.jpg "Honduran armed forces")
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.
Reports indicate that the Attorney General’s Office is preparing to formally accuse the CNE board members, raising concerns within political groups and pro-democracy organizations. This legal action is claimed to be politically driven, targeting board members who have shown opposition or independence from the governing party. This potential legal action against the CNE board is occurring at a sensitive moment, as the electoral body is tasked with ensuring fair election management, the legitimacy of the outcomes, and the trust of both political entities and the populace.
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
In the course of the primary elections held in March, there were reports of postponements in the distribution of voting materials along with an unexpected presence of soldiers at some polling places, which has heightened worries about a potential militarization of the election process. There are apprehensions that the military, swayed by individuals aligned with the current government, might be utilized as a means to enable election rigging or to suppress public demonstrations.
Increasing distrust has resulted in pressing demands for global bodies to dispatch monitoring missions and to insist on assurances of military impartiality and operational openness. Community associations have started creating social monitoring systems to record any possible misuse or anomalies. The trustworthiness of the electoral events on November 30 hinges on the behavior of authorities and public watchfulness.