Final Report of the Nominating Board 2023

It clarified that the election of representatives from the Honduran Bar Association, the Honduran Council of Private Enterprise, the Faculty of Schools of Legal Sciences, and the Confederations of Workers would also be carried out through extraordinary assemblies, as mandated by the Constitution of the Republic. In this manner, the Nominating Board was integrated as described below: # Institution Principal Representative Alternate Representative Date of Appointment 1 Supreme Court of Justice Carlos Josué Padilla Eveline Daysi Rodríguez August 29, 2022 2 Honduran Bar Association Mario Roberto Urquía Fajardo Reina Isabel Nájera August 20, 2022 3 National Commissioner of Human Rights Blanca Saraí Izaguirre Lozano Rolando Arturo Milla Hernández August 4, 2022 # Institution Principal Representative Alternate Representative Date of Appointment 4 Honduran Council of Private Enterprise Olban Francisco Valladares Ordóñez Helui Guadalupe Castillo Hung August 23, 2022 5 Faculty of Schools of Legal Sciences Waldo Rodman Rivera Portillo Yessenia Julissa Aguilar Santos August 29, 2022 6 Civil Society Organizations Martha Elizabeth Dubón Acosta Tomás Andino Mencía August 17, 2022 7 Confederations of Workers María Elena Sabillón Paz Mauro Joel Domínguez Almendarez August 24, 2022 In the case of CONADEH, the appointment is made by constitutional mandate to its director, who also appoints his or her alternate. Likewise, in the case of the representation of the Supreme Court of Justice, it falls to the justices of the Court to elect their principal representative and alternate

In the case of CONADEH, the appointment is made by constitutional mandate to its director, who also appoints his or her alternate. Likewise, in the case of the representation of the Supreme Court of Justice, it falls to the justices of the Court to elect their principal representative and alternate with the favorable vote of two-thirds (2/3) of its justices, in an extraordinary plenary session. Once the representatives of each organization were appointed, Article 9 of the Special Law provided for the opening of a period of seventy-two (72) hours after the publication of the appointment for any citizen to challenge, in a reasoned manner, before a standing committee appointed to receive, process, and resolve challenges. None of the appointments made by the representatives was subject to a challenge; therefore, the accreditation of the seven institutions before the National Congress was produced, which also opened a period of seventy-two (72) hours to allow the presentation of challenges from August thirty-first (31), 2022. However, it did not receive any challenges. And, finally, on September 14, 2022, the deputy president of the National Congress, Mr. Luis Redondo, proceeded to swear in the principal and alternate representatives of the Nominating Board on September 14, 2022 at the headquarters of the National Congress in Tegucigalpa. Following the swearing-in, in compliance with the provisions of the Special Law, on September 19, 2022, at the facilities of the Technological University of Honduras (UTH), located in Tegucigalpa, the public draw was held to define the persons who would hold the positions of president, secretary, and spokesman of the Nominating Board. Likewise, the Nominating Board decided that the attorney Blanca Izaguirre, who serves as National Commissioner of Human Rights, would assume the function of Public Information Officer. And, finally, on September 14, 2022, the deputy president of the National Congress, Mr. Luis Redondo, proceeded to swear in the principal and alternate representatives of the Nominating Board on September 14, 2022 at the headquarters of the National Congress in Tegucigalpa. Following the swearing-in, in compliance with the provisions of the Special Law, on September 19, 2022, at the facilities of the Technological University of Honduras (UTH), located in Tegucigalpa, the public draw was held to define the persons who would hold the positions of president, secretary, and spokesman of the Nominating Board. Likewise, the Nominating Board decided that the attorney Blanca Izaguirre, who serves as National Commissioner of Human Rights, would assume the function of Public Information Officer. Board of Directors of the Nominating Board for the Selection Process of the Supreme Court of Justice 2022-2023 President Mario Roberto Urquía Fajardo Secretary María Elena Sabillón Paz Spokesman Carlos Josué Padilla Eveline Public Information Officer Blanca Saraí Izaguirre Lozano Once the Nominating Board was installed, and after the positions of president, secretary, and spokesman were elected by means of a draw, and the appointment of the public information officer, the Nominating Board decided that the Technical Secretariat, as support to the Secretariat, would be led by Gustavo Solórzano Díaz, but it also decided to integrate an Assistant Secretariat as well as the Legal and Technical Assistants that each sector deemed prudent to appoint. In this manner, the Technical Secretariat was

Once the Nominating Board was installed, and after the positions of president, secretary, and spokesman were elected by means of a draw, and the appointment of the public information officer, the Nominating Board decided that the Technical Secretariat, as support to the Secretariat, would be led by Gustavo Solórzano Díaz, but it also decided to integrate an Assistant Secretariat as well as the Legal and Technical Assistants that each sector deemed prudent to appoint. In this manner, the Technical Secretariat was integrated as follows: Assistant Technical Secretary Karol Sarahí Hernández Bobadilla Civil Society Organizations Assistant Technical Secretary Karla Ninoska Escalante Alegría Honduran Bar Association Legal Assistant Ariel Díaz National Commissioner of Human Rights Legal Assistant Rafael Jerez Moreno Honduran Council of Private Enterprise Legal Assistant Alejandra Flores Mejía Confederations of Workers Systems Assistant Luis Antonio Mendoza Soliz Honduran Council of Private Enterprise Assistant Mónica Isabel Sierra Cooper National Commissioner of Human Rights Assistant Benda Lizeth Zuniga Reyes National Commissioner of Human Rights Diffusion and Communication Assistant Carmen Elena Mejía Figueroa Honduran Council of Private Enterprise Assistant Angelica Navarro Honduran Council of Private Enterprise Transparency Portal Assistant Leonel Enrrique Valladares Velásquez 4. Selection Procedure for Candidates for Justices A. Organization and Criteria Definition Phase. Page 8 Secretary María Elena Sabillón Paz Spokesman Carlos Josué Padilla Eveline Public Information Officer Blanca Saraí Izaguirre Lozano Once the Nominating Board was installed, and after the positions of president, secretary, and spokesman were elected by means of a draw, and the appointment of the public information officer, the Nominating Board decided that the Technical Secretariat, as support to the Secretariat, would be led by Gustavo Solórzano Díaz, but it also decided to integrate an Assistant Secretariat as well as the Legal and Technical Assistants that each sector deemed prudent to appoint. In this manner, the Technical Secretariat was integrated as follows: Technical Secretariat of the Nominating Board Technical Secretary Gustavo Rafael Solórzano Díaz Honduran Council of Private Enterprise

4. Selection Procedure for Candidates for Justices A. Organization and Criteria Definition Phase. The Special Law mandated that the Nominating Board must issue its regulations and the technical evaluation matrix prepared in accordance with international human rights standards, developed by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, in accordance with the content of related international treaties concerning the judicial function and international jurisprudence on judicial independence, together with instructions that include objective, clear, and measurable indicators regarding characteristics of integrity and professional and personal suitability; said documents were to be issued no later than one calendar month after its installation, publishing them in the Official Gazette (La Gaceta) and in three (3) national circulation newspapers. In this regard, the Nominating Board issued: a. Resolution No. 01-2022-JN containing the Regulations of the Special Law on Organization and Functioning of the Nominating Board for the Nomination of Candidates for Justices of the Supreme Court of Justice, published in the Official Gazette La Gaceta No. 36,050, on October 13, 2022. b. The instrument JN-2022-IT-01, containing the Technical Evaluation Matrix, published on October 14, 2022 in the Official Gazette La Gaceta No. 36,051. c. The instrument JN-2022-IT-02 concerning the Profile of Justice of the Supreme Court of Justice approved on October 13, 2022. d. Work schedule of the Nominating Board in October, subsequently updated twice in November 2022. e. The instrument JN-2022-IT-03 containing the Selection Protocol approved on October 14, 2022. B. Phase 1: Call for Applications and Reception of Nominations As part of the obligations that the Special Law mandated for compliance by the Nominating Board, Article 14 required the publication of a general call for nominations during the first half of October of the election year, 2022, directed at persons who met the constitutional requirements and those contained in the Special Law, for the submission of their nomination to the Board. In this regard, on October 13, 2022, the Nominating Board issued the "Call for Nominations for the Selection Process of Candidates for Justices of the Supreme Court of Justice of Honduras, Period 2023-2030," so that, in compliance with the requirements contained in Articles 311 and 312 of the Constitution of the Republic, and Articles 11 numeral 6, 14 and 15 of the Special Law, interested persons would submit their nomination from Thursday, October 13 through Monday, October 31, 2022. In the call, the Nominating Board encouraged the participation of women and those from insufficiently represented sectors in the highest judicial office in the country.

The required documentation addressed the fulfillment of general requirements, health condition, professional and academic information, financial, patrimonial, fiscal and employment information (absence of complaints, administrative, criminal, and disciplinary proceedings and other matters). The call required the submission of a file with original documents in physical form, with respective copies and one digital copy on a data storage device (USB). As of October 31, 2022, 185 persons submitted their nomination to participate in the selection process, as detailed below: 1. Malcon Eduardo Guzmán Valladares 2. Miriam Suyapa Barahona Rodríguez 3. Miguel Fernando Ruiz Rápalo 4. Luis Alejandro Matamoros Quilico 5. María Paulina Pérez Núñez 6. José Luis Arévalo Sandoval 7. Aída Patricia Martínez Linares 8. Delmy Anarda Banegas Padilla 9. Wilfredo Guevara Trujillo 10. José Adalid Rodríguez Rosa 11. José Erásmo Ochoa Rodríguez 12. Nancy Carolina Sandoval Escoto 13. Luis Fernando Padilla Castellanos 14. Suyapa Lizeth Mejía Portillo 15. Edward Terencio Navarro Miranda 16. Denis René Gallardo Funes 17. José Tomás Guillén 18. Wendy Carolina Escobar Cantarero 19. Ingrid Ebelinda Monzon López 20. Adán Guillermo López Lone 21. Sandra Lizeth Avelar Rajo 22. José Luis Valladares Guifarro 23. Wagner Vallecillo Paredes 24. Mario Rolando Díaz Flores 25. Tirza Del Carmen Flores Lanza 26. Héctor Rodolfo Bueso Hernández 27. Jorge Abilio Serrano Villanueva 28. José Raúl Pineda Alvarado 29. Yuri Fernando Melara Berlioz 30. Mario Alejandro Calderón Maldonado 31. José Juan Pineda Varela 32. Antonio Isaac Martínez Dubón 33. José Joaquín Lizano Casco 34. Juan Rafael Soto Aguilar 35. Francisca Villela Zavala 36. Conan Rafael Argueta Bourdett 37. Marlon Javier Arévalo Cerna 38. Danelia Gramizel Garay Caballero 39. Edin Yobany De La O Ramos 40. Anny Belinda Ochoa Medrano 41. Walter Raúl Miranda Sabio 42. Emilio Cabrera Cabrera 43. Aníbal Federico Izaguirre Maradiaga 44. Ivis Antonio Discua Barillas 45. César Antonio Pinto Pacheco 46. Marvin Oswaldo Ferrera Alvarenga 47. Carlos Roberto Cálix Hernández 48. Rebeca Lizette Ráquel Obando 49. Melida Estrada Quintanilla 50. Mario Donaldo Acosta Cárcamo

