Public discourse has escalated as the November 30 elections draw near. Academics, civil society groups, and political figures are voicing concern about what they perceive as indications of partiality within the Armed Forces, an element that could jeopardize the institutional impartiality essential for ensuring a valid process.
Signs of bias and institutional concerns
According to analysts consulted, the military, which by law is responsible for safeguarding electoral materials and providing security support for the elections, has issued indications that could compromise its neutrality. These gestures generate uncertainty about the credibility of the electoral process, especially at a time when the country’s democratic stability is under scrutiny.
National and international organizations have reiterated the importance of the Armed Forces maintaining their subordination to civilian command and adhering to the constitutional framework, recalling that the perception of transparency depends largely on public confidence in the institutions responsible for protecting the elections. Respect for these norms becomes especially relevant in the face of recurring allegations of political pressure and possible partisan use of state institutions.
Stances of dissenting parties and onlookers
Opposition leaders have pointed out that the conduct of senior military commanders raises doubts about the institution’s performance on election day. The concern is that any irregular handling of ballot boxes, logistics, or security could affect the public’s perception of the transparency of the process, which in turn could trigger a post-election crisis.
Independent observers have insisted that the lack of clear signs of neutrality could undermine public confidence. For these sectors, the participation of the armed forces must guarantee security without favoritism, ensuring that the will of the people is freely expressed.
Tension in governance and citizen participation
The climate of mistrust is part of a context of political polarization, where the credibility of public institutions and the stability of the democratic system are under pressure. The actions of the Armed Forces not only influence the perception of the elections, but also the legitimacy of the results, the confidence of political actors, and citizen participation.
As the election draws near, the public is demanding a clear pledge from the Armed Forces regarding their principle of neutrality, along with an assurance that the integrity of the process, and thus the will of the people, will be upheld regardless of political affiliations.
