POLITICAL SYSTEM OF NICARAGUA

(Project Report)

Submitted To:
Mrs Nisha Bind
Faculty, Dept. of Political Science

Submitted by:
Name: Rishabh Jha
Roll No. – 129
Section: A
Semester – IV B.A.LLB
(Hons.)

Hidayatullah National Law

University, Post Uparwara, Abhanpur, New Raipur – 492002
(Chhattisgarh)

Page | i
 DECLARATION

I, Rishabh Jha, hereby declare that, this project report entitled, “Working of Indian Parliament”
with respect to committee system submitted to Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur is
record of an original work done by me under the guidance of Mrs Nisha Bind,Faculty Member,
H.N.L.U., Raipur and that no part of this work has been plagiarized without citations.

Date: 15.02.2017

Place: Raipur

Name – Rishabh Jha

Roll no-129

Section- A

Semester- IV

Page | ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to the Almighty who gave me the strength to accomplish the project with sheer hard
work and honesty. This research venture has been made possible due to the generous co-
operation of various persons. To list them all is not practicable, even to repay them in words is
beyond the domain of my lexicon.
This project wouldn’t have been possible without the help of my teacher Mrs Nisha Bind,
Faculty, Dept. of Economics at HNLU, who had always been there at my side whenever I needed
some help regarding any information. He has been my mentor in the truest sense of the term. The
administration has also been kind enough to let me use their facilities for research work. I thank
them for this.

Much obliged,
Rishabh Jha
Semester- IV
Roll No.-129

Page | iii
 CONTENTS

1. Introduction……….................................................................................................1

2. Nicarguan politics: A brief introduction………………...…………………......3

3. Current political system in Nicaragua…….. …………………………………...5

4. Judicial system………………………….……...……………………………..…..8

5. Evoloutions of parties and elections in Nicaragua..……….………...…….……9

6. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….12

7. Bibliography…………………………………………………………...…...…....14

Page | iv
 INTRODUCTION
Since independence, Nicaragua has had a republican form of government, with an elected
president, a congress, and a supreme court. However, the executive branch has usually been
dominant. Constitutional rights could be suspended, congress and courts usually carried out
presidential orders, and the military often played a decisive role. Intervention by the United
States also distorted the political system, as the United States used its power and at times troops
to keep favored rulers in power, prevent rebellions, and maintain order. Although
constitutionally defined as a democracy, Nicaragua was ruled by the Somoza family from 1934–
79; they did not hesitate to suppress political opponents with violence. The last of the
constitutions promulgated during the Somoza period, effective 3 April 1974, provided for a
bicameral congress, a president elected for a six-year term, and guaranteed political rights. After
the FSLN took power as the Government of National Reconstruction in July 1979, this
constitution was abrogated and congress dissolved. From July 1979 until November 1984,
executive power was vested in a junta composed of five members (three members after April
1980).

The 1984 electoral reforms created an executive branch with a president elected for a six-year
term by popular vote and assisted by a vice president and a cabinet. (The presidential term was
shortened to five years in 1995.) Legislative power is vested in a 93-member unicameral
National Constituent Assembly elected under a system of proportional representation for six-year
terms. The electoral process in Nicaragua is said to be one of the most complicated in the
Americas as it forces voters to select candidates for the office of president, National Assembly
posts, and local municipalities from a vast number of political parties. Further, vote counting is
still a tedious, manual process.
As of 2006 the Sandinista constitution of 1987 was in effect; it provides for a democratic system
in which elections are held every six years and there is an executive, National Assembly
(legislature), judiciary, and electoral council (Consejo Supremo Electoral—CSE). It also called
for two new levels of elected government—municipal councils (131 in 1987; 153 as of 2006),
and the two autonomous Atlantic coast regional councils.
From 1936 until 1979 the nation was dominated by the Somoza family, which ruled as a
dictatorship. With the support of the U.S.-trained military, known as the National Guard, the

