NicaNotes

May 28, 2026

By Alfred de Zayas

[Alfred de Zayas is a U.S. and Swiss citizen, residing in Geneva, Switzerland, where he is Professor of Law at the Geneva School of Diplomacy. He is a former senior lawyer with the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and former UN Independent Expert on International Order (2012-18). He is author of 12 books including Building a Just World Order. This article was first published by Covert Action Magazine on April 28, 2026. We publish a condensed version here.]

In the light of the proliferation of unilateral coercive measures (UCMs, wrongly characterized as “sanctions”) and the adverse human rights impacts they generate worldwide, the question arises what measures States should adopt to counter the UCM plague.

Diplomatic protection on behalf of individuals and corporations harmed by UCMs is an under-utilized foreign policy tool that can be exercised through formal protest, retorsion, counter-measures, arbitration, adjudication before international tribunals, declaring the Ambassador of the imposing State persona non grata, expelling diplomats, etc.

Bearing in mind that the UN General Assembly and UN Human Rights Council adopt yearly resolutions condemning UCMs as being contrary to the UN Charter and in violation of customary international law, and considering the growing number of scholarly studies and reports documenting the lethality of UCMs, it is hard to understand why affected States have not organized a robust pushback against this systematic violation of State sovereignty and illegal interference in the internal affairs of States.

It is time for the “global Majority” represented in the BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and the Non-Aligned Movement to join forces to reject the arrogant imposition of “sanctions” by the U.S. and EU in ways that adversely impact their economies, and generate suffering and in some cases trigger humanitarian crises.

The U.S. and EU have zero right to “punish” countries like Cuba, Iran, Nicaragua, Russia, Venezuela and Zimbabwe. Legal sanctions can only be imposed by the UN Security Council. UCMs constitute an illegal and illegitimate use of force, prohibited in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.

States affected by U.S. and EU unilateral coercive measures should challenge their legality before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) the International Criminal Court (ICC), as well as international and regional judicial and quasi-judicial instances, including the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR), and the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACtHPR), which provide for inter-State complaint procedures.

Undoubtedly, States have the right to exercise diplomatic protection to defend the rights of their subjects and demand compensation on their behalf. Moreover, States should reaffirm the fundamental principle of sovereignty and demand reparation for the violation of the principle of non-intervention in their internal affairs through the extra-territorial application of foreign laws.

Negative Human Rights Impacts of UCMs

The UN Special Rapporteur on UCMs, Professor Alena Douhan, has submitted some 14 reports to the UN General Assembly and to the Human Rights Council. She has conducted country visits to countries affected by UCMs and documented gross violations of human rights generated by them, amounting to crimes against humanity within the meaning of Article 7 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court.

Researchers have documented the devastating impacts of UCMs on one-third of the population of the planet, which every year have caused, according to a study by experts published in the British medical journal The Lancet, an estimated half a million deaths worldwide. Undoubtedly this constitutes a crime against humanity.

A separate report on UCMs as a form of unlawful collective punishment concerns the hybrid economic war and draconian measures, including financial blockades, adopted by the U.S. against Venezuela. The study, by Professor Jeffrey Sachs (Columbia University) and Dr. Mark Weisbrot (Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C.), concluded that, for the year 2018 alone, 40,000 deaths in Venezuela could be attributable to the adverse impacts of UCMs on nutrition and health.

My own research during and following my official visit to Venezuela in November/December 2017 made me conclude that at least 100,000 UCM-related deaths had occurred.

Besides death, illness and malnutrition, UCMs generate distressing economic, social and cultural impacts. UCMs have destroyed supply chains and voided the benefits of globalization, led to bankruptcies, unemployment, increased corruption associated with black markets, triggered uncontrolled flows of economic migration and humanitarian crises. All of these violations of international law and human rights are justiciable before national and international fora.

The Law of Diplomatic Protection

As we know from customary international law, the idea that a State has a right to protect its subjects vis-à-vis other States is a given. It was expressed as early as the 18^th century by Emmerich de Vattel in his treatise The Law of Nations:

“Whoever uses a citizen ill, indirectly offends the state, which is bound to protect this citizen; and the sovereign of the latter should avenge his wrongs, punish the aggressor, and, if possible, oblige him to make full reparation.”

The Permanent Court of International Justice [the predecessor of the World Court] and the International Court of Justice [World Court] have concretized and expanded this doctrine.

In its famous Mavrommatis Judgment of 1924, the Permanent Court of International Justice summarized diplomatic protection as follows:

“It is an elementary principle of international law that a State is entitled to protect its subjects, when injured by acts contrary to international law committed by another State…By taking up the case of one of its subjects and by resorting to diplomatic action or international judicial proceedings on his behalf, a State is in reality asserting its own rights – its right to ensure, in the person of its subjects, respect for the rules of international law.”

