Current political situacion June 2026

Re-election at the USAC: A New Chapter in the University Governance Crisis

The process to elect the president of the University of San Carlos (USAC) offers a glimpse into the complicated situation of the rule of law in Guatemala. On April 8, Walter Mazariegos was re-elected despite strong and widespread concerns about the legality of the process. Mazariegos took office as university president in 2022, following a tumultuous process marked by allegations of fraud.1 During his tenure, the university approved institutional reforms that have been criticized by different university-based groups, such as USAC Dignidad y Resistencia, because they limit opposition groups’ participation. One such example was the reform of the university’s electoral regulations, which granted greater authority to the University High Council (CSU) at the expense of the University Electoral Tribunal. This reform gave the CSU greater involvement in organizing and overseeing the electoral process, sparking concerns over allegations that the council had been co-opted by Mazariegos. This situation and other measures—including the criminalization of students and professors and the exclusion of opposition electoral groups—have undermined independence and increased uncertainty regarding the process to elect the university’s new president.2

Mazariegos’s re-election has sparked wide-ranging legal challenges and social protests. At least 17 injunctions have been filed before different courts, as well as complaints with the Public Prosecutor’s Office (MP).3 However, different Courts of Appeals have ruled in Mazariegos’ favor, and the Constitutional Court (CC) rejected a large portion of the injunctions filed by opposition groups, suggesting that Mazariegos’ reelection will go forward on July 1 of this year.

This electoral process takes place against the backdrop of a co-opted justice system. The involvement of Judges Leyla Susana Lemus and Dina Josefina Ochoa—who have ties to Walter Mazariegos and are accused of having interfered in the rulings that ordered the dismissal of the injunctions filed against Mazariegos4—is a clear sign of the deeply troubling co-optation of the judicial system.

Nearly 30 Years After the Signing of the Peace Agreement: A Plan for Reparations and Dignification for Victims of the IAC5

This month, the Official Journal of Guatemala published a ministerial decree in which President Bernardo Arévalo ordered all government agencies to participate in the 2026–2036 Plan for Reparations and Dignification for Victims of the Internal Armed Conflict (IAC). Nearly 30 years after the signing of the Peace Accords—which brought an end to the 36-year-long IAC—Arévalo’s administration announced the implementation of this Plan, as well as a mechanism to search for the disappeared.

The Plan includes provisions for individual and collective reparations as set forth in the 1996 Peace Accords. According to Elvin Díaz of the Presidential Commission for Peace and Human Rights (COPADEH), the Plan is based on the Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ (IACHR) 14 judgments against the Guatemalan State for human rights violations. “To date, the State has not provided any follow-up or support to victims of disappearances; only specialized nongovernmental organizations have done so. Other countries in the region have search commissions, but we have never managed to set those up in Guatemala,” said the official. He explained that the goal is to collect and record all the information gathered by organizations and state institutions—including some 54,000 files on disappeared persons, which previous governments ignored—as well as to recognize the work of NGOs and provide them with financial support so they can continue searching for the disappeared.

Francisco Vivar, a lawyer representing the relatives of victims of crimes against humanity, stated that “reparations” for those who suffered human rights violations “are a debt owed by the State.” He noted that “there have been various government initiatives to provide benefits to former paramilitaries (…) which contrasts with the limited support that victims have received.” In 2022, the Guatemalan Congress passed a law to provide financial compensation to thousands of civil defense patrolmen, known as PACs, who were recruited by the Army during the IAC to repress and control the population; some of the PACs have been accused of war crimes.

As Vivar notes, “victims (in general) have never received dignified reparations. It’s not just about financial reparations for the loss of their family members; it’s about health care systems, infrastructure…, the non-repetition of such crimes, and the right to justice.” Furthermore, during Consuelo Porras’s tenure as head of the MP (2018–2026), the special prosecutor’s office dedicated to assisting victims of the IAC was dismantled, and the staff who were familiar with the judicial proceedings, having worked on the cases for years, were fired or transferred. Many organizations have repeatedly spoken out against this.

