The creation of the International Commission against Corruption and Impunity in Honduras (CICIH), a key campaign promise of President Xiomara Castro, has been delayed yet again after the memorandum of understanding with the United Nations was extended for the fifth time. The announcement, made this week, aligns with the absence of developments in the National Congress regarding the approval of constitutional reforms crucial for the anti-corruption initiative’s operation.
The deadlock has sparked renewed criticism from multiple areas of civil society and the international community, who see the delay as an indication of declining governmental dedication to combating impunity. The absence of legislative agreement, especially regarding the removal of parliamentary immunity, is hindering the successful setup of the CICIH, even after a second official proposal was sent to the UN in September 2024.
Institutional and social reactions
The executive branch has consistently expressed its readiness to create the commission, highlighting advancements in discussions with the United Nations. Nonetheless, the prerequisites for its execution rely on legal and constitutional changes that need endorsement by Congress, where adequate backing has not been obtained.
In reaction to the recent extension, key sectors have voiced their displeasure with how the process has been managed.
A National Party congresswoman described the renewal as “a blow to the people who believed in the promise of justice,” reflecting the unrest within the political opposition. Meanwhile, organizations such as the Association for a More Just Society (ASJ), Transparency International, and the Bar Association have called for an end to the institutional blockade that is preventing the project from moving forward.
Challenges in politics and public fatigue
The process to establish the CICIH faces multiple obstacles at the political level. Among these are the structural reforms that would involve the removal of legislative protections considered by social actors to be an obstacle to the effective fight against corruption. The lack of political will in Congress has been pointed out by various actors as one of the main causes of the stalemate.
Over two years into Castro’s leadership, various civil organizations and community groups criticize the discrepancy between early promises and actual measures taken. These groups highlight that the continuous delay of crucial resolutions has diminished trust in the administration and the institutional framework as a whole.
Calls for action and international pressure
The renewed memorandum of understanding does not include a clear date for the establishment of the CICIH, which, according to international observers, could jeopardize the country’s credibility in terms of international cooperation. The perception of immobility has generated skepticism among external actors, which could translate into negative effects for the economic and technical support that Honduras receives to strengthen its democratic institutions.
Considering this situation, multiple perspectives emphasize the pressing necessity to move forward by promptly endorsing the essential reforms, enabling the conclusion of a definitive agreement with the UN. These measures, they assert, would not only initiate a strategy to tackle corruption but also demonstrate a dedication to transparency and responsibility.
Unpredictable institutional perspective
The extended duration of setting up the CICIH underscores the fundamental challenges Honduras encounters in creating an autonomous and efficient framework. The continuous presence of legal barriers, along with the absence of political agreement, has stalled a key initiative intended to address impunity in the nation.
The situation underscores the friction between international pledges by the executive branch and the domestic legislative dynamics, alongside the difficulty of fulfilling political pledges with tangible structural changes. Simultaneously, the nation lacks an international framework to probe into major cases, casting doubt on the viability of institutional actions against corruption in the near and long term.