I admit now that I was wrong, and that what happened on June 28, 2009 in Honduras was a coup d’Etat.

In this blog I have defended the thesis that in June 28, 2009 there was a constitutional succession in Honduras, and that Roberto Micheletti was a legitimate President. Although I initially said it was a coup, then I backed down, but I always kept expressing my doubts.

This is an issue that has been spinning round in my head, and I realize that my utter contempt for the figure of Zelaya led me to support a de facto regime in my country.

This is an issue I had in the back of my mind, but the new revelations of Wikileaks have made me see the Honduran crisis in a new perspective.

I do not know how reliable Wikileaks is, I argue that we should not believe something just because a cable published by Wikileaks says it, but the alleged reports of Ambassador Hugo Llorens make much sense to me.

It seems that there was no arrest warrant against Zelaya, the warrant was fabricated after the fact by the coup makers. The military simply decided to oust Zelaya and abort the referendum that was to take place that day. They had no authority to do so. It was a clear act of abuse of authority.

This argument of “necessity” of the military collapses, according to which they justified the expulsion of Zelaya under the guise of saving lives. How are lives going to be saved through a coup? It’s absurd.

The Zelaya’s resignation letter was an obvious forgery, a clumsy move of the coup makers. Congress was not authorized to remove a president, despite the twisted interpretation of a legal report of the US Library of Congress.

Article 239 of the Constitution has been used repeatedly to justify the coup. It was said that Zelaya was promoting the presidential reelection, so he was automatically dismissed from the presidency, so that when the military kidnapped Zelaya he was no longer president.

However, even if this is true, the Constitution also holds the principle of presumption of innocence. Every Honduran has the right to due process, but this right was denied to Zelaya when he was removed from the country. Therefore, Micheletti committed the crime of usurpation of functions and abuse of authority. Roberto Micheletti served as a de facto president, the legitimate president was still Zelaya.

Roberto Micheletti is not a hero who saved the country from falling into the clutches of communism. Roberto Micheletti grossly violated the Constitution while pretending to save it. There is no justification for the coup, none whatsoever.

It was said that Zelaya had planned to dissolve the Congress and the Supreme Court, and to immediately convene a National Constituent Assembly. This was the justification for the coup of Roberto Micheletti. To prove this they cite the decree PCM-020-2009, but that decree refers to the installation of a fourth ballot box in the November 2009 elections, it does not speak of immediately convening a Constituent Assembly. Micheletti therefore lied to justify the coup and probably conspired with the military to execute the coup. There was no imminent threat to justify such a serious crime.

I apologize to my readers for having supported a coup. I am not a follower of Zelaya, and never will be, but I maintain that the perpetrators of the coup and those who supported the coup also owe apologies to the people of Honduras.

There was no arrest warrant for Manuel Zelaya the day of the coup, according to a Wikileaks cable attributed to Ambassador Hugo Llorens.

While there have been claims that the Supreme Court issued a warrant for Zelaya’s arrest, the president of the Supreme Court has told us that this is not true. The only warrant we are aware of is one issued either late on June 25 or early on June 26 by a lower court ordering the seizure of polling material.

If this is true, the arrest warrant against Zelaya was made after the fact to justify the coup d’Etat.

If this statement is true, there would be no justification for the coup. The argument of “necessity” of the military collapses .

They argue they removed Zelaya out of the country in order to save lives, because the other option would be to lock him in jail, which would have caused violent riots and loss of human lives.

But if there is no arrest warrant, Zelaya’s kidnapping is clearly just a case of military abuse, there is nothing to justify it. There’s no doubt that this is a coup.

The same cable refers to the excuse used to justify the coup:

It appears that the Attorney General, the military conspired with Micheletti and other leaders of Congress to remove Zelaya based on their fear that he planned to convene a Constituent Assembly immediately after the June 28 poll. They base their claim that he would have done so on the publication in the legal gazette on June 25 of the decree calling for the poll. Micheletti’s supporters say that publication calls for the convening of the Constituent Assembly. However, this is patently false, the publication simply states: “Are you in agreement that in the general elections of 2009, there be a fourth urn in which the people decide the convocation of a National Constituent Assembly.”

There was no reason to believe that Zelaya was about to dissolve the Congress and the Supreme Court, and to convene a National Constituent Assembly that day. There was no justification for a coup d’Etat.

Could it be possible that Micheletti and his entourage were involved in a coup for misreading a decree?

The coup leaders point to the title of the survey in the decree PCM-020-2009: “Public Opinion Poll Call for a National Constituent Assembly.” This implies, according to them, that the call for a Constituent Assembly would have been performed on the same day. But that title should be interpreted in context: again, the question in the survey refers to a fourth ballot box in the elections of November 2009.

It is inconceivable that Micheletti and his advisers were so stupid to misunderstand this decree in such a clumsy way, and to sincerely believe that this warranted a coup. I suspect Micheletti just wanted an excuse to be a de facto president.