Talk:Impeachment of Fernando Lugo

Like it or not, Lugo gave up the Presidency

This article isn't moving passed the first week of headline news. A lot has transpired since. The article must stress several things: first, Lugo accepted facing the trial with a speech on national TV. Second, he said to the press, in the very morning before his scheduled defense, that he would appear before Congress to defend himself; some hours later, he didn't showed up but anyway he sent his team of lawyers. Third, and once again on national TV, he said that he accepted the verdict and he said he was saying good-bye as President but not as a citizen, and he will face the consequences of his acts as a former President. Fourth, the Organization of American States, after sending an ad hoc, fact-finding mission to Paraguay, refused in Assembly to condemn the change of Government. Fifth, Federico Franco's government appealed the decision of MERCOSUR to suspend the country and admit Venezuela without the Paraguayan consent; a MERCOSUR controversies court admitted the appeal as coming from the Government of Paraguay, even though Lugo says he is the President of the Republic. Sixth and more serious, Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay responded to Franco's accusations through legal documents presented to the MERCOSUR controversies court, de facto acknowledging that Lugo is out of power. Seveth, it was rumored on the day of the impeachment that Lugo left the Presidential Palace saying "I'm not Allende", meaning he would not cling to his position as Head of State of Paraguay, Head of Government of Paraguay and Commander in Chief of the Paraguayan Armed Forces. In a TV debate aired one month after the impeachment, moderated by journalist Mina Feliciángeli, Lugo supporters confirmed the words and criticized Lugo for not resisting the ousting, as he would be entitled to do if the Constitution was on his side; even more, he must have resisted because he received a popular mandate to defend the Constitution against any illegal usurpation of power. This created the following situation: 8 countries, Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Ecuador, Bolivia, Peru and Nicaragua does not recognize Federico Franco's government; the rest of the 34 countries affiliated to the Organization of American States do recognize him, and paradoxically, all four members of MERCOSUR, Paraguay itself, plus Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay do not have other interlocutor in Asuncion to deal with matters of State, because Lugo has lost his powers. In 1989, when dictator Stroessner was ousted in a bloody coup d'etat that started the democratic process in Paraguay, he did what every president of the Republic of Paraguay must do if she or he thinks that she or he must remain in power: he went directly to a specialized Army base, the Presidential Escort Batallion, in the middle of the city of Asuncion, established precisely and still in full operation to protect the country's president against any enemy, internal or external. Lugo did the exact opposite: he went to his private residence in the neighboring city of Lambaré and established a "Cabinet in the shadows", even though he is freely speaking to the press and circulating around the country. His speeches even appear in the local newspapers that his supporters accuse of being behind "the plot" to impeach him. I am asking all of you now: Who is the President of the Republic of Paraguay? If Lugo was not ousted by a de facto action, at least he submitted a de facto resignation. Writing this article from the point of view of foreign presidents is senseless, because they themselves do not believe that Fernando Lugo is the man who you have to talk to in Paraguay if you want something from that country. Aldo L (talk) 05:21, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Things to improve

1) "A number of Latin American governments declared the proceeding was effectively a coup d'etat. Lugo himself formally accepted the impeachment, but called it a "parliamentary coup".[1]"

In the end there were only 10 countries out of the 34 members of the Organization of American States, plus Cuba. No country in any other continent of the world protested against the impeachment.

2) "(gaining 42.3% of the vote, against the second-placed Colorado candidate's 31.8%)."

The score was Lugo and Franco 40.8%, Ovelar and Santacruz 30.6%

3) "The Liberal Party, initially a member of the Alliance, withdrew in 2009, leaving the Alliance with just a handful of Congressional seats."

