A little over four months before the general elections on November 30, Honduras is undergoing an institutional crisis marked by the concentration of power, tensions between state powers, and a growing climate of public mistrust. At the center of this situation is Manuel “Mel” Zelaya Rosales, former president and current general coordinator of the Libertad y Refundación (LIBRE) party, identified by various sectors as the main political strategist of the ruling party and a key figure in shaping the pre-election scenario.
Political control and institutional apparatus
Since his return to political life after the 2009 coup, Zelaya has built a power structure that goes beyond the party leadership. His influence extends to the executive branch led by his wife, President Xiomara Castro, to the National Congress, and to autonomous bodies such as the National Electoral Council (CNE), through the appointment of allies and family members to strategic positions.
Analysts and local media agree that this centralization of decision-making is a deliberate strategy by Zelaya aimed at consolidating LIBRE’s control over state institutions. Among the most recurrent criticisms is the selective use of public resources and mechanisms to favor party interests, which has raised questions about the democratic health of the country.
Challenges within the election commission and lack of public confidence
A primary cause of institutional strife is the CNE, with its autonomy being questioned due to internal stalemates, outside influences, and disagreements among its members. Opposition groups and civil organizations have raised concerns about the potential for the electoral process to be dominated by the ruling party, which heightens the likelihood of disputes, confrontations, and the weakening of democratic validity.
Groups affiliated with LIBRE, which have led demonstrations and blockades in support of the ruling party, have also been accused of coercing electoral authorities. The growing perception of institutional manipulation has led to a loss of confidence in the process, fueling a climate of polarization and discontent that could result in abstention, protests, or incidents of electoral violence.
Scandals, maneuvers, and internal disputes
Amid this situation, Zelaya’s entourage has been rocked by episodes that have weakened the ruling party’s image. The most recent, linked to the so-called “narco-video,” has led to the resignation of figures close to the former president and tensions within the government. Although Zelaya has sought to distance himself from these events, his role as a political operator has been key in negotiating internal agreements to prevent further fractures within LIBRE.
Even amid the challenges, Zelaya has succeeded in keeping the party united by building coalitions and resolving conflicts that endangered the governing party’s political agenda. This flexibility strengthens his position as a crucial leader for the ruling party’s governance, but it also subjects him to significant scrutiny regarding the present democratic landscape.
A key figure in the configuration of power
Zelaya’s trajectory from his ouster in 2009 to his current position reveals his ability to influence the national agenda and shape the country’s political dynamics. Founder of LIBRE and architect of its rise to power in 2021, he has played a central role in the party’s strategic decisions, even in contexts of crisis and confrontation with traditional sectors.
To opponents, Zelaya is seen as the primary hindrance to democratic bodies; to backers, he is viewed as a political figure who has challenged the established elites and advocated for a national rebuilding plan. This division reveals a significant split within Honduran society, where political personalities evoke both strong approval and disapproval.
A vague outlook before the voting period
Mel Zelaya’s position within Honduras’ political scene prompts inquiries regarding the nation’s institutional trajectory and the clarity of the forthcoming election procedures. The blend of centralized power, internal frictions among electoral entities, and controversies undermining public trust fosters a highly uncertain atmosphere.
With the electoral calendar advancing and political divisions growing, Honduras faces the challenge of ensuring a legitimate and credible process. The outcome of this stage will depend largely on the ability of institutional actors to resist pressure, restore public confidence, and ensure fair conditions for the democratic contest.
