Growing mistrust in Honduras over military and judicial election roles

In Honduras, as the general elections slated for November 30, 2025, draw closer, worries regarding the fairness of the voting process have heightened. Two primary points of contention have arisen: doubts about potential interference by the Public Prosecutor’s Office against the National Electoral Council (CNE) members and increasing skepticism about the Armed Forces’ role in safeguarding the democratic process.

There are reports that the Public Prosecutor’s Office is preparing formal charges against CNE councilors, which has caused alarm among political sectors and organizations defending democracy. It is alleged that this judicial process is politically motivated and directed against councilors who have expressed critical or independent positions toward the ruling party. The possible prosecution of CNE council members comes at a delicate time, when the electoral body must guarantee the impartial organization of the electoral process, the credibility of the results, and the confidence of political parties and citizens.

Risk of institutional control and mistrust

Such actions could weaken institutional independence and erode the people’s confidence in the electoral process. The opposition and civil society have expressed their concern, demanding investigations based on solid evidence and not on political reprisals. Calls have been made to the international community to speak out against any attempt to manipulate the CNE and to monitor the actions of the Public Prosecutor’s Office.

Simultaneously, distrust from the public and politicians regarding the role of the military as defenders of the democratic process has increased. Leaders from opposition parties, organizations from civil society, and independent experts have voiced worries about questionable dismissals and retirements within the military, the ideological and operational closeness between the executive authority and the Armed Forces, the active involvement of military personnel in civilian procedures and electoral activities, and the absence of transparency in how military operations are planned during the elections.

Fear of militarization and calls for vigilance

During the March primary elections, incidents were reported involving delays in the delivery of electoral materials and an unusual military presence at certain polling stations, which has increased fears of a militarization of the electoral process. There are concerns that the Armed Forces, under the influence of figures from the ruling party, will act as a tool to facilitate electoral fraud or repress citizen protests.

Increasing skepticism has prompted pressing demands for global entities to deploy observation teams and insist on assurances of military impartiality and procedural clarity. Civilian organizations have started forming social oversight networks to record potential misconduct or anomalies. The legitimacy of the November 30 election proceedings will rely on institutional behavior and public vigilance.