Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
09MANAGUA313
2009-03-23 22:25:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy Managua
Cable title:
NICARAGUA: ATTRONEY GENERAL CLAIMS PROGRESS ON PROPERTY CLAIMS
how-toVZCZCXYZ0000 RR RUEHWEB DE RUEHMU #0313/01 0822225 ZNR UUUUU ZZH R 232225Z MAR 09 FM AMEMBASSY MANAGUA TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3926 INFO RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC RUEHZA/WHA CENTRAL AMERICAN COLLECTIVE
UNCLAS MANAGUA 000313
STATE FOR WHA/CEN, EB/IFD/OIA, AND L/CID
STATE ALSO FOR WHA/EPSC
STATE PASS TO USTR
TREASURY FOR INL AND OWH
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EINV ECON USTR KIDE NU
SUBJECT: NICARAGUA: ATTRONEY GENERAL CLAIMS PROGRESS ON PROPERTY CLAIMS
REFS: A) 08 MANAGUA 1546, B) 08 MANAGUA 1352, C) 02 MANAGUA 877, D)
MANAGUA 228, E) 08 MANAGUA 1120, F) 08 MANAGUA 287, G) MANAGUA 235
SUMMARY
-------
UNCLAS MANAGUA 000313
STATE FOR WHA/CEN, EB/IFD/OIA, AND L/CID
STATE ALSO FOR WHA/EPSC
STATE PASS TO USTR
TREASURY FOR INL AND OWH
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EINV ECON USTR KIDE NU
SUBJECT: NICARAGUA: ATTRONEY GENERAL CLAIMS PROGRESS ON PROPERTY CLAIMS
REFS: A) 08 MANAGUA 1546, B) 08 MANAGUA 1352, C) 02 MANAGUA 877, D)
MANAGUA 228, E) 08 MANAGUA 1120, F) 08 MANAGUA 287, G) MANAGUA 235
SUMMARY
--------------
1. (SBU) During the mid-year review of the 2008-09 waiver
year, Attorney General Estrada took the opportunity to assert that
he had fulfilled all of the commitments he made during the bilateral
review, such the establishment of a Liaison Office, a committee to
review claims in court, and a committee to review claims under
government control, as well as the publication of the claims
resolution process on the Attorney General's website. He also
pledged to re-examine 70 U.S. citizen claims dismissed under Decrees
3 and 38 to determine whether they could be resolved favorably. The
Ambassador raised concerns about the nullification of previously
resolved claims and pressed for detailed explanation of how final
settlement offers are made. Econoff passed U.S. claimants' concerns
surrounding the Attorney General's policy of no longer pursuing
court claims filed on behalf of claimants and, instead, arguing in
favor of illegal occupants. Throughout the mid-year review, Estrada
stressed that he was doing all he could to improve Nicaragua's
chances at receiving a Section 527 waiver this year and avoid
further tension in our bilateral relationship. End Summary.
AMBASSADOR DISCUSSES SECTION 527 BENCHMARKS
--------------
2. (SBU) On March 12, the Ambassador met with Attorney General
Hernan Estrada to review the first six months of the 2008-09 waiver
year and to follow up on issues raised during the bilateral review
(Ref A). The DCM, Economics Counselor, and Econoff participated in
the meeting. Rebeca Zuniga, Coordinator of the Liaison Office for
U.S. Citizen Claims, also attended the meeting.
3. (SBU) The Ambassador observed that the GON had settled only 14
claims during the first half of the waiver year, and that there had
been little progress in resolving claims under the government's
control. So far, the GON had resolved one claim under the control
of the Nicaraguan National Police (Ref B),and a local court
returned to a U.S. claimant property that was under the control of a
former Nicaraguan Army officer (septel). Estrada responded that the
GON is working diligently on U.S. citizen claims, adding that his
staff is negotiating a settlement with U.S. citizen Juan Barreto to
solve the Las Serranias case, which consists of 28 claims under the
control of the Nicaraguan Army (Ref C). Estrada noted that he had
instructed Ruth Zapata, Head of the Office of Assessment and
Indemnification (OCI),to meet with the Barreto family as soon as
possible to iron out issues to pave the way for a final settlement
this waiver year.
