Constrained
This is the weighted total of the four scored pillars.
Country assessmentResearch confidence: Medium · Evidence coverage: Standard
Honduras · 2026
Honduras
Political information remains broadly reachable. Violence against journalists and activists, surveillance concerns, legal pressure, and weak accountability constrain online freedom.
Assessment windowJanuary 1–December 31, 2025
Research cutoffJuly 17, 2026
FrameworkMethodology v0.3 · 20 indicators
Territory coverageHonduras
Finding
01Why Honduras received this score.
Political information remains broadly reachable. Violence against journalists and activists, surveillance concerns, legal pressure, and weak accountability constrain online freedom.
The score draws on country reporting, network measurements, shutdown records, journalist cases, privacy law, and rule-of-law data. The indicator findings below show how that evidence was converted into points. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]
Open Internet & Content Controls
Targeted blocking and regulatory pressure occur without a comprehensive national filtering system.
Rule of Law & Accountability
Oversight and remedies are weak, selective, or difficult to use against state digital powers.
Standard coverage
8 cited sources support this assessment.
Scored assessment
02Indicator scores.
Each indicator receives 0–4 points. Five indicators form a pillar. The pillar average is converted to a percentage and multiplied by its published weight.
B
30% weight
Open Internet & Content Controls
Targeted blocking and regulatory pressure occur without a comprehensive national filtering system.
77.523.3 / 30 points
B1Shutdowns and throttling3.5 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Political websites and global platforms remain broadly available without a systemic national filtering regime, allowing active independent and civic reporting.; DSP's 2025 shutdown-practice estimate 4/4; social-media shutdown estimate 4/4; OONI measurements and the Access Now shutdown record provide the incident check. [2][3][4][1]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's B1 evidence supports 3.5/4. Protection is strong, with a bounded exception preventing full credit.
B2Website and service blocking3.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Political websites and global platforms remain broadly available without a systemic national filtering regime, allowing active independent and civic reporting.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and private discussion 2/4; DSP's 2025 political-filtering estimate 4/4; the country OONI dashboard supplies direct network measurements. [3][1][2]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's B2 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
B3Removal and filtering orders3.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Political websites and global platforms remain broadly available without a systemic national filtering regime, allowing active independent and civic reporting.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and private discussion 2/4; DSP's 2025 political-content censorship estimate 4/4; online-speech legal protection 4/4. [2][1][3]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's B3 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
B4Intermediary liability3.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Political websites and global platforms remain broadly available without a systemic national filtering regime, allowing active independent and civic reporting.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4; DSP's online-speech legal protection estimate 4/4; protection against legal abuse by political elites 4/4. [2][1][3]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's B4 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
B5Circumvention and cross-border access3.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Political websites and global platforms remain broadly available without a systemic national filtering regime, allowing active independent and civic reporting.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and private discussion 2/4; DSP's political-filtering estimate 4/4; independence from state-controlled social platforms 4/4; OONI and Freedom House records provide the circumvention check. [3][1][2]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's B5 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
C
30% weight
Free Expression & Civic Space
Violence, harassment, or impunity materially limits journalism and civic participation online.
50.015.0 / 30 points
C1Legal protection for expression2.5 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Journalists, political activists, and women face threats and violence, and online intimidation can escalate into physical harm in an environment of pervasive impunity.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and private discussion 2/4; DSP's online-speech legal protection estimate 4/4; WJP's effective-expression measure 2.0/4; the relevant Freedom House country score 47/100. [1][7][5][8]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's C1 evidence supports 2.5/4. Meaningful safeguards coexist with material restrictions.
