What will Washington do about Fernando Lugo's ouster in Paraguay?

[Judi Lynn]

What will Washington do about Fernando Lugo's ouster in Paraguay?
This hasty, trumped-up impeachment of President Lugo amounts to a coup d'etat. The US must back democratic process
Mark Weisbrot
guardian.co.uk, Friday 22 June 2012 16.17 EDT

A coup d'etat is taking place right now, Friday afternoon, in Paraguay.
That is how it has been described by a number of neighboring governments. And the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) is treating it as such, taking it very seriously. All 12 foreign ministers (including those of Brazil and Argentina, who are deeply concerned) flew to Asunción Thursday night to meet with the government, as well as the opposition in Paraguay's Congress.

The Congress of Paraguay is trying to oust the president, Fernando Lugo, by means of an impeachment proceeding for which he was given less than 24 hours to prepare and only two hours to present a defense. It appears that a decision to convict him has already been written, and will be presented Friday evening (at 20.30 GMT). It would be impossible to call this due process under any circumstances, but it is also a clear violation of Article 17 of Paraguay's constitution, which provides for the right to an adequate defense.

The politics of the situation are clear enough. Paraguay was controlled for 61 years by the rightwing Colorado party. For most of this time (1947-1989), the country was ruled by dictatorship. President Lugo, a former Catholic bishop from the tradition of liberation theology who had fought for the rights of the poor, was elected in 2008, but did not win majority backing in the Congress. He put together a coalition government, but the right – including the media – has never really accepted his presidency.

I met Fernando Lugo in early 2009, and I was impressed with his patience and long-term strategy. He said that given the strength of the institutions aligned against him, he did not expect to gain all that much in the present; he was fighting so that the next generation could have a better life. But the opposition to him was ruthless. In November of 2009, he had to fire his top military officers because of credible reports that they were conspiring with the political opposition.

More:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/22/washington-fernando-lugo-ouster-paraguay

[Judi Lynn]

1. Remember it was 3 yrs ago, June 26, when the right-wing staged its military coup in Honduras. n/t

[Judi Lynn]

2. (A squint back to the last Lat.Am.coup)The Honduras coup is a sign: the radical tide can be turned

The Honduras coup is a sign: the radical tide can be turned
If this were Burma or Iran the assault on democracy would be a global cause celebre. Instead, Obama is sitting on his hands
Seumas Milne
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 12 August 2009 16.00 EDT

If Honduras were in another part of the world – or if it were, say, Iran or Burma – the global reaction to its current plight would be very different. Right now, in the heart of what the United States traditionally regarded as its backyard, thousands of pro-democracy activists are risking their lives to reverse the coup that ousted the country's elected president. Six weeks after the left-leaning Manuel Zelaya was kidnapped at dawn from the presidential palace in Tegucigalpa and expelled over the border, strikes are closing schools and grounding flights as farmers and trade unionists march in defiance of masked soldiers and military roadblocks.

The coup-makers have reached for the classic South American takeover textbook. Demonstrators have been shot, more than a thousand people are reported arrested, television and radio stations have been closed down and trade unionists and political activists murdered. But although official international condemnation has been almost universal, including by the US government, barely a finger has been lifted outside Latin America to restore the elected Honduran leadership.

Of course, Latin America has long been plagued by military coups – routinely backed by the US – against elected governments. And Honduras, the original banana republic, has been afflicted more than most. But all that was supposed to have changed after the end of the cold war: henceforth, democracy would reign. And as Barack Obama declared, there was to be a "new chapter" for the Americas of "equal partnership", with no return to the "dark past".

But as the coup regime of Roberto Micheletti digs in without a hint of serious sanction from the country's powerful northern sponsor, there is every sign of a historical replay. In a grotesquely unequal country of seven million people, famously owned and controlled by 15 families, in which more than two-thirds live below the poverty line, the oligarch rancher Zelaya was an unlikely champion of social advance.

More:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/12/honduras-coup-democracy-barack-obama

[Judi Lynn]

3. Ouster of Paraguay's president sparks criticism

Ouster of Paraguay's president sparks criticism
Associated Press | Posted: Friday, June 22, 2012 11:58 pm

President Fernando Lugo's rapid impeachment and ouster by lawmakers has plunged Paraguay into crisis and unleashed a wave of criticism by fellow leftist leaders in Latin America.

