2011 Nicaraguan general election

The Sandinista National Liberation Front (Spanish: Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional, FSLN) returned to power with Daniel Ortega as president in 2007 after losing the 1990 general elections to the National Opposition Union (UNO) and its candidate, Violeta Barrios de Chamorro. It was the third election (1984, 1990, 2011) that the Sandinista National Liberation Front contested an election being in power.

Although the constitution had banned the re-election of a sitting president, the Constitutional Court ruled in 2009 that the ban was unenforceable and that Ortega could run again.[2]

He faced Fabio Gadea Mantilla of the Independent Liberal Party, who was in alliance with other opposition forces both to the right and to the center-left of the national political spectrum including the Sandinista Renovation Movement (MRS).

Another candidate was former President Arnoldo Alemán, backed by the traditional Constitutionalist Liberal Party (Spanish: Partido Liberal Constitucionalista – PLC). Alemán had been convicted in 2003 for corruption and money laundering and been given a 20-year jail sentence,[3] but his conviction was controversially overturned in 2009.

Nicaragua's legislative elections operate within a list proportional representation voting system and so the percentage of votes that each party receives grants it the same proportion of seats in the legislature, with no minimum vote boundary.[4] The 62.69% of the vote Ortega received in the election translated to nearly two-thirds of government seats for his party, falling just a few seats short of the two-thirds required to amend the constitution in Nicaragua.[5]

In October 2009, the Supreme Court, which has a majority of Sandinista judges, overturned presidential term limits as set by the constitution. Previously, the constitution of Nicaragua specifically prohibited consecutive terms and limited presidents to holding office for two terms. Many opponents claim that the bid to overturn the term limits should have been taken to Congress, because it requires full constitutional reform. Ortega initially proposed a congressional referendum amending the constitution, but his plan never came to fruition.[27]

The case was tried in the Constitutional Courtroom of the Supreme Court of Justice (or CSJ) as a case of amparo, a method through which citizens whose constitutional rights have been violated may approach the courts for compensation. The amparo framework functions as a redress of grievances, wherein the court's decision impacts only the plaintiff, or individual(s) bringing forth the complaint.[27] The use of amparo to address electoral reform greatly narrows the impact of the decision: because the injunction was filed by Ortega and 109 Sandinista mayors, the topic in question was whether the Constitution's ban on re-election violated the political rights of that group specifically. As a result, the ruling on re-elections applied solely to Ortega and the FSLN mayors; any opposition candidates seeking exemption to the re-election limits would have to file their own petition.[28]

The decision was made unanimously by six judges from the governing Sandinista party, including three who were summoned as replacements when opposition magistrates did not attend. One such magistrate, Sergio Cuarezma, a member of the court's constitutional chamber, claims he was never informed of the afternoon session that overturned the ban.[28] Another magistrate also claimed they were not given enough time to meet, and the third magistrate was out of the country,[27] leading to allegations that the court convened without establishing a legal quorum.[27]

Critics said this constitutional change could set the stage for Ortega to have the presidency for life. Furthermore, with a commanding majority in the election he could also promote constitutional changes to allow for his re-election indefinitely.[29]

The results of the election were widely protested and produced diverse reactions. Fabio Gadea, an opposition candidate, said that "We cannot accept these results, since they represent not the will of the Nicaraguan people but of the Supreme Electoral Council," which was also controlled by Ortega's Sandinistas. Several Nicaraguan groups were forbidden from monitoring the election, causing the leader of the group of observers from the EU to note that the fact that domestic observation groups were not accredited "represents a problem for the transparency of the whole exercise."[30] Hagamos Democracia and Etica y Transparencia, the largest domestic election organizations, were also critical of the election. Etica y Transparencia— which was not granted observer accreditation by the Ortega administration— later released a statement saying that "We estimate that the electoral process does not meet with the required minimum universal guarantees for an election," and Hagamos Democracia reported that four people suffered gunshot wounds and 20 were arrested in the north of the country.[31] The leader of the Organization of American States observers, Dante Caputo, claimed that his staff was blocked from ten polling stations midway through voting, and the EU team of observers said they faced "sometimes inexplicable obstacles" to access.[32]

