With regards to the recent events in Honduras, BBC News quoted Hillary Clinton, the U.S. Secretary of State, as saying, "It's important that we stand for the rule of law".
My questions for Hillary are: Why wasn't the United States standing for the rule of law when Mel Zelaya was blatantly ignoring rulings of the Honduran Supreme Court? What objections did the U.S. make when Mel insisted on carrying out his illegal referendum despite a Honduran constitution that requires this type of referendum to be authorized by the Honduran Congress? Why was the U.S. silent then? Does the rule of law only extend to some institutions, but not others? Does the U.S. government believe that the executive branch is exempt from the rule of law (hence Watergate, the Iran-Contra affair, etc), but other branches are obligated? Is a constitutionally mandated 'balance of powers' strictly a facade so that people will believe they live in a democracy, but the executive branch ('wink, wink') is not expected to abide by the law and has a 'carte blanche'?
Hillary, please leave your answers in my comment section.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment