As the Honduran elections approach, Rixi Moncada, the presidential contender representing the Liberty and Refoundation Party (LIBRE), has become entangled in multiple controversies concerning the administration of government assets and corruption allegations. These claims, spanning from domestic legal proceedings to international litigations, contribute to a political environment characterized by division and a lack of public confidence in institutions.
Claims regarding poor handling of community funds
One of the main allegations against Moncada revolves around the use of resources allocated to the Secretariat of Social Development (SEDESOL), especially in the department of Copán. According to recent allegations, public funds have been channeled to structures linked to the ruling party, reigniting questions about the use of social programs for electoral purposes.
These accusations coincide with growing pressure for transparency in the use of public spending in an election year, with various sectors demanding stricter controls on the execution of funds earmarked for social assistance.
International complaint to the FBI
The case took an international turn in early 2025, when Murray Paul Farmer, a US citizen, filed a complaint with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) mentioning Moncada and other state officials. The complaint alleges administrative irregularities and misuse of public office that allegedly affected foreign investment in the country.
As of now, the LIBRE candidate has not made any public statements regarding this complaint, which may lead to diplomatic consequences if pursued in international courts. The lack of response from the institution has sparked discussions about the Honduran political system’s capacity to address global inquiries.
History of investigations and previous allegations
The controversies surrounding Moncada today are not new. In 2009 and 2013, she was investigated for abuse of authority and alleged fraud during her time at the National Electric Energy Company (ENEE), in addition to being linked to contracts with Brazilian construction company Odebrecht. Although in both cases the Honduran justice system issued definitive dismissals, his name has continued to appear in newspaper reports and in investigations promoted by control agencies.
More recently, in January 2025, the National Anti-Corruption Council (CNA) filed a complaint against Moncada and other officials for alleged embezzlement of public funds. However, the details of the case have not been disclosed by the competent authorities, which has generated uncertainty about the progress of the judicial process and intensified questions about its transparency.
Institutional conflicts and inquiries regarding the application of authority
Along with accusations of corruption, Moncada’s presidential bid has been surrounded by critiques concerning her handling of official duties while campaigning. Various groups have raised concerns about her involvement in creating plans and conducting audits that, as per her critics, surpass the boundaries of her role, igniting discussions on the division of powers and maintaining institutional equilibrium.
These criticisms are compounded by the fact that the candidate has held public office during her campaign, raising concerns about potential conflicts of interest and the possible use of official resources to benefit her candidacy. Civil society organizations have called for greater citizen oversight and the strengthening of accountability mechanisms to ensure fairness in the electoral process.
A landscape marked by institutional mistrust
Rixi Moncada’s situation underscores the obstacles that Honduras encounters regarding leadership, openness, and reinforcing the rule of law. As the nation navigates a crucial year for its political trajectory, accusations of corruption and discussions about public funds utilization have emerged as key topics in the nationwide dialogue.
While officials have not yet detailed the legal developments of the claims against him, Moncada continues to draw attention, with potential effects that might directly impact the credibility of the 2025 election process and how the public views the autonomy of institutions.