In the 1927 Chorzow Factory Case, Germany espoused the rights of German subjects who had suffered discriminatory confiscations by Polish authorities. The PCIJ ruled that Poland owed compensation to the victims.

The International Court of Justice expanded this principle in the Barcelona Traction Case holding that diplomatic protection can be exercised on behalf of corporations, besides individuals. It also elaborated the notion of obligations owed erga omnes (towards everyone) to the international community.

Other significant cases concern human rights matters, e.g., the LaGrand v. United States case, and the Avena v. United States case, both concerning failure of the US to abide by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the imposition of the death penalty on two German nationals and on 51 Mexican nationals. Notwithstanding “provisional measures” issued by the court to prevent the execution of these German and Mexican citizens, the United States proceeded to execute the foreign nationals.

International Law Commission

In 2006, the International Law Commission adopted draft Articles on Diplomatic Protection, for regulating the entitlement and exercise of diplomatic protection, largely codifying established practice.

The ILC rapporteur, Professor John Dugard, has proposed a definition: “A State is responsible for injury to an alien caused by that State’s wrongful act or omission. Diplomatic protection is the procedure employed by the State of nationality of the injured person to secure protection of that person, and to obtain reparation for the internationally wrongful act inflected. Such protection extends to both natural and legal persons.”

Recent ICJ jurisprudence built on the concept of diplomatic protection

In its 1980 judgment in the United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran case, the U.S. exercised diplomatic protection on behalf of its diplomats. The ICJ decided that “the Islamic Republic of Iran…has violated in several respects, and is still violating, obligations owed by it to the United States of America under international conventions in force.

More recently, in the 2023 case of Certain Iranian Assets (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), Iran represented the rights of its citizens, corporations and banks affected by unilateral U.S. decrees. In its 2023 judgment, the Court held that the United States of America had violated its obligation under Articles III and IV of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights…”

The late Judge Cançado Trindade, noted “that ours are the times of a new jus gentium [law of nations], focused on the rights of the human person, individually or collectively.”

These judicial ruminations have implications for the relevance of diplomatic protection today and the growing importance of asserting human rights through diplomatic protection and ICJ adjudication.

Indeed, if States affected by unilateral coercive measures were to challenge their before the International Court of Justice, focusing on the obvious violations of multiple rulings, the Court would have no option but to rely on its own precedents and explicitly condemn UCMs as contrary to the UN Charter and fundamental principles of international law.

Violations of Human Rights Treaties Require Resolute Pushback from States, Including Through Diplomatic Protection

Because of the erga omnes character of human rights treaties, all States have a legitimate interest in defending the principle of human dignity and the necessity to ensure that all States parties to the International Covenants on Civil and Political Right, on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and on The Elimination of Racial Discrimination are enforced worldwide and that obstacles to their implementation, such as UCMs, are removed. This erga omnes obligation of States encompasses effective support of persons under their jurisdiction, including by opening cases before international courts and expert committees, and by assisting victims in submitting cases where individuals have standing. Where individuals have no standing (e.g., before the ICJ and ICC), it is the State that should use all international instances to vindicate the human rights of their subjects.

Interim Measures of Protection

While diplomatic protection could be used in thousands of cases, States have failed to use this foreign policy tool effectively. Whenever a State brings a case before the ICJ, it should also consider asking for “provisional measures” under Article 41 of the ICJ statute. These interim measures are binding. In numerous UCM cases, there would be irreparable damage unless the violation is immediately stopped. This is certainly the case with some U.S. and EU sanctions that place the targeted person in legal limbo without recourse, and in cases of comprehensive UCMs, expose the populations to hunger, disease and ultimately to death. In some cases, it can be said that the failure of the State to assert the rights of its citizens amounts to a “denial of justice,” a separate and distinct violation of human rights committed by the State that fails to act on behalf of its aggrieved citizens.

Is Diplomatic Protection Only Discretionary?

To this day many governments maintain that the exercise of diplomatic protection is a political act and remains a discretionary matter, one of the many tools of foreign policy of every sovereign State. Even if it has not yet coagulated into law and practice, an exception to the “discretionary” approach is emerging because of the erga omnes obligations of all States to promote and protect human rights, to prevent genocide and crimes against humanity.

Genocide must not only be punished, it must be prevented, and States have an obligation to do so by every means available, including diplomatic protection. This entails pro-active defense of persons threatened with extermination, and punishment of those responsible for persecution and genocide. In other words, there is no discretion in the use of diplomatic protection when the violations of human rights entail crimes against humanity or genocide.

Professor Eckart Klein wrote in his book on Diplomatischer Schutz that the German government was obliged to exercise diplomatic protection on behalf of its citizens who endured the most brutal mass expulsion of the 20^th century—the 15 million Germans expelled from their homes in East Prussia, Pomerania, Bohemia and Moravia at the end of the Second World War from territories where their ancestors had lived for 700 years. Two million died in the process.

A New Definition of “Diplomatic Protection”

It is time for the International Law Commission to resume its work on diplomatic protection and to adopt a viable definition of the concept, even if some countries, including those imposing UCMs, are likely to oppose this initiative.

The definition could be formulated as follows:

Diplomatic protection is a foreign policy tool that every sovereign state can exercise to defend and protect the rights of its citizens and corporations against actions by foreign states that adversely impact the rights of both the injured state and its subjects. Among the foreign acts that can be challenged through diplomatic protection are confiscations of property, financial blockades, hybrid economic warfare, and the imposition of unilateral coercive measures. When the right of a citizen is violated, the violation also impacts the sovereignty and honor of the state of nationality. It also affects the erga omnes obligations of the state of nationality to fulfil its obligations under international human rights treaties and its duty to promote and protect the human rights of its subjects. Diplomatic protection can be exercised inter alia through formal diplomatic protests, retorsion, countermeasures, arbitration, and adjudication by international tribunals. Diplomatic protection is not only discretionary, it constitutes a peremptory obligation of the State if the international wrongful acts amount to gross violations of human rights, crimes against humanity or genocide. 

Conclusion and Recommendations

Diplomatic protection remains an under-utilized foreign policy tool. In the light of the proliferation of UCMs and their lethal consequences, it is imperative that states systematically counter this lawless development diplomatically, politically and judicially.

UCMs are demonstrably more damaging than the problems they are supposed to remedy. As the Roman poet Vergilius wrote: Aegrescit medendo.  “The cure is worse than the disease.” Economic sanctions and blockades have been shown to take a yearly toll of hundreds of thousands of lives worldwide. They have been notoriously ineffective in achieving their geopolitical aim of inducing undemocratic “regime change.” UCMs have been noxious and counterproductive for all concerned, UCMs make me think of the obsolete medical practice of blood-letting, that over centuries contributed to the demise of so many victims of medical malpractice, including King Charles II, George Washington and Lord Byron.

Briefs

By Nan McCurdy

Nicaragua Calls on UN to Eliminate Unilateral Coercive Measures

On Tuesday, during a high-level session on the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, Nicaragua called for the unconditional and complete elimination of all unilateral coercive measures (often called sanctions), reported Co-President Rosario Murillo. She noted that the United Nations Charter was signed more than eight decades ago and remains the legal instrument necessary to uphold its principles and purposes: peace, international security, peaceful and harmonious coexistence among nations, and the sovereign equality of states. She noted that the validity of this Charter is currently being systematically undermined by the practices of those who seek to subordinate it to their hegemonic agendas and interests.

“These practices directly threaten the peace, development, and security of our peoples. Poverty, war, climate change, illegal impositions, and unilateral coercive measures—which constitute crimes against humanity—undermine the right to development of all peoples, the right to education, health, food, and the very lives of entire peoples,” Murillo stated. She said that these measures are the greatest obstacle to the implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and to the eradication of poverty.

She highlighted the participation of Deputy Foreign Minister Valdrack Jaentschke in the debate held in New York. She said that the debate was an initiative of the People’s Republic of China that has been welcomed by many countries and peoples who are aware of the importance of upholding the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter while also strengthening an international system that must focus on those instruments of order and respect that we, as peoples, have established there—but which, unfortunately, are often ignored.

Murillo reported that Foreign Minister Jaentschke congratulated Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on his successful presidency of the Security Council this month. She also reiterated Jaentschke’s expression of Nicaragua’s gratitude for convening this debate, and said it is timely and necessary at this critical juncture for humanity. Murillo said that Nicaragua recognizes the People’s Republic of China, all its models of global integration, Belt and Road as well as its initiatives for global development and global security, among many others, which offer the countries and peoples of the developing world mechanisms for cooperation based on respect and the indispensable recognition of sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs. See photos: https://radiolaprimerisima.com/2026/05/26/nicaragua-exige-ante-onu-eliminacion-de-medidas-coercitivas-unilaterales/ (La Primerisima, 26 May 2026)

The Seven Megaprojects Transforming the Southern Caribbean

Nicaragua’s Southern Caribbean is undergoing an unprecedented transformation driven by an infrastructure development plan that is radically changing its economic, social, and productive landscape. Seven flagship megaprojects are driving this momentum: the construction of the Glorias Costeñas Sports Complex; the commissioning of the Ing. Danilo Hernández Electrical Substation; and, complementing these, the modernization of the airport, the construction of the Deepwater Port at El Bluff, the connecting highway, and the construction of new primary schools and high schools, among other projects. With an initial progress of 8.8% focused on earthworks, grading, and underground drainage, the Glorias Costeñas Sports Complex is establishing itself as the most important sports infrastructure in the region’s history. (La Primerisima, 22 May 2026

