Growing doubts about the Armed Forces’ role in the 2025 general elections

With under five months remaining before the general elections in Honduras, the involvement of the Armed Forces (FF. AA.) in the electoral proceedings remains a topic of discussion. Their constitutional duty is to ensure the security, safekeeping, and transportation of election materials, as well as the safeguarding of polling locations. However, this role is encountering increasing scrutiny, driven by recent decisions and a backdrop of institutional skepticism.

Institutional statements and official commitments

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 Department of Defense has reiterated that the military will operate in accordance with the directives of the National Electoral Council (CNE), as mandated by the Constitution. Concerning this matter, during the election phase, the Armed Forces are required to detach themselves functionally from the executive branch to concentrate solely on their duty of protecting the electoral 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 conflicts and potential for political influence

The debate has also permeated the official rhetoric. Analysts note that groups aligned with the government have tried to downplay the role of the armed forces in the logistical mishaps of March, pushing a story meant to protect the reputation of the military entity. This viewpoint has surfaced alongside increasing skepticism towards the CNE, whose technical prowess and authority have been questioned regarding its management of the election schedule and its ties 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.