My beloved and troubled country, Honduras, desperately needs a truth commission. On June 28th of last year, a military coup d'etat shattered our fragile democracy and ushered in a period of arbitrary and repressive rule in which those who opposed the coup were subject to violent attacks, illegal detentions and state-imposed media censorship. Though a new government headed by Porfirio Lobo took power on Feb. 27 following highly controversial elections, there has been no real investigation or prosecution of those responsible for the coup and for the many killings, rapes, beatings and illegal detentions that occurred after June 28. In fact, targeted extrajudicial killings and attacks against coup opponents continue to regularly occur with complete impunity.
The Committee for the Families of the Detained and Disappeared of Honduras (COFADEH), which has been documenting forced disappearances and political violence in Honduras since the late '80s, has registered 47 assassinations of anti-coup activists, 14 of which have occurred since the inauguration of Mr. Lobo. Respected international human rights organizations like the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Center for Justice and International Law have also voiced their alarm regarding the ongoing attacks, but Honduras' state and judicial authorities have failed to address or even recognize the problem.
Now the Lobo government, in an effort to regain international legitimacy, is creating a Truth Commission, an initiative that is being applauded by the United States administration. Yet COFADEH and the other Honduran human rights defenders who have spent much of our lives calling for a truth commission to investigate past political violence are not applauding. We are protesting.
The fact is, Lobo's proposal in no way resembles our idea of a truth commission, or indeed any other truth commission that has played a role in healing the wounds provoked by repressive regimes, such as those of El Salvador, Argentina or South Africa. If we were not dealing with such a tragic situation, the Lobo proposal could be considered laughable.
To begin with, this so-called Truth Commission has been given no mandate to examine the human rights violations that have taken place since the coup. The presidential decree that establishes the commission does not even recognize that a coup took place on June 28th and makes no mention of the victims of the subsequent repression.
But the problems with the Lobo Commission go far deeper than the flawed text of the founding decree. The experience of truth commissions in Central America and elsewhere has demonstrated that they can only achieve some measure of success if the victims of repression as well as actors from both sides of the political divide are closely involved in the design of the commission and the selection of the commissioners. The Lobo Commission was created behind closed doors, without even a public discussion, and its commissioners were handpicked by the Lobo government. Eduardo Stein, the former Guatemalan vice president who chairs the Commission, has also failed to identify the coup as a coup.
These facts appear to indicate that the only purpose of the Lobo commission is to support the Honduran regime's continued efforts to whitewash those responsible for the coup and its violent aftermath. This would be consistent with other measures taken such as the blanket amnesty of all the political crimes that took place before, during and after June 28th, the decision to grant permanent immunity to coup president Roberto Micheletti by appointing him Congressman for life, and the Lobo government's decision to place the state telecommunications company in the hands of the general who executed the coup.
Again, there is a dire need for a truth commission in Honduras so as to begin to mend the wounds suffered by Honduran society since June 28th. That is why the Platform of Human Rights Organizations of Honduras is presenting an alternative proposal that addresses the grave human rights violations that have occurred and that calls for an open discussion and a thorough consultation of the victims of these violations. With the support of human rights defenders worldwide, we hope and pray that this commission will see the day and begin to help our country heal and move towards a more just and democratic future.
Bertha Oliva is director of the Honduran Committee of the Families of the Detained and Disappeared (Comite de Familiares de Detenidos Desparecidos en Honduras -- COFADEH) based in Tegucigalpa.
But the election was used to wash away the sins of the coup and when that didn't do the trick, the "Truth Commission" was rolled out to whitewash any stain that is left.
Thanks to Bertha Oliva and the Huffington Post for shedding light on the situation in Honduras.
1) When the Supreme Court and Congress determine and vote that you violated the Constitution, and your Constitution states that is grounds for removal, that is not a coup. Keep using that word, but it doesn't make it that.
2) Zelayists are not cooperating with this truth commission because they DON'T want the truth to come out. If they had nothing to be afraid of, why wouldn't they present their evidence?
The point here is, Mel was trying an illegal power grab, financed and orchestrated by Chavez, but people of reason and the LAW said no.
All of these other claims of Micheletti repression and right-wing murder are just a smoke screen. And mostly, lies.
Two rapes do not make a fascist dictatorship, and if you just go by the VOTE, the Hondurans wanted Mel the hell out of there.
I think the Zelayists aren't cooperating because if you do the math, they were responsible for a HELL of a lot more lawlessness than the administration. In fact, Mel encouraged it, as a little coward, hiding in the Brazilian Embassy.
Lula can't recognize the new Honduras administration not based on any perceived injustices:
He won't recognize it because it shows what an ineffectual "leader" he is, and he won't admit that he backed the wrong horse on this. He backed the horse AGAINST democracy.
VIVA HONDURAS Y SU GENTE!!!
Trying to claim one of the US's bogeymen was behind it to try and play to the audience is a nice touch. Seems to be fairly new, though. But I will give you a hint about how ridiculous that claim is. Zelaya, like every Honduran President before him (and the ones after him) was VERY wealthy, and could have afforded to pay for the printing of the ballots (after the Army broke the law and refused to print them), the running of the polling stations (after the Army broke the law again and refused to do that), and paid for the Constitutional Congress out of his own pocket, and have to ask an accountant how much it cost.
What would he need Chavez for? An army to suppress the population? It took the entire Honduran army to keep the population from supporting him, and they were so stretched doing it that they couldn't manage to enter towns where Zelaya's cabinet ministers were walking the street, pressing the flesh, and trying to run a government in exile with the twist of only being exiled from their capital.
His own party voted that he broke the rules. It is PROVEN that the ballots came in from VZ--CLEARLY proven., and Chavez even hinted at military assistance to restore Mel to power.
What the hell does Burma have to do with this?
The US Supreme Court made a scandalous ruling in the Dred Scott decision.
The Germans legalized all sorts of things under the Nuremberg laws.
You should consider your motives for suddenly considering a Kritarchy - any Kritarchy - to be acceptable. In my book, it never is.
If they aren't investigating human rights abuses, and they definitely aren't calling it a coup, what exactly are they there to find the truth about?
Meanwhile, the political ties quietly go back to normal. World Bank aid is restored, and the murder of political opponents continues unabated in Honduras:
http://www.joshuafrens-string.com/2010/02/eduardo-stein-to-head-honduran-truth.html
Yes, there were some media restrictions during the crisis--happens all the time--and just ask Chavez, who orchestrated Mel's power grab. (Proven! He supplied the ballots!) But Chavez shut opposition media down permanently, as opposed to Micheletti, who did it on a temporary basis for public safety.
How many were killed during Mel's removal? How many were killed by Chavez's coup attempt in 1992?
Go back to first grade math and figure it out. You defend garbage.