COOPERATION
--------------
4. (SBU) The Ambassador expressed his appreciation for the
creation of the Liaison Office for U.S. Citizen Claims, noting that
the office had improved communication between the Embassy Property
Office. Estrada seized the opportunity to assert that he had
fulfilled all of the commitments he made during the bilateral
review, such the establishment of a Liaison Office, a committee to
review claims in court, a committee to review claims under
government control, and the publication of the claims resolution
process on the Attorney General's website (Ref A). The Ambassador
welcomed these positive developments and expressed the desire to
continue the effort to deal with unresolved claims and other
property-related issues.
REVIEW OF DECREE 3 AND 38 DISMISSALS
--------------
5. (SBU) Estrada told the Ambassador that he planned to review 70
of the 98 U.S citizen claims dismissed under Decree 3 (1979) and
Decree 38 (1979),which authorized the government to confiscate
property of Somoza family members and "their close allies," to
determine whether they could be resolved favorably. The Ambassador
welcomed this development and pressed him for quick action. The
Ambassador reiterated the assertion that the USG does not recognize
Decree 3 and 38 dismissals and urged Estrada to develop a fair and
transparent process to allow claimants due process.
NULLIFICATION OF SETTLED CLAIMS
--------------
6. (SBU) The Ambassador raised concern about the National Confiscation Review Commission's (CNRC) recent notices to two U.S. citizens that their previously settled claims had been nullified (Ref D). The Ambassador reminded Estrada of the pledge that he had made during the bilateral review, i.e., to leave previously settled claims alone. Estrada tried to clarify his position, stating that some claims needed to be reviewed for legal or administrative reasons. The Ambassador pointed out that the Embassy had already counted these claims as having been resolved; nullifying them would be a serious setback to our efforts to reduce the case load. Estrada instructed Zuniga to review the two cases in question for errors or misunderstandings. Econoff suggested that should the CNRC revoke the nullification notices, that it recognize this publicly to relieve fears among the U.S. claimant community.
TRANSPARENCY IN FINAL SETTLEMENT OFFERS
--------------
7. (SBU) The DCM pressed Estrada to develop a clear, detailed
explanation of final settlement offers to help claimants understand
the appraisal process (Ref E). The DCM explained that if claimants
understood how the government determined offers under Nicaraguan
law, they might be more willing to accept the offer. Estrada did
not engage on this point.
CLAIMS IN COURT
--------------
8. (SBU) Econoff raised U.S. claimant concerns surrounding the
Attorney General's policy of no longer pursuing court claims filed
on behalf of claimants, and, instead, arguing in favor of illegal
occupants, and awarding them titles based on Laws 85 (1990),86
(1990) and 88 (1990),known as the "Pinata Laws" (Ref F). Estrada
retorted that property claims are complex issues, and that he must
apply the law to protect the rights of all Nicaraguans, not just the
rights of foreigners. Econoff highlighted the Attorney General
Office's role in petitioning the highest court for property issues,
the National Property Appeals Court, to rule against the lawsuit of
U.S. citizen claimant Sylvia Sanchez (who sought the return of her
property) and the subsequent transfer of ownership of her property
to the occupant who was not even considered a beneficiary under the
"Pinata Laws." Estrada instructed Zuniga to look into the case.
[Note: On March 16, Zuniga corroborated to us on March 16 that the
National Property Appeals Court had indeed ruled against Ms.
Sanchez. End Note.]
PROPERTY INVASIONS
--------------
9. (SBU) The Ambassador urged Estrada to help U.S. citizen
landowners dealing with recent land invasions against their
property (Ref G). Estrada asserted that his government had "zero
tolerance" when it came to land invasions, but when pressed to take
action on specific cases, he deferred to law enforcement officials
and the courts. Econoff pointed out that the Attorney General's
Office had assisted some U.S. citizen landowners in the past by
issuing dicta clarifying their legal ownership of the property in
question. At this point, the Ambassador handed Estrada a list of
U.S. citizen landowners who are requesting assistance to remove
squatters from their land. Estrada instructed Zuniga to look into
these cases.