It withdrew on 21 June 2012, a day after the Colorados requested the Impeachment (the number 24, according to Lugo's recollection). From 15 August 2008 through 21 June 2012 about half of Lugo's cabinet was composed by Liberal Party people, if not more. They withdrew from the government when they realized it was not longer viable, as Lugo's popularity was in its extreme low afters his so many paternity scandals, broken promises, etc., but the Curuguaty massacre was a catalyzer: in a small country like Paraguay, the fact that a pro campesinos president such as Lugo was killing campesinos was too difficult to swallow. No massacre, with almost two dozen killed and around 80 injured (i.e., nearly 100 firearm casualties) has occurred in Paraguay in decades, if not in generations. This shocked the country.

4) "A US Embassy cable from March 2009 (posted on Wikileaks) discussed the intention of Lino Oviedo and ex-President Nicanor Duarte to organise the impeachment of Lugo as a means to gain power. The cable is quoted as saying "Duarte's and Oviedo's shared goal: Find a 'cause celebre' to champion so as to change the current political equation, break the political deadlock in Congress, impeach Lugo and regain their own political relevance. Oviedo's dream scenario involves legally impeaching Lugo, even if on spurious grounds." The document goes on to suggest that Oviedo would be a leading candidate for the Vice Presidency, once Federico Franco had replaced Lugo as President, while Duarte might attain the Senate presidency."

All the local newspaper headlines from 15 August 2008 (the day Lugo and Franco were sworn in) denounced it wide open that UNACE and ANR did not want Lugo as president. Even more, they threatened Lugo with an impeachment 23 times during those four years, a figure given by Lugo himself. Oviedo could hardly have been a leading candidate in an election as he obtained only one fith of the total votes the prevoius year. In any case, a Colorado or a Liberal would have been the leading candidate, as both parties consistenly mantained a popularity of over one third of the votes during the past two decades. Nicanor could never achieve the presidency of the Senate as he was a senator-for-life, with voice but without vote, veto or number as part of the quorum, as stated by the Constitution and ratified by the Senate in 2008.

5) "In mid-May 2012 around 150 landless farmers occupied the Campos Morombi belonging to ex-Colorado Senator Blas Riquelme."

It was a natural reserve area, recognized as such by the government, so it was out of any land reform program. It also belonged to the Nation so Riquelme's case was already in the Judiciary. Riquelme was prominent during the 90's but by 2012 was retired. He died a few weeks ago, age 80 plus.

6) "On 15 June 2012 a police operation to evict landless farmers, enforcing a court order obtained by Riquelme."

The order was the seventh court order in a row during 2012. It wasn't Riquelme's land, nor it was the squatters' land.

7) "On 16 June Lugo accepted the resignation of his interior minister Carlos Filizzola and of National Police chief General Paulino Rojas."

Right after the massacre, there was a tremendous public pressure to evict Carlos Filizzola as this man was already unpopular. Lugo didn't reacted and Filizzola said he had Lugo's support. In the end, Lugo had to comply with the public outrage. But even then Carlos Filizzola said he was neither expelled nor he resigned, just left his office. Confusing, isn't it?

8) "Immediately, the PLRA requested the destitution of Candia Amarilla and the new National Police chief Arnaldo Sanabria, who lead the police operative that ended in the dead on the farmers in Curuguaty."

Chief Arnaldo Sanabria was the chief of the policial zone were the massacre ocurred, which comprised three National Departments: Alto Paraná, Canindeyú and San Pedro. The person who led the operative was the chief for the Curuguaty district. The GOE chief asked for more intelligence and reinforcement as it was known the squatters were armed. After the massacre, TV stations broadcasted a video taped before the policemen entered the property where this man was briefing his troops to go in without firearms. A second line was to stand behind armed with rubber bullets. Only the third line of policemen were armed. The widow of this man stated that before leaving his home he complained that the strategy was totally wrong and he said "Good-bye. I don't know if I would return alive". The briefing video shocked the public and caused outrage.

And then those two people responsible for the operation were promoted: the chief for the Curuguaty district to Chief of Alto Paraná - Canindeyú - San Pedro police zone and the Chief for Alto Paraná - Canindeyú - San Pero Departments to Chief of the National Police, the other way around what the people was especting, i.e., everybody was expecting them to be demoted.

