Hora Cero
junio 16, 2025
On August 3, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) held its first-ever hearing on the impacts of mining on the human rights of Indigenous and Afro-descendant communities in Nicaragua. In a historic coincidence, the Rubén Darío Hall became the venue for this denunciation of autocratic extractivism, witnessed by anonymous Nicaraguan Indigenous and Afro-descendant leaders and collaborators via Zoom.
According to figures from the Central Bank of Nicaragua, mineral exports reached $2,009.2 million in 2025, representing 22.55% of total goods exports. These macroeconomic figures are the result of the plundering and dispossession of the country’s resources. But they also serve the regime to maintain a facade of GDP growth—which would be reduced by 50% without minerals—and of an “economic boom” that does not translate into local benefits for the owners of the territories where the concessions are located.
The Ortega-Murillo regime is aware not only of the benefits of this cosmetic approach, but also of the direct economic benefits generated by controlling the mining sector, which it did not control before 2018, unlike other economic sectors such as energy and hydrocarbons. For this reason, the regime plans to grant concessions for more than 40% of the national territory, leaving only 15% to reach its goal.
Fundación del Río has documented that, as of April 2026, 62 metallic mining concessions have been granted in at least 18 Indigenous and Afro-descendant territories across the country, committing 25.5% of communal lands to mining exploration and exploitation. Of these concessions, 24 belong to Chinese companies, 15 to Canadian companies, 11 to Colombian companies, 6 to Nicaraguan companies, and 6 correspond to Mining Reserve Areas arbitrarily declared by the government.
In the three administrations prior to Ortega’s, 32 mining concessions had been granted, totaling 139,852 hectares, representing only 1% of the national territory. It was during these administrations that the institutional framework—albeit insufficient—that regulated and established certain environmental and social safeguards was consolidated. For example, the Environmental Impact Assessment System was established in 1994, the General Law on the Environment and Natural Resources was approved in 1996, and the Municipalities Law was reformed in 1997, increasing the powers of municipalities before they could grant environmental permits. For the Ortega-Murillo regime to be rapidly granting concessions across the territory, it had to create certain conditions and dismantle the existing environmental and social safeguards.
One of the first forms of dismantling has been the weakening of the territorial guarantees of Indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples, centered on a historical failure to complete the regularization of titled territories under the Law of the Communal Property Regime of Indigenous Peoples and Ethnic Communities (Law No. 445). This has generated a process of massive invasion and displacement. Furthermore, there has been no support for a law recognizing the territorial rights of Indigenous peoples in the Pacific, Central, and Northern regions of the country. In addition, the regime has distorted and manipulated the autonomy regime of the Caribbean Coast, subordinating and co-opting Regional Councils, territorial and communal authorities to the central government, thus rendering meaningless the mechanisms for participation and decision-making by Indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples regarding their own territories.
The second approach was the change to the Environmental Assessment System, which began in 2017. This involved modifications to promote economic investment, centralize and streamline procedures, and resulted from a «dialogue and consensus» model with the country’s private sector. Further changes in 2025 eliminated Environmental Impact Assessments required before the approval of Category II projects—which include mining projects—replacing them with a simplified environmental management program after the concession is granted. The system also repealed the prohibition on developing projects in fragile ecosystems, eliminated mandatory public consultation, and reduced the timeframe for granting environmental permits to 30 days.
The third measure was the repeal of the Protected Areas Regulations and modifications to the General Law of the Environment and Natural Resources. In its place, the Law of Conservation Areas was passed, which for the first time permitted mining exploration and other extractive projects within the country’s protected natural areas, including spaces that previously enjoyed strict protection. As a practical result, 75 mining concessions currently affect 19 protected areas and 2 biosphere reserves, impacting more than 900,000 hectares within protected areas, representing 20% of their total surface area.