51. Tania Petrona Fuentes 52. Ismael Molina Rodríguez 53. Linda Patricia Reyes Interiano 54. Martha Delia Merino Conde 55. Walton Rolando Bouloy Cabrera 56. Greisy Zelaya Pineda 57. Gaudy Alejandra Bustillo Martínez 58. Salomé Antonia Castellanos Delgado 59. Gerardo Enrique Gómez Cobos 60. Francisco Javier Mejía Sánchez 61. Danelia Ferrera Turcios 62. Rubén Rivera Flores 63. María Marlene Villela Franco 64. Loany Patricia Alvarado Sorto 65. Linda Lizzie Rivera Lobo 66. Marco Vinicio Montes Tavarone 67. Luis Alfredo Galeano Ordóñez 68. Marcio Beyran Membreño Villela 69. Karen Lizeth Martínez Ponce 70. José Emeterio Rodas Pavón 71. Luis Alonso Discua Cerrato 72. Daniel Arturo Sibrián Bueso 73. Francisco Darío Lobo Lara 74. Andy Reynaldo Mena Rodríguez 75. Alex Rafael D´Vicente Jarquin 76. Johel Antonio Zelaya Álvarez 77. Carlos Rubén López Oliva 78. Isbela Bustillo Hernández 79. Elvin Francisco Romero Castillo 80. Garín Enoc Urquía Castro 81. María Fernanda Castro Mendoza 82. Julio César Lagos Reyes 83. Gilberto Navas Izaguirre 84. Edwin Francisco Ortez Cruz 85. Rony David Molina Euceda 86. Juan Wilfredo Castellanos Hipp 87. Fernando Francisco Azcona Schrenzel 88. Edwin Alberto Anemis López 89. Marco Tulio Lara Guevara 90. Nelson Martín Reyes Morales 91. María De Jesús Palacios Zelaya 92. Stephanie Claudette Bustillo Zelaya 93. Alejandro Hernández Oyuela 94. Norman Enrique Mejía Orozco 95. Francibel Zepeda Castro 96. Doris Alicia Madrid Lezama 97. Felipe René Speer Laínez 98. Ana Alejandrina Pineda Hernández 99. Rubenia Esperanza Galeano Barralaga 100. Edgardo Cáceres Castellanos 101. Julio César Cruz Bonilla 102. Eva Fabiola Castro Márquez 103. Juan Pablo Cruz Garrido 104. Jorge Alberto García Martínez 105. Manuel Enrique Cálix Bonilla 106. Ramón Antonio Romero Cantarero 107. Roy David Urtecho López 108. Rebeca Angélina Ávila Baca 109. Erika Yolanda Cálix Hernández 110. Isaías Morán Pavón 111. Marcio Said Barahona Salgado 112. Emilio Enrique Hernández Hércules 113. Nery Mauricio Miranda Sanabria 114. Fredis Alonso Cerrato Valladares 115. Rafael Bustillo Romero 116. Rosman Wilfredo Montiel Girón 117. Nelson Danilo Mairena Franco 118. Mario Enrique Boquin Hernández

119. Dunia Aracely Herrera Anduray 120. José Francisco Morales Martínez 121. Marlene Suyapa Pérez Valle 122. Ilsa Lorena Torres Matamoros 123. Vera Vanessa Goussen Paguaga 124. Víctor Méndez Ordóñez 125. Jorge Alberto Zelaya Zaldaña 126. Gloria Bertila Oyuela Carrasco 127. Jorge Berlamino Reyes 128. Anabelly Suyapa Medina Moncada 129. Henry Lara Trejo 130. Marcia Núñez Ennabe 131. Remberto Ordóñez 132. Luis Miguel Lara Hernández 133. Raúl Antonio Ramos Canales 134. Roy Pineda Castro 135. Liliana Patricia Paz Paguaga 136. Gessenia López Zepeda 137. Miguel Ángel Bonilla González 138. León Rojas Caron 139. Juan Miguel Ochoa Cardona 140. Nasry Javier Ictech Guifarro 141. Sergio Daniel Rivera Sagastume 142. Pedro Pablo Ramírez Guevara 143. José Mauricio Salazar 144. Walter Galindo Valeriano 145. Marvin Omar Aguilar Romero 146. Roxana Liceth Morales Toro 147. Norma Iris Coto Santos 148. Marvin Rigoberto Espinal Pinel 149. Sonia Marlina Dubón Villeda 150. Jorge Adalid Rodríguez Murillo 151. Juan Rafael Rodríguez Cerritos 152. Nery Esteban Baca Mondragón 153. Yimy Daniel Chirinos Orellana 154. Darío Josué García Villalta 155. Miltón Danilo Jiménez Puerto 156. Carlos Alberto Gómez Moreno 157. Oliver Gerardo Erazo Gómez 158. José Ricardo Pineda Médina 159. Rosa Helena Bonilla Galindo 160. Odalis Aleyda Nájera Medina 161. Marco Tulio Barahona Valle 162. Carlos Alberto Izaguirre Bustillo 163. Iván Adán Martínez Ordóñez 164. Damián Gilberto Pineda Reyes 165. Rommel Armando Ruiz Guillén 166. Pablo Emilio Reyes Theodore 167. René Velásquez Díaz 168. Mercedes Geraldina Alonzo Cortés 169. Lester Ilich Mejía Flores 170. Hermes Omar Moncada 171. Marvin Geovanny García Martínez 172. Carlos Alberto Cobos Ramírez 173. Rafael Antonio Canales Girbal 174. Raúl Hernán Rafael Baltodano 175. Juan Ramón Gonzáles Rodríguez 176. Humberto Domínguez Aguiluz 177. Gloria Guadalupe Oqueli Solórzano 178. Armando Urtecho López 179. Aída Estela Romero Reyes 180. Danery Antonio Medal Raudales 181. Wilfredo Flores Valladares 182. José María Díaz Ávila 183. Miguel Ángel Cardona 184. Félix Gerardo Martínez Umanzor 185. Nelson Omar Madrid Chinchilla

C. Phase 2: Review of Requirements and Disqualifications. From the documentary review for accreditation of constitutional and legal requirements, 11 applicant persons were excluded for not meeting some constitutional or legal requirement, so they did not continue to the stage of toxicological, psychometric, and knowledge test applications. Thus, the persons who continued to the testing phase were as follows1: 1. Malcon Eduardo Guzmán Valladares 2. Miriam Suyapa Barahona Rodríguez 3. Miguel Fernando Ruiz Rápalo 4. Luis Alejandro Matamoros Quilico 5. José Luis Arévalo Sandoval 6. Aída Patricia Martínez Linares 7. Delmy Anarda Banegas Padilla 8. Wilfredo Guevara Trujillo 9. José Adalid Rodríguez Rosa 10. José Erásmo Ochoa Rodríguez 11. Nancy Carolina Sandoval Escoto 12. Luis Fernando Padilla Castellanos 13. Suyapa Lizeth Mejía Portillo 1 Below is information on the persons who were excluded in each phase of the process. 14. Edward Terencio Navarro Miranda 15. Denis René Gallardo Funes 16. José Tomás Guillén 17. Wendy Carolina Escobar Cantarero 18. Ingrid Ebelinda Monzón López 19. Adán Guillermo López Lone 20. Sandra Lizeth Avelar Rajo 21. José Luis Valladares Guifarro 22. Wagner Vallecillo Paredes 23. Mario Rolando Díaz Flores 24. Tirza Del Carmen Flores Lanza 25. Héctor Rodolfo Bueso Hernández 26. Jorge Abilio Serrano Villanueva 27. José Raúl Pineda Alvarado 28. Yuri Fernando Melara Berlioz 29. Mario Alejandro Calderón Maldonado 30. José Juan Pineda Varela 31. Antonio Isaac Martínez Dubón 32. José Joaquín Lizano Casco 33. Juan Rafael Soto Aguilar 34. Francisca Villela Zavala 35. Conan Rafael Argueta Bourdett 36. Marlon Javier Arévalo Cerna 37. Danelia Gramizel Garay Caballero 38. Edin Yobany De La O Ramos 39. Anny Belinda Ochoa Medrano 40. Walter Raúl Miranda Sabio 41. Emilio Cabrera Cabrera 42. Aníbal Federico Izaguirre Maradiaga 43. Ivis Antonio Discua Barillas 44. César Antonio Pinto Pacheco Page 14 163. Iván Adán Martínez Ordóñez 164. Damián Gilberto Pineda Reyes 165. Rommel Armando Ruiz Guillén 166. Pablo Emilio Reyes Theodore 167. René Velásquez Díaz 180. Danery Antonio Medal Raudales 181. Wilfredo Flores Valladares 182. José María Díaz Ávila 183. Miguel Ángel Cardona 184. Félix Gerardo Martínez Umanzor 185. Nelson Omar Madrid Chinchilla Total number of citizens who submitted their nomination to the Nominating Board 2022-2023 Men Women

45. Marvin Oswaldo Ferrera Alvarenga 46. Carlos Roberto Cálix Hernández 47. Rebeca Lizette Ráquel Obando 48. Melida Estrada Quintanilla 49. Mario Donaldo Acosta Carcamo 50. Tania Petrona Fuentes 51. Ismael Molina Rodríguez 52. Linda Patricia Reyes Interiano 53. Martha Delia Merino Conde 54. Walton Rolando Bouloy Cabrera 55. Greisy Zelaya Pineda 56. Gaudy Alejandra Bustillo Martínez 57. Salomé Antonia Castellanos Delgado 58. Gerardo Enrique Gómez Cobos 59. Francisco Javier Mejía Sánchez 60. Danelia Ferrera Turcios 61. Rubén Rivera Flores 62. María Marlene Villela Franco 63. Loany Patricia Alvarado Sorto 64. Linda Lizzie Rivera Lobo 65. Marco Vinicio Montes Tavarone 66. Luis Alfredo Galeano Ordóñez 67. Marcio Beyran Membreño Villela 68. Karen Lizeth Martínez Ponce 69. José Emeterio Rodas Pavón 70. Luis Alonso Discua Cerrato 71. Daniel Arturo Sibrián Bueso 72. Francisco Darío Lobo Lara 73. Andy Reynaldo Mena Rodríguez 74. Alex Rafael D´Vicente Jarquin 75. Johel Antonio Zelaya Álvarez 76. Carlos Rubén López Oliva 77. Isbela Bustillo Hernández 78. Elvin Francisco Romero Castillo 79. Garín Enoc Urquía Castro 80. María Fernanda Castro Mendoz 81. Julio César Lagos Reyes 82. Edwin Francisco Ortez Cruz 83. Rony David Molina Euceda 84. Juan Wilfredo Castellanos Hipp 85. Fernando Francisco Azcona Schrenzel 86. Edwin Alberto Anemis López 87. Marco Tulio Lara Guevara 88. Nelson Martín Reyes Morales 89. María De Jesús Palacios Zelaya 90. Alejandro Hernández Oyuela 91. Norman Enrique Mejía Orozco 92. Francibel Zepeda Castro 93. Doris Alicia Madrid Lezama 94. Felipe René Speer Laínez 95. Ana Alejandrina Pineda Hernández 96. Rubenia Esperanza Galeano Barralaga 97. Edgardo Cáceres Castellanos 98. Eva Fabiola Castro Márquez 99. Jorge Alberto García Martínez 100. Manuel Enrique Cálix Bonilla 101. Ramón Antonio Romero Cantarero 102. Roy David Urtecho López 103. Rebeca Angélina Ávila Baca 104. Erika Yolanda Cálix Hernández 105. Isaías Morán Pavón 106. Marcio Said Barahona Salgado 107. Nery Mauricio Miranda Sanabria 108. Fredis Alonso Cerrato Valladares 109. Rafael Bustillo Romero 110. Rosman Wilfredo Montiel Girón

