Legal Certainty and Institutional Strengthening in Honduras: The Control of Conventionality as a Normative Validity Parameter

Abstract

This article analyzes the paradigmatic transition of the Honduran Constitutional Chamber from a model based on legal formalism toward the adoption of the control of conventionality as the axis of normative validity. The primary objective is to evaluate the extent to which Honduran constitutional jurisprudence has internalized the standards of the Inter-American corpus iuris. Methodologically, a qualitative-dogmatic approach was employed through the documentary analysis of landmark rulings from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the Supreme Court of Justice of Honduras during the 2014-2024 period. The results demonstrate that, while there are significant advances in the protection of vulnerable groups and the defense of national sovereignty (ZEDE Case), a methodological gap persists in the systematic application of balancing tests and judicial dialogue. The study concludes with a proposal for argumentative guidelines to consolidate a materially just and conventionally oriented constitutional justice.