The fourth approach was the design of an institutional architecture intended to facilitate mining concessions. This began with the 2017 creation of the Nicaraguan Mining Company (ENIMINAS), which empowered the Ministry of Energy and Mines to unilaterally declare «Mining Reserve Areas,» including within Indigenous and Afro-descendant territories. A subsequent reform expanded this power, allowing direct public-private partnerships within these areas through contracts. This same 2021 reform centralized control of the royalty fund, legalized the entry of illegal artisanal mining through «guarantees,» and empowered the Ministry to authorize exports and intervene in concession holders. Then, in 2026, the General Directorate of Mines was transferred to the Attorney General’s Office to exert greater control, circumvent sanctions, and reduce the leakage of mining information.
The fifth form of dismantling was the increased opacity and discretion surrounding public information and the mining registry. The latest published official data dates back to 2024 and has not been updated. Furthermore, the regime does not publish mining investment projects and their economic viability, nor public-private partnership contracts for lots located in Mining Reserve Areas. There is also a high degree of discretion regarding the number of industrial, semi-industrial, and artisanal mining operations and their operating permits. Data on the volumes processed by these operations and the origin of the materials they process are not published, hindering the traceability of mineral resources. Finally, Fundación del Río has documented inconsistencies and discrepancies between Nicaragua’s mining trade registries and those of other countries where the minerals are exported, as well as the use of different tariff classifications to conceal the true volume and value of exports.
As a consequence of this dismantling, Indigenous and Afro-descendant communities bear the brunt of the environmental and social costs generated by this imposed extractive mining policy. This extractive approach of the regime directly impacts the rights to consultation and consent of the country’s Indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples. In none of these cases has the international standard for consultation been met, nor have the Communal Assemblies, where the legitimacy of these peoples resides, been considered. This pattern of non-compliance is not new; it occurred in 2013 with the approval of the Interoceanic Canal project and in 2020 when the Bio-Clima project was submitted to the Green Climate Fund, in both cases without genuine consultation and consent processes within the communities.
Another impact is on their territorial rights and the few or nonexistent economic benefits derived from the use and exploitation of their natural resources. Even if mining concessions are granted without consultation processes regarding their territorial rights, the economic benefits resulting from the use, exploration, and exploitation of their resources should reach the communities. According to Law 445, 25% of the economic benefits should correspond to the affected community, in addition to profits and the right to compensation for damages and losses caused in their territories.
There are also risks of impact on water resources within Indigenous and Afro-descendant communities. Fundación del Río has documented that at least 163 rivers, 80 streams, and nearly 1,900 kilometers of the water network are located within concession areas on Indigenous and Afro-descendant territories. Specifically, a 2025 IPEN study showed that 80% of Miskito women participating in the study, belonging to the Li Lamni and Li Auhbra territories, had mercury levels exceeding 1 part per million (ppm) in their tissues, which surpasses what is considered safe according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. This is due to the contamination of water sources and aquatic biodiversity that these communities rely on.
Finally, another impact of this imposed extractive policy is the consolidation of an environment of extreme violence against Indigenous communities, particularly those who defend their territory. Invaders forcibly evict community members to seize mining sites, as happened in the case of Kiwakumbai Hill, where at least 13 Indigenous people were killed. In addition to the impacts on the right to a healthy environment and living conditions, both artisanal and industrial mining have generated pollution, loss of biodiversity, deforestation, and profound alterations to the ecosystems upon which these communities depend.
In conclusion, I believe that the mining extractive policy implemented by the Ortega-Murillo regime constitutes an architecture of dispossession that sacrifices natural resources and the self-determination of Indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples to retain the economic benefit of this plunder. The systematic dismantling of the legal and institutional framework is a deliberate mechanism to nullify the rights to consultation, territorial rights, and economic rights, leaving the environmental and social costs to the communities, including territorial violence and irreversible mercury contamination. Faced with this approach by the regime, the resistance of these anonymous Indigenous and Afro-descendant leaders and the rigorous documentation of their experiences emerge as the last ethical bastion to denounce before the international community an autocratic extractive model that is rapidly jeopardizing the environmental future and cultural survival of Nicaragua.
