Cas individuel (CAS) - Discussion : 2025, Publication : 113ème session CIT (2025)

Convention (n° 169) relative aux peuples indigènes et tribaux, 1989 - Nicaragua (Ratification: 2010)

Chairperson – I inform the Committee that the Government of Nicaragua has not accredited a delegation to the 113th session of the International Labour Conference. The Government has neither responded to the invitation sent on Monday 2 June, date of the adoption of the list of individual cases, nor to the reminders sent by the secretariat of the Committee, and to those published in the Daily Conference Programme and on the Committee’s web page. As indicated in Part VII, paragraph 35, of document D.1 on the working methods of the Committee, in the case of governments that are not present at the Conference, the Committee will not discuss the substance of the case but will draw attention in its report to the importance of the questions raised. In both situations, a particular emphasis will be put on steps to be taken to resume the dialogue.

Representative of the Secretary General – I would like to inform the Committee that, by communication dated 27 February 2025, the Government of Nicaragua has notified the ILO Director-General of its intention to withdraw from the Organization. In accordance with article 1, paragraph 5, of the Constitution of the ILO, the notice of withdrawal presented by the Government will take effect on 28 February 2027, provided that Nicaragua has, by that date, fulfilled all its financial obligations arising from its membership. It is important to remember that Nicaragua is currently bound and will remain bound by all the obligations arising from the Conventions it has ratified and the obligations relating thereto, for the period provided for in the said Conventions, irrespective of its status within the Organization.

Employer members – Today we are discussing the case of Nicaragua, a country where, regrettably, the systematic nature of violations of fundamental labour rights has reached a point of extreme gravity. We do so with a deep sense of responsibility placed on us by this Committee, which defends the rule of law, freedom of association and the genuine tripartism that gave rise to this Organization.

There is some background to the comments made by the Committee of Experts in 2024. The Convention was ratified by Nicaragua in 2010. Although it was never discussed in this Committee, observations were made by the Committee of Experts in 2018 and 2024. In its latest comments, the Committee of Experts observed that the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, among other bodies, had expressed concern that the indigenous authorities elected in community assemblies were not recognized by the Nicaraguan Government, and that parallel governments had been set up to replace them. It therefore requested the Government to ensure coordinated and systematic action with indigenous peoples through their legitimate representatives in the policies and programmes that affect them.

The Committee of Experts also observed the existence of a climate of violence on the North Caribbean Coast as a result of disputes related to land occupation, and deplored the fact that the Government had not provided information on the subject. These disputes have resulted in murders, disappearances and injuries. It also observed with concern the reports of physical, psychological and sexual violence against indigenous women. The Committee of Experts, in addition to expressing its deep concern, firmly urged the Government to ensure a climate free from violence and adequate protection for the physical and psychological integrity of the peoples covered by the Convention.

The Government did not provide information on the operation of the prior consultation mechanisms required by the Convention and, therefore, the Committee of Experts requested information on those procedures regarding any legislative or administrative measures that might affect these peoples directly. Finally, it observed an absence of the clarification of title to indigenous lands that had led to illegal invasions and violent conflicts over access to land. The Committee requested the Government to continue these processes and provide detailed information in this regard.

The Employer members once again reiterate that we deplore violence in all its forms, and especially as it affects indigenous peoples and particularly women.

In Nicaragua, a worrying duality persists in the application of justice. While certain offences go unpunished, others are prosecuted arbitrarily and selectively. This is a regrettable situation which benefits nobody, and which significantly prejudices legality and legal certainty.

The case under discussion today, which focuses on compliance with the Convention, is part of a much broader and more alarming pattern of institutional repression. In Nicaragua, not only have indigenous voices been suppressed through the usurpation of their representation, the rejection of their traditional authorities and the dismantling of prior consultation mechanisms, but a climate of violence and impunity has developed which threatens the lives, identity and collective rights of indigenous peoples, particularly on the North Caribbean Coast, as documented by the Committee of Experts and multiple UN human rights bodies.

The Employer members wish to emphasize that these practices are not isolated events. They have occurred in a context in which over 5,700 organizations have been illegally dissolved, including all the legitimate employers’ organizations in the country, and in which all forms of independent representation have been completely dismantled. We would like to reiterate that, as a result of this destructive policy, the Higher Council for Private Enterprise of Nicaragua (COSEP), the most representative employers’ organization in the country, has been destroyed together with the rest of Nicaragua’s civic and institutional bodies. Its legal personality was revoked, its assets were seized, and its members were deprived, not only of their most basic rights, but also of their country, as they were stripped of their nationality and forced into exile. These very facts were condemned by the ILO Director-General in an official letter sent to the Government at the express request of the International Organisation of Employers.

In Nicaragua there is no space for legitimate tripartism as we understand it in this House and as reflected in the fundamental ILO Conventions. There are no employers or workers organized freely and independently. What is left is a land stripped bare of its institutions and where fear and the arbitrary action of the authorities renders impossible the exercise of fundamental rights. What remains is a regime that has not only abandoned any will to engage in dialogue, but has also formally announced its withdrawal from the ILO, deepening its international isolation and its disdain for multilateralism.

We would have welcomed the Government’s presence today before this Committee to provide information on the application of the Convention, but it has not even registered a delegation for the Conference. As indicated by the representative of the Secretary-General, the Government indicated in February 2025 that it was withdrawing from the ILO. Article 1 of the ILO Constitution provides that any Member State that withdraws from the Organization must give notice to the Director-General – which the Government of Nicaragua has done – and that such notice shall take effect two years after the date of its reception by the DirectorGeneral, subject to the Member having fulfilled all financial obligations arising out of its membership. Furthermore, when the State has ratified an international labour Convention, all obligations arising thereunder shall remain valid in the State for the period provided for in that Convention. In the case of Nicaragua and Convention No. 169, the period when the Government may denounce it and, eventually, cease to recognize the obligations assumed under it, runs from 5 September 2031 for one year. In the meantime, the Government will be required to continue to comply with the Convention as ratified.

Nicaragua stated that it was withdrawing from the Organization due to the distortion of the ILO’s purpose, as it was acting in a politicized manner by lending itself to destabilization and interventionist manoeuvres in issues that are the internal responsibility of the State. That is untrue: there is no interference of any kind in the internal affairs of the State, but rather an established process for the supervision of international Conventions ratified voluntarily by the State of Nicaragua, which it is not respecting. The Committee on the Application of Standards is the forum where it should answer for its non-compliance.

The Employer members understand that cutting off communications with the ILO may seem like a good short-term strategy for the Government, but it renders the situation of Nicaraguan workers and employers increasingly precarious. In view of this unsustainable situation, the Governing Body, at its 353rd Session in March 2025, decided to establish a Commission of Inquiry under article 26 of the ILO Constitution to consider the allegations contained in the complaint. That decision, adopted in light of the total lack of cooperation by the Government and the ongoing aggravation of the situation, represents a historic, firm and absolutely necessary step.

In conclusion, the Employer members reaffirm their commitment to the employers and workers of Nicaragua, to those who cannot be here today because they have been forced into silence or into exile. To them, we want to say that they are not alone, that this house of freedom and tripartism has not closed its doors or renounced its principles.

We ask this Committee to demonstrate clear support for the decision adopted by the Governing Body and to express forcefully that this Organization will tolerate neither impunity nor the denial of basic human rights.

Worker members – We are faced with a regrettable situation because the Government’s absence demonstrates its lack of interest and, as has been described, its decision to withdraw from the ILO. As this Committee has indicated, this makes it necessary for us to engage in deep collective reflection. In accordance with the official information, this decision was announced in the context of the Governing Body session last March and, in the Worker members’ view, constitutes an extremely serious act at the institutional level.

The ILO is an organization founded on the pillars of social dialogue, social justice and respect for international law. Therefore, the mere intention of withdrawal gives rise to deep concern, for both the workers and employers of Nicaragua, and for all the Nicaraguan people. Furthermore, it cannot be ignored that this measure has been announced in a context of reports of serious violations of international labour Conventions ratified by Nicaragua.

It is important to emphasize that, in accordance with the ILO Constitution, the withdrawal of a Member State does not have immediate effect. Article 1 sets forth a period of two years following the formal notification during which the country remains a party to the ILO and is bound to comply with the Conventions it has ratified, except for those that have been explicitly denounced, and in accordance with the envisaged procedure. This has not happened, particularly in respect of the fundamental Conventions, such as the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and other key instruments, such as Convention No. 169, that brings us together today and which remains fully in force in Nicaragua. Convention No. 169 is an essential tool for the protection of the collective rights of indigenous peoples. It recognizes their right to free, informed and prior consultation, respect for their cultures and traditions, and the protection of their territories, natural resources and ways of life. Although Nicaragua has expressed the wish to withdraw from the ILO, it is still obliged to comply with the provisions of this Convention, which has not been denounced.

We must recall that, at the previous session of the Conference, Nicaragua was included in the list of double footnoted cases, an exceptional measure that responded to the gravity of the situation. The Governing Body has also been engaged in special follow-up of the case.

As the Committee of Experts said in its report, “The Committee notes this information with concern. It notes with regret the absence of information from the Government on the operation of the participatory mechanisms for the various indigenous peoples in the country in the formulation of policies and programmes that affect them”. The Committee of Experts has also requested the Government to “indicate the manner in which it ensures coordinated and systematic action, with the participation of indigenous peoples through their representative institutions, in the policies and programmes that affect them”. It also noted with deep concern that all the information demonstrates the persistence of a climate of violence and attacks on the life and physical integrity of indigenous communities in the North Caribbean Coast Autonomous Region, which is related to land claims and processes for the clarification of land ownership by those communities.

The Committee of Experts recalls that a climate of violence, as described here, constitutes a serious obstacle to the exercise of the rights of indigenous peoples set out in the Convention, and emphasizes that the absence of prosecutions and convictions of the perpetrators of acts of violence results in an unacceptable climate of impunity which affects the exercise of the rights of indigenous peoples. For further information, the report provides an in-depth analysis of the serious situation in Nicaragua. There was no response to this, nor is the Government here today.

As we know, the ILO was established to protect the workers of the world and is based on the fundamental principle of tripartite social dialogue. This mandate must therefore guide all our actions. We are here: the Committee, the Office and the Governing Body. Diplomatic, institutional and technical efforts will perhaps be stepped up to establish channels of dialogue with the Nicaraguan Government, urging it to reflect and to reconsider complying with its international obligations.

We, in the trade union movement, want the protection of workers. We want genuine tripartite social dialogue to be established, with respect and guarantees, and we want the entire Nicaraguan trade union movement to be safeguarded, as well as employers’ representatives. We also believe that the defence of labour rights and of indigenous peoples cannot be subject to unilateral decisions that isolate a country from the system of international protection. These principles that speak to sovereignty also speak of responsibility and summarize the mission that we have in the ILO; because we exist to ensure that people’s rights and workers’ rights are respected, and that observance of tripartite social dialogue is formalized, particularly when countries face difficult periods.