Honduras
Executive Summary
Honduras is a constitutional, multiparty republic. The country last held national and local elections in November 2017. Voters elected Juan Orlando Hernandez of the National Party as president for a four-year term beginning January 2018. International observers generally recognized the elections as free but disputed the fairness and transparency of the results.
Civilian authorities at times did not maintain effective control over the security forces.
Human rights issues included reports of arbitrary and unlawful killings; complaints of torture; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest or detention; killings of and threats to media members by criminal elements; criminalization of libel, although no cases were reported; widespread government corruption; and threats and violence against indigenous, Afro-descendent communities and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) persons.
The government took steps to prosecute and punish officials who committed abuses. Impunity existed in many cases, however, as evidenced by lengthy judicial processes, few convictions of perpetrators, and failures to prosecute intellectual authors of crimes.
Organized criminal elements, including local and transnational gangs and narcotics traffickers, were significant perpetrators of violent crimes and committed acts of homicide, extortion, kidnapping, torture, human trafficking, intimidation, and other threats and violence directed against human rights defenders, judicial authorities, lawyers, the business community, journalists, bloggers, women, and members of vulnerable populations.
Section 4. Corruption and Lack of Transparency in Government
The law provides for criminal penalties for corruption by officials, but authorities did not implement the law effectively, and officials continued to engage in corrupt practices with impunity. There were numerous reports of government corruption during the year. The government took steps to address corruption at high levels in government agencies, including arresting and charging members of congress, judges, prosecutors, sitting and former senior officials, mayors and other local authorities, and police officers. Anticorruption efforts continued to lag and remained an area of concern, as well as the government’s ability to protect justice operators, such as prosecutors and judges.
Corruption: The Public Ministry’s anticorruption unit (UFECIC) made several announcements of case investigations, including against former first lady Rosa Elena Bonilla de Lobo, spouse of former president Porfirio Lobo; the “fe de erratas” case against two members of congress accused of altering legislation; and the “Network of Congresspersons” case, in which five officials were accused of diverting public funds. UFECIC announced a fourth case in June, named “Pandora,” in which 38 individuals, including a former secretary of agriculture and several members of congress, were accused of fraud, abuse of authority, misuse of public funds, and other corruption-related crimes.
On February 22, the CNA presented five of its highest-profile cases to the public, citing several public administration and elected officials, including a Supreme Court judge, a congressman, and former first lady Bonilla de Lobo. Following the announcement the CNA reported harassment campaigns and threats.
MACCIH, the CNA, and civil society organizations continued to press for the passage of legislation to combat corruption, but most legislative efforts stalled in congress.
Financial Disclosure: Public officials are subject to financial disclosure law but did not always comply. The law mandates that the Supreme Auditing Tribunal monitor and verify disclosures. The tribunal published its reports on its website and cited the names of public officials who did not comply with disclosure law. The Public Ministry’s Campaign Financing Unit, created in June 2017, conducted audits of 397 candidates, focusing on those who won their bids for election. The unit reported that 76 percent of candidates for public office reported on all campaign expenditures and that four cases were referred to the Public Ministry for investigation.
Section 5. Governmental Attitude Regarding International and Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Violations of Human Rights
A wide variety of domestic and international human rights groups generally operated without government restriction, investigating and publishing their findings on human rights cases. Government officials were somewhat cooperative and responsive to their views. Human rights organizations criticized government officials for lack of access and responsiveness.
The United Nations or Other International Bodies: Some civil society organizations criticized the government for failing to comply with, or inadequately complying with, rulings by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and protection measures ordered by the court and the IACHR.
Government Human Rights Bodies: A semiautonomous commissioner for human rights served as an ombudsman and investigated complaints of human rights abuses. With offices throughout the country, the ombudsman received cases that otherwise may not have risen to national attention. An independent Ministry of Human Rights was established in January and, despite operational challenges from its recent inception, has served as an effective advocate for human rights within the government. The Public Ministry’s Office of the Special Prosecutor for Human Rights handled cases involving charges of human rights abuses by government officials. In March the Public Ministry also created the Special Prosecutor’s Office for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, Journalists, Social Communicators, and Justice Officials. The Human Rights Committee is in the congress. The Ministries of Security and Defense both have human rights offices that investigated alleged human rights abuses and coordinated human rights-related activities with the Ministry of Human Rights.