MP Drops Criminal Charges Against Seven Journalists and Columnists from elPeriódico

On June 8, following a three-year legal battle, the MP announced that it was dropping a criminal case that the Special Prosecutor’s Office Against Impunity (FECI) had brought against journalists from elPeriódico. The investigation, led by the widely criticized Rafael Curruchiche, sought to have a group of journalists from the now defunct newspaper elPeriódico prosecuted on charges of obstruction of justice, because of their opinions and reporting on alleged irregularities in the legal proceedings against the newspaper’s founder, José Rubén Zamora.6 As part of this attempt to criminalize journalism, journalists Alexander Valdéz, Gerson Ortiz, Julia Corado, Cristian Vélix, Rony Ríos, and Denis Aguilar, as well as columnists Edgar Gutiérrez and Gonzalo Marroquín Godoy, were all criminalized.7

Guatemala: The Only Country in Latin America Without a Water Law8

Guatemala is the only country in Latin America that does not have a water law. There is unequal access to the right to water. Ninety percent of Guatemala’s water is contaminated, and 54% of the Guatemalan population’s drinking water contains fecal matter. This situation disproportionately affects indigenous and rural populations living in poverty.

The lack of a law to regulate the quality and equitable distribution of water represents a constitutional shortfall that has persisted for more than three decades. Article 127 of the Political Constitution of the Republic establishes that “all water is a public good, inalienable and imprescriptible. The exploitation, use, and enjoyment of water are granted in the manner established by law, in accordance with the public interest. A specific law shall regulate this matter.” However, such a law has never been enacted.

Pedro Arnulfo Pineda Cotzojay, acting director of the Institute for Research in Natural Sciences and Technology (Iarna) at Rafael Landívar University (URL), and Luis Fernando Paiz Lemus, a legal researcher at the Institute for Social and Humanistic Research (ICESH) at URL, argue that, given the way water is currently being used, it is already effectively privatized , making legislation essential. As an example, they cite cases where agribusinesses divert river flows or dam up rivers, leaving surrounding communities without access to water. Or, in the capital city, residents are forced to buy water tanks due to a lack of access to the water supply. Paiz states that “the water law is not optional. It is a constitutional mandate that has been expressly recognized in the Constitution for the past 40 years.”

In October 2025, the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (MARN) presented a draft water bill, developed after a series of discussions with civil society organizations, indigenous authorities, community leaders, and private sector representatives. Recently, on May 17, the president of Congress, Luis Contreras, stated in an interview with Canal Antigua that the bill would be introduced “next week.” However, the bill has not yet been introduced in Congress, and MARN has not provided any updates on the matter.

Yich K’isis Asks the CC to Ensure Prior Consultation on the Pojom I and II Hydroelectric Project

Representatives of the indigenous communities of Yich K’isis, in San Mateo Ixtatán, Huehuetenango, asked the CC to ensure prior, free, and informed consultation on the Pojom I and II hydroelectric projects, run by Energía y Renovación S.A., given that the projects were authorized without the consent of the affected population. The lawsuit was filed in response to a Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ) ruling that ordered the Ministry of Energy and Mines (MEM) to complete the consultation process within 12 months and then proceed with the hydroelectric project. The plaintiffs argue that this ruling does not remedy the alleged violations, since the consultation would take place after the licenses were granted and part of the construction work was already completed.9

The communities argue that a consultation after the fact contradicts the principle of free, prior, and informed consultation established in Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization (ILO) and leaves unresolved issues concerning indigenous ancestral authorities’ participation and environmental, cultural, and spiritual impact evaluations.10

The ruling only recognizes Community Development Councils (COCODES) and Municipal Development Councils (COMUDES) as stakeholders, excluding indigenous ancestral authorities, thereby limiting the participation of indigenous peoples in the process.