Page | 1
Somozas rigged elections, violated human rights, and looted the economy. They were
overthrown in 1979 by the revolutionary Sandinista regime, which led the government until
1990. Although the Sandinistas allowed opposition parties, they also restricted rights and
manipulated the political process. With the election of Violeta Barrios de Chamorro as president
in 1990, Nicaragua began an era of increasingly democratic political practices.
Nicaragua's current constitution was adopted in 1987 and extensively amended in 1995.
Additional minor amendments were added in 2000. Its provisions include guarantees of
individual freedoms, rights to education and housing, and equality for women. Voter registration
and elections are conducted by the Supreme Electoral Council, which was an independent branch
of the government until an amendment in 2000 gave control over the appointments of council
members to the ruling party and the largest opposition party. All Nicaraguan citizens over the
age of 16 have the right to vote, and voting is by secret ballot.

NICARAGUAN POLITICS: A BRIEF INTRODUCTION

U.S. intervention in Nicaragua began in the 19th century, setting the stage for political instability
and violence in the 20th century. Aspirations for an interoceanic canal route in Central America
drove early U.S. interests in the region. After the U.S. opted for the more favorable Panamanian

Page | 2
route, the Marines occupied Nicaragua from 1912 to 1933, in part to avert competing canal
proposals that might weaken their monopoly to the south. Nicaragua’s Augusto César Sandino
mounted a guerrilla opposition to the occupation in 1927. To help quash the rebellion, the U.S.
armed, trained, and expanded the Nicaraguan National Guard. Anastasio Somoza García headed
the organization and used its coercive power to establish one of the most enduring family
dynasties in Latin America. After orchestrating Sandino’s assassination, Somoza established an
expansive system of political patronage, isolating opponents and maintaining firm control over
Nicaraguan civil society. His sons, Luis and Anastasio Somoza Debayle, took the reins of power
after their father’s assassination in 1956.
U.S. occupation and support for the Somoza regime bestowed on Nicaragua a deep and enduring
experience of political repression. It is no wonder that FSLN founder Carlos Fonseca identified
U.S. imperialism as the driving force behind authoritarianism in the country. Inspired by
Sandino’s struggle for national sovereignty in the 1920s, the FSLN emerged in the 1960s as a
homegrown response to dictatorship and imperialism. The improbable success of the Sandinista
Revolution initiated a period of political transformation, as Nicaragua attempted to forge a new
society, grounded in political pluralism and democratic participation, which served the interests
of its most vulnerable sectors. Sandinista state policy reflected these commitments with agrarian
reform, expansions in health services, and a national literacy campaign that brought a generation
of youth to the countryside to teach rural families to read. The revolution infused new social and
democratic energies into political life, and popular participation in revolutionary organizations
burgeoned.
From the time of independence until the 1970s, Nicaraguan politics were dominated by the
Liberal and Conservative parties. These parties represented rival factions within the elite class,
while other groups had little political voice. Traditionally, the Conservatives supported the
Catholic Church and were closely tied to rural, landowning interests, while Liberals emphasized
free trade, were more open to foreign influences, and sought to restrict church power. But by the
20th century their ideological differences had decreased, and both parties splintered into many
smaller factions. From 1936 until the 1970s, the Somoza dictatorship dominated the political
arena, controlling most of the Liberals and facing little effective opposition.
After the overthrow of the Somoza dictatorship in 1979, the number of political parties in
Nicaragua grew. But many of them failed to survive for more than one election. For many years,

Page | 3
the major political force was the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN), the leftist
guerrilla force that toppled Somoza in 1979. The Sandinistas governed the country until 1990. A
coalition of opposition parties defeated the Sandinistas in 1990 elections, but the coalition soon
split, leaving the Sandinistas considerable power.1
War weary and suffering scarcity and economic crisis by the late 1980s, the Nicaraguan people
sought relief in the democratic process. But beyond the respite from war, the average Nicaraguan
did not fare well after the revolution. U.S. intervention persisted, now through the mechanism of
development and “Washington Consensus” reforms. The Sandinista government inherited $1.6
billion USD in debt from the Somoza regime. Burdened by economic sanctions and defense
spending during the war, the country’s debt had grown to $10.8 billion USD by the end of the
revolution. The economy stabilized with International Monetary Fund oversight, but poverty and
unemployment rates remained high and popular sectors bore the brunt of austerity, privatization,
and economic adjustment policies. Meanwhile, the national economy staggered under a growing
debt burden that necessitated debt relief through the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC)
program in the mid-2000s. This period of free market reform, sociologist William Robinson
contends, resulted in a process of class restructuring that concentrated wealth in the hands of the
Nicaraguan elite and multinational corporations.
It was during these difficult years that Ortega’s betrayal of the revolutionary Left began in
earnest, as he molded the Sandinista Party into a vehicle to advance his own interests. The
transfer of power from the revolutionary state to the center-right coalition led by President
Violeta Chamorro was marred by the appropriation of public funds and properties by outgoing
officials, Ortega included. These acts of plunder, popularly referred to as the Piñata, paved the
way for the development of a powerful Sandinista business class. Another key moment of
alienation occurred in 1998 when Murillo’s daughter, Zoilamérica Narváez, accused Ortega of
sexually abusing her as an adolescent. The feminist Left rallied in support of Narváez, but
Murillo chose to side with Ortega, cementing her position as his second-in-command. Once it
became clear that the popular vote alone would not be a viable strategy to regain the presidency,
Ortega engineered his return to power by changing electoral laws, aided by quid pro quo
pacts with right-wing caudillo Arnoldo Alemán. The coup de grace was Sandinista support for

1
www.laprensa.com.nicaragua

Page | 4
a total abortion ban, which established Ortega’s alliance with the Christian Right in the run up to
the 2006 elections that returned him to power.2
Despite their alliances with the Right, Ortega and Murillo, who is currently communications
director for her husband’s administration, continue to characterize their political project as one of
popular revolutionary democracy, now rebranded with the slogan “Christian, Socialist, and in
Solidarity.” Their vision of direct democracy or “the presidency of the people” is administered
through local Citizen Power Councils (CPCs), which have become a conduit for redistributive
programs that focus on reducing hunger, poverty, and infant mortality. But even with a growing
economy and some success with poverty reduction
Civil society, which emerged as a vibrant political sphere in the 1990s, has suffered under the
Ortega administration. For instance, Ortega has targeted feminist non-governmental
organizations, many of them founded by onetime Sandinistas, with policies that monitor and
limit their outside funding. These efforts have been accompanied by a vitriolic campaign in
FSLN-controlled media, accusing Nicaraguan feminists of money laundering, CIA collusion,
pornography, and promoting illegal abortions. Attempts by former Sandinistas to develop
opposition parties like the Sandinista Renovation Movement have been met with similar
responses. A cursory review of Ortega’s policy positions shows that his administration no longer
enacts the values that once defined the Sandinista Revolution.

CURRENT POLITICAL SYSTEM IN NICARAGUA

The country is now a democratic republic. The nation's president is both the head of state and the
leader of the government. The president is elected for a 5-year term and chooses the cabinet
ministers. The legislature is a single-chamber body that has 93 members who are also elected for
5-year terms. The legislature is known as the National Assembly. The Supreme Court is
composed of 16 magistrates who are elected to 7-year terms by the National Assembly.
Nicaragua has 35 registered political parties and factions, but the country is dominated by just
2: the Liberal Alliance, and the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN). The Liberal

2
www.vanderbilt.edu/lapop/nicaragua/2010-political-culture

Page | 5
Alliance is a coalition of 5 moderate to conservative parties that support economic reforms. The
FSLN controlled Nicaragua from 1979 to 1990 under a dictatorial government.
Since 1990, the government has undertaken a variety of reforms to restructure the economy
and liberalize the nation's political system. From 1995-96, there were broad reforms of
the army and the national police force, including reductions in military spending

Nicaragua has long had a very interesting - and at times intense - political situation. This was
especially so from the time of the country's gaining independence to the political battles of the
1970s. During this period of the country’s history, Nicaraguan politics was dominated by the
Liberal and Conservative parties. While there were a number of smaller political parties, these
were always grossly outweighed by the support given to these two elite political parties.
Traditionally the Conservatives were supported by the Catholic Church. The Conservatives
where closely tied to rural, landowning interests and they were often well supported in their
endeavors. The Liberals instead chose to focus on free trade. Open to foreign influences, they
restricted church power. The differences between the supporters of these parties often resulted in
conflicts and for a while there was a lot of civil unrest as a result. However by the 1970s, the
ideologies of these two parties were largely lost and as a result the parties began to split and lost
their strength.

