The scandal surrounding the Koriun Inversiones pyramid scheme, which has affected more than 35,000 people in Honduras, has escalated to the center of the political debate after questions were raised about figures close to the presidential circle. In particular, criticism has focused on the so-called “Zelaya family,” a term used by opposition sectors and citizen organizations to refer to officials with family or political ties to President Xiomara Castro and former President Manuel Zelaya.
Despite the fact that the Public Ministry has begun legal actions and the National Banking and Insurance Commission (CNBS) has taken steps like freezing accounts and carrying out some arrests, there is still significant doubt about the transparency and true extent of the investigations. The absence of detailed official information on why the fraudulent scheme was permitted to function for such an extended period has initiated new scrutiny for the bodies in charge of financial oversight and the judicial system.
Allegations against officials with political ties
Among the names mentioned in the public debate are Héctor Zelaya, private secretary to the president and son of former president Zelaya, and Attorney General Johel Zelaya. Both have held strategic positions since the beginning of the current administration and, according to various critical voices, may have the ability to influence institutional processes related to the Koriun case.
Such allegations arise within an environment characterized by division and increasing skepticism towards government bodies. While there is no public proof directly connecting the officials in question to the deception, the concerns raised suggest a potential absence of neutrality in their conduct and the selective management of their official duties.
Uncertainty regarding organizational effectiveness
The CNBS has been one of the institutions most criticized for its delayed response to the fraudulent operation, which managed to mobilize at least 428 million lempiras before being dismantled. The commission supported the government’s announcement to compensate those affected, although it did not present a technical or legal report explaining the conditions of this process or the causes of the failure of preventive controls.
On their end, the Public Prosecutor’s Office, under the leadership of Johel Zelaya, has succeeded in retrieving a portion of the money. Nonetheless, advancements in the investigation have lacked transparent and public communication to eliminate uncertainties regarding the involvement of state officials in either neglecting or potentially concealing irregularities.
Demands for transparency and independent oversight
Civil society organizations, analysts, and political actors have called for the establishment of an independent commission, either national or with international support, to investigate the facts and possible links between those responsible for the scheme and public officials. Demands include the publication of a detailed report clarifying the operational mechanisms of the scam, the identification of omissions in financial controls, and accountability for anyone involved, without exceptions based on kinship or political proximity.
Various civic groups have warned that the handling of the Koriun case could become a turning point for the country’s institutional credibility. “When the state prioritizes political payments over justice, the damage to institutional credibility is irreversible,” said a recent forum on transparency and the fight against corruption.
A turmoil that extends past the economic
Sixty days following the revelation of the case, the impact has extended beyond just economic issues. The belief that influential individuals might avoid facing legal consequences has heightened public doubt and sparked renewed discussions about the political manipulation of institutions.
The evolution of this process, the government’s actions, and the behavior of autonomous entities will shape not just the legal conclusion of the case, but also the degree of confidence that the people of Honduras have in their leaders amid a scenario of weak institutions and intense division. The primary demand, at this moment, is for an investigation that is free from intervention and includes assurances of transparency, as a basic requirement for sustaining the legitimacy of the legal system.