~snip~

His quick acceptance of his ouster appeared to have prevented a bigger confrontation and potentially violent protests in the streets of Paraguay's capital of Asuncion, where his supporters had gathered. But other South American presidents were critical of the impeachment trial, which several called a de-facto coup d'etat.

~snip~

Crowds of pro-Lugo protesters took to the streets condemning the impeachment trial and expressing support for the president. When several dozen young protesters tried to break through a police barricade to reach Congress, police in anti-riot gear drove them back on horseback and using tear gas and water cannons.

Some protesters listened to the vote on speakers set up in the street, and booed lawmakers who voted for Lugo's dismissal. When the vote was over, some chanted "Lugo president!" Others wept. After Franco's swearing in, the crowd of protesters waned.

More: http://www.stltoday.com/news/world/ouster-of-paraguay-s-president-sparks-criticism/article_8d1f43b4-256b-5720-b12a-b5eb6fee3a60.html#ixzz1ybUf2zM5

[Judi Lynn]

4. Paraguay Kicks Out President, Latin America Cries Foul

Paraguay Kicks Out President, Latin America Cries Foul
June 23, 2012, Saturday

Paraguay President Fernando Lugo has stepped down following a rapid impeachment procedure passed in Congress.

Federico Franco has already assumed office as the country's new president.

The development of Paraguay's political crisis has been however decried by many other Latin America countries as illegal and actually constituting a coup.

Brazil President Dilma Rousseff has even called for a suspension of Paraguay's memership from regional organizations UNASUR and MERCOSUR.

More:
http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=140604

[Zorro]

5. So what should Washington do?

I thought the clamor has been for the US not to interfere in the internal politics of Latin American countries.

[joshcryer]

8. That's only when the president is a leftist.

You'll note that the US denounced the Honduran "coup" and Obama was credited for doing so. Of course, a year or so down the line the US recognized the Honduran government, which pissed a lot of people off.

Can't win for losing.

[roody]

42. They should not recognize the new government.

[naaman fletcher]

6. What will the US do?

"What will Washington do about Fernando Lugo's ouster in Paraguay? "

Does this mean that Weisbrot is in favor of the US interfering in the internal politics of a Latin American nation?

[joshcryer]

9. Hopefully nothing. Article 255 was designed to stop another Stroessner.

The vote against Lugo was unambiguous and legal. He lost all confidence.

It may have been precipitous, but oh well, there's no necessary condition that it be an arduous process. Indeed, if it was a long process a Stroessner would have a lot of time to do a lot of damage and even prevent it from happening. Something like this in Latin America has to happen quickly.

Just as in the case of Honduras, these constitutions were designed to oust presidents when they overextend and don't do the right thing for the people.

[ocpagu]

10. So... Honduras, in your opinion, was not a coup.

...

[joshcryer]

12. That is not my opinion.

That is objective fact.

But you can search my name and Honduras if you want the argument.

I am not going to go into circles again with yet another supporter of the millionaire Zelaya's cronyism.

(Ironically, Capriles gets shit on for having a "wealthy background" which is much less than Zelaya by all accounts, but he gets a pass because he feigned populism.)

[ocpagu]

14. LOL. Yeah.

The entire world considered it was a coup - the OAS, UN, the vast majority of Western governments. But you and the guys from the Free Republic must be right, LOL.

You are not going into circles, in fact, because you simply can't support such a nonsensical opinion. You can't prove Honduras was not a coup, as you can't prove the Earth is a square.

[joshcryer]

16. An appeal to authority doesn't go far with me.

It doesn't matter what the crony states called it.

I have fully supported my factual observation of the Honduras constitutional crisis on several occasions here and it is simply not necessary to do it again. No one has ever refuted the facts as they are, they use incoherent spin and conspiracies to back that crony piece of shit Zelaya.

[ocpagu]

17. My dear, you can "fully support your factual observation" for decades...

... it won't change reality. Period.

Sorry.

[joshcryer]

19. Um, I clearly stated that I'm done supporting it.

It is written. Feel free to find the discussions and refute what I have written on the subject. It is not my job to rehash the argument. Done with the inconsequential.

[ocpagu]

21. Ok.

I'm just stating the obvious. Your opinion is an extremely minoritary point of view that is only popular among... right wingers.

To the vast majority, it was a coup. That's how Honduras issue will be studied in history.

[joshcryer]

22. What will be studied in history was why so many people got it wrong.

Argumentum ad populum and appeal to authority are two logical fallacies I find common on these forums.

They don't change the facts.

[naaman fletcher]

23. Who is the guy from free republic? nt

[ocpagu]

11. And, no, you are wrong.

It may have been precipitous, but oh well, there's no necessary condition that it be an arduous process.

There is the necessary condition that impeachments, as any kind of legal process, must respect the defendant's right to elaborate and present his defense. This can't be done in 2 hours. A legal impeachment takes weeks, even months. Not less than one day.

That was an opportunistic coup, as even the right wing press in South America is calling it.

[joshcryer]

13. All but one voted for it.

Total nonsense.

Doesn't surprise me that you'd agree with right wing press in South America.

[ocpagu]

15. I think you didn't understand what I wrote.

I said that even the right wing press in South America is calling it a coup. Not that only the right wing press is calling it a coup - that would make some sense in your pathetic attempt to smear me, so typical of your incapacity of focusing in arguments rather than people...

[joshcryer]

18. Pfft, says someone who attributed my views to Free Republic.

Fact is if the right wing press is saying it then they must have an agenda.

It's probable that they want to get rid of the leftists who scapegoated Lugo and by framing it as a coup it delegitimizes the legitimate government of Paraguay and marginalizes the leftists still in power.

Of course they fucking think it's a coup.

But we fall for that shit every time.

This should be a wake up call to leftists that cronyism doesn't fit leftist ideals and is in fact a right wing mechanism.

[ocpagu]

20. Fantastic information...

... for the conspiracy theories thread.

[ocpagu]

26. "All but one voted for it."

The point is not how many of them voted for it. The point is that the accused didn't have proper conditions of presenting his defence.

[joshcryer]

27. Fernando Collor de Mello had a similar impeachment. Do you think it was too quick?

We'll have to see if charges are forthcoming for Lugo, though Paraguay's impeachment process lowers the bar further than Brazil's as far as I understand (in Paraguay you can impeach simply over a loss of confidence, in Brazil it was "high crimes&quot .

What is there to "defend" if you have lost confidence with the legislature?

"Please don't impeach me please!"

[ocpagu]

29. It was not similar.

Collor's impeachment took months.

After the accusations of influence peddling scheme, the Parliament created a commission of inquiry lasting almost a year! And Collor had the opportunity to present his defense - had even the opportunity to ask for popular support on TV! Even the impeachment itself (the counting of the votes) took 4 days! And there was popular support for his removal, with millions of Brazilians going to street asking Collor to resign!

His impeachment was legal, because it respected his right to defense and reflected the popular will.

[Bacchus4.0]

30. so it seems that Lugo's impeachment is illigitimate

because 1) it was too fast and 2) leaders of other nations don't approve.

[ocpagu]

31. It's illegitimate...

... because it didn't respect the Constitutional right of granting the defendant full defense.

The Paraguayan parliament already had made their decision. They were only waiting for an opportunity to destitute Lugo. Impeachments require relevant accusations to justify the legislative power meddling in the executive power. The accusation is a joke. It's clearly opportunistic.

What would DUers that are here supporting the coup say if Republicans launch a successful impeachment proccess against Obama in less than one day, accusing him of responsability over civilian deaths in drone attacks, for example?

[Bacchus4.0]

32. Republicans would never get Democratic support unlike the coalition to oust Lugo

where he received only 1 vote of support. In the US it would end like the Clinton impeachment. The House could definitely impeach Obama because it would only require a simple majority. but nothing would happen in the Senate.

I have no idea how Paraguayan impeachment process works or is supposed to work, but as far as I know the US Senate could vote to oust a president without allowing for a defense. Clinton was not present at his "trial" and offered no defense himself.

THere sure are alot of experts on Paraguayan Constitutional law who are not Paraguayan it seems. It certainly was opportunistic but the given reasons for his ouster are not trivial.

[ocpagu]

33. They may not be trivial.

But they should be debated, and Lugo should have been given the opportunity to refute them - in proper conditions. That's the point.

The fact that the majority of law-makers voted for his impeachment doesn't mean it was democratic and constitutional. The majority can also act against democracy and attempt against the Constitution. If the majority of Paraguayan congressmen voted in favor of slavery of indigenous, would that be democratic?

[Bacchus4.0]

34. oh, I don't know the process for impeachment in Paraguay

In the US, the process is entirely up to the Congress. So I don't actually know whether or not Lugo's removal was Constitutional. If it was, labeling it a coup doesn't make it NOT constitutional.

