Armed Forces’ involvement in the 2025 general elections under scrutiny

With less than five months to go before the general elections in Honduras, the participation of the Armed Forces (FF. AA.) in the electoral process continues to be a matter of debate. Their constitutional role is to guarantee the security, custody, and transport of electoral material, as well as the protection of polling stations, but this role is facing growing questions, fueled by recent rulings and a context of institutional mistrust.

Formal declarations and official pledges

Top military leaders have openly restated their commitment to the principles of neutrality outlined in the constitution and their backing of democratic values. General Roosevelt Hernández, speaking on behalf of the military hierarchy, emphasized the armed forces’ dedication to ensuring an electoral process that is “clean, transparent, and secure”, highlighting the non-political and non-opinionated character of the military entity.

The Ministry of Defense has also insisted that the Army will act under the orders of the National Electoral Council (CNE), as established by the Constitution. In this regard, during the electoral period, the Armed Forces must separate themselves operationally from the executive branch to focus exclusively on their mission of safeguarding the process.

Criticism for logistical failures and recent history

Although official announcements have been made, multiple sectors have expressed doubts about the Armed Forces’ capacity to ensure an efficient electoral process. During the primary elections conducted in March 2025, there were reports of delays lasting as long as five hours in the provision of electoral materials in major cities including San Pedro Sula and Tegucigalpa.

The logistical failures were attributed to both the military command and the defense minister, Rixi Moncada, sparking a wave of criticism from the opposition and civil society organizations.

Those occurrences have sparked renewed discussions regarding the military’s preparedness for election-related duties and have also raised inquiries about its impartiality. Certain experts caution that if the issues observed during the primary elections are not addressed, the November 30 event might encounter comparable challenges, potentially undermining public trust in the entities accountable for handling the democratic proceedings.

Institutional tensions and risk of politicization

The controversy has also reached the institutional discourse. Experts point out that sectors close to the ruling party have attempted to minimize the responsibility of the armed forces in the logistical errors of March, promoting a narrative aimed at preserving the image of the military institution. This stance has coincided with growing mistrust of the CNE, whose technical capabilities and leadership have been criticized for its handling of the electoral calendar and its relationship with the executive branch.

In this scenario, the responsibilities of the military grow increasingly sensitive. Despite their constitutional duty barring them from engaging in political discussions, their perceived neutrality is influenced by the political nature of the election discussions. Tensions are escalating with the election date nearing, within an atmosphere of division and skepticism towards democratic bodies.

A trial for the authenticity of elections

The participation of the Armed Forces in the November elections represents a critical point for the legitimacy of the Honduran electoral process. Although the Constitution assigns them a clear and defined operational role, the history of logistical failures and the crisis of confidence in the electoral system place the military institution in a complex position.

In a nation with significant political division and weak democratic establishments, the role of the military during the elections might heavily impact how legitimate the voting outcomes are seen. Clear operations and unwavering adherence to the constitutional obligations are crucial to prevent additional conflicts and maintain democratic stability in a pivotal election year.