111. Nelson Danilo Mairena Franco 112. Mario Enrique Boquin Hernández 113. Dunia Aracely Herrera Anduray 114. José Francisco Morales Martínez 115. Marlene Suyapa Pérez Valle 116. Ilsa Lorena Torres Matamoros 117. Vera Vanessa Goussen Paguaga 118. Jorge Alberto Zelaya Zaldaña 119. Gloria Bertila Oyuela Carrasco 120. Jorge Berlamino Reyes 121. Anabelly Suyapa Medina Moncada 122. Henry Lara Trejo 123. Marcia Núñez Ennabe 124. Remberto Ordóñez 125. Luis Miguel Lara Hernández 126. . Raúl Antonio Ramos Canales 127. Roy Pineda Castro 128. Liliana Patricia Paz Paguaga 129. Gessenia López Zepeda 130. Miguel Ángel Bonilla González 131. León Rojas Caron 132. Juan Miguel Ochoa Cardona 133. Nasry Javier Ictech Guifarro 134. Sergio Daniel Rivera Sagastume 135. Pedro Pablo Ramírez Guevara 136. José Mauricio Salazar 137. Walter Galindo Valeriano 138. Marvin Omar Aguilar Romero 139. Roxana Liceth Morales Toro 140. Norma Iris Coto Santos 141. Marvin Rigoberto Espinal Pinel 142. Sonia Marlina Dubón Villeda 143. Jorge Adalid Rodríguez Murillo 144. Juan Rafael Rodríguez Cerritos 145. Nery Esteban Baca Mondragón 146. Yimy Daniel Chirinos Orellana 147. Darío Josué García Villalta 148. Miltón Danilo Jiménez Puerto 149. Carlos Alberto Gómez Moreno 150. Oliver Gerardo Erazo Gómez 151. José Ricardo Pineda Médina 152. Rosa Helena Bonilla Galindo 153. Odalis Aleyda Nájera Medina 154. Marco Tulio Barahona Valle 155. Carlos Alberto Izaguirre Bustillo 156. Iván Adán Martínez Ordóñez 157. Damián Gilberto Pineda Reyes 158. Rommel Armando Ruiz Guillén 159. Pablo Emilio Reyes Theodore 160. Lester Ilich Mejía Flores 161. Hermes Omar Moncada 162. Marvin Geovanny García Martínez 163. Carlos Alberto Cobos Ramírez 164. Rafael Antonio Canales Girbal 165. Juan Ramón Gonzáles Rodríguez 166. Humberto Domínguez Aguiluz 167. Gloria Guadalupe Oqueli Solórzano 168. Armando Urtecho López 169. Aída Estela Romero Reyes 170. Danery Antonio Medal Raudales 171. Wilfredo Flores Valladares 172. José María Díaz Ávila 173. Miguel Ángel Cardona 174. Nelson Omar Madrid Chinchilla

D. Phase 3: Knowledge, Psychological, and Psychometric Tests. Likewise, through Communiqué JN-2022-01, the Nominating Board called for the implementation of: 1. Psychometric test: November 8, 2022 2. Toxicological test: November 9, 2022 3. Written knowledge test: November 14 of The psychometric and toxicological tests were conducted at the Polideportivo of the National Autonomous University of Honduras. For this purpose, the Nominating Board had the technical assistance of the National Intelligence and Investigation Directorate for the administration of these tests. Furthermore, prior to deciding to use the technical assistance of the Directorate, the Nominating Board held meetings with representation from the National Autonomous University of Honduras and the College of Psychologists of Honduras, in order to determine which was the best option for conducting these tests. For the written knowledge test, according to the Selection Process Protocol approved by the Nominating Board, the scoring criteria were "passed" or "failed," and for the toxicological and psychometric tests, the criteria "capable" or "incapable." Any person who failed any of the three tests would not be promoted to the next phase of the selection process. The specific results were confidential in order to preserve the right to dignity, privacy, and integrity of the applicants. The listing of persons approved or failed was public, in addition to the notification sent to all applicants via email. With respect to the written knowledge test, the objective was to determine the level of technical competency of the applicant for the position of Justice of the Supreme Court of Justice. Prior to the official administration of the knowledge examination, a practice test was conducted to allow applicants to familiarize themselves with the characteristics of the platform on which it would be conducted. The subject areas included in the legal knowledge test were: Page 18 173. Miguel Ángel Cardona 174. Nelson Omar Madrid Chinchilla D. Phase 3: Knowledge, Psychological, and Psychometric Tests. Likewise, through Communiqué JN-2022-01, the Nominating Board called for the implementation of: 1. Psychometric test: November 8, 2022 2. Toxicological test: November 9, 2022 3. Written knowledge test: November 14, 2022 The psychometric and toxicological tests were conducted at the Polideportivo of the National Autonomous University of Honduras. For this purpose, the Nominating Board had the technical assistance of the National Intelligence and Investigation Directorate for the administration of these tests. Furthermore, prior to deciding to use the technical assistance of the Directorate, the Nominating Board held meetings with representation from the National Autonomous University of Honduras and the College of Psychologists of Honduras, in order to determine which was the best option for conducting these tests. For the written knowledge test, according to the Selection Process Protocol approved by the Nominating Board, the scoring criteria were "passed (a)" or Total number of applicants who proceeded to the Knowledge Testing Stage Men Women

Page 19 as Justice of the Supreme Court of Justice. Prior to the official administration of the knowledge examination, a practice test was conducted to allow applicants to familiarize themselves with the characteristics of the platform on which it would be conducted. The subject areas included in the legal knowledge test were: Constitutional Law 1 Constitution of the Republic 2 Law on Constitutional Justice 3 Law on Protection for Human Rights Defenders, Journalists, Social Communicators and Justice Operators International Legal Instruments on Human Rights 1 American Convention on Human Rights 2 Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Protocol of San Salvador) of 3 Inter-American Convention to Prevent, Punish and Eradicate Violence Against Women, "Convention of Belém do Pará," of 1994. 4 Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities, of 1999 5 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its two Optional Protocols (United Nations). 6 Convention on the Rights of the Child. 7 Brasilia Rules on Access to Justice for Persons in Vulnerable Situations. 8 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Civil Law 1 Civil Code 2 Civil Procedure Code 3 Code of Commerce 4 Notary Code Family Law, Childhood and Gender 1 Family Code 2 Childhood Code 3 Law Against Domestic Violence 4 Law on Equal Opportunities for Women Criminal and Criminal Procedural Law 1 Penal Code 2 Criminal Procedure Code 3 United Nations Convention Against Organized Crime

3 Declaration of Principles and Fundamental Rights of the International Labour Organization 4 Convention 169 of the International Labour Organization on the Rights of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Legal Ethics and Judicial Career 1 Iberoamerican Legal Statute 2 Iberoamerican Code of Judicial Ethics 3 Basic Principles Relating to the Independence of the Judiciary (Bangalore Principles) 4 Code of Ethics for Judicial Officials and Employees 5 Law on Judicial Career 6 Strategic Plan of the Judicial Branch Civil Law 1 Civil Code 2 Civil Procedure Code 3 Code of Commerce 4 Notary Code Family Law, Childhood and Gender 1 Family Code 2 Childhood Code 3 Law Against Domestic Violence 4 Law on Equal Opportunities for Women Criminal and Criminal Procedural Law 1 Penal Code 2 Criminal Procedure Code 3 United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime (Palermo Convention) 4 United Nations Convention Against Corruption (Mérida Convention) 5 Treaties and conventions for extradition proceedings for drug trafficking and asset laundering offenses (Spain, United States of America and Montevideo) Administrative Law 1 General Law of Public Administration 2 Law of Administrative Procedures 3 Law of Administrative Contentious Jurisdiction 4 Tax Code 5 State Contracting Law Labor Law 1 Labor Code 2 Law on Labor Inspection

The Nominating Board decided to conduct the written knowledge test electronically, on the technological platform of the National Autonomous University of Honduras. This decision was made considering the speed in reviewing written tests and the reliability of the system and, likewise, to provide transparency to the public and the applicants, since they could immediately learn their scores upon completion of their test. The written knowledge test was administered at the Laboratory of the Executive Directorate of Technology Management of the National Autonomous University of Honduras, at the Ciudad Universitaria campus, in Tegucigalpa, on November 14, 2022. Article 17 of the Special Law explains that only applicants who have passed all three tests will advance to the investigation phase regarding aspects related to their personal, professional, and patrimonial background. In this regard, upon completion of the administration of the three tests, 105 applicants advanced to the investigation stage. 1. Malcon Eduardo Guzmán Valladares 2. Miriam Suyapa Barahona Rodríguez 3. Miguel Fernando Ruiz Rápalo 4. José Luis Arévalo Sandoval 5. Aida Patricia Martínez Linares 6. José Adalid Rodríguez Rosa 7. Nancy Carolina Sandoval Escoto 8. Luis Fernando Padilla Castellanos 9. Edward Terencio Navarro Miranda 10. José Tomas Guillén 11. Wendy Carolina Escobar Cantarero 12. Ingrid Ebelinda Monzón López 13. Sandra Lizeth Avelar Rajo 14. José Luis Valladares Guifarro 15. Wagner Vallecillo Paredes 16. Mario Rolando Díaz Flores 17. Tirza Del Carmen Flores Lanza 18. Jorge Abilio Serrano Villanueva 19. José Raúl Pineda Alvarado 20. Yuri Fernando Melara Berlioz 21. Mario Alejandro Calderón Maldonado 22. Antonio Isaac Martínez Dubón 23. José Joaquín Lizano Casco 24. Francisca Villela Zavala 25. Conan Rafael Argueta Bourdett 26. Danelia Gramizel Garay Caballero 27. Edin Yobany De La O Ramos 28. Anny Belinda Ochoa Medrano 29. Walter Raúl Miranda Sabio 30. Emilio Cabrera Cabrera 31. Aníbal Federico Izaguirre Maradiaga 32. César Antonio Pinto Pacheco 33. Marvin Oswaldo Ferrera Alvarenga 34. Rebeca Lizette Ráquel Obando 35. Mario Donaldo Acosta Cárcamo 36. Ismael Molina Rodríguez 37. Linda Patricia Reyes Interiano 38. Martha Delia Merino Conde 39. Walton Rolando Bouloy Cabrera 40. Gaudy Alejandra Bustillo Martínez 41. Gerardo Enrique Gómez Cobos 42. Francisco Javier Mejía Sánchez