COMMENT
--------------
10. (SBU) Throughout the mid-year review, Estrada stressed that
he was doing all that he could to work on Embassy-registered claims
and address issues raised during the bilateral review. It appears
that he is making at least a modest effort to meet all three Section
527 benchmarks this waiver year, if only to avoid further tension in
the bilateral relationship. We remain concerned about Estrada's
unwillingness to 1) establish a fair and transparent process to
allow claimants to contest Decree 3 and 38 dismissals, 2) improve
transparency in the calculation of settlement offers, 3) support
U.S. citizen cases in court, 4) reevaluate his policy of arguing on
behalf of illegal occupants in court in order to transfer to them
titles to property belonging to U.S. citizens, and 5) reconsider the
CNRC's nullification of previously resolved claims.
SANDERS
STATE FOR WHA/CEN, EB/IFD/OIA, AND L/CID
STATE ALSO FOR WHA/EPSC
STATE PASS TO USTR
TREASURY FOR INL AND OWH
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EINV ECON USTR KIDE NU
SUBJECT: NICARAGUA: ATTRONEY GENERAL CLAIMS PROGRESS ON PROPERTY CLAIMS
REFS: A) 08 MANAGUA 1546, B) 08 MANAGUA 1352, C) 02 MANAGUA 877, D)
MANAGUA 228, E) 08 MANAGUA 1120, F) 08 MANAGUA 287, G) MANAGUA 235
SUMMARY
--------------
1. (SBU) During the mid-year review of the 2008-09 waiver
year, Attorney General Estrada took the opportunity to assert that
he had fulfilled all of the commitments he made during the bilateral
review, such the establishment of a Liaison Office, a committee to
review claims in court, and a committee to review claims under
government control, as well as the publication of the claims
resolution process on the Attorney General's website. He also
pledged to re-examine 70 U.S. citizen claims dismissed under Decrees
3 and 38 to determine whether they could be resolved favorably. The
Ambassador raised concerns about the nullification of previously
resolved claims and pressed for detailed explanation of how final
settlement offers are made. Econoff passed U.S. claimants' concerns
surrounding the Attorney General's policy of no longer pursuing
court claims filed on behalf of claimants and, instead, arguing in
favor of illegal occupants. Throughout the mid-year review, Estrada
stressed that he was doing all he could to improve Nicaragua's
chances at receiving a Section 527 waiver this year and avoid
further tension in our bilateral relationship. End Summary.
AMBASSADOR DISCUSSES SECTION 527 BENCHMARKS
--------------
2. (SBU) On March 12, the Ambassador met with Attorney General
Hernan Estrada to review the first six months of the 2008-09 waiver
year and to follow up on issues raised during the bilateral review
(Ref A). The DCM, Economics Counselor, and Econoff participated in
the meeting. Rebeca Zuniga, Coordinator of the Liaison Office for
U.S. Citizen Claims, also attended the meeting.
3. (SBU) The Ambassador observed that the GON had settled only 14
claims during the first half of the waiver year, and that there had
been little progress in resolving claims under the government's
control. So far, the GON had resolved one claim under the control
of the Nicaraguan National Police (Ref B),and a local court
returned to a U.S. claimant property that was under the control of a
former Nicaraguan Army officer (septel). Estrada responded that the
GON is working diligently on U.S. citizen claims, adding that his
staff is negotiating a settlement with U.S. citizen Juan Barreto to
solve the Las Serranias case, which consists of 28 claims under the
control of the Nicaraguan Army (Ref C). Estrada noted that he had
instructed Ruth Zapata, Head of the Office of Assessment and
Indemnification (OCI),to meet with the Barreto family as soon as
possible to iron out issues to pave the way for a final settlement
this waiver year.
COOPERATION
--------------
4. (SBU) The Ambassador expressed his appreciation for the
creation of the Liaison Office for U.S. Citizen Claims, noting that
the office had improved communication between the Embassy Property
Office. Estrada seized the opportunity to assert that he had
fulfilled all of the commitments he made during the bilateral
review, such the establishment of a Liaison Office, a committee to
review claims in court, a committee to review claims under
government control, and the publication of the claims resolution
process on the Attorney General's website (Ref A). The Ambassador
welcomed these positive developments and expressed the desire to
continue the effort to deal with unresolved claims and other
property-related issues.
REVIEW OF DECREE 3 AND 38 DISMISSALS
--------------
5. (SBU) Estrada told the Ambassador that he planned to review 70
of the 98 U.S citizen claims dismissed under Decree 3 (1979) and
Decree 38 (1979),which authorized the government to confiscate
property of Somoza family members and "their close allies," to
determine whether they could be resolved favorably. The Ambassador
welcomed this development and pressed him for quick action. The
Ambassador reiterated the assertion that the USG does not recognize
Decree 3 and 38 dismissals and urged Estrada to develop a fair and
transparent process to allow claimants due process.
NULLIFICATION OF SETTLED CLAIMS
--------------
6. (SBU) The Ambassador raised concern about the National Confiscation Review Commission's (CNRC) recent notices to two U.S. citizens that their previously settled claims had been nullified (Ref D). The Ambassador reminded Estrada of the pledge that he had made during the bilateral review, i.e., to leave previously settled claims alone. Estrada tried to clarify his position, stating that some claims needed to be reviewed for legal or administrative reasons. The Ambassador pointed out that the Embassy had already counted these claims as having been resolved; nullifying them would be a serious setback to our efforts to reduce the case load. Estrada instructed Zuniga to review the two cases in question for errors or misunderstandings. Econoff suggested that should the CNRC revoke the nullification notices, that it recognize this publicly to relieve fears among the U.S. claimant community.
TRANSPARENCY IN FINAL SETTLEMENT OFFERS
--------------
7. (SBU) The DCM pressed Estrada to develop a clear, detailed
explanation of final settlement offers to help claimants understand
the appraisal process (Ref E). The DCM explained that if claimants
understood how the government determined offers under Nicaraguan
law, they might be more willing to accept the offer. Estrada did
not engage on this point.
CLAIMS IN COURT
--------------
8. (SBU) Econoff raised U.S. claimant concerns surrounding the
Attorney General's policy of no longer pursuing court claims filed
on behalf of claimants, and, instead, arguing in favor of illegal
occupants, and awarding them titles based on Laws 85 (1990),86
(1990) and 88 (1990),known as the "Pinata Laws" (Ref F). Estrada
retorted that property claims are complex issues, and that he must
apply the law to protect the rights of all Nicaraguans, not just the
rights of foreigners. Econoff highlighted the Attorney General
Office's role in petitioning the highest court for property issues,
the National Property Appeals Court, to rule against the lawsuit of
U.S. citizen claimant Sylvia Sanchez (who sought the return of her
property) and the subsequent transfer of ownership of her property
to the occupant who was not even considered a beneficiary under the
"Pinata Laws." Estrada instructed Zuniga to look into the case.
[Note: On March 16, Zuniga corroborated to us on March 16 that the
National Property Appeals Court had indeed ruled against Ms.
Sanchez. End Note.]
PROPERTY INVASIONS
--------------
9. (SBU) The Ambassador urged Estrada to help U.S. citizen
landowners dealing with recent land invasions against their
property (Ref G). Estrada asserted that his government had "zero
tolerance" when it came to land invasions, but when pressed to take
action on specific cases, he deferred to law enforcement officials
and the courts. Econoff pointed out that the Attorney General's
Office had assisted some U.S. citizen landowners in the past by
issuing dicta clarifying their legal ownership of the property in
question. At this point, the Ambassador handed Estrada a list of
U.S. citizen landowners who are requesting assistance to remove
squatters from their land. Estrada instructed Zuniga to look into
these cases.
COMMENT
--------------
10. (SBU) Throughout the mid-year review, Estrada stressed that
he was doing all that he could to work on Embassy-registered claims
and address issues raised during the bilateral review. It appears
that he is making at least a modest effort to meet all three Section
527 benchmarks this waiver year, if only to avoid further tension in
the bilateral relationship. We remain concerned about Estrada's
unwillingness to 1) establish a fair and transparent process to
allow claimants to contest Decree 3 and 38 dismissals, 2) improve
transparency in the calculation of settlement offers, 3) support
U.S. citizen cases in court, 4) reevaluate his policy of arguing on
behalf of illegal occupants in court in order to transfer to them
titles to property belonging to U.S. citizens, and 5) reconsider the
CNRC's nullification of previously resolved claims.
SANDERS