C2Speech-related offenses3.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Journalists, political activists, and women face threats and violence, and online intimidation can escalate into physical harm in an environment of pervasive impunity.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and due process 1/4; DSP's protection against abuse of defamation and copyright law 4/4; Freedom House country reporting supplies the offense and enforcement record. [2][1][5][8]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's C2 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
C3Arrests and penalties2.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Journalists, political activists, and women face threats and violence, and online intimidation can escalate into physical harm in an environment of pervasive impunity.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded due process 1/4 and equal treatment under law 1/4; DSP's 2025 political-arrest estimate 3/3; CPJ and Freedom House records provide the documented case check. [2][5][1][8]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's C3 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.
C4Harassment, violence, and digital attacks1.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Journalists, political activists, and women face threats and violence, and online intimidation can escalate into physical harm in an environment of pervasive impunity.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and equal treatment under law 1/4; the 2026 RSF press-freedom score 41.0/100; CPJ and Freedom House reporting provide the violence, harassment, and accountability record. [5][8][1]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's C4 evidence supports 1.0/4. The right is severely restricted and effective safeguards are weak.
C5Civic participation and pluralism1.5 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Journalists, political activists, and women face threats and violence, and online intimidation can escalate into physical harm in an environment of pervasive impunity.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded political choice free from domination 3/4 and assembly freedom 2/4; DSP's online-media pluralism estimate 2/4; ordinary people's online civic-mobilization estimate 3/4; WJP's civic-participation measure 1.9/4. [2][1][5][8]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's C5 evidence supports 1.5/4. Restrictions are widespread, although limited protection remains.
D
20% weight
Privacy, Anonymity & User Security
Broad surveillance powers and limited independent authorization weaken privacy and anonymity.
60.012.0 / 20 points
D1Data protection rights2.5 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Encrypted tools remain available, but organized crime, corruption, weak data enforcement, and security-service access expose journalists and political users.; DSP's privacy-law existence measure 1/1; privacy-law constraint on government access 4/4; WJP's effective-privacy measure 1.5/4. [6][1][2][7]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's D1 evidence supports 2.5/4. Meaningful safeguards coexist with material restrictions.
D2Surveillance law and authorization2.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Encrypted tools remain available, but organized crime, corruption, weak data enforcement, and security-service access expose journalists and political users.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded judicial independence 1/4 and due process 1/4; DSP's protection from political social-media monitoring 3/4; WJP's effective-privacy measure 1.5/4. [1][7][2]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's D2 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.
D3Retention, access, and identity mandates2.5 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Encrypted tools remain available, but organized crime, corruption, weak data enforcement, and security-service access expose journalists and political users.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded private discussion 2/4 and due process 1/4; DSP's privacy-law constraint on government access 4/4; protection from political monitoring 3/4; UNCTAD and Freedom House records provide the retention and identity-law check. [1][6][2][7]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's D3 evidence supports 2.5/4. Meaningful safeguards coexist with material restrictions.
D4Targeted surveillance and spyware2.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Encrypted tools remain available, but organized crime, corruption, weak data enforcement, and security-service access expose journalists and political users.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded media freedom 1/4 and equal treatment under law 1/4; DSP's protection from political monitoring 3/4; the RSF press-freedom environment 41.0/100; CPJ and Freedom House reporting provide the targeted-surveillance case record. [5][1][2][7]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's D4 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.
D5Encryption and anonymity3.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Encrypted tools remain available, but organized crime, corruption, weak data enforcement, and security-service access expose journalists and political users.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded private discussion 2/4; DSP's political-filtering estimate 4/4; protection from political monitoring 3/4; OONI and Freedom House records provide the encryption and anonymity check. [3][1][2][7]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's D5 evidence supports 3.0/4. Protection is generally effective, with recurring but bounded shortcomings.
E
20% weight
Rule of Law & Accountability
Oversight and remedies are weak, selective, or difficult to use against state digital powers.
32.56.5 / 20 points
E1Judicial independence and due process1.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Competitive elections and courts provide formal review, while corruption, institutional weakness, violence, and rare accountability substantially reduce effective remedy.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded judicial independence 1/4 and due process 1/4; WJP's judicial-constraint measure 1.3/4; administrative due-process measure 1/4; civil-justice independence measure 1.2/4. [7][1]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's E1 evidence supports 1.0/4. The right is severely restricted and effective safeguards are weak.
