_-_copia.jpg?w=800&resize=800,500&ssl=1 "CNE Honduras")
As November 2025 approaches, the general elections in Honduras are causing growing concern in various sectors. There is an apparent intention on the part of the LIBRE Party to concentrate power over the National Electoral Council (CNE), a key body in the administration and supervision of the electoral process. Simultaneously, the role of the Armed Forces (FF. AA.) in the elections is causing alarm, with accusations of interference during the primary elections.
The National Electoral Council, which ensures transparent and fair voting processes, is being closely observed because its substitute members are believed to cater to powerful political agendas, especially those of the current government. This situation may lead to the removal of the main council members, aiming to influence the electoral council’s impartiality. There are concerns regarding possible interference in party accreditation, vote tallying, and the verification of outcomes.
Potential influence over the CNE and dangers to voting transparency
Figures from the opposition voice unease regarding the potential tampering with the CNE to secure the ongoing political agenda of the LIBRE Party. Claims involve meddling with the voter registry and counting oversight, leading to a climate of skepticism. The predicament is worsened by accusations of internal cheating in the LIBRE Party primaries, doubts about the misappropriation of government resources, and a general lack of trust in electoral bodies.
Should these cautions come to fruition, Honduras may encounter a post-election turmoil with significant impacts on political stability. Both domestic and global entities have called for enhanced autonomy of the CNE and greater openness in the voting process. Doubts about the potential for fair elections, with an electoral commission seen as influenced, create uncertainty regarding the future government’s legitimacy.
Increasing concern about the military’s involvement in the voting process
Concurrently, allegations have been made against the military by the opposition, claiming disruptions during the preliminary voting process. Alleged issues included delays in providing election materials, intimidating military presence at certain voting sites, restricted entry to voting locations, and halted electoral transport in opposition territories. These events, noted by monitors, spur concerns about the potential militarization of the voting procedure.
The growth in the involvement of the military in civilian matters, encouraged by the ruling party, is seen as a strategy to bolster political dominance. This scenario provokes concerns regarding the neutrality of the military, whose constitutional duty in safeguarding electoral processes is undermined by lack of transparency and political meddling. Both the electoral commission and global monitors are called upon to insist on impartiality and conduct strict oversight. It is cautioned that a potentially partial intervention by the military might lead to a democratic upheaval, casting uncertainty over the fairness of elections and the conduct of institutions tasked with upholding peace amid political tension.