Law 140 on the Regulation of Foreign Agents
Cases- Case status
- Unknown
- Location of case in SG report
- 2021-080-001
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2021
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 12.865416
Longitude: -85.207229
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- Nicaragua
- From Region
- UN body that raised the case prior to the SG report
- OHCHR: OHCHR - General
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic
- Dates of prior UN action
- 2020
- Type of record
- General situation addressed
- Reported trigger of reprisal
cooperate with the UN, including through the receipt of technical assistance and/or funding for service provision, research, reporting and advocacy.
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- October 2020
- Location of mentioned reprisals
- Nicaragua
- Reprisal information
It was reported to OHCHR by civil society organizations that the application of Law 140 on the Regulation of Foreign Agents, adopted in October 2020, is affecting their ability and willingness to cooperate with the UN, including through the receipt of technical assistance and/or funding for service provision, research, reporting and advocacy. The Foreign Agent Law foresees the cancellation of the legal registration of organizations obtaining foreign funds “for activities interfering in the internal affairs of Nicaragua, threatening its independence, self-determination, sovereignty and economic and political stability”. It also makes registration mandatory with the Ministry of the Interior, imposes the duty to inform authorities in detail about foreign funds obtained, and prohibits anonymous donations. OHCHR has expressed concern about these provisions of the law and offered technical assistance to ensure its alignment with international human rights norms and standards, to no avail (A/HRC/46/21, paras. 19–20). Special procedure mandate holders have also expressed concern about the Law (OL NIC 3/2020).
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Threats/Intimidations (incl. "fear of reprisal")
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- Yes
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- No
- Was the case raised by a State at the UN?
- No
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- No
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- Yes
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?
- 0