How do the new Honduran “charter cities” differ from those of Romer?

by on September 19, 2012 at 2:09 am in Current Affairs, Law | Permalink

Here is a very useful article and interview, excerpt:

Segundo, nuestro modelo donde los residentes siguen el acceso a las mejores leyes sin ser gobernados por extranjeros es mucho más respetuoso de la autonomía local y soberanía del país.

Tercero, aunque al final será el gobernador, que será hondureño, quien decidirá qué sistemas legales estarán disponibles en la RED, proponemos que los hondureños sean permitidos a decidir usar ley hondureña en sus contratos si la prefieren a los otros sistemas que proveeremos.

De esta forma, nuestra visión es simplemente expandir otros mecanismos legales aplicados a los contratos y no restringir el derecho a las leyes de Honduras y no estamos de acuerdo con imponer un sistema legal extranjero sin que la persona pueda personalmente adherirse a él.

La diferencia final entre nuestro modelo y el de Romer es que el de MGK no depende de una concesión de tierra por parte del Gobierno de Honduras.

Fewer concessions to foreigners and foreign laws, for a start.  More corporatist.  For the pointer I thank M.

CarlC September 19, 2012 at 4:47 am

Or more importantly: How do they differ from those of Cromer?
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/08/from-cromer-to-romer-and-back-again.html

context? September 19, 2012 at 5:50 am

Some context please? Which new honduran “charter cities”? What happened to romers charter city?

ad*m September 19, 2012 at 9:19 am

Ook Nieuw Amsterdam, wat nu New York is, had voor 1924 eenzelfde status, en was opgezet als een commerciele onderneming. Niets nieuws dus, zoals ook al aangestipt door CarlC.

Heel effectief, een meertalig blog, dat houdt het riff-raff er maar buiten.

Alan September 19, 2012 at 9:41 am

I realized Google Translate gives a relatively accurate summation of this excerpt, but in case anyone doesn’t wish to bother with that, here’s my quick stab at a translation:

Secondly, our model where residents retain access to major laws without being governed by foreigners is much more respectful of the local autonomy and sovereignty of the country.

Thirdly, even though it will be a governor, who will be Honduran, that will decide what legal systems will be available in the RED, we propose that Hondurans be permitted to decide to use Honduran law in their contracts if they prefer it to the other systems we provide.

Thus, our vision is simply to expand other legal mechanisms that can be applied to contracts and not to restrict the right to Honduran laws and we do not agree with imposing a foreign legal system to which a person cannot personally adhere.

The final difference between our model and Romer’s is that the MGK’s does not depend on a land grant by the government of Honduras.

Frank September 20, 2012 at 10:29 pm

We’re too educated and worldly to make use of such translations. Please see yourself out.

Polly Glott September 19, 2012 at 11:41 am

Crowdsource the translation for this post at http://polly.glott.org/?p=75.

Tobias September 19, 2012 at 11:55 am

mejor means better, not major. So it’s “access to better laws”.

freethinker September 19, 2012 at 9:31 pm

Thanks for the translation Alan. And Tyler, not everyone can be a polyglot like you. Please do think of providing a translation next time!

freethinker September 19, 2012 at 9:34 pm

All the translations start with “secondly”. What about the first point?

RC September 23, 2012 at 4:12 pm

The first point:
“la primera es que nuestro modelo está diseñado de la misma manera que lo están las empresas de modelo de emprendimiento de Silicon Valley: empezamos en pequeño y cuando aseguramos que funciona lo hacemos crecer. Este es el modelo que utilizaron Google, Apple, Microsoft y Facebook.”

Meaning: start small and scale it up later, just like internet companies do.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: