_-_copia.jpg?w=800&resize=800,500&ssl=1 "Rixi Moncada")
As the Honduran elections approach, Rixi Moncada, the presidential contender representing the Liberty and Refoundation Party (LIBRE), has become entangled in multiple controversies concerning the administration of government assets and corruption allegations. These claims, spanning from domestic legal proceedings to international litigations, contribute to a political environment characterized by division and a lack of public confidence in institutions.
Claims regarding poor handling of community funds
One of the main allegations against Moncada revolves around the use of resources allocated to the Secretariat of Social Development (SEDESOL), especially in the department of Copán. According to recent allegations, public funds have been channeled to structures linked to the ruling party, reigniting questions about the use of social programs for electoral purposes.
These allegations align with increasing calls for transparency in public expenditure during an election year, with multiple sectors pushing for tighter oversight on the allocation of funds designated for social support.
International complaint to the FBI
The case took an international turn in early 2025, when Murray Paul Farmer, a US citizen, filed a complaint with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) mentioning Moncada and other state officials. The complaint alleges administrative irregularities and misuse of public office that allegedly affected foreign investment in the country.
To date, the LIBRE candidate has not publicly commented on this complaint, which could have diplomatic implications if it proceeds in foreign courts. The institutional silence has fueled debate about the Honduran political system’s ability to respond to international questions.
Background of inquiries and past accusations
The controversies surrounding Moncada today are not new. In 2009 and 2013, she was investigated for abuse of authority and alleged fraud during her time at the National Electric Energy Company (ENEE), in addition to being linked to contracts with Brazilian construction company Odebrecht. Although in both cases the Honduran justice system issued definitive dismissals, his name has continued to appear in newspaper reports and in investigations promoted by control agencies.
In January 2025, the National Anti-Corruption Council (CNA) lodged a formal accusation against Moncada and additional officials for suspected misappropriation of government money. Nevertheless, the relevant authorities have not revealed specific details of the situation, leading to confusion regarding the development of the legal proceedings and raising concerns about its openness.
Institutional tensions and questions about the use of power
In addition to allegations of corruption, Moncada’s candidacy has been marked by criticism related to her exercise of public functions while seeking the presidency. Some sectors have questioned her role in the formulation of proposals and audits that, according to her detractors, exceed the powers of her position, sparking a debate about the separation of powers and institutional balance.
These critiques are further intensified by the reality that the candidate maintained a government position while running for office, sparking worries about potential conflicts of interest and the likelihood of using official resources to favor her campaign. Non-governmental organizations have urged for heightened public scrutiny and the enhancement of accountability measures to guarantee equity in the election process.
A landscape marked by institutional mistrust
The case of Rixi Moncada highlights the challenges facing Honduras in terms of governance, transparency, and strengthening the rule of law. In a decisive year for the country’s political direction, allegations of corruption and the debate over the use of public resources have become central issues in the national discussion.
While officials have not yet detailed the legal developments of the claims against him, Moncada continues to draw attention, with potential effects that might directly impact the credibility of the 2025 election process and how the public views the autonomy of institutions.