Zelaya’s “Spurious” Attack of Honduran Elections
1
Deposed Honduran president Manuel Zelaya claims this Sunday’s election is “spurious” because of a “state of repression, with censoring of media opposing the regime, and a biased electoral tribunal”. All this is misdirection. Zelaya isn’t even on the ballot.
Who is the alleged “repression” against? Against supporters of Zelaya. Do these supporters want an election? No. Why is the election invalid if those who are being “repressed” don’t even want an election? In fact, the Honduran Constitution (Spanish PDF, or English Translation) states very clearly in article 4 that “the infringement of this standard {alternation of the executive branch} constitutes the crime of treason.” Article 37 states that citizens have the right to elect and be elected. According to Article 42, proponents of the boycott can also be stripped of their citizenship, and be charged as criminals. Yes, they would be political prisoners, unfortunately, but the Constitution is the law of the land. The article states that citizenship is lost “by restricting freedom of suffrage, adulterating electoral documents or using fraudulent means to circumvent the will of the people;” among other reasons.
This clause means that when Zelaya admitted (see above video) that he won the presidential election through fraud, he could also have been stripped of his Honduran citizenship because he used fraudulent means to circumvent the will of the people. In this case, Porfirio “Pepe” Lobo, who is the likely winner of Sunday’s elections, should have been elected president four years ago. Curiously it was on channel 36, with Esdras Amado Lopez, where Zelaya confessed his fraud.
What media are the government allegedly “censoring”? Cholusat, Channel 36 and Radio Globo. Are any of these media in favor of a presidential candidate? No, they are against the whole elections. Again, they are breaking the law in calling for a boycott, according to Article 4 of the Constitution. The government is justified in shutting them down. But of course, they can’t, because of world opinion, and they shouldn’t, because it is counterproductive and unnecessary. Would the elections be any different whether these media operate or not? They have no effect on the election, except stoking the furnace of international sanctions against Honduras.
Zelaya’s third charge is that the Supreme Electoral Tribunal is biased. In favor of whom are they biased? In favor of any of the 6 (now 5) presidential candidates? No. If they are “biased”, they are “biased” against the proponents of electoral boycott. Where is the bias that makes the elections spurious?
If we apply reason to Zelaya’s accusations we see they are only buzzwords designed to make journalists’ ears tingle, and tickle their self-importance in upholding a cause that is worthy in their eyes, and hide their outright bias and in some cases, perhaps, incompetence. The result is a misinformed and anodized public that will consume whatever agenda the news media throw at them, and rabidly defend their puppeteer’s wishes. Then they sip their lattes and feel like the intellectual saviors of the world.
But many nations are supporting the Honduran election. Even Oscar Arias is calling for all nations to recognize them, “if everything goes well”. Surprisingly, Obama, whose “coup” verbal misfire landed the US in the company of Castro and Chavez, has written Brazilian president Lula da Silva, asking him to influence Iran, and also recognize the Honduran elections. Da Silva rejected the letter. The US, Costa Rica, Panama and Peru have expressed their support of a transparent electoral process in Honduras, and will recognize their results
Of course Zelaya will cry fraud even before the results are anounced. But who would the fraud be in favor of, or who would it be against?
Related posts:
[...] Honduran election, and Zelaya’s attack on them, dominated the blog. He called the elections spurious, and refused to participate in the [...]