Caribbean & Central America - February 2016 (ISSN 1741-4458)

The fraught process to form a new 15-member supreme court bench, which takes places every seven years, has shone a glaring new light on the lack of transparency in Honduran politics.

Congress failed for a fourth time on 9 February to elect seven judges outstanding as part of the supreme court renewal. The ousted former president and head of the opposition Libertad y Refundación (Libre) party, Manuel Zelaya (2006-2009), decried that eight deputies had been offered bribes from the ruling Partido Nacional (PN). His complaints followed controversial new allegations by a local journalist that the PN has been funnelling cheques for thousands of US dollars to Libre and other opposition deputies via a PN-linked trade association, in return for their support in the legislature. A handful of the deputies identified had quit Libre in previous weeks.

Meanwhile, the selection process for the magisterial candidates – as well as the final slate of candidates – has also been heavily criticised by external observers and by the US embassy in Tegucigalpa. An international oversight committee created in October 2015 to oversee and assist with the Honduran process has suggested that its work (which included workshops for the nominating committee on international standards and best practices) made little or no difference. On 21 January, the American Bar Association - which along with the Centre for Justice and International Law (CEJIL), Impunity Watch and the Due Process of Law Foundation (DPLF) led the oversight committee - issued a statement critical of the nominating committee and the selection process, saying it had not been sufficiently “exhaustive” and “lacked transparency”.

Local observers have been more forthright in declaring the whole process nothing more than an elaborate setpiece between the PN and the country’s other traditional political party, Partido Liberal (PL), to divvy up the supreme court between them, as has gone on for decades.

Critics of the PN government led by President Juan Orlando Hernández also allege, moreover, that the Hernández administration brooks no dissent and is engaging in all sorts of machinations, both in and out of congress, to ensure that the supreme court remains effectively in its pocket. It is worth remembering that Hernández, who in the last PN administration led by President Porfirio Lobo (2009-2014) presided over congress with an iron hand, directly manoeuvred against the supreme court in December 2012 when it ruled against the government’s hardline security plans, replacing four of the five magistrates on the court’s constitutional chamber with sympathetic judges. The chamber has since gone on to remove the country’s ironclad constitutional ban on presidential re-election (in April), potentially paving the way for Hernández to seek another term in office following his current four-year term (January 2014-January 2018).

It came as no surprise to local observers, therefore, when the final slate of 15 candidates chosen by congress, from a list of 45 submitted by the nominating committee, duly comprised eight candidates affiliated to the PN and seven affiliated to the PL.

To be elected to the supreme court bench a candidate needs a minimum of 86 votes. The PN has 48 deputies in the unicameral congress, the PL has 27, Libre 31 and the also-opposition Partido Anti Corrupción (PAC) 13. Thereafter follow smaller parties with one deputy each including the Partido Innovación y Unidad Social Demócrata (PINU-SD), Unificación Democrática (UD), Partido Demócrata Cristiano (PDC) and one other independent deputy.

The first round of voting, held in late January, elected eight justices: five affiliated to the PL, two affiliated to the PN and one independent. No candidate got the required 86 votes in three subsequent rounds, and Zelaya and others have accused the PN of manoeuvring, in cahoots with the PL, to get its preferred candidates elected among the final eight.

David Romero Ellner, of Radio Globo, broke the congressional bribery story in early February. He also broke a major corruption scandal at the Honduran national social security institute implicating the last PN government, and so his latest allegations will be taken seriously locally.

In this context, the new Mission for Support against Corruption and Impunity in Honduras (Maccih), signed by President Hernández and the secretary general of the Organization of American States, Luis Almagro, on 19 January last, looks to have its work cut out. The mission provides for an international team of investigators and prosecutors to collaborate with Honduran counterparts to pursue corruption cases and implement systemic judicial reform.

Its stated aim is to improve the Honduran judiciary “through active cooperation, technical advice, supervision and oversight of the state institutions responsible for preventing, investigating, and punishing acts of corruption”. Significantly, it will have full and unobstructed access to official documents and the power to investigate corruption cases, after loud demands by the Honduran opposition and civil-society groups that it be given more teeth. Originally it was envisaged as more of an observatory body, with a remit to recommend and advise on reform.

• Voting

A fifth round of voting was due as we went to press on 10 February. Under the law, the existing supreme court bench remains in office pending replacement.