Hora Cero
junio 16, 2025
The demand for comprehensive justice, coordinated actions, and support for the Juan López case continues in Honduras. The preliminary hearing against the three alleged perpetrators (Óscar Alexi Guardado Alvarenga, Daniel Antonio Juárez Torres, and Lenin Adonis Cruz Munguía) was originally scheduled for June 3, 2025, in San Pedro Sula. However, it was postponed at the request of the Municipal Committee for the Defense of Common and Public Goods of Tocoa (CMDBCPT), because the Public Prosecutor’s Office had not yet completed the expert reports on the analysis of telephone data, evidence considered essential for the advancement of the criminal proceedings1.
The hearing was rescheduled for August 14, 2025. For this date, the CMDBCPT denounced the lack of investigation and arrest of the masterminds, emphasizing that simply prosecuting the perpetrators is not enough2. This hearing was again suspended, this time at the request of the defendants’ defense, which requested more time to review the telephone evidence. The trial was rescheduled one more time for Thursday, August 21, 2025.
Finally, on August 21, 20253, the Public Prosecutor’s Office formalized the charges against the three defendants and, together with the private prosecutor, requested that the case proceed to public trial. However, the defense announced that it would appeal the Public Prosecutor’s Office’s refusal to grant a summary trial, leading the judge to set a new date for Thursday, August 28, 2025. This entire judicial process is exhausting in itself, as it involves the mobilization of family members, communities, and organizations. However, the most tedious aspect is the late and inefficient action of the authorities in charge.
This judicial case of Juan López should challenge us and invite us to reflect on the essential personal dimensions of the Honduran social and environmental movement, both institutionally and especially within an electoral context. Regarding the agency of Juan López, Attorney Rita Romero stated: “The case of Juan López represents a martyr for life, someone of great recognition, not only by the Church he championed as a committed delegate of the word within the Catholic Church, but also at the community, ecclesial, and institutional levels. He was part of the Catholic Church’s commitment to once again call for the care of our common home, to which Pope Francis invited us, a commitment Juan embarked on and sustained until the very end. Today we see how his legacy is embraced by Catholics and non-Catholics, by human rights defenders and non-Catholics alike, by people who knew him and by those who never had direct contact with him.”4.
In terms of the electoral context, attorney Junior Zúniga states: “It is totally relevant in political matters because it calls into question the political party currently in power. A party that, from the moment it came to power, claimed it would support all these social struggles. Even many of the people who are part of the government today come directly from those struggles.5” Along the same lines, attorney Rita Romero states: “Juan leaves a very profound and powerful message about the meaning of the polis, the commitment to the people, and politics in its true sense: the search for the word in the service of the people. So much so that he managed to unravel the corruption within his own party. He was unable to completely align himself with a party proposal, but instead championed a visionary political plan and project, built from the streets in freedom and refoundation. At the same time, he confronted those members of his own party whose actions in power contradicted the political project he had defended and helped to build.6”
With these elements in mind, it’s important to answer the initial question in the title of this opinion: why should we care? Well, first, it’s important to understand that Juan López wasn’t murdered coincidentally, but rather occurred in a context of extractive corruption, drug trafficking, influence peddling, the interests of economic groups and political parties, and human rights violations. His work defending nature and collective rights represented the conjunction of faith, community, and transformative political action.
We should also care because this trial is taking place in an electoral context that exposes profound contradictions. Juan’s memory questions the distance between a political party (as a progressive option) and the social movement, but even more so, the co-optation of the administration of justice, which remains at the service of private interests and the influence of organized crime. Finally, we should care because honoring Juan López’s life and not allowing it to escape public discussion at any time means defending principles that transcend the individual: the right to a healthy environment, the protection of natural resources, and respect for the lives of those who defend the territory. As attorney Rita Romero pointed out, if state institutions are unwilling to implement Decree 18-2024 and free Carlos Escaleras Mejía National Park from corporate armed occupation, then any commemorative speech will be void of any meaning.
Ultimately, the Juan López case should matter to us, as a country and as a region, because it reflects realities and represents a form of violence that must not continue to exist. Setting a precedent in terms of grassroots justice—through pressure and support—and translating it into structural changes, must be everyone’s commitment.
Notes
Interview. August 22, 2025.
Interview. August 23, 2025.
Interview, August 22, 2025.
