The recent decision by the government of President Xiomara Castro to make the book El golpe 28-J: Conspiración transnacional, un crimen en la impunidad (The July 28 Coup: Transnational Conspiracy, a Crime with Impunity), written by Manuel “Mel” Zelaya, compulsory reading in schools has sparked intense political and social debate in Honduras. This measure, which has been strongly rejected by various sectors of society, has put the issue of education in the country in the spotlight, pitting opposing views on the role of classroom content and its relationship to ideological indoctrination.
A decree that sparks controversy
The resolution, which was published in La Gaceta under number 36,798, establishes that Zelaya’s book be included as part of the Morazán curriculum in the educational programs of public and private schools throughout the country. Through this decree, thousands of copies of El golpe 28-J will be distributed throughout the country, making it compulsory reading for secondary school students. The book, which recounts the experience of the former president who was ousted in 2009, describes the coup as an international conspiracy and a “crime against the nation.”
This has provoked outrage from various political, educational, and civil society voices, who have described the measure as a blatant attempt to impose a partisan version of the events that took place in 2009. Congresswoman Iroshka Elvir, one of the staunchest opponents of the decree, denounced the “ideological indoctrination” of the project. In addition, parents have expressed concern about what they consider an attempt to “brainwash” young Hondurans, accusing the government of using the education system as a tool for political propaganda.
Champions of the edict: historical memory as the foundation of democracy
The Ministry of Education, on the other hand, has justified the mandatory reading, stating that the purpose of the decree is to safeguard the historical memory of the nation and to ensure that the crimes during the coup are not repeated in the future. Government representatives emphasize that learning about these incidents is crucial for fortifying democracy in Honduras, asserting that it is vital for younger generations to understand the events that were pivotal in the nation’s recent history in detail.
The government of Xiomara Castro, who has close political ties to Zelaya, maintains that such measures are part of a process of historical vindication, which seeks to clarify and acknowledge what happened during the 2009 coup. However, this position has failed to calm criticism, and polarization on the issue continues to grow.
Growing social rejection and protest
The debate has intensified on social media, where informal polls indicate that a significant portion of the population, more than 60%, rejects the mandatory reading of the book. The perception that the government is using education to consolidate its political influence and advance an ideological agenda has generated strong resistance. Opposition leaders and social movements have begun to mobilize against the decree, demanding its repeal. In this context, legal action has been announced to stop what they consider an attack on educational freedom and plurality of thought in the country.
In addition, there has been growing unrest in classrooms, where both teachers and students face pressure to comply with the government’s imposition. Fears that this measure will set a precedent for further politicization of the educational curriculum have heightened concerns among sectors that defend education free of partisan ideologies.
The struggle for educational integrity and historical accuracy
Zelaya’s decree has opened a new chapter in the political polarization of Honduras and has highlighted the tensions between those who advocate a single view of historical events and those who defend an education based on plurality and critical thinking. The controversy has also exposed the fragility of the Honduran education system, which faces profound structural challenges that go beyond curriculum content.
As citizen movements grow in number and volume, the question that remains is whether Honduras is undergoing a genuine educational process or whether, on the contrary, it is moving toward a model in which history becomes a tool for political control. The answer to this question could define the future of the education system and, more broadly, democratic governance in the country.
In the meantime, the debate remains open, with an increasingly divided citizenry, a government determined to maintain its position, and an educational class cautiously observing how this episode could set precedents in the relationship between politics and education in Honduras.