Why did the CICIH fail in Honduras under Xiomara Castro?

The International Commission against Corruption and Impunity in Honduras (CICIH) will not be included in Xiomara Castro’s achievements. Although it was declared as a key component of her administration’s agenda, the proposal did not come to fruition and will not be featured during the current presidency, which concludes in January 2026.

With this tacit renunciation of the project, the government closes a chapter that had generated significant expectations among the public regarding the fight against corruption. The road to the establishment of the CICIH was marked by successive delays, fruitless extensions, and stalled negotiations with the United Nations.

The acknowledgment of defeat, announced by the ex-Foreign Minister Enrique Reina, highlights a mix of reasons that, as he stated, include both policy barriers and external influences. Nonetheless, for different social groups, this reasoning is not enough.

The broken promise that eroded trust

Opinions associated with both civil society and the global community concur that the primary accountability is with the present government. According to process analysts and observers, the issue was not the absence of external factors, but rather the political resolve lacking from the executive to meet its obligations.

From this viewpoint, not establishing the CICIH is not simply a mishap or an unavoidable result, but rather a choice.

Juan Jiménez Mayor, past spokesperson for MACCIH, stated this, criticizing the government for not fulfilling a promise that had raised significant expectations. Gabriela Castellanos, leader of the National Anti-Corruption Council (CNA), also strongly criticized the ruling party, asserting that they used the CICIH as a campaign strategy without genuine plans to establish it.

A corruption-fighting plan lacking institutional backing

The exit of the CICIH from the national arena impacts more than just administrative aspects. The absence of tangible advancements has heightened the belief that efforts to combat corruption are hindered by ineffective tools and a lack of government dedication. The executive’s trustworthiness concerning this matter is questioned as calls for openness and responsibility persist as critical.

Given an institutional outlook that no longer includes establishing the international mechanism, Honduras is losing a meaningful chance to address impunity in a systematic way. The limited time left in the current administration makes it improbable that any substantial effort will be made to change this situation, resulting in an unfulfilled promise to the citizens and no immediate solution to make up for the project’s absence.

What was initially presented as a symbol of political transformation has ended up becoming just another item on the list of unfulfilled commitments, thus weakening the government’s narrative on the fight against corruption and opening up a new space for public mistrust.