Today things have changed somewhat and the political situation in Nicaragua has greatly
improved. Nicaragua still has a two-party system and smaller minority groups still struggle to
achieve electoral success against them. However politics has taken on a less corrupt and violent
face and these days there are few, if any, conflicts related to politics. There is also a tendency
towards fewer political parties participating in recent elections. Currently, the two major political
parties are the Constitutional Liberal Party and the Sandinista National Liberation Front. The
Conservative Party still exists and along with these two major parties, holds a seat in the
National Assembly.3
There are a number of other minority parties which currently exist in Nicaragua. The majority of
these have been listed below for your convenience. Several of these parties have been existence
for some time while a few are still relatively young. Attempts to create new political parties are
usually largely unsuccessful due to the strengths of majority parties but old parties have a
3
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Sandinista

Page | 6
tendency to break apart, due to differences in opinion, and result in a number of smaller, new
parties. This tendency has always characterized Nicaragua’s politics.
Other Political Parties in Nicaragua:
Communist Party of Nicaragua
Central American Unionist Party
Independent Liberal Party
Independent Liberal Party for National Unity
Marxist-Leninist Party of Nicaragua
National Conservative Party
National Project
New Liberal party
Nicaragua Party of the Christian Path
Nicaraguan Resistance Party
Nicaraguan Socialist Party
Sardinista Renovation Movement
Unity Alliance
UNO-96

JUDICIAL SYSTEM

Constitutionally, Nicaragua's Supreme Court is an independent branch of the government.

However, selection of its 16 members (who serve five-year terms) is proscribed by politics, in
that selection is limited to a list submitted by the president and political parties to the National
Assembly. The court appoints judges to the lower courts. The selection of magistrates (who
decide the Supreme Court's president and vice-president) has been historically political, making
de facto judicial independence from executive and legislative pressures unlikely.
The Supreme Court has administrative, criminal, civil, and constitutional matters divisions. The
judicial system consists of both civilian and military courts. Military courts investigate,
prosecute, and try crimes committed by or against the police or armed forces. Therefore, the
military courts have jurisdiction over citizens involved in security-related offenses. In a

Page | 7
controversial 1993 decision, a military court exercised jurisdiction to convict a former member
of the EPS (Sandinista Popular Army).
In 2004, it was legislated that the judicial career system should be based on merit. This is partly
in response to a public lack of confidence in the training or fairness of judges. In 2006 the
Economist Intelligence Unit warned that corruption and influence-peddling in the judicial branch
puts foreign investors at a sharp disadvantage in any litigation or dispute, and legal security for
business in general is among the lowest in Latin America.
The judicial system consists of both civilian and military courts. Military courts investigate,
prosecute and try crimes committed by or against the police or armed forces. Therefore, the
military courts have jurisdiction over citizens involved in security-related offenses. In a
controversial 1993 decision, a military court exercised jurisdiction to convict a former member
of the EPS (Sandinista Popular Army).4

THE EVOLUTION OF PARTIES AND ELECTIONS IN

NICARAGUA

The political culture of a collective group is formed by various elements,such as its historical
experiences, its political participation, and theirnatures . The way in which theNicaraguan people
have resolved political issues in the recent past andtoday can be better understood if a general
historical perspective is provided, with emphasison the role of parties and elections.
The history of Nicaragua is marked by the volatility of its political systems. It is worth
mentioning that Nicaragua has been through not onebut several political systems and a number
of diverse situations: anarchyduring the years immediately following independence; periods of
stabiliy under oligarchic control; prolonged right-wing dictatorships, and then,
the other extreme – a Marxist-Leninist regime. Following that, the country weathered a bloody
civil war with extensive international participation, to become a democracy in 1990, which now
has become reasonably consolidated. 5

4
www.nationsencyclopedia.com › Americas › Nicaragua
5
nacla.org/news/2016/09/16/nicaragua’s-authoritarian-turn-not-product-leftist-politics

Page | 8
From the time of its independence in 1821 untilthe year 2002, Nicaragua had 14 political
constitutions and 91 presidents,including various government juntas and heads of state . The first
Constitution of Nicaragua was approved in 1824 and the last in 1987.This last one has been
revised twice, once in 1995 and again in 2000.Following a period of anarchy that afflicted the
country from the timeof independence (1821) until 1858, Nicaragua went through a slow process
of institutionalization. At this time, the country was dominated by a well-structured provincial
oligarchy, which initiated the construction ofthe Nicaraguan state. It was an era dominated by the
Partido Conservador(the Conservative Party), then an “elitist party,” according to Duverger’s
typology. During this era, known as “the period of 30 years,” political participation and demands
for electoral resources fundamentally served the dominant strata of society. Nevertheless, the
transfer of public duties was institutionalized, political careers of the leaders were forged, and
Nicaraguan society was considerably stabilized. Over time, that political order became rigid and
was unresponsive to the people; it was over-thrown by the liberal revolution of 1893, which
became the foundation of the Primera República Liberal, the First Liberal Republic. The revolu
tion’s leader, José Santos Zelaya, would soon become the dictator who would modernize the
country’s legal and economic systems, but his poli-cies distorted the function of the parties and
elections.6
The Partido Liberal advanced as the party of the masses under anti-democratic control and
pursued a form of empty legitimacy, through“elections” controlled by the National Congress.
The system, in spite of its liberal rhetoric, established an authoritarian tradition and continued
clientelism and other inherited corrupt practices, such as particularismand appointment.
The Segunda República Conservadora -- the Second Conservative Republic (1911-1936) --
succeeded Zelayismo and represents a case study of how a political system, in itself weak and
anarchical, can be pressured by external factors that it encouraged itself; in this case, the main
factor was the United states. The Partido Conservador even lost its role of recruiting the political
elite, which was at least partially self-assigned to the U.S. State Department in view of the
chaotic Nicaraguan situation. 7
Liberalism returned to power in 1929, and after an apparently promising democratic period of
two administrations (1929-1936), theSomocista era was initiated (1936-1979), following a coup
d’état byAnastasio Somoza García. Somocismo was an entirely different regimefrom its
6
www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Nicaragua
7
www.latinamericagoesglobal.org/2016/10/ Nicaragua

Page | 9
predecessors in several respects and shared some similar characteristics with those of certain
dictatorships of the Southern Cone, classi-fied by Guillermo O’Donnell as corporate-military
regimes.Somocismo, like Zelayismo, acquired a formal legitimacy, but Somocismo was more
complex. Somocismo was a dynasty starting with a father, Anastasio Somoza García (1937-
1956), and his two sons, Luis Somoza (1956-1963), and Anastasio Somoza Debayle (1967-1972
and 1974-1979). The Somoza regime celebrated numerous popular elections and established
political alliances with diverse forces, including leadership circles of the Partido Conservador
and the Partido Socialista de Nicaragua (Socialist Party of Nicaragua – PSN), which adhered to
the Moscow line.Even though Somocismo was a dictatorial regime, it also had a noteworthy
capacity for inclusion of the economic and social areas.During the Somocista era, national and
international factors converged to produce the longest period of economic growth and
modernization in the history of the country. The growth of the economy as a consequence of
good international prices in the exportation of crops (primarily cotton); the expansion of the state
and its institutions (ministries, the army,autonomous entities); and a relatively efficient
administration facilitated the ascent of groups proceeding from diverse social sectors.8
The period when the army was controlled by the Guardia Nacional de Nicaragua (Nicaraguan
National Guard – GN) is illustrative. Somoza transformed the military institution into a
praetorian body through various mechanisms. One mechanism was the cultivation of personal
loyalty to the dictator, partly based on the fact that a high percentage of the members of the GN
came from the lower classes and found in the armed forces, whether through licit or illicit means,
a source of power and social mobility. Fixed elections were an important means used by
Somocismo to include numerous opponents in its system. Through its resources, many
politicians, critical of the government, agreed to limited participation in an asymmetrical
interdependent relationship, which strengthened the system. In that era, the government party,
the Partido Liberal Nacionalista (Liberal Nationalist Party – PLN) was a party of the masses in
many aspects, with disciplined structure and a strong presence in cantonal,municipal,
departmental (provincial), and national settings. Some state resources were at the party’s
disposal, mostly for electoral campaigns.Although the PLN added to its platform provisions and
assigned individuals to take care of the interests of considerable sectors of the population, the
PLN fundamentally served the orders and interests of the Somozas and their followers. This