43. Danelia Ferrera Turcios 44. Rubén Rivera Flores 45. Marco Vinicio Montes Tavarone 46. Marcio Beyran Membreño Villela 47. Karen Lizeth Martínez Ponce 48. Luis Alonso Discua Cerrato 49. Daniel Arturo Sibrián Bueso 50. Isbela Bustillo Hernández 51. Garín Enoc Urquía Castro 52. María Fernanda Castro Mendoza 53. Julio César Lagos Reyes 54. Edwin Francisco Ortez Cruz 55. Juan Wilfredo Castellanos Hipp 56. Fernando Francisco Azcona Schrenzel 57. Edwin Alberto Anemis López 58. Nelson Martin Reyes Morales 59. María De Jesús Palacios Zelaya 60. Alejandro Hernández Oyuela 61. Norman Enrique Mejía Orozco 62. Francibel Zepeda Castro 63. Felipe René Speer Laínez 64. Ana Alejandrina Pineda Hernández 65. Rubenia Esperanza Galeano Barralaga 66. Edgardo Cáceres Castellanos 67. Manuel Enrique Cálix Bonilla 68. Marcio Said Barahona Salgado 69. Nery Mauricio Miranda Sanabria 70. Fredis Alonso Cerrato Valladares 71. Rafael Bustillo Romero 72. Nelson Danilo Mairena Franco 73. Dunia Aracely Herrera Anduray 74. Marlene Suyapa Pérez Valle 75. Jorge Alberto Zelaya Zaldaña 76. Gloria Bertila Oyuela Carrasco 77. Anabelly Suyapa Medina Moncada 78. Marcia Núñez Ennabe 79. Raúl Antonio Ramos Canales 80. Roy Pineda Castro 81. Liliana Patricia Paz Paguaga 82. Gessenia López Zepeda 83. Sergio Daniel Rivera Sagastume 84. José Mauricio Salazar 85. Roxana Liceth Morales Toro 86. Norma Iris Coto Santos 87. Marvin Rigoberto Espinal Pinel 88. Sonia Marlina Dubón Villeda 89. Yimy Daniel Chirinos Orellana 90. Milton Danilo Jiménez Puerto 91. Carlos Alberto Gómez Moreno 92. Oliver Gerardo Erazo Gómez 93. José Ricardo Pineda Medina 94. Rosa Helena Bonilla Galindo 95. Odalis Aleyda Nájera Medina 96. Marco Tulio Barahona Valle 97. Damián Gilberto Pineda Reyes 98. Pablo Emilio Reyes Theodore 99. Lester Ilich Mejía Flores 100. Hermes Omar Moncada 101. Carlos Alberto Cobos Ramírez 102. Aida Estela Romero Reyes 103. José María Díaz Ávila 104. Miguel Ángel Cardona 105. Nelson Omar Madrid Chinchilla 69. Nery Mauricio Miranda Sanabria 70. Fredis Alonso Cerrato Valladares 71. Rafael Bustillo Romero 72. Nelson Danilo Mairena Franco 73. Dunia Aracely Herrera Anduray 74. Marlene Suyapa Pérez Valle 75. Jorge Alberto Zelaya Zaldaña 76. Gloria Bertila Oyuela Carrasco 77. Anabelly Suyapa Medina Moncada 78. Marcia Núñez Ennabe 79. Raúl Antonio Ramos Canales 80. Roy Pineda Castro 81. Liliana Patricia Paz Paguaga 82. Gessenia López Zepeda 83. Sergio Daniel Rivera Sagastume 84. José Mauricio Salazar 85. Roxana Liceth Morales Toro 86. Norma Iris Coto Santos 87. Marvin Rigoberto Espinal Pinel 88. Sonia Marlina Dubón Villeda 89. Yimy Daniel Chirinos Orellana 90. Milton Danilo Jiménez Puerto 91. Carlos Alberto Gómez Moreno 92. Oliver Gerardo Erazo Gómez 93. José Ricardo Pineda Medina 94. Rosa Helena Bonilla Galindo 95. Odalis Aleyda Nájera Medina 96. Marco Tulio Barahona Valle 97. Damián Gilberto Pineda Reyes 98. Pablo Emilio Reyes Theodore 99. Lester Ilich Mejía Flores 100. Hermes Omar Moncada 101. Carlos Alberto Cobos Ramírez 102. Aida Estela Romero Reyes 103. José María Díaz Ávila 104. Miguel Ángel Cardona 105. Nelson Omar Madrid Chinchilla Total number of applicants who proceeded to the Investigation Stage Men Women

It should be noted that the Nominating Board allowed applicants who wished to conduct a review of questions that, on the knowledge test, had incomplete statements or any of their answers, since according to the analysis conducted on the entire question bank that was prepared (816 in total), it was verified that four questions did not have their complete statement or answer. Also, it is important to note that, according to guidelines developed by the Nominating Board, reviews of all questions were not permitted under arguments related to incorrect formulation. Likewise, the principle of transparency and maximum publicity was guaranteed, so the requested reviews were conducted publicly and with the presence of the applicant who requested it. For these purposes, a review protocol was prepared that allowed reviewing questions one by one and if an incomplete question appeared, either in its statement or answer, then the applicant had the right to take a replacement test with the number of incorrect questions. In this review, only two tests reflected incomplete questions, but one person did not submit to the replacement test; and the only person who submitted to said test was Attorney MARCOS VINICIO MONTES, who improved his score by two points. E. Phase 4: Investigations. For the implementation of this phase, the Nominating Board issued a methodology for conducting socioeconomic investigations that would be subdivided into a personal interview, home visit, and investigation of databases and open sources. For this purpose, applicants attended the headquarters of the National Intelligence and Investigation Directorate, in the Building of the Trust Certification Division. The process was conducted between Monday, November 21 and Thursday, November 24, 2022. Likewise, at the request of the Nominating Board, information on applicants was received from the following institutions: 1. Tribunal of Honor of the Honduran Bar Association 2. Office of the Attorney General 3. Judicial Branch 4. Union of Notaries of Honduras 5. Institute of Access to Public Information 6. General Secretariat and Unit of Property Registry Intelligence of the Property Institute 7. National Anti-Corruption Council 8. Financial Investigation Unit of the National Banking and Insurance Commission 9. Tax Administration Service 10. Public Ministry 11. Honduras Customs 12. Notary Audit Board 13. General Directorate of the National Police The Nominating Board issued a communiqué on December 15,

2022, informing the public about the application of an exception to information publicity that governed the entire selection process. This exception to information publicity was based on the legislation in force in the country, for example, the Criminal Procedure Code, Tax Code, the Law on Transparency and Access to Public Information, and the Law Against Money Laundering, in addressing information related to the confidentiality of criminal investigations while judicial authorities do not receive the results derived from this process; the duty of confidentiality with respect to statements and data provided by obligated taxpayers or third parties, in the framework of the activities of the Department of State in the Ministry of Finance, Tax Administration and Customs; the classification of information as confidential personal data; and, lastly, the previously established grounds for suspension of banking secrecy. In the framework of the evaluations conducted by the Nominating Board, 101 applicants passed the investigation phase, advancing to the stage of presentation, discussion, and resolution of complaints and objections. 1. Malcon Eduardo Guzmán Valladares 2. Miriam Suyapa Barahona Rodríguez 3. Miguel Fernando Ruiz Rápalo 4. José Luis Arévalo Sandoval 5. Aida Patricia Martínez Linares 6. Nancy Carolina Sandoval Escoto 7. Luis Fernando Padilla Castellanos 8. Edward Terencio Navarro Miranda 9. José Tomas Guillén 10. Wendy Carolina Escobar Cantarero 11. Ingrid Ebelinda Monzón López 12. Sandra Lizeth Avelar Rajo 13. José Luis Valladares Guifarro 14. Wagner Vallecillo Paredes 15. Mario Rolando Díaz Flores 16. Tirza Del Carmen Flores Lanza 17. Jorge Abilio Serrano Villanueva 18. José Raúl Pineda Alvarado 19. Yuri Fernando Melara Berlioz 20. Mario Alejandro Calderón Maldonado 21. Antonio Isaac Martínez Dubón 22. José Joaquín Lizano Casco 23. Francisca Villela Zavala 24. Conan Rafael Argueta Bourdett 25. Danelia Gramizel Garay Caballero 26. Edin Yobany De La O Ramos 27. Anny Belinda Ochoa Medrano 28. Walter Raúl Miranda Sabio 29. Emilio Cabrera Cabrera 30. Aníbal Federico Izaguirre Maradiaga 31. Marvin Oswaldo Ferrera Alvarenga 32. Rebeca Lizette Ráquel Obando 33. Mario Donaldo Acosta Cárcamo 34. Ismael Molina Rodríguez 35. Linda Patricia Reyes Interiano 36. Martha Delia Merino Conde 37. Walton Rolando Bouloy Cabrera 38. Gaudy Alejandra Bustillo Martínez 39. Gerardo Enrique Gómez Cobos

40. Francisco Javier Mejía Sánchez 41. Danelia Ferrera Turcios 42. Rubén Rivera Flores 43. Marco Vinicio Montes Tavarone 44. Marcio Beyran Membreño Villela 45. Karen Lizeth Martínez Ponce 46. Luis Alonso Discua Cerrato 47. Daniel Arturo Sibrián Bueso 48. Isbela Bustillo Hernández 49. Garín Enoc Urquía Castro 50. María Fernanda Castro Mendoza 51. Julio César Lagos Reyes 52. Edwin Francisco Ortez Cruz 53. Juan Wilfredo Castellanos Hipp 54. Fernando Francisco Azcona Schrenzel 55. Edwin Alberto Anemis López 56. Nelson Martin Reyes Morales 57. María De Jesús Palacios Zelaya 58. Alejandro Hernández Oyuela 59. Norman Enrique Mejía Orozco 60. Francibel Zepeda Castro 61. Felipe René Speer Laínez 62. Ana Alejandrina Pineda Hernández 63. Rubenia Esperanza Galeano Barralaga 64. Edgardo Cáceres Castellanos 65. Manuel Enrique Cálix Bonilla 66. Marcio Said Barahona Salgado 67. Nery Mauricio Miranda Sanabria 68. Fredis Alonso Cerrato Valladares 69. Rafael Bustillo Romero 70. Nelson Danilo Mairena Franco 71. Dunia Aracely Herrera Anduray 72. Marlene Suyapa Pérez Valle 73. Jorge Alberto Zelaya Zaldaña 74. Gloria Bertila Oyuela Carrasco 75. Anabelly Suyapa Medina Moncada 76. Marcia Núñez Ennabe 77. Raúl Antonio Ramos Canales 78. Roy Pineda Castro 79. Liliana Patricia Paz Paguaga 80. Gessenia López Zepeda 81. José Mauricio Salazar 82. Roxana Liceth Morales Toro 83. Norma Iris Coto Santos 84. Marvin Rigoberto Espinal Pinel 85. Sonia Marlina Dubón Villeda 86. Yimy Daniel Chirinos Orellana 87. Milton Danilo Jiménez Puerto 88. Carlos Alberto Gómez Moreno 89. Oliver Gerardo Erazo Gómez 90. José Ricardo Pineda Medina 91. Odalis Aleyda Nájera Medina 92. Marco Tulio Barahona Valle 93. Damián Gilberto Pineda Reyes 94. Pablo Emilio Reyes Theodore 95. Lester Ilich Mejía Flores 96. Hermes Omar Moncada 97. Carlos Alberto Cobos Ramírez 98. Aida Estela Romero Reyes 99. José María Díaz Ávila 100. Miguel Ángel Cardona 101. Nelson Omar Madrid Chinchilla

F. Phase 5: Objections and Complaints. The Special Law provided in its Article 20 that over the preliminary listing of applicants who would advance to the final interview, after the investigation phase, any person could file a complaint or objection against any of the applicants through a reasoned writing meeting the requirements, disqualifications, and selection criteria established in the law. The Special Law also made a distinction between what should be understood as a complaint and an objection. In this case, a complaint constitutes information intended to question the integrity or ethics of the applicant, as well as to point out alleged administrative, civil, or criminal responsibilities. On the other hand, an objection refers to non-compliance with requirements, the existence of disqualifications, or lack of professional suitability and capacity of the applicant. Likewise, the Nominating Board approved Instrument JN-2022-IT-04 containing the Procedure Protocol for Objections and Complaints. For purposes of this report, it is necessary to revisit the constituent criteria of objections: 1. Lack of constitutional or legal requirements, due to questioning or impugning any document or requirement submitted by the applicant and required by the Law of the Nominating Board or its Regulations: i. Being a relative within the fourth degree of consanguinity or second degree of affinity of the President of the Republic. ii. Not having clearance of solvency of their account, if they have administered or collected public funds. iii. Being within the presumption of illicit enrichment, in accordance with Article 225 of the Constitution of the Republic. iv. Not holding notary authorization (Exequatur). v. Not having exercised the legal profession for ten (10) years or not having been holder of a judicial office for five (5) years. vi. Being delinquent with the Public Treasury. vii. Having been convicted with a final sentence for domestic violence or failure to pay child support. viii. Not being in the enjoyment and exercise of their civil rights. ix. Being a concessionaire of the State, authorized agent or representative of the State for the exploitation of natural resources. x. Being a contractor for public services and works financed with State funds, and those who have pending accounts with the State for such concepts. 2. Questioning the solvency or moral suitability of the applicant. Among its grounds may be found the following: i. Having been convicted with a final sentence for the commission of any willful crime, or being judicially prosecuted for any willful crime. ii. Having two (2) or more complaints for domestic violence or being judicially prosecuted for domestic violence. iii. Failure to comply with tax obligations during any of the five (5) years prior to the date of application. iv. Having complaints or investigations initiated before the Public Ministry for crimes of corruption, organized crime, bribery, fraud, money laundering, embezzlement of public funds, conspiracy to commit crimes, and any other willful crime. v. Having pending antejudgments initiated by the Public Ministry. vi. Being a relative within the fourth degree of consanguinity or second degree of affinity, spouse or household companion of a person who has been convicted with a final sentence for crimes related to acts of corruption, money laundering, drug trafficking, or organized crime. vii. Having been defeated by final sentence or being defendant in actions for breach or violation of contractual obligations in civil judicial proceedings, tenancy, administrative, labor or any other nature. viii. Having complaints, grievances, or investigations for human rights violations before any body of the justice system or the national and international human rights protection system. ix. Having complaints or pending investigations before the Public Ministry for the commission of any willful crime. x. Having been sanctioned for serious misconduct by the Honduran Bar Association (CAH), or by the Notary Audit Board. xi. Having disciplinary proceedings pending before the Honduran Bar Association (CAH) or before the Notary Audit Board. xii. Having two (2) or more disciplinary proceedings pending or having been sanctioned for serious misconduct in the Judicial Branch, Public Ministry, Office of the Attorney General or other state institution in which they have served or are serving as an official or employee. xiii. Having been removed by disciplinary action from the Judicial Branch, Public Ministry, or any Institution of the Public Administration, or having been dismissed in private activity for serious misconduct duly proven. xiv. Having been complained about in any institution for interference in lawsuits of any nature or attacks against judicial independence. xv. Having acted in procedural representation as legal counsel in any stage of criminal proceedings in cases related to acts of corruption, money laundering and organized crime, as well as in asset forfeiture proceedings of illicit origin linked to those cases; except for those who have acted as Public Defenders. xvi. Being a relative within the fourth degree of consanguinity or second degree of affinity, spouse or household companion of persons who have acted in procedural representation as legal counsel in any stage of criminal proceedings in cases related to acts of corruption, money laundering and organized crime, as well as in asset forfeiture proceedings of illicit origin linked to those cases; except for those who have acted as Public Defenders. xvii. If as a public official or government employee they have acted arbitrarily, without safeguarding fundamental rights, including respect for labor rights of workers under their charge, or if convictions against the State have been generated by their actions or omissions. xviii. If in the exercise of the function

The Law of the Public Ministry, in which the fiscal authority cannot divulge information that attacks the confidentiality of investigations or that could violate the rights of persons. The Tax Code, indicates in Article 70 concerning the duties of confidentiality of public servants and other collaborators of the Department of State in the Ministry of Finance, Tax Administration and Customs Administration; which regulates that public servants who intervene in the various procedures related to the application of tax and customs provisions are obligated to maintain absolute confidentiality regarding the declarations and data provided by obligated taxpayers or third parties, as well as information obtained in the exercise of auditing powers; a series of exceptions are set forth in this provision which, in the present process, do not have applicability. The Law on Transparency and Access to Public Information defines in Article 3, which is understood as "7) Confidential Personal Data: Those relating to ethnic or racial origin, physical, moral or emotional characteristics, private residence, private telephone number, private email address, participation, affiliation to a political organization, political ideology, religious or philosophical beliefs, state of health, physical or mental, personal, family patrimony or one's own image". Article 16 of the aforementioned Law, indicates in its numeral 2) that it recognizes as reserved or confidential information personal data, also Article 24 of the mentioned rule establishes that personal data will be protected always, so that access to these will only proceed by court order or at the request of the person whose personal data is contained in said information or of their representatives or successors. Regulating, in Article 25 of the Transparency Law, the prohibition of delivering or providing personal data that could cause discrimination or cause damage or patrimonial or moral risks to persons. For these reasons it is not appropriate to publish the information provided by the National Intelligence and Investigation Directorate, given that it contains personal and patrimonial data provided in the Socioeconomic Study of the applicants, as well as the patrimonial information supplied by the Property Institute. Regarding Banking Secrecy, the Law Against Money Laundering indicates, in Article 47 concerning banking, professional or tax secrecy, that the first should only be suspended in investigations for the crimes typified in Titles XXV and XXXII of the Penal Code and cases of definitive forfeiture of property of illicit origin, by order issued by the competent body, this motivated the Board to hold reserved meetings to analyze all information, both reserved or confidential, in order to contrast the data and issue resolutions in accordance with law. 4.5. Decisions of the Nominating Board A good practice observed was the democratization in decision-making and empathetic listening to the opinions of each sector. Thus, in each decision, the viewpoints of all sectors were debated, allowing each member of the board to present motions on specific matters. After this, parliamentary rules were followed and voting was allowed, always prevailing the opinion and decision of the majority of the sectors that make up the Board. 5. Nominated and Excluded Candidates. 5.1. List of Selected Candidates As previously explained, each applicant went through the stages of the selection process by passing the toxicological, psychometric, and written knowledge tests, as well as the patrimonial, personal, and professional investigation. And, likewise, they passed the stage of complaints and objections and the interview phase. And then the analysis was conducted using the Technical Evaluation Matrix, with the following result: 5.1.1.1. Excluded Candidates In each phase of the process applicants were excluded for not meeting some legal or constitutional requirement, or for not passing any of the tests, as explained in this section. b.1. Phase of Review of Requirements and Disqualifications. Regarding the grounds for exclusion of these applicants, the resolutions expressing the motivation of the Nominating Board are attached in the annexes, under which the exclusion resolutions of the applicants were notified. No Applicant File Name of Applicant Grounds for Exclusion 1 PCSJ-2022-92 Stephanie Claudette Bustillo Zelaya The Law of the Nominating Board establishes as a requirement the non-existence of conviction with a final sentence for domestic violence, a requirement that was not met by the applicant. Page 58 No Applicant File Name of Applicant Grounds for Exclusion 2 PCSJ-2022- Emilio Enrique Hernández Hércules Non-compliance with the constitutional requirement referring to "having exercised the profession for ten years 3 ." 3 PCSJ-2022- René Velásquez Díaz The relatives of the applicant attended the Nominating Board with the desire to honor the memory of their father, submitting his nomination; however, it is understandable that it is impossible to analyze and admit him in the process, due to his unfortunate death. 4 PCSJ-2022- Mercedes Geraldina Alonzo Cortés The applicant was excluded on November 3, 2022 because she did not meet the constitutional and legal requirements established for nomination, as she did not attach a law degree issued by a Honduran university or certified by the National Autonomous University of Honduras. She also did not present proof of registration with the Honduran Bar Association, as required by Article 167 of the Constitution of the Republic and Article

Page 59 No Applicant File Name of Applicant Grounds for Exclusion 5 of the Law of the Bar Association. And, in addition to this, she also did not certify that she has notary authorization (Exequatur) obtained by the Supreme Court of Justice. 5 PCSJ-2022- Raúl Hernán Rafael Baltodano Applicant Raúl Hernan Rafael Silva Baltodano was excluded for not presenting the corresponding tax clearance, as he did not certify that he is in compliance with the Public Treasury, so it fell to reject his nomination completely in this process. 6 PCSJ-2022- Félix Gerardo Martínez Umanzor For its part, Article 310 of the Constitution of the Republic establishes that the disqualifications for being elected Justice of the Supreme Court of Justice are the same as those that prevent being Secretary or Undersecretary of State, that is, it refers to Article 250 of the Constitution of the Republic. And this Article 250, in its numeral 3, indicates that being delinquent with the Public Treasury is a disqualification for being Secretary or Undersecretary of State. 7 PCSJ-2022- Juan Pablo Cruz Garrido Applicant Juan Pablo Cruz Garrido did not present the corresponding tax clearance, in addition to the documents mentioned above. From the foregoing, it is evident that the applicant Juan Pablo Cruz Garrido has not certified that he is in compliance with the Public Treasury, so it corresponds to reject, completely, his nomination in this process. b.2. Phase of Tests (Toxicological, Knowledge, and Psychometric). No Applicant File Name of Applicant Reason for Exclusion 1 PCSJ-2022-67 Luis Alfredo Galeano Ordoñez Failure in knowledge examination. 2 PCSJ-2022- Jorge Alberto García Martínez Failure in knowledge examination. 3 PCSJ-2022- Luis Miguel Lara Hernández Failure in knowledge examination. 4 PCSJ-2022-73 Francisco Darío Lobo Lara Failure in knowledge examination. 5 PCSJ-2022- Armando Urtecho López Failure in knowledge examination. 6 PCSJ-2022- José Francisco Morales Martínez Failure in knowledge examination. 7 PCSJ-2022- Humberto Domínguez Aguiluz Failure in knowledge examination. 8 PCSJ-2022-64 Loany Patricia Alvarado Sorto Failure in knowledge examination. 9 PCSJ-2022-37 Marlon Javier Arévalo Cerna Failure in knowledge examination.

No Applicant File Name of Applicant Reason for Exclusion 10 PCSJ-2022- Nery Esteban Baca Mondragón Failure in knowledge examination. 11 PCSJ-2022- Vera Vanessa Goussen Paguaga Failure in knowledge examination. 12 PCSJ-2022-31 José Juan Pineda Varela Failure in knowledge examination. 13 PCSJ-2022- Ramón Antonio Romero Cantarero Failure in knowledge examination. 14 PCSJ-2022- Ilsa Lorena Torres Matamoros Failure in knowledge examination. 15 PCSJ-2022-63 María Marlene Villela Franco Failure in knowledge examination. 16 PCSJ-2022-44 Ivis Antonio Discua Barillas Failure in knowledge examination. 17 PCSJ-2022- Marvin Geovanny García Martínez Failure in knowledge examination. 18 PCSJ-2022- Darío Josué García Villalta Failure in knowledge examination. 19 PCSJ-2022- Nasry Javier Ictech Guifarro Failure in knowledge examination. 20 PCSJ-2022-20 Adán Guillermo López Lone Failure in knowledge examination. 21 PCSJ-2022-04 Luis Alejandro Matamoros Quilico Failure in knowledge examination. 22 PCSJ-2022-65 Linda Lizzie Rivera Lobo Failure in knowledge examination.

No Applicant File Name of Applicant Reason for Exclusion 23 PCSJ-2022-34 Juan Rafael Soto Aguilar Failure in knowledge examination. 24 PCSJ-2022- Marvin Omar Aguilar Romero Failure in knowledge examination. 25 PCSJ-2022- Mario Enrique Boquín Hernández Failure in knowledge examination. 26 PCSJ-2022- Gloria Guadalupe Oqueli Solorzano Failure in knowledge examination. 27 PCSJ-2022-49 Mélida Estrada Quintanilla Failure in knowledge examination. 28 PCSJ-2022- Roy David Urtecho López Failure in knowledge examination. 29 PCSJ-2022-76 Johel Antonio Zelaya Alvarez Failure in knowledge examination. 30 PCSJ-2022- Rommel Armando Ruiz Guillen Failure in knowledge examination. 31 PCSJ-2022-74 Andy Reynaldo Mena Rodríguez Failure in knowledge examination. 32 PCSJ-2022- Remberto Ordoñez Failure in knowledge examination. 33 PCSJ-2022-85 Rony David Molina Euceda Failure in knowledge examination. 34 PCSJ-2022-08 Delmy Anarda Banegas Padilla Failure in knowledge examination. 35 PCSJ-2022-75 Alex Rafael D´Vicente Jarquín Failure in knowledge examination.

No Applicant File Name of Applicant Reason for Exclusion 36 PCSJ-2022-14 Suyapa Lizeth Mejía Portillo Failure in knowledge examination. 37 PCSJ-2022-56 Greisy Zelaya Pineda Failure in knowledge examination. 38 PCSJ-2022-09 Wilfredo Guevara Trujillo Failure in knowledge examination. 39 PCSJ-2022- Walter Galindo Valeriano Failure in knowledge examination. 40 PCSJ-2022- Eva Fabiola Castro Márquez Failure in knowledge examination. 41 PCSJ-2022-16 Denis Rene Gallardo Funes Failure in knowledge examination. 42 PCSJ-2022- Rebeca Angelina Ávila Baca Failure in knowledge examination. 43 PCSJ-2022- Miguel Angel Bonilla Gonzalez Failure in knowledge examination. 44 PCSJ-2022- Erika Yolanda Calix Hernández Failure in knowledge examination. 45 PCSJ-2022- Jorge Berlamino Reyes Failure in knowledge examination. 46 PCSJ-2022-11 José Erásmo Ochoa Rodríguez Failure in knowledge examination. 47 PCSJ-2022- Wilfredo Flores Valladares Failure in knowledge examination. 48 PCSJ-2022-89 Marco Tulio Lara Guevara Failure in knowledge examination.

No Applicant File Name of Applicant Reason for Exclusion 49 PCSJ-2022-77 Carlos Ruben López Oliva Failure in knowledge examination. 50 PCSJ-2022-26 Hector Rodolfo Bueso Hernández Failure in knowledge examination. 51 PCSJ-2022-58 Salome Antonia Castellanos Delgado Failure in knowledge examination. 52 PCSJ-2022- Leon Homero Rojas Caron Failure in knowledge examination. 53 PCSJ-2022- Juan Miguel Ochoa Cardona Failure in psychometric examination. 54 PCSJ-2022- Juan Rafael Rodríguez Cerritos Failure in psychometric examination. 55 PCSJ-2022- Carlos Alberto Izaguirre Bustillo Failure in psychometric examination. 56 PCSJ-2022-47 Carlos Roberto Calix Hernández Failure in psychometric examination. 57 PCSJ-2022- Henry Lara Trejo Failure in psychometric examination. 58 PCSJ-2022-96 Doris Alicia Madrid Lezama Failure in psychometric examination. 59 PCSJ-2022- Danery Antonio Medal Raudales Failure in psychometric examination. 60 PCSJ-2022- Juan Ramon Gonzales Rodriguez Failure in psychometric examination. 61 PCSJ-2022-79 Elvin Francisco Romero Castillo Failure in psychometric examination.

No Applicant File Name of Applicant Reason for Exclusion 62 PCSJ-2022- Ivan Adan Martinez Ordoñez Failure in psychometric examination. 63 PCSJ-2022- Isaias Morán Pavón Failure in psychometric examination. 64 PCSJ-2022- Jorge Adalid Rodriguez Murillo Failure in psychometric examination and knowledge examination. 65 PCSJ-2022- Rafael Antonio Canales Girbal Failure in psychometric examination and knowledge examination. 66 PCSJ-2022- Rosman Wilfredo Montiel Girón Failure in psychometric examination and knowledge examination. 67 PCSJ-2022- Pedro Pablo Ramírez Guevara Failure in psychometric examination and knowledge examination. 68 PCSJ-2022-70 José Emeterio Rodas Pavón Failure in psychometric examination and knowledge examination. 69 PCSJ-2022-51 Tania Petrona Fuentes Failure in psychometric examination and knowledge examination. 70 PCSJ-2022-83 Gilberto Navas Izaguirre. Did not appear for psychometric examination. 71 PCSJ-2022-05 María Paulina Pérez Núñez. Did not appear for knowledge examination. 72 PCSJ-2022- Julio Cesar Cruz Bonilla. Did not appear for psychometric examination. 73 PCSJ-2022- Víctor Méndez Ordoñez. Did not appear for psychometric examination. 5.1.2. Phase of Investigations.

Page 66 During the investigation phase, cases with grounds for exclusion were analyzed, which are set forth below. No Applicant File Name of Applicant Reason for Exclusion 1 PCSJ-2022-141 Sergio Daniel Rivera Sagastume Upon conducting a comparative analysis of the information and reviewing the reports sent by institutions, inconsistencies were found that were explained through reasoned resolution to the applicants. In compliance with the mandate to protect patrimonial information, these resolutions and specific grounds for exclusion were not published. 2 PCSJ-2022-10 José Adalid Rodríguez Rosa 3 PCSJ-2022-159 Rosa Helena Bonilla Galindo 4 PCSJ-2022-45 Cesar Antonio Pinto Pacheco 5.1.3. Phase of Objections and Complaints. The grounds for exclusion at this stage were established in each resolution issued, which are attached as annexes. The following persons were excluded: No Applicant File Name of Applicant 1 PCSJ-2022-36 Conan Rafael Argueta Bourdett 2 PCSJ-2022-84 Edwin Francisco Ortez Cruz 3 PCSJ-2022-114 Fredis Alonso Cerrato Valladares 5.1.2. Phase of Investigations. During the investigation phase, cases with grounds for exclusion were analyzed, which are set forth below.

Page 67 4 PCSJ-2022-27 Miriam Suyapa Barahona Rodríguez 5 PCSJ-2022-27 Jorge Abilio Serrano Villanueva 6 PCSJ-2022-115 Rafael Bustillo Romero 7 PCSJ-2022-19 Ingrid Ebelinda Monzón López 8 PCSJ-2022-81 Maria Fernanda Castro 9 PCSJ-2022-100 Edgardo Caseres Castellanos 10 PCSJ-2022-185 Nelson Omar Madrid Chinchilla 11 PCSJ-2022-94 Norman Mejía Orozco 12 PCSJ-2022-80 Garín Enoc Urquía 13 PCSJ-2022-170 José Tomas Guillen 14 PCSJ-2022-153 Yimi Daniel Chirinos Orellana 15 PCSJ-2022-169 Lester Ilich Mejía Flores 16 PCSJ-2022-121 Marlene Suyapa Perez Valle 17 PCSJ-2022-87 Fernando Francisco Azcona Schrenzel 18 PCSJ-2022-42 Emilio Cabrera Cabrera 5.1.4. Phase of Final Selection. In the final selection, it was not considered to include in the list those persons who had the lowest scores, according to the analysis conducted on the Technical Evaluation Matrix, being the following persons: No. File Number Names and Surnames Score 1 PCSJ-2022-90 NELSON MARTÍN REYES MORALES 73.64 2 PCSJ-2022-30 MARIO ALEJANDRO CALDERON MALDONADO 72.05 3 PCSJ-2022-28 JOSÉ RAÚL PINEDA ALVARADO 71.98 4 PCSJ-2022-161 MARCO TULIO BARAHONA VALLE 71.29 5 PCSJ-2022-157 OLIVER GERARDO ERAZO GOMEZ 70.45 6 PCSJ-2022-166 PABLO EMILIO REYES THEODORE 70.28