E2Independent regulators1.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Competitive elections and courts provide formal review, while corruption, institutional weakness, violence, and rare accountability substantially reduce effective remedy.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded government safeguards against corruption 1/4 and government openness and transparency 2/4; WJP's independent-review measure 1.3/4; regulatory independence measure 2.0/4. [7][1]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's E2 evidence supports 1.0/4. The right is severely restricted and effective safeguards are weak.
E3Government transparency1.5 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Competitive elections and courts provide formal review, while corruption, institutional weakness, violence, and rare accountability substantially reduce effective remedy.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded government openness and transparency 2/4; WJP's publicized-laws measure 1.2/4; right-to-information measure 1.9/4. [7][1]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's E3 evidence supports 1.5/4. Restrictions are widespread, although limited protection remains.
E4Notice, appeal, and remedy1.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Competitive elections and courts provide formal review, while corruption, institutional weakness, violence, and rare accountability substantially reduce effective remedy.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded judicial independence 1/4 and due process 1/4; WJP's complaint-mechanisms measure 2.0/4; civil-justice access measure 1.9/4; civil-justice enforcement measure 1.6/4. [7][1]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's E4 evidence supports 1.0/4. The right is severely restricted and effective safeguards are weak.
E5Open and multistakeholder policymaking2.0 / 4
Observed record
Honduras: Competitive elections and courts provide formal review, while corruption, institutional weakness, violence, and rare accountability substantially reduce effective remedy.; Freedom House's 2026 country scorecard recorded elected officials' authority 2/4 and assembly freedom 2/4; WJP's civic-participation measure 1.9/4; DSP's online civic-mobilization estimate 3/4. [2][1][7]
Scoring judgment
Honduras's E5 evidence supports 2.0/4. Restrictions are recurrent and safeguards are only partly effective.
Country findings
03Findings by pillar.
These are the principal findings for each scored part of the report. The indicator records above provide the supporting detail.
Open Internet & Content Controls
Targeted blocking and regulatory pressure occur without a comprehensive national filtering system.
[2][3][4]Free Expression & Civic Space
Violence, harassment, or impunity materially limits journalism and civic participation online.
[2][5][8]Privacy, Anonymity & User Security
Broad surveillance powers and limited independent authorization weaken privacy and anonymity.
[6][1]Rule of Law & Accountability
Oversight and remedies are weak, selective, or difficult to use against state digital powers.
[7][1]Research record
04Coverage
Honduras, assessed from January 1 through December 31, 2025.
Evidence
Network measurements, legal and institutional datasets, shutdown records, and documented cases support the findings.
Scoring
Twenty indicators measure content openness, expression, privacy, security, and institutional checks under Methodology v0.3.
Source register
05Sources used for this report.
Country reporting, open measurements, and cross-national datasets form the report record.
- 01Freedom HouseHonduras: Freedom in the World 2026 country report ↗Civil society · 2026 edition
- 02Digital Society ProjectDigital Society Project Dataset v8 ↗Independent measurement · 2000–2025 country-year data
- 03Open Observatory of Network InterferenceHonduras measurement dashboard ↗Independent measurement · Accessed July 17, 2026
- 04Access Now and the #KeepItOn coalitionInternet Shutdowns in 2025 Annual Report ↗Civil society · March 2026
- 05Committee to Protect Journalists2025 journalist prison census and case database ↗Civil society · January 21, 2026
- 06UN Trade and DevelopmentData protection and privacy legislation worldwide ↗International organization · Accessed July 17, 2026
- 07World Justice ProjectRule of Law Index 2025 ↗Independent measurement · October 28, 2025
- 08Reporters Without BordersHonduras: World Press Freedom Index 2026 profile ↗Civil society · May 2026