9) "On 20 June Lugo announced a special commission to investigate the incident."

This was THE main immediate cause for the impeachment. Under Paraguayan law, this commission was totally illegal. Lugo said it would have the collaboration of the OAS but the OAS was never invited. The only person officially invited was Alcibiades González Delvalle, a well known journalist, but when asked who will be the other members of this "Commission of Notable Personalities" Delvalle said he did not know.

The right course of action was to separate both the Police Chief who send the GOE team under those circumstances and with those orders, and the Chief for the Alto Paraná - Canindeyú - San Pedro police zone from their duties pending an internal investigation by the National Police, and at the same time, let the prosecutors and judges open an investigation and charge the assassins and other people responsible for the massacre. That is in the Constitution. What Lugo was doing was attributing to himself roles only the Judiciary was entitled to perform, a totally inconstitutional action.

10) "The Chamber cited the 15 June incident as well as insecurity, nepotism and a controversial land purchase"

Wrong. The accusations were five: a) a political rally, more precisely, an international political youth congress which took place, during several straight days, inside an Army base in 2009 and which was organized by Lugo's government, something totally illegal under the National Constitution, which prohibits the Armed Forces to enter into any political activity; b) a lack of decision to fight criminallity, specially the guerrilla group EPP, lead by Lugo's former students of a Seminary ran by this former bishop which is still a vocal supporter of Liberation Theology (one EPP man was killed but no one was ever taken to prison during his four-year mandate, in contrast to dozens captured and sentenced during the previous government); c) the sending of Army troops to SUPPORT an invasion of squatters in Ñacunday, followed by the official threat that all lands in the Alto Paraná Department will be measured again by the Army to find out lands stolen from the Government, while only the Judiciary could do that, not the President despite being Commander in Chief, etc.; d) The signature of the Ushuaia II Protocol, which allow foreing countries to cut all naval, land and air communication with Paraguay, cut energy supply, block trade and movement of people through the borders, and other measures if there was a threat to any President of an UNASUR country. In the whole American Continent (North, Center, South, the Caribbean) there are only two landlocked countries: Bolivia and Paraguay. The Ushuaia II Protocol has striking similarities with the Triple Alliance Secret Treaty signed, and with the promise to keep it secret, in 1865 by Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay uniting them in a war against Paraguay's "government, not its People" but which resulted in the biggest genocide in the American Continent, and the highest death toll in relation to percentage of a country's total population in the history of Warfare; figures range from 10% to 90%, with the normal value given as two-thirds of the population killed; in any case, a disproportionate high number to any military historian. The very next day after Lugo signed this protocol local newspapers carried the headline "Treason to our Fatherland!" and the like; e) the disastrous police planning, from the Ministry below, of the Curuguaty eviction, and the impossible-to-understand "investigation" that Lugo ordered in the aftermath, promoting the people directly involved to higher ranks and assembling this illegal "special commission" to "find the truth", a non-existent legal mechanism in Paraguay which meant nothing less than by-passing the Judiciary.

11) "After the impeachment was endorsed by the Supreme Court of Paraguay and by the country's electoral court"

Lugo's lawyers asked for inconstitutionallity in two separate occasions since. Both were rejected as the trial was for political responsabilities, not for crimes and felonies. Under the Constitution, only the National Congress can judge political responsabilities. This differs from the Brazilian system and the United States of America's system of impeachment, for instance. The Congress is much more powerful in Paraguay. The Supreme Tribunal of Electoral Justice stated that Lugo's successor, Federico Franco, is the legitimate President of Paraguay after the impeachment, as he was elected jointly with Lugo. Federico Franco was sworn in not in 2012, but in 2008, one minute after Lugo, so the act on 22 June 2012 was only protocollary. Federico Franco was automatically the new President of the Republic of Paraguay the very moment the President of the Senate read the result of the voting condemning Lugo.

12) "Leonel Fernández of the Dominican Republic announced that they would not recognize Franco as president"

Dominican Republic did not condemned Paraguay in the OAS. That's the current situation.

