Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
09TEGUCIGALPA700
2009-08-05 00:03:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Cable title:
TFH01: HONDURAN CONGRESS KEEPS AMNESTY DOOR OPEN
how-toVZCZCXRO4766 OO RUEHAO RUEHCD RUEHGA RUEHGD RUEHHA RUEHHO RUEHMC RUEHMT RUEHNG RUEHNL RUEHQU RUEHRD RUEHRG RUEHRS RUEHTM RUEHVC DE RUEHTG #0700 2170003 ZNY CCCCC ZZH O 050003Z AUG 09 FM AMEMBASSY TEGUCIGALPA TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 0325 INFO RUEHWH/WESTERN HEMISPHERIC AFFAIRS DIPL POSTS IMMEDIATE RUEAHND/COMJTF-B SOTO CANO HO IMMEDIATE RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC IMMEDIATE RUMIAAA/CDR USSOUTHCOM MIAMI FL IMMEDIATE RUEAHND/CDRJTFB SOTO CANO HO IMMEDIATE RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC IMMEDIATE RULGPSU/COMSOCSOUTH IMMEDIATE RHEFDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE RUEIDN/DNI WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC IMMEDIATE RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC IMMEDIATE RUMIAAA/USSOUTHCOM MIAMI FL IMMEDIATE
C O N F I D E N T I A L TEGUCIGALPA 000700
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/03/2019
TAGS: PGOV KDEM HO
SUBJECT: TFH01: HONDURAN CONGRESS KEEPS AMNESTY DOOR OPEN
REF: A. TEGUCIGALPA 696
B. TEGUCIGALPA 692
C. TEGUCIGALPA 677
Classified By: Ambassador Hugo Llorens, reasons 1.4 (b and d)
C O N F I D E N T I A L TEGUCIGALPA 000700
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/03/2019
TAGS: PGOV KDEM HO
SUBJECT: TFH01: HONDURAN CONGRESS KEEPS AMNESTY DOOR OPEN
REF: A. TEGUCIGALPA 696
B. TEGUCIGALPA 692
C. TEGUCIGALPA 677
Classified By: Ambassador Hugo Llorens, reasons 1.4 (b and d)
1. (C) The congressional commission tasked with analyzing the
amnesty element of the San Jose Agreement presented their
assessment to Congress on August 3. In its report, the
commission stated that Congress has the legal authority to
grant amnesty for political crimes as described in the San
Jose Agreement, as long as a bill is presented to Congress
seeking such amnesty. The recommendation represents a
positive step toward acceptance of the agreement by the de
facto regime inasmuch as Congress has acknowledged it would
be legal to grant amnesty, an issue which many on the
commission had publicly questioned at first. This shift in
position was the result of a concerted effort by the Embassy
to sway opinions in favor of the Agreement.
2. (C) When the special commission was established to study
the legality of granting amnesty as part of the San Jose
Agreement, the prevailing opinion of commission members was
against the agreement (refs A and C). Embassy officers spoke
with every member of the commission, gauging opinions and
presenting the case in favor of the agreement. The
Ambassador also encouraged Micheletti team negotiators Vilma
Morales and Arturo Corrales (ref B) to explain the legal
basis for the amnesty to the commission members.
3. (C) Comment: In the meetings with Emboff, most commission
members were philosophically opposed to the concept of
amnesty, and expressed legal reasons to be against it (ref
C). Eventual acceptance by the commission of the legality of
amnesty is a signal that they did not want to be seen as
torpedoing the San Jose Agreement. Nonetheless, much work
remains to build the political will to accept the agreement
The commission stopped short of outright approval of the
amnesty, asserting congressional authority and noting that
first it would have to be presented as a bill to the full
Congress for approval. The commission also made a point of
highlighting that amnesty would be for political crimes only.
LLORENS
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/03/2019
TAGS: PGOV KDEM HO
SUBJECT: TFH01: HONDURAN CONGRESS KEEPS AMNESTY DOOR OPEN
REF: A. TEGUCIGALPA 696
B. TEGUCIGALPA 692
C. TEGUCIGALPA 677
Classified By: Ambassador Hugo Llorens, reasons 1.4 (b and d)
1. (C) The congressional commission tasked with analyzing the
amnesty element of the San Jose Agreement presented their
assessment to Congress on August 3. In its report, the
commission stated that Congress has the legal authority to
grant amnesty for political crimes as described in the San
Jose Agreement, as long as a bill is presented to Congress
seeking such amnesty. The recommendation represents a
positive step toward acceptance of the agreement by the de
facto regime inasmuch as Congress has acknowledged it would
be legal to grant amnesty, an issue which many on the
commission had publicly questioned at first. This shift in
position was the result of a concerted effort by the Embassy
to sway opinions in favor of the Agreement.
2. (C) When the special commission was established to study
the legality of granting amnesty as part of the San Jose
Agreement, the prevailing opinion of commission members was
against the agreement (refs A and C). Embassy officers spoke
with every member of the commission, gauging opinions and
presenting the case in favor of the agreement. The
Ambassador also encouraged Micheletti team negotiators Vilma
Morales and Arturo Corrales (ref B) to explain the legal
basis for the amnesty to the commission members.
3. (C) Comment: In the meetings with Emboff, most commission
members were philosophically opposed to the concept of
amnesty, and expressed legal reasons to be against it (ref
C). Eventual acceptance by the commission of the legality of
amnesty is a signal that they did not want to be seen as
torpedoing the San Jose Agreement. Nonetheless, much work
remains to build the political will to accept the agreement
The commission stopped short of outright approval of the
amnesty, asserting congressional authority and noting that
first it would have to be presented as a bill to the full
Congress for approval. The commission also made a point of
highlighting that amnesty would be for political crimes only.
LLORENS