translations are respectable. When I went looking for the Honduran Constitution I found it in Spanish. What I didn't find in it was clarity. However, I will repeat what I said, it appears that the Honduran Supreme Court ordered the arrest of President Zelaya and ordered the army to make the arrest. Since, the Presidential Guarsd is part of the Army, it sees prudent to order the army to do so rather than the police who are much less competent and disciplined.

Part of the debate here is over the definition of a coup. It appears that you are arguing that any time the head of govt of a state is arrested by the armed forces and forced out of office it is a coup d'etat. But is it a coup when the armed forces are carrying out the lawful orders of another branch of govt? Based on the information available, this is what appears to have happened. If so, then I am not willing to call it a a coup or any kind of illegal transer fo power. What gives us the right or duty to interpret the Honduran Constitution? Seems to me that we generally grant that authority to the courts of the land and the highest court in HO is its Supreme Court which ordered the action taken.