The International Commission against Corruption and Impunity in Honduras (CICIH) will not form a part of Xiomara Castro’s achievements. Even though it was declared as a fundamental aspect of her administration’s agenda, the plan was not realized and is excluded from the ongoing presidential term, concluding in January 2026.
With this tacit renunciation of the project, the government closes a chapter that had generated significant expectations among the public regarding the fight against corruption. The road to the establishment of the CICIH was marked by successive delays, fruitless extensions, and stalled negotiations with the United Nations.
The acknowledgment of defeat, announced by the ex-Foreign Minister Enrique Reina, highlights a mix of reasons that, as he stated, include both policy barriers and external influences. Nonetheless, for different social groups, this reasoning is not enough.
The unfulfilled commitment that undermined confidence
Opinions associated with both civil society and the global community concur that the primary accountability is with the present government. According to process analysts and observers, the issue was not the absence of external factors, but rather the political resolve lacking from the executive to meet its obligations.
Viewed from this angle, the non-execution of the CICIH is not by chance nor a foregone conclusion, but rather a choice.
Juan Jiménez Mayor, past spokesperson for MACCIH, stated this, criticizing the government for not fulfilling a promise that had raised significant expectations. Gabriela Castellanos, leader of the National Anti-Corruption Council (CNA), also strongly criticized the ruling party, asserting that they used the CICIH as a campaign strategy without genuine plans to establish it.
A plan against corruption lacking institutional backing
The exit of the CICIH from the national arena impacts more than just administrative aspects. The absence of tangible advancements has heightened the belief that efforts to combat corruption are hindered by ineffective tools and a lack of government dedication. The executive’s trustworthiness concerning this matter is questioned as calls for openness and responsibility persist as critical.
With an institutional horizon that no longer contemplates the establishment of the international mechanism, Honduras is missing a significant opportunity to tackle impunity in a structural manner. The time remaining in the current administration makes any serious attempt to reverse this scenario unlikely, leaving citizens with an empty promise and no immediate alternative to compensate for the absence of the project.
Originally introduced as a representation of political change, it has ultimately turned into one more uncompleted promise, thereby diminishing the government’s rhetoric on combating corruption and creating further room for public skepticism.
