Nov 29, 2009
Lindsay

Grumble and get on with it, OAS

The people of Honduras have voted for their government to get on about its business, and I hope this encourages the states of the OAS to do the same. If the citizenry of Honduras thinks the exercise was legitimate enough to participate in – and they did, with an estimated 60 to 70% turnout – then it will be difficult for Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Venezuela, and other OAS members to explain why they are not honoring it. The best thing for everyone to do is accept this election – including Zelaya. Once he accepts that he has not won and will not win, he should put the interests of his country ahead of his own and withdraw his protest for the election.

There were certainly protests by expatriates supporting Zelaya and a small boycott at home, but they did not disrupt the process. Furthermore, Zelaya’s term is over, and these elections have been scheduled for some time. As long as observers certify that the election was free and fair, which they are likely to do even though the OAS refused to send a delegation, there is no reason for Honduras to continue to be such a prominent international issue. If this was a “constitutional” coup and the interim government was legitimate, than they have fulfilled their duties. If it was illegitimate, Honduras has gotten rid of it through the most democratic means possible, an election. While there are certainly some issues for Honduras to deal with to straighten out these legal issues, they do not require such intense diplomatic efforts by neighbors.

It is understandable for South American states to be touchy over the issue of military coups, since they have been so unlucky with them in the past. They are afraid Honduras will set a bad example. Yet the Honduran case was clearly not a power grab by the military. The military immediately stepped aside for the civilian government, which held elections as scheduled and has now turned power over to its opposition, which won the vote fair and square. The OAS can feel justified in having condemned what it saw as a coup, but now it needs to let Honduras move on.

2 Comments

  • I am not sure I agree with you, Lindsay. The government did not allow anything close to a free and fair election, and it is still far from clear that the Supreme Court and Congress had any legal justification for asking the military to depose Zelaya.

  • The government might have silenced some of the voices of opposition, and I certainly don’t defend them for doing that. But we recognize elections in other countries with a lot worse (although I will withhold final judgment until I see some election observation reports, because my knowledge of the situation is admittedly sparse). I think the point is that the constitution had no good provision for what to do with Zelaya and the Congress and court made a decision on their own on what to do with him since they had no real guidance. Perhaps this has all been handled badly, but Zelaya isn’t the good guy here — he behaved unconstitutionally himself. And the election was run fairly enough so that the opposition won. Turnover for me is a pretty fair indicator of letting the voice of the people be heard, since the opposition wasn’t in any position to rig the election. I think it’s up to the new government now to address the constitutional issues — but it’s the new government and not Zelaya’s that needs to be in power doing it.

Leave a comment

The MA in Democracy and Governance at Georgetown University is now accepting applications for the 2012-2013 academic year. Find out more.
Founded in 2004, Democracy and Society is a biannual print journal published by the Center for Democracy and Civil Society at Georgetown University. The D&S Blog provides web-only content, including special reports and investigative series, on issues relating to democracy and development.

Sign up for our mailing list

Posts by Region

Posts by Topic

Switch to our mobile site