Page 68 No. File Number Names and Surnames Score 7 PCSJ-2022-03 MIGUEL FERNANDO RUIZ RAPALO 69.59 8 PCSJ-2022-143 JOSÉ MAURICIO SALAZAR 68.18 9 PCSJ-2022-172 CARLOS ALBERTO COBOS RAMIREZ 68.13 10 PCSJ-2022-170 HERMES OMAR MONCADA 67.20 11 PCSJ-2022-32 ANTONIO ISAAC MARTINEZ DUBÓN 67.11 12 PCSJ-2022-22 JOSÉ LUIS VALLADARES GUIFARRO 66.85 13 PCSJ-2022-164 DAMIAN GILBERTO PINEDA REYES 66.08 14 PCSJ-2022-33 JOSÉ JOAQUÍN LIZANO CASCO 65.08 15 PCSJ-2022-156 CARLOS ALBERTO GÓMEZ MORENO 65.04 16 PCSJ-2022-111 MARCIO SAID BARAHONA SALGADO 64.13 17 PCSJ-2022-62 RUBEN RIVERA FLORES 63.29 18 PCSJ-2022-15 EDWARD TERENCIO NAVARRO MIRANDA 62.97 19 PCSJ-2022-119 DUNIA ARACELY HERRERA ANDURAY 62.79 20 PCSJ-2022-95 FRANCIBEL ZEPEDA CASTRO 62.09 21 PCSJ-2022-147 NORMA IRIS COTO SANTOS 61.77 22 PCSJ-2022-133 RAUL ANTONIO RAMOS CANALES 61.75 23 PCSJ-2022-06 JOSE LUIS AREVALO SANDOVAL 61.18 24 PCSJ-2022-18 WENDY CAROLINA ESCOBAR CANTARERO 60.87 25 PCSJ-2022-130 MARCIA NUÑEZ ENNABE 59.15 26 PCSJ-2022-12 NANCY CAROLINA SANDOVAL ESCOTO 58.50 27 PCSJ-2022-82 JULIO CESAR LAGOS REYES 56.95 28 PCSJ-2022-43 ANIBAL FEDERICO IZAGUIRRE MARADIAGA 56.58 29 PCSJ-2022-113 NERY MAURICIO MIRANDA SANABRIA 56.24 30 PCSJ-2022-93 ALEJANDRO HERNANDEZ OYUELA 55.27 31 PCSJ-2022-88 EDWIN ALBERTO ANEMIS LÓPEZ 54.89 32 PCSJ-2022-55 WALTON ROLANDO BOULOY CABRERA 50.02 33 PCSJ-2022-38 DANELIA GRAMIZEL GARAY CABALLERO 48.81 34 PCSJ-2022-46 MARVIN OSWALDO FERRERA ALVARENGA 48.69 35 PCSJ-2022-52 ISMAEL MOLINA RODRIGUEZ 42.28

Page 69 No. File Number Names and Surnames Score 36 PCSJ-2022-59 GERARDO ENRIQUE GOMEZ COBOS 40.72 37 PCSJ-2022-183 MIGUEL ANGEL CARDONA 40.52 And, those persons who obtained the highest scores 4 , according to the consolidated information of the Technical Evaluation Matrix, with the following list composed: List of Candidates (Female) No. Applicant Code Candidate Evaluation 1 PCSJ-2022-98 ANA ALEJANDRINA PINEDA HERNÁNDEZ 93,22 2 PCSJ-2022-179 AIDA ESTELA ROMERO REYES 86,47 3 PCSJ-2022-149 SONIA MARLINA DUBÓN VILLEDA 85,78 4 PCSJ-2022-99 RUBENIA ESPERANZA GALEANO BARRALAGA 85,47 5 PCSJ-2022-160 ODALIS ALEYDA NAJERA MEDINA 84,96 6 PCSJ-2022-57 GAUDY ALEJANDRA BUSTILLO MARTINEZ 83,24 7 PCSJ-2022-146 ROXANA LICETH MORALES TORO 81,96 8 PCSJ-2022-40 ANNY BELINDA OCHOA MEDRANO 80,43 9 PCSJ-2022-78 ISBELA BUSTILLO HERNÁNDEZ 80,4 10 PCSJ-2022-69 KAREN LIZETH MARTINEZ PONCE 79,68 11 PCSJ-2022-48 REBECA LIZETTE RÁQUEL OBANDO 79,39 12 PCSJ-2022-35 FRANCISCA VILLELA ZAVALA 79,05 13 PCSJ-2022-25 TIRZA DEL CARMEN FLORES LANZA 77,45 14 PCSJ-2022-91 MARIA DE JESÚS PALACIOS ZELAYA 75,58 15 PCSJ-2022-128 ANABELLY SUYAPA MEDINA MONCADA 74,93 16 PCSJ-2022-135 LILIANA PATRICIA PAZ PAGUAGA 74,37 17 PCSJ-2022-61 DANELIA FERRERA TURCIOS 73,92 18 PCSJ-2022-54 MARTHA DELIA MERINO CONDE 73,76 19 PCSJ-2022-07 AIDA PATRICIA MARTINEZ LINARES 71,16 4 The Faculty of Professors of Schools of Legal Sciences issued a reasoned vote which is attached as an annex.

Page 70 List of Candidates (Female) No. Applicant Code Candidate Evaluation 20 PCSJ-2022-53 LINDA PATRICIA REYES INTERIANO 70,94 21 PCSJ-2022-21 SANDRA LIZETH AVELAR RAJO 69,6 22 PCSJ-2022-136 GESSENIA LOPEZ ZEPEDA 67,65 23 PCSJ-2022-126 GLORIA BERTILA OYUELA CARRASCO 66,3 List of Candidates (Male) No Applicant Code Candidate TOTAL 1 PCSJ-2022-134 ROY PINEDA CASTRO 92,95 2 PCSJ-2022-86 JUAN WILFREDO CASTELLANOS HIPP 91,14 3 PCSJ-2022-24 MARIO ROLANDO DÍAZ FLORES 88,28 4 PCSJ-2022-158 JOSÉ RICARDO PINEDA MÉDINA 87,69 5 PCSJ-2022-01 MALCON EDUARDO GUZMAN VELÁSQUEZ 87,15 6 PCSJ-2022-66 MARCO VINICIO MONTES TAVARONE 86,86 7 PCSJ-2022-117 NELSON DANILO MAIRENA FRANCO 84,79 8 PCSJ-2022-97 FELIPE RENE SPEER LAINEZ 83,4 9 PCSJ-2022-155 MILTÓN DANILO JIMENEZ PUERTO 82,75 10 PCSJ-2022-182 JOSÉ MARÍA DIAZ AVILA 81,2 11 PCSJ-2022-68 MARCIO BEYRAN MEMBREÑO VILLELA 80,9 12 PCSJ-2022-39 EDIN YOBANY DE LA O RAMOS 80,31 13 PCSJ-2022-60 FRANCISCO JAVIER MEJIA SANCHEZ 79,72 14 PCSJ-2022-148 MARVIN RIGOBERTO ESPINAL PINEL 79,25 15 PCSJ-2022-29 YURI FERNANDO MELARA BERLIOZ 78,88 16 PCSJ-2022-71 LUIS ALONSO DISCUA CERRATO 78,24 17 PCSJ-2022-50 MARIO DONALDO ACOSTA CARCAMO 75,71 18 PCSJ-2022-72 DANIEL ARTURO SIBRIÁN BUESO 74,7 19 PCSJ-2022-41 WALTER RAUL MIRANDA SABIO 73,96 List of Candidates (Male) No Applicant Code Candidate TOTAL 20 PCSJ-2022-23 WAGNER VALLECILLO PAREDES 73,78 21 PCSJ-2022-105 MANUEL ENRIQUE CALIX BONILLA 73,76 22 PCSJ-2022-13 LUIS FERNANDO PADILLA CASTELLANOS 73,67 5.2. Disqualifications of Nominated Persons. The participation of spouses and relatives within the fourth degree of consanguinity and

5.2. Disqualifications of Nominated Persons. The participation of spouses and relatives within the fourth degree of consanguinity and second degree of affinity in the selection process is not a ground for exclusion from the selection process, in accordance with Article 310 of the Constitution of the Republic, it being the obligation of the National Congress of the Republic not to elect a person who has this constitutional prohibition. But it is the obligation of the Nominating Board to indicate, in accordance with information derived from the process, who has this prohibition, as is the case in this process of the applicants Sonia Marlina Dubon Villeda with registration No. PCSJ-2022-149 and Tirza del Carmen Flores Lanza with registration No. PCSJ-2022-025 who are sisters-in-law to each other; likewise the applicants Marcio Beyran Membreño Villela with registration No. PCSJ-2022-068 and Francisca Villela Zavala who are cousins. 6. Conclusions 6.1. The Special Law of the Nominating Board contained in Legislative Decree 74-2022 published in "La Gaceta" Official Gazette of the Republic of Honduras on July 20, 2022, establishes in Article 7, second paragraph, that the President of the National Congress will swear in the principal and alternate members of each of the 7 organizations that make it up within the first half of September, this Nominating Board concludes that by having sworn them in until September 14, this took away 15 days from the process, it being important that in future selection processes for candidates to Justices of the Supreme Court of Justice this swearing-in act be conducted within the first 5 days of September. 6.2. The working time contemplated for the Nominating Board is not sufficient to conduct in a more thorough manner the processes of document preparation, reception of documentation, application of tests, investigations, interviews, review and admission of objections and complaints, and application of evaluation matrix. 6.3. In relation to the matter of financing and logistics of operations established in Article 10 of the Special Law of the Nominating Board, the National Congress must from the beginning assign the budget line to be able to begin operations of the Board, this due to the difficulties that arose from beginning work without having a defined budget, for which reason this Nominating Board requests that the financial report that is issued may be made available to new Nominating Boards and that it may be adjusted and brought to present value

