Ecuador President dissolves parliament

[DotAndBuzz]

www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-65624035

Short version: he was at risk of being removed at his impeachment trial, so he took the nuclear option and dissolved parliament. He now will rule solely by decree for 6 months until a new election is held. 

"Ecuador's influential confederation of indigenous groups, Conaie, has called the move "dictatorial" and convened a meeting for later on Wednesday.
Mass protests organised by Conaie, including the blockade of key highways, have paralysed parts of the country before.
The opposition Social Christian Party has also questioned whether the dissolution of the National Assembly is constitutional.
Its leader said he would ask Ecuador's constitutional court to suspend Mr Lasso's decree.
But Ecuador's military and police have backed the president, describing the move as constitutional."

 Their president is conservative, sounds like parliament is split, but enough voted for the impeachment that it was a legit risk that he could be ousted. Military is standing by the president.

Anyone have more insight into this?

[meganew]

I feel like our conservative leaders are happily taking notes here

[pixy0stix]

No insight, but I think this is the type of reign that Trump wanted.

[sugarbear1]

I have what might be a really dumb question.
Let's say the military did NOT back this move (in Ecuador or in the U.S.). Who decides that? And then what? The head of the military -- who, at least in the US, is a member of the president's cabinet -- is now the opposition leader?

[StrawberryBlondie]

May 17, 2023 11:34:54 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

No insight, but I think this is the type of reign that Trump wanted.

At *best* he definitely wouldn't have minded.

[Deleted]

May 17, 2023 13:02:47 GMT -5 sugarbear1 said:

I have what might be a really dumb question.
Let's say the military did NOT back this move (in Ecuador or in the U.S.). Who decides that? And then what? The head of the military -- who, at least in the US, is a member of the president's cabinet -- is now the opposition leader?

The US military answers to the constitution, not the president. Generally speaking we follow the president’s lawful orders. If there was a question about whether or not something is constitutional, it would go to the Supreme Court. But at least in the US the military doesn’t really have authority to act against Us citizens anyway, so if there was a coup the military wouldn’t really be involved. The National Guard could though, and they act on the orders of their governor, but they also have to do what’s constitutional.

The military is actually quite apolitical, by design.

[wawa]

May 17, 2023 16:14:13 GMT -5 @villainv said:

May 17, 2023 13:02:47 GMT -5 sugarbear1 said:

I have what might be a really dumb question.
Let's say the military did NOT back this move (in Ecuador or in the U.S.). Who decides that? And then what? The head of the military -- who, at least in the US, is a member of the president's cabinet -- is now the opposition leader?

The US military answers to the constitution, not the president. Generally speaking we follow the president’s lawful orders. If there was a question about whether or not something is constitutional, it would go to the Supreme Court. But at least in the US the military doesn’t really have authority to act against Us citizens anyway, so if there was a coup the military wouldn’t really be involved. The National Guard could though, and they act on the orders of their governor, but they also have to do what’s constitutional.

The military is actually quite apolitical, by design.

I mean.  A coup is illegal, sort of by definition?  so we're already assuming the rule of law is out the window in the situation, no?

It's giving me the giggles that your comment reads to me that if shit totally hit the fan and there was an usuperation of the leadership of the country, the military would just...sit it out?  Look toward the supreme court and be like, "hey, you guys seeing this?" 

I want to say that historically, failed coups are often failed if they get past the conspiracy stage because the military in the given country decides to tell the new leaders to fuck right off but i'm far from a coup expert.  that might not be true at all.  plenty of people doing a coup and opposition leaders in historical coups were military leaders though, so yeah, sugarbear, that's probably about what would happen.

[Deleted]

May 17, 2023 18:36:47 GMT -5 wawa said:

May 17, 2023 16:14:13 GMT -5 @villainv said:

The US military answers to the constitution, not the president. Generally speaking we follow the president’s lawful orders. If there was a question about whether or not something is constitutional, it would go to the Supreme Court. But at least in the US the military doesn’t really have authority to act against Us citizens anyway, so if there was a coup the military wouldn’t really be involved. The National Guard could though, and they act on the orders of their governor, but they also have to do what’s constitutional.

The military is actually quite apolitical, by design.

I mean.  A coup is illegal, sort of by definition?  so we're already assuming the rule of law is out the window in the situation, no?

It's giving me the giggles that your comment reads to me that if shit totally hit the fan and there was an usuperation of the leadership of the country, the military would just...sit it out?  Look toward the supreme court and be like, "hey, you guys seeing this?" 

I want to say that historically, failed coups are often failed if they get past the conspiracy stage because the military in the given country decides to tell the new leaders to fuck right off but i'm far from a coup expert.  that might not be true at all.  plenty of people doing a coup and opposition leaders in historical coups were military leaders though, so yeah, sugarbear, that's probably about what would happen.

I mean, yeah, we would sit it out. The US military doesn’t have any authority to act in domestic situations because of the Posse Comitatus Act. And we’re not one of the three arms of political power in the US, so we can’t really act in any kind of political capacity. The founders did good on this one.