Acute and Chronic Malnutrition Declining in Nicaragua

The Ministry of Health (MINSA) reported on May 26 that acute malnutrition in Nicaragua fell from 3.1% in 2025 to 2.9% in 2026, while chronic malnutrition fell from 5.9% in 2025 to 5.4% in 2026. Authorities highlighted that these results are part of the national nutritional survey of children under 6 years of age, conducted from March to May of this year. They reported that the nutritional survey was carried out thanks to the active participation of Nicaraguan families, the Community Network, the Sandinista Youth, the educational community, health workers, and local authorities. During this period, door-to-door visits and visits to educational centers were conducted to assess weight and height, yielding the aforementioned results. The government will continue to develop strategies and programs that protect the health and nutritional status of children, who are the future of the country. (La Primerisima, 26 May 2026)

Marlon Zelaya Sports Festival Kicks Off

Officials from the Nicaraguan Institute of Sports and the Alexis Arguello Sports Movement inaugurated the 39th edition of the Marlon Zelaya Sports Festival on May 25 at the National Autonomous University of Nicaragua (UNAN) in Managua. The rector of UNAN Managua, Thelma López, said that this event represents a space for joy and historical remembrance for the university community, while strengthening sports through the participation of more than 3,000 athletes. The athletes will compete in basketball, fencing, taekwondo, karate, soccer, baseball, volleyball, judo, and boxing, promoting university sports and healthy camaraderie. José Selva, president of the Rubén Darío University Campus, underlined the students’ commitment to the legacy of student leader Marlon Zelaya, remembered 43 years after his death along with Segundo Lezama, Marvin González, and Adolfo Noguera, who fell in combat on May 24, 1983, in Las Tiricias, Río San Juan, defending the Sandinista Popular Revolution. See photos: https://radiolaprimerisima.com/2026/05/25/arranca-jornada-deportiva-marlon-zelaya-cruz/ (La Primerisima, 25 May 2026)

Specialized Care for Women in the Capital

On May 23, a large-scale health fair was held at the Camila López Maternal and Child Health Center, located in District I of Managua, to provide care for women. During the event, services were provided in general medicine, gynecology, pediatrics, dermatology, dentistry, and specialized ultrasounds. “I think this is great because in the past we didn’t receive medication for free, and I see that thanks to this government, women are now given the opportunity to undergo all these types of exams at no cost,” said Miriam Soto. The massive health fair was held in honor of Nicaraguan mothers [Mother’s day is May 30 in Nicaragua]. See photos: https://radiolaprimerisima.com/2026/05/24/desarrollan-mega-feria-de-salud-para-mujeres-de-la-capital/ (La Primerisima, 24 May 2026)

Solidarity with Cuba

On 21st May, the Nicaraguan government issued a statement in solidarity with Cuba. A copy of the statement can be found here with an English translation below the Spanish: https://www.el19digital.com/articulos/ver/177351-cuba-potencia-de-bien-comun

The UK-based Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign Action Group (NSCAG) has signed on to an urgent call for peace and sovereignty issued by the also UK-based Cuba Solidarity Campaign. You can add your name to the statement if you haven’t done so already: https://cuba-solidarity.org.uk/peace-and-sovereignty/ See also the statement on Cuba from European Solidarity Movement with Nicaragua’s Sandinista Revolution: https://www.ces-rps.com/2026/05/23/ante-las-nuevas-agresiones-y-amenazas-del-imperialismo-al-pueblo-de-cuba-y-su-revolucion/ (Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign Action Group, May 2026)

Copa Sandino 2026

The Copa Sandino football [soccer] for Nicaragua tournament in Bristol, England has been taking place every year since 1987 (apart from the Covid year). Over this time, the event has raised tens of thousands of pounds for a range of solidarity, health, education and development projects in Nicaragua. This year, twelve teams battled it out for the coveted trophy and the tournament raised £1000 to support a girls’ football and education program in Nicaragua and the visit of a Nicaraguan Fairtrade coffee grower to Bristol schools in October. For more information about this and the work of Bristol Link with Nicaragua see here: (NSCAG May update, https://nscag.org.uk/)

Managua Becomes a Global Diplomatic Hub

From May 25 to 27, the Regional Seminar of the United Nations Special Committee on Peoples Under Colonial Administration was held in Nicaragua. The presence of 47 countries and peoples engaged in debates on sovereignty, self-determination, and independence turned the meeting into a political event of global significance, not only because of the topics discussed, but also because of the symbolism of the forum taking place in Managua under the coordination of the United Nations and with delegations from Africa, Asia, Latin America, Europe, and the Caribbean.

The issue of decolonization remains a live item on the international agenda. Cases such as the Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, Guam, and French Polynesia continue to feature in multilateral debates concