LIFE in Paraguay, landlocked in South America's sweltering heart, normally moves slowly, and well behind the times. The trappings of democracy arrived only in 1992, after 35 years of dictatorship under General Stroessner and the Colorado Party, and well after the rest of the continent. The Colorados, their creole fascism discarded but not erased, held on to power at successive elections.

The victory of Fernando Lugo (pictured) in 2008 promised a democratic breakthrough at last. A former bishop, President Lugo promised to help the poor and landless in a country marked by huge inequalities of race, income and land ownership. But in temporal matters the president never showed much skill. His nominal allies, let alone his Colorado opponents who retained a legislative majority, rarely let him govern. On June 21st and 22nd, accused of “poor performance of his duties” over a murky incident earlier this month in which six policemen and eleven landless protesters were killed, he was impeached in less than 36 hours, bundled out of office by 39 votes to four in the Senate, and replaced by his deputy and erstwhile ally, Federico Franco (see article).

Venezuela and Argentina said it was a coup; but it wasn't quite. The actions of Paraguay's Congress were legal and constitutional. Mr Lugo himself at first accepted his fate. Paraguayans have reacted calmly to it. Nevertheless, the manner in which he was kicked out was not democratic. Above all, he was given no time to organise his defence. He faced a summary trial worthy of Communist Cuba.

Mr Lugo thus follows Manuel Zelaya of Honduras in becoming only the second Latin American president since 2005 to be forced out before completing his term. Mr Zelaya was ousted by soldiers. The region, rightly, called that a coup, though it was also a conflict between a headstrong president and his foes in the legislature, who thwarted outsiders' attempts to restore Mr Zelaya. Part of the problem in Honduras was that the constitution made impeachment impossible. In Paraguay, it was too easy. This “express impeachment” marks a dangerous precedent in a region where democracy is still being consolidated, and where presidents often find themselves unpopular and lacking a majority in congress.

Inconsistent posturing does not strengthen democracy

In reaction to Mr Lugo's ejection, Brazil has joined with Argentina and Uruguay to bar Mr Franco from this week's meeting of the Mercosur trade block. Some talk of suspending Paraguay from the South American Union and even the Organisation of American States.

Instead of punishing Paraguay, South American governments would do better to help it get back on track by negotiating with Mr Franco to ensure that a presidential election due next April is free and fair—and held earlier. And if they want their protests to sound convincing, they need to be more consistent. Brazil called for economic sanctions over Honduras, where it had no real interest at stake, but has not done over Paraguay, where tens of thousands of Brazilians have farms and with which Brazil shares the giant Itaipu hydroelectric plant. Left-of-centre governments have been quick to condemn threats from the right against elected presidents, but not from their own side against democratic procedures. In breach of Venezuela's constitution, Hugo Chávez took partisan control of the judiciary and the armed forces. Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega stole a municipal election in 2008. But both men are welcomed in the region's councils. Until South America's governments deal even-handedly with abuses of the democratic process, their pious protests will sound like hypocrisy.