot…

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/yukos-case-robert-amsterdam-soviet-style-propagandist

~~~~~~~~~~
On edit, from another article:

Who Really Is Robert Amsterdam?
Sunday, 10 May 2009

~snip~
In the name of what or whom?

Amsterdam is therefore best described as a lobbyist rather than a lawyer. Since his strategy does not seem to be benefiting his client very much, it is worth wondering, then, what exactly Amsterdam is lobbying for, and on whose behalf.

Given Amsterdam’s activities and spotty past, there has been speculation that he is on the CIA or MI5 payroll. Given Amsterdam’s level of contacts worldwide and his strange background prior to 2003, this is a legitimate question. Such a direct link, however, seems unlikely: these agencies would be most in need of information on the Khodorkovsky trial, but Amsterdam’s knowledge on this is in fact quite limited.

Nevertheless, without actually being a salaried agent, one may speculate that, at the very least, Amsterdam gladly trades information with Western secret services – and indeed does much of the work for them, being a “one-man Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty”.

It is also strange and dubiously ethical for an international lawyer to live in a £ 3,000,000 London home at Cavendish Avenue that is owned by a BVI-based company, or to have his professional expenses routed through a Guernsey-based limited company, Corbiere Trust Company. Surely such a murky figure is not best-placed to defend one now accused of embezzlement and money laundering.

In the end, it seems that Amsterdam is lobbying for himself. After all, who has gained most from all the publicity surrounding the Khodorkovsky trials? Unknown before 2004, Amsterdam owes all of his notoriety from the Khodorkovsky affair.

Amsterdam’s job ought not to be self-publicity, however. Neither should it be an impassioned crusade against what he considers a rogue regime. Indeed, as a lawyer Amsterdam’s top priority should rather be to get his client released. So far, nothing demonstrates that Amsterdam’s actions have helped his client – quite the contrary.

Considering that Khodorkovsky is facing charges that could lead to more than 20 years in jail, Khodorkovsky himself should really be the first to wonder, who is Robert Amsterdam?

http://www.borba.rs/eng/content/view/5542/123/

[fascisthunter]

20. I Knew It....... this man needs exposure...

the type he dislikes.

I'll keep my ears open... I already emailed Guy and told him this man was a phony. Hopefully he reads more about the man...

[Judi Lynn]

22. Here's the background on his Russian client:

Robert Amsterdam, a Lawyer in troubled waters
23 Februarie 2009 541 de vizualizari The lawyer of the imprisoned Russian oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky has chosen to adopt a radical line of defence: avoiding courtrooms in order to face off against the Russian government via the media.

http://www.qmagazine.ro/articole/2435/Robert-Amsterdam-a-Lawyer-in-troubled-waters.htmltt

Recently he's been after Latin American politics. I became so angry I didn't want to follow it further. He's an utterly slippery ass. The truth won't be recognizable by the time he's finished with it.

He must have a ton of people helping him in his loathesome efforts.