the needs that are required, the organizations may contribute with their contributions in the measures of their possibilities in an equitable manner, but the initial support of the National Congress is required; The Nominating Board was able to begin its activities thanks to the economic and technical contributions of the 7 organizations or institutions that compose it. 6.4. The working time contemplated for the Nominating Board is not sufficient to conduct in a more thorough manner the processes of document preparation, reception of documentation, application of tests, investigations, interviews, review and admission of objections and complaints, and application of evaluation matrix. 6.5. It is valued as an important advance that the Special Law of the Nominating Board establishes in Article 12 the creation of a technical secretariat, which was great support together with the assistant secretariats that were created as support staff for the work of the Nominating Board and which allowed compliance with the deadlines established in the Law. 6.6. In relation to the third paragraph of Article 12 of the Special Law of the Nominating Board, where the publication of the Regulations of the Law is mandated in 3 national circulation newspapers, the Nominating Board could not comply with this obligation due to the high economic cost that these publications represented, with other means of distribution having equal or greater reach than written media, without incurring high economic costs, for which reason it is concluded that this obligation is not necessary to achieve maximum publicity of the regulations issued by the Nominating Board, publication in "La Gaceta" Official Gazette of the Republic and dissemination through digital media being sufficient. This same conclusion applies to what is established in Article 22 of the Special Law that mandates the publication of the report in 3 national circulation newspapers. 6.7. In relation to the selection criteria in the evaluation matrix, a weighted point system should be established for verifying professional ethics, since this criterion only allows evaluation with zero "0" or twenty "20" despite having 3 selection criteria such as: 1. Professional performance, 2. Professional and personal relationships incompatible with the practice of the judiciary and with the confidence that this position should inspire in the public; and, 3. Serious ethical objections, and should, as in the other requirements, have an evaluation for each criterion. 6.8. Having defined the National Autonomous University of Honduras (UNAH) as the headquarters allowed having a place with adequate working conditions, and a significant cost savings, which was evidenced in all phases of the process, from its beginning to its conclusion, in addition to guaranteeing neutrality in the process. 6.9. Having conducted an open, transparent process with permanent observers helped generate public confidence, which was evidenced in the high number of objections and complaints, the Nominating Board complied with the principle of maximum publicity by holding all its sessions with broadcasts on social networks, with the presence of the media and state channels. 7. Recommendations After all the process followed, this Nominating Board considers it necessary to issue the following recommendations: 7.1. TIME OF SELECTION PROCESS. The current Nominating Board considers that the time from when it was officially integrated was very short for the selection process and to form the list of candidates for the Supreme Court of Justice, for which reason it recommends that the selection process begin in June of the year prior to the election of justices. The Special Law on Organization and Functioning of the Nominating Board for the Nomination of Candidates for Justices of the Supreme Court of Justice, indicates in Article 7, regarding the call and installation of the Nominating Board, that in the second half of July of the year prior to the election of the justices of the Court, the President of the National Congress will call the institutions and organizations that make up the collegial body, to submit in writing the names of their respective representatives, no later than August thirty-first of that year, this process should begin four months before what was indicated. In this sense it is appropriate that the Congress proceed to make reforms this year to the Law of the Nominating Board, to resolve this problem, taking advantage of the commitment of the current Congress to create a new Law, not leaving to future political will the implementation of changes that will ensure that the actions of the future Nominating Board be better than that of the present. 7.2. PREPARATORY COMMISSION. The Nominating Board considers that a preselection phase could be carried out which could be conducted by a preparatory commission, which would be in charge of reviewing the formal requirements of the nomination prior to the work of the Nominating Board itself in the selection of justices, without prejudice to the preservation of the Nominating Board model, as indicated below.

7.3. BUDGET OF THE PROCESS. The process entails the use of economic and human resources so that it can be agile, as the law provides, each organization may make a voluntary contribution for the support of the expenses of the process, however, not all organizations have a budget for such purpose, for which reason it is recommended that in the General Budget of the Republic a budget line be assigned to cover the costs that the process entails. 7.4. TECHNICAL EVALUATION MATRIX. Although it was an element that allowed considerable objectivity in the evaluation of the merits of the self-nominated applicants, we believe that in aspects such as personal and professional integrity, the existence of only one indicator is very limited, while in other aspects of the matrix, such as the area of human rights and constitutional, there is repetition of indicators, for which reason the distribution should be better balanced, opening up to other legal and social areas. It is not advisable to leave the evaluation of each and every aspect of the matrix until the end of the process, but rather this should be done during the process. For this purpose, it is proposed to organize a system for capturing information and emptying it into formats available to each sector, which as the stages progress is being filled to feed the different indicators of the matrix. At the end the scores obtained are only integrated and marathon sessions of file review are avoided. 7.5. EXAMINATIONS. Although there was manifest dissatisfaction regarding knowledge evaluation, we must also assess that sixty-three percent (63%) of the self-nominated applicants passed with a score above seventy-five percent (75%), for which reason, even with the little time they had for the process, the result is commendable; in this context, and following recommendation number 1 of this document, better results could be obtained for which reason this Board considers it important that it be maintained. 7.6. COMPUTER SECURITY. The Nominating Board should anticipate any incident of theft, leakage or hacking of the information it handles, by installing antispyware systems on the computers of its members that block this possibility. 7.7. OBJECTIONS AND COMPLAINTS. The selection process currently has almost at the final stage the process of objections and complaints, which in some way hinders the process given the amount of challenge documents that must be resolved by the Board, added to the fact that subjecting the Board to administrative processes obligates it to provide the remedy of reconsideration to those affected by the resolutions. In this scenario, we recommend establishing a special process in the same law to resolve objections and complaints which should be prior to the investigations that the Board conducts with the reports from the different security institutions of the country. On the other hand, it is unnecessary and a waste of time that after the receipt of objections and complaints, these pass through a filter of "admission" and "non-admission" and then through the substantive review process of the same. All should be admitted and dismissed for reasons of form and substance, and resolved on both aspects in a single phase. 7.8. REPORTS FROM INSTITUTIONS LINKED TO THE JUSTICE SYSTEM. One of the main problems in the investigation process, the reports from the public institutions to which relevant information was requested, did not have updated information, for example, complaints dating back more than 10 years without administrative closure, and others that sent lists of persons who allegedly had incurred in unlawful acts, without providing supporting documentation; for the foregoing, it is recommended that the reports required from institutions be accompanied by legal support to sustain the responsibility being indicated. 7.9. PUBLIC INTERVIEWS. This valuable stage should have a very precise methodology and instruments for capturing information while interviews are conducted, which is aligned with the different sub-indicators that this technique feeds. This prevents evaluation from being conducted arbitrarily or after the interview and requires that evaluation to be in real-time and systematic. 7.10. EXEQUATUR. The possibility of participation in the selection process was diminished because the number of notaries at this date represents only 10% of the membership of the Honduran Bar Association, for which reason a recommendation is that the granting of notary authorization (Exequatur) be done by prioritizing the order of application in such a way that the oldest applications will have preference to be presented before the Supreme Court of Justice. And likewise, a democratization and transparency is required in the manner in which the examination prior to obtaining the Exequatur is conducted. 7.11. STAGGERED ELECTION OF JUSTICES. As a good corporate governance practice, this Board recommends that the election of justices be conducted in a staggered manner, that is, that the selection processes be conducted partially and not the totality of justices that make up the Court, which will allow the consolidation of jurisprudential criteria and the continuity of the Strategic Plan of the Judicial Branch. 7.12. MODEL OF THE NOMINATING BOARD. The creation of the Nominating Board by means of a constitutional reform allowed the participation of different sectors of society in the selection processes of high State officials, without disregarding the competencies constitutionally attributed to the Legislative Branch. After three selection processes, with the approval of the Special Law in force, the Nominating Board functioned on the basis of principles of transparency and strict accountability. In this sense, it is recommended to preserve the Nominating Board model as a prior phase in the selection process of the justices of the Supreme Court of Justice, and, contrary to its repeal, to commit to strengthening the model to ensure compliance with the participatory democracy model that Article 5 of the Constitution recognizes. 7.13. UNCONSTITUTIONALITY DECISIONS. A parameter of independence is that the decisions handed down by a judicial body have binding force, for which reason we recommend reforming the Law on Constitutional Justice in the sense that sentences of unconstitutionality be published without intervention of the National Congress. 7.14. LABOR PREROGATIVES OF MEMBERS OF THE NOMINATING BOARD. Within the Law of the Nominating Board, it is considered pertinent to establish the obligation that members of the Board belong to or have been part of the sectors they represent in the last 3 years, and also to provide them with protection against their employers, by recognizing that labor sanctions cannot be applied to any of the members of the body, during the nomination process is pending, nor 6 months after it, without judicial authorization. 7.15. DOUBLE VALIDATION OF PSYCHOMETRIC TESTS. Likewise, to modify Article 17 of the Law of the Nominating Board, to establish a double validation of the results of psychometric and toxicological tests, to provide greater certainty of the results. 7.16. DEFINITION OF EXCUSES AND RECUSALS. The lack of regulation must be addressed, both in the Law of the Nominating Board and in the Organic Law of the Legislative Branch, of grounds for abstention or citizen recusal against deputies and female deputies, for the existence of any real conflict of interest with the nominated persons or for having judicial proceedings that could be influenced by their participation in the election; it being necessary to include that the National Congress hold public hearings with the persons nominated for the election of the Supreme Court, extending this obligation to the elections it conducts such as the case of authorities in the Public Ministry, Superior Court of Accounts, Office of the Attorney General, National Commissioner of Human Rights, Judiciary Council and Judicial Career, National Registry of Persons, National Electoral Council, Electoral Justice Court, Institute of Access to Public Information, Commission for the Defense and Promotion of Competition, among others. 7.17. SOCIALIZATION OF REFORMS. We consider it necessary that the National Congress begin a socialization with different sectors of Honduran society and with the general public, on the reform to the selection process of the justices of the Supreme Court of Justice, establishing a partial renewal of its members, as well as increasing the period for which they are elected; this would translate into a consolidation of processes within the Judicial Branch; for this reform different models of operation of the High Courts in our region can be discussed, for example, we could have a Plenary in which one-third of its members is appointed every five years, with their term lasting 10 years, that would allow that when changes occur in its composition, doubts and uncertainty about legal criteria be less, as well as a reduction in the influence that members of Congress of a certain moment might have. 7.18. LEGAL REFORMS. This Nominating Board also analyzes the need to carry out legal reforms, such as:

• a)

  to reform Article 316 of the Constitution of the Republic in relation to the integration of the plenary of the Supreme Court of Justice when there is absence of any justice of said tribunal, since the modality is to order the integration of a justice from the Court of Appeals, but it is possible that the National Congress also appoint alternate justices to integrate in these cases;

• b)

  A new Law on the Judiciary Council and Judicial Career must be approved, as well as a new Organic Law of the Judicial Branch that replaces the Law on Organization and Jurisdiction of Courts;

• c)

  It is necessary to regulate a nomination process, similar to this, for the selection of candidates from other institutions such as the Public Ministry, Superior Court of Accounts, Office of the Attorney General, Electoral Justice Court, National Commissioner of Human Rights, National Electoral Council, and any other that is appointed by the National Congress;

• d)

  It is imperative to reform the special procedure for trying high State officials in the criminal arena, so that a court in the area of corruption issues the corresponding resolutions, to avoid conflicts of interest that may arise from the appointment of justices of the Supreme Court of Justice. 7.19. BUDGET OF THE JUDICIAL BRANCH. To strengthen judicial independence and the proper functioning of this Branch of State, it is imperative that compliance with the allocation of 3% of the general budget of the State be fulfilled, as mandated by the Constitution of the Republic. 8. Annexes The following annexes are attached: 8.1. Final List of Candidates 8.2. Minutes of Sessions 8.3. Communiqués 8.4. Official Letters 8.5. Technical Instruments: profile of the justice, technical evaluation matrix, selection process protocol, review protocol for written knowledge tests, protocol for objections and complaints. 8.6. Resolutions: exclusion and remedy of reconsideration resolutions. 8.7. Regulations Tegucigalpa, January 23, 2023 Supreme Court of Justice Honduran Bar Association National Commissioner of Human Rights Honduran Council of Private Enterprise Faculty of Professors of Schools of Legal Sciences Civil Society Confederations of Workers

Of the Law of the Bar Association. And, in addition to this, she also did not certify that she has notary authorization (Exequatur) obtained by the Supreme Court of Justice.