8
http://www.nicanet.org/

Page | 10
regime was supported by the armed forces almost unanimously, by the business sector to a large
extent, by the Catholic Church’s friendship, and by a succession of administrations of the United
states during the Cold War era. With time, the system aged and became more corrupt. Clashes of
interests with the private sector suddenly occurred. \Several Latin American governments also
distanced themselves from the Nicaraguan regime. Besieged on national and international levels
and with the country fighting a bloody civil war, Nicaragua’s multiparty and multiclass regime
collapsed on July 19, 1979.The results of this struggle were skillfully monopolized by a radical
organization, that until that time had been small and clandestine, ElFrente Sandinista de
Liberación Nacional (the Sandanista NationalLiberation Front – FSLN). There is little doubt that
the radical tendencies of Sandinismo, its use of violence to reach power and to exercise it, and its
attitude toward law were all influenced by an inherited political culture; although not very
edifying, this culture had been a tradition for more than a century and a half.

CONCLUSION

Starting back in 1936, Nicaraguan General Anastasio Somoza Garcia moved quickly from being
president to setting himself up as a dictator. The Somoza regime was extremely nepotistic, with
his friends and family offered positions in every important office. Soon Somoza’s Nicaragua
became one of the most corrupt nations in Latin America. This sort of corruption left a stifling
effect on the Nicaraguan economy. Somoza would remain in power until 1956.
Latin America has long been plagued by strongman (caudillo) leadership.
The present leadership is quickly turning into another Somoza-like regime. Nicaragua’s National
Assembly just approved  major electoral changes, allowing Ortega to remain in office, a move
reminiscent of a Hugo Chavez-like precedent. Since Ortega took office , the Frente Sandinista de
Liberacion National (also known as the Sandinistas) have consolidated single-party dominance
overthecountry’slegislativeandjudicialinstitutions.Like Chavez, Ortega is using clientelistic
policies to secure personal support from the poor He is, in essence, a leftist version of Somoza,
the tyrant he overthrew, though without brutality. Clientelism ensures personal loyalty that
greatlyreducestheneedforrepression.9
In order to prevent a competitive democracy from turning into a plebiscitary democracy with a
caudillo at the top, some argue radical reform is needed. Redding argues that Nicaragua needs to

9
www.economist.com/topics/nicaragua

Page | 11
change the model on which its government is based. The country, he argues, may function better
under a European model rather than under its current U.S. model.
I believe part of the problem is that all Latin American countries have modeled themselves on
the United States presidential system. It would arguably make more sense to try the European
alternative: a parliamentary system, with a prime minister
Regardless of whether or not such a change is possible, the issue of Ortega quickly becoming
Latin America’s next big dictator is very real.  Currently, it is not being given the attention it
needs from the global community. Within the past few years Ortega has been accused of rigging
municipal elections, manipulating the Supreme Court to approve his reelection aspirations,
usurping powers from the National Assembly, illegally replacing democratically elected mayors,
threatening free press, and cracking down on opposition protests. Concerns over the Sandinistas’
commitment to democracy have led the U.S. and the EU to cancel some $190 million in
Developmentandbudgetaryaid.

While Nicaragua may not be on the radar of major news organizations, it does deserve the
attention of politicians and the general public. Otherwise, Ortega may sweep into office for the
unforeseen future and undermine the very nature of his country’s democracy.

Page | 12
 REFERENCES

This project report would not have been completed without the following valuable sources of
information:

1.www.nationsencyclopedia.com

2.www.nicaragua.com

3.www.countriesquest.com

4. www.jstor.org

5.www.nationsonline.org

Page | 13