Additionally, complaints from international observers raised questions about the validity of Ortega's margin of victory. Observers from the United States and other countries claim that the 2011 elections were flawed, and were manipulated by Ortega to strengthen his control of national institutions.[33] However, the Sandinistas are widely popular and have strong public support as a result of their social programs (which have improved the standards of living for many poor Nicaraguans), so many observers conceded that Ortega would most likely have won the elections regardless of whether or not he committed fraud.[33]

Freedom of the press was another area of contention, as many Nicaraguan journalists felt that they lacked the ability to speak freely.[34] In June 2011, Journalist Roberto Mora spoke about the fear felt by independent journalists and how many feel that this has led to their self-censorship, saying "In order to avoid problems with the government, independent journalists are forced to censor themselves and avoid covering any controversial issues that may arouse the ire of the government."[34] The Ortega family owns TV and radio stations, giving him control over much of the mass media, which, as a result, rarely gave air time to the opposition.[30]

After the polls closed, the Organisation of American States' observer mission, led by former Argentine foreign minister Dante Caputo, said that its job was hindered in 10 of 52 polling stations and was "worrying. If we had trouble in 10 out of 52 polling stations, that means that in 20 per cent of the sample on which we normally base our assessment, we haven't been able to work as we normally do. That means that we can't say that things went appropriately in 100 per cent of the polling stations."[35]

Reactions were diverse and not unified on the result of the election, both in Nicaragua and internationally.

To illustrate the disparity of opinions and statements, below are a series of deviating positions on the election:

Those who did not recognize the election results: Local Electoral Observers such as the "Hagamos Democracia" and "Etica and Transparencia" have rejected the electoral results.[36]

The Episcopal Conference of Nicaragua considered the election not to be transparent.[37] They claimed that the election results did not accurately represent the will of the people.[38]

The European Union Electoral Observers stated that "the process was led by an electoral system that was not independent and that failed to fulfill its job of transparency and collaboration with all political parties."[39]

The Higher Council of Private Enterprise (COSEP) called for a replacement for the CSE.[38]

The main opposition candidate, Fabio Gadea of the Liberal Independent Party, has also denounced the election as "fraud". President Ortega has urged his opponents to accept the results several times. The president of Nicaragua's election authority, Roberto Rivas, stated that "a process is legitimate if the people's wishes were respected, and that is what we are experiencing here."[40][41] Gadea said that the result was allegedly plagued with vices and "that we suspect that we are in the presence of fraud of unprecedented proportions;" he also added that members of his party should await instructions as "the struggle continues."[42]

The United States coincided with European Union Observers "that the Supreme Electoral Council did not operate in a transparent and impartial manner".[43]

There have been three notable post-election violent clashes. Three opposition supporters were killed by the National Police in San Jose de Cusmapa, while one activist was killed in Siuna. The government and opposition has also clashed several times in the capital, Managua, during weekly protests for fair and transparent elections. The demonstrators gathered every week in front of the Supreme Electoral Council in the center of Managua.[41][44]

Those who did recognize the election results: The Organization of American States ratified, that the results of the Nicaraguan general elections of 2011, won by Daniel Ortega Saavedra with more than 62 percent of the vote, corresponded to the count realized by this and other organizations during their electoral observer mission in Nicaragua.[45] While they recognize the results, their report noted that there were several irregularities during the election involving providing identification cards to vote, proper accreditation of the election observers, and an imbalance in political parties present at polling stations.[40]

The Carter Center issued a statement in the election aftermath stating "We acknowledge the strong electoral support given to President Ortega in Sunday's election".[46]

The head of accompanying mission of the European Union (EU), Luis Yáñez called the triumph of Daniel Ortega and the Sandinista Front in the Nicaraguan General Elections indubitable and ruled out any possibility of fraud during them.[47]

Rosario Murillo, Ortega's wife and spokeswoman, said of the win that: "This is the victory of Christianity, socialism and solidarity;" she also repeated Ortega's campaign slogan – "Our promise is to keep building the common good."[48] Ortega's flourishing social programs and improvements to the economy has made him increasingly popular with both the working class and the poor.[49]