13) "Lugo's removal has drawn comparisons[by whom?] to the ouster of Honduras's Manuel Zelaya in 2009; like the ouster of Lugo, it was defended as legal and constitutional while being denounced as a coup across the Western Hemisphere's political spectrum.[20]"

The ouster of Honduras' Manuel Zelaya in 2009 was compared to Lugo's impeachment by the OAS and they concluded they were two very different things: "The former WAS a coup d'Etat" as Secretary General Insulza said during the OAS Assembly to the review of the report of the fact-finding mission to Paraguay. The written report clearly stated that the Paraguayan Constitution was followed step by step, no law was broken, the military played no role, all national institutions are functioning with normallity, the economy is stable, there are no civil unrests, nobody is in jail, Lugo and his supporters do politics normally within the country with no restrictions,etc.

It is hard to say that "there was an interruption of the democratic process" when the Legislative and the Judiciary stay the same and the only thing that changed is that the vice president was promoted to president in a manner specified by the Constitution.

14) "Mercosur suspended Paraguay, and Ecuador has said it may invoke UNASUR's democratic clause, which could lead to the expulsion of Paraguay from both bodies."

Ecuador said nonsense. The only democratic clause they can invoke is the Ushuaia II Protocol, that was ratified only by a minority of countries (nine ratifications are needed) so it is unenforceable against ANY country in South America, nor any country can invoke it because it has not yet entered into force in any part of the Continent. Paraguay requested to UNASUR to point out under which article of which treaty are they being suspended and received no reply. MERCOSUR suspended Paraguay under Article V of the Ushuaia I Protocol, but they leaped over Article IV, which demands that the country in question must be consulted before any sanction be imposed. As a Congressman in Uruguay said: "Paraguay was heard for zero hours, zero minutes and zero seconds" to defend itself. President Mujica's now infamous reply: "Politics is above Legality".

15) "The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on 23 June issued"

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights condemned the Paraguayan Congress faster than the Paraguayan Congress condemned Lugo. The Paraguayan Supreme Court of Justice rejected two appeals by Lugo's attorneys. Only now the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has the floor. By the way, Lugo's attorneys haven't gone to San José de Costa Rica yet, although they have said they would go if the Paraguayan Supreme Court does not rule in their favor. On the other hand, Federico Franco requested an analysis to go to the International Court of Justice in The Hague but the estimate was that the case will cost them US$ 3 million and the ruling will come after he leaves office. But Franco said that if the situation with their neighbors does not improve in the coming months Paraguay should go to The Hague against Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay.

16) "On 26 June Reporters without Borders raised concerns about possible censorship of TV Pública Paraguay following the impeachment trial."

An employee from the vice-president office went to the Public TV and requested a copy of the programming schedule. He specifically asked about a certain program, "Open Microphone", where microphones are placed on sidewalks and anyboody can say whatever they want about whatever they want. Marcelo Martinessi, Public TV director, released a video tape showing the intrusion by this man and called it intimidatory. The man confirmed later that he entered the Public TV building and requested the programming schedule. In the video Martinessi is asking this man why he entered without proper clearence, and the other replied "because I called you by phone five times and you didn't reply" and then asked "who is your secretary?" and then looked around. The man asked if the programming schedule would suffer any alteration and Martinessi promised that it wouldn't. Then "Open Microphone" began and stayed on the air for 48 uninterrumpted hours. A pro Lugo crowd gathered in front of it and about 1000 people paraded insulting Franco, the Congress, genetically-modified food, etc. A couple of anti Lugo demonstrators tried to participate too but they were booed by the crowd. A pro Lugo protester said they were "symbolically taking over" the Public TV building. Half a dozen policemen lined in front of the main entrance in order to keep the crowd out. The next day only two policemen were watching the building, from a distance of about a block away as seen on Public TV. On Sunday morning the open radiospectrum signal was lost for 26 minutes due to a black-out in the neighborhood were the main transmitter is located, but no loss of signal occurred in the cable TV channel nor the studio ceased to operate. Marcelo Martinessi resigned after a few days and he was replaced by the Director of National Radio. She held both directorships while a new permanent director was found. At around this time "Open Microphone" returned to its normal one-hour, early-evening slot, but now two microphones were placed: one in front of the building for the pro Lugo demonstrators and another in front of the National Congresss building for the anti Lugo crowd. Fernando Lugo and all of his aides are freely talking to any news media they want to talk to, both national and international, the go up and down, in and out the country, they boo President Franco when he goes to the park to ride his bicycle, they established their "resistence" headquarters just 50 m away from the Presidential Residence where Lugo lived for the past four years and now his former vice president is living, their speeches even appear in the same media outlets they say conspired against Lugo, Ricardo Canese, secretary general of Lugo's political movement continues to be a columnist in ABC Color, a newspaper he calls "lier", etc. Nobody is in jail and nobody has been fired from anywhere.

Aldo L (talk) 08:24, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Interesting, but if you want to change/update the article, you need to provide reliable sources to back up the above. Rd232 ^talk 15:51, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Exactly. That's another thing to improve. There are reliable sources all over the WWW. Aldo L (talk) 15:30, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Aldo L , thank you very much for your contribution to the talk page. You are obviously very well-read and knowledgable on the subject. It would be great if you could incorporate your analysis into the article--like you have done on this talk page, but with reliable and preferrably firsthand sources (i.e. the Paraguayan Constitution, the Paraguayan Supreme Court ruling, the Paraguayan Congressional impeachment proceedings, etc. etc. etc.). The article could be much better if you updated it. --Lacarids (talk) 19:09, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Impeachment and acquittal of Andrew Johnson which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 01:30, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 31 May 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No clear consensus for move after 1 relisting. Personal comment: consider the page Impeachment of Renato Corona, which resulted in a removal, but the title does not contain "removal". (non-admin closure) — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 05:01, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

---

Impeachment of Fernando Lugo → Impeachment and removal of Fernando Lugo – Now that the central discussion is archived, we should look at this and others individually. According to the article, Fernando Lugo was impeached and then removed from office. The proposed title should reflect that. George Ho (talk) 10:24, 31 May 2016 (UTC) -- Relisting. Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:50, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

• Support. If anything, the removal is more important than the impeachment. —  AjaxSmack  21:47, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

• Comment Playing devil's advocate, what does "removal" mean in this context? Maybe Impeachment and removal from office of Fernando Lugo would be a better title. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 18:03, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
  • What about Impeachment and replacement of Fernando Lugo, AjaxSmack and Lugnuts? George Ho (talk) 23:29, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
    • If a reader doesn't know who Fernando Lugo is, neither "removal" nor "replacement" will be clear. However, it is not the job of the title to paraphrase the entire article. I prefer "removal" to "replacement" as the action taken was to remove Lugo and the replacement came automatically under Article 227. —  AjaxSmack  05:18, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose – All such "Impeachment of…" articles should only state the name of the person involved. In articles about legal cases, we don't show the outcome in the title, just the names of accusators and defendants, see Roe v. Wade, Trial of Michael Jackson, etc. — JFG ^talk 09:25, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose: there's no need to add the result of the impeachment in the title. DaltonCastle (talk) 00:19, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Impeachment of Fernando Lugo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130928065657/http://www.cronica.com.py/online/articulo/2007-lugo-creo-una-comision-civil-para-investigar-masacre-en-curuguaty.html to http://www.cronica.com.py/online/articulo/2007-lugo-creo-una-comision-civil-para-investigar-masacre-en-curuguaty.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120619064001/http://www.lanacion.com.py/articulo/76504-ruben-candia-amarilla-es-el-nuevo-ministro-del-interior.html to http://www.lanacion.com.py/articulo/76504-ruben-candia-amarilla-es-el-nuevo-ministro-del-interior.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:38, 12 November 2017 (UTC)