No, Congressman voting for slavery would not be democratic. Most democracies are democratic republics whereas representatives vote on behalf of the constituencies.

but to be clear democratic does not necessarily mean just or fair, , There certainly could be a "democratic" vote on slavery. Many states in the US have done that with gay marriage.

Hugo CHavez does it to push his agenda. Even when he loses he just schedules another so the people "get it right".

[joshcryer]

37. Yeah, the poster seems to think that a defense changes the outcome of an impeachment.

Impeachment is a political process, there is no "defense." Impeachment is a vote to remove someone from power, that is all.

[ocpagu]

38. "Impeachment is a political process, there is no "defense.""

In your world. Only.

[joshcryer]

44. So, if he had a legitimate defense, the votes of the parliment / senate wouldn't matter?

That's what we call dictators, people who cannot be ousted from power except in elections. That's nonsense. If there is a political process to oust a president from power, such as impeachment, then the results should be respected.

Defense has nothing to do with it.

[joshcryer]

36. There was nothing for him to refute.

The Paraguayan constitution allows one to be impeached or ousted for any reason whatsoever.

It is amusing that you conflate removing the power from one person with enslaving an entire population.

Just goes to show the mentality people have when it comes to worshiping these populist Latin American presidents...

[ocpagu]

39. "The Paraguayan constitution allows one to be impeached or ousted for any reason whatsoever."

I've shown your comment to a Paraguayan professor who works in the same university where I study. I'm reproducing his answer below:

"Hahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahaah"

"Just goes to show the mentality people have when it comes to worshiping these populist Latin American presidents..."

You mean leftist Latin American presidents. You just write "populist" because you don't want to show your true colors. Gotta love right-wingers arrogance. You want to see real populism? Take a look at your foreign policy for the last 50 years, for Christ sake. Your government is selling your country to China while keeps blocking Communist threatening nation of... Cuba.

Get real. Really.

[Bacchus4.0]

41. I found an English translation of the Paraguayan Constitution

Section VI About Impeachment

Article 225 About Procedures
(1) The president of the Republic, the vice president, cabinet ministers, justices of the Supreme Court of Justice, the attorney general, the public defender, the comptroller and the deputy comptroller general of the Republic, and members of the Superior Electoral Court may be forced to undergo impeachment proceedings for malfeasance in office, for crimes committed in office, or for common crimes.
(2) The Chamber of Deputies, by a two-thirds majority, will press the respective charges. The Senate, by a two-thirds absolute majority, will conduct a public trial of those charged by the Chamber of Deputies and, if appropriate, will declare them guilty for the sole purpose of removing them from office. In cases in which it appears that common crimes have been committed, the files on the respective impeachment proceedings will be referred to a competent court.

http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/pa00000_.html

---------------

thats it on impeachment.

[joshcryer]

45. Yep, and "malfeasance" is "basically anything they can trump up."

[joshcryer]

43. No, the leftists in Chile and Brazil reduced poverty more effectively...

...than the populists in Argentina and Venezuela. This is why the distinction was made. It's quite simple, really. You can be a leftist but against certain populist faux policies that actually are less effective at providing justice for the poor and actually more effective at providing profits for the rich.

Your "Paraguayan professor" I'm sure can read the Paraguay constitution. It's a simple observation.

[joshcryer]

35. They were both legal impeachments.

[joshcryer]

7. His government needed a scapegoat for its policies. He was it.

It won't change the ineffective policies much.

But the US has no place being involved in that.

[naaman fletcher]

24. Of course the US has no place being involved

But, we have another exposure of the hypocrisy of some people. They spend years here railing against US involvement in Latin America, and then suddenly they want the US to be involved in Latin America.

It's the same thing with railing against imperialism. Then, when a spanish speaking country wants to colonize and english speaking people, they are all for it.

[joshcryer]

25. Yep, far be it for the US to STFU. For what it's worth...

...I think the Obama administration will condemn it like Honduras. Wrongly, imho, but that's what they'll do I think, just to win points within Latin America as a whole. Politics is a nasty business.

[Bacchus4.0]

28. the US, or Argentina, or Venezuela have no business commenting on whether or not

Lugo was removed according to proper procedures.

[bemildred]

40. Not much.

But it is interesting that we have been reduced to hanging on to these little bits and pieces of the hemisphere, these fig leafs.