The Libertad y Refundación (LIBRE) party, in power since 2022, faces new accusations of pushing through high-impact structural reforms without broad consultation or legislative transparency. The criticism comes amid growing political and institutional tension, with various sectors questioning the ruling party’s approach to advancing its agenda.
Inquiries regarding the legislative techniques of the ruling party
Various voices from the political, business, and civil society spheres have expressed concern about what they consider to be a strategy of legislative imposition by the ruling party. Under the leadership of President Xiomara Castro and with central figures such as Héctor Zelaya and National Congress President Luis Redondo, the LIBRE party has been accused of using mechanisms that allegedly circumvent due parliamentary process.
A highly debated scenario centers on the Tax Justice Law, a legislative proposal that carries notable fiscal consequences. Allegedly, this bill has progressed without publicly available technical reports or a comprehensive consultation with affected sectors. Furthermore, concerns have been raised that the law might be passed in expedited sessions, lacking formal affirmation of the related legislative documentation.
The lack of transparency in this type of procedure has been described by experts as a risk to democratic institutions. A constitutional analyst consulted pointed out that the use of “questionable, even illegal” methods to introduce structural reforms without political or technical support represents a direct threat to the rule of law.
Responses from the corporate sector and the political opposition
The Honduran Council of Private Enterprise (COHEP) has voiced worries about these actions, noting that they might undermine trust in the investment environment, domestically and globally. During a period when Honduras is experiencing financial difficulties, like joblessness and slow growth, the business sector holds that such legislative choices could worsen economic unpredictability.
The parliamentary opposition has raised concerns about irregularities as well. Opposition representatives assert that certain laws have been published in the official gazette La Gaceta without following the required procedures, like obtaining formal approval for legislative measures. They argue that this undermines the principle of legality that guides the operations of Congress and questions the validity of the reforms passed under these circumstances.
The tensions between the ruling party and the opposition, coupled with the distancing of key sectors such as the business community and civil society organizations, reflect a growing polarization in the management of legislative power, where political dialogue has been replaced by confrontation.
Institutional junctions and citizens’ contributions
The current scenario raises questions about the strength of the Honduran democratic system. The way in which legislative reforms are being managed reveals persistent tensions between the ruling party’s quest for structural transformation and the demand for legality, transparency, and participation expressed by other political and social actors.
Pressure from organized citizens, as well as constant scrutiny by the media and institutional observers, are emerging as key factors in containing legislative practices that could undermine the democratic framework. The lack of consensus on high-impact reforms not only fuels institutional mistrust, but also jeopardizes governance in a country marked by institutional fragility and a historical lack of cohesion between the branches of government.
In this setting, Honduras encounters the task of establishing systems for legislative debate and supervision that ensure the lawfulness of its procedures and the participation of social groups influenced by government policies, particularly concerning changes that affect the nation’s financial and economic framework.
