Was the presidential ouster illegal? (Forbes)

[struggle4progress]

Honduras Havoc
Viviana Krsticevic and Juan Mendez, 10.22.09, 10:20 AM EDT

U.S. policymakers are currently debating the appropriate response to a coup that ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya from power June 28. But as they continue discussions on a way forward for the Latin American nation, it is essential they have all the facts straight. Note, then, a recent Law Library of Congress analysis regarding the legality of the removal of Zelaya. The report misunderstands several basic tenets of Honduran law ...

Dubious legal reasoning aside, it is doubtful that the Honduran Congress has the power to interpret the country's constitution. In fact, one of the provisions the report cites to support the existence of such authority does not exist. The provision in question--Article 218, section 9 of the constitution--was struck down by the Honduran Supreme Court more than six years ago ...

The Law Library of Congress report also fails to mention a series of due process violations that took place in the criminal proceedings against President Zelaya. According to the report, "the Supreme Court, based on its constitutional powers, heard the case against Zelaya and applied the appropriate procedure mandated by the Code of Criminal Procedure." However, the report fails to identify several questionable aspects of these proceedings.

For example, Zelaya was not read his rights, informed of the charges against him or provided access to his lawyers while being detained and forcibly expelled from the country. In addition, the Supreme Court based its decision to order Zelaya's detention on the assumption that he posed a flight risk, a rather dubious contention as regards to a sitting president ...

http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/20/honduras-manuel-zelaya-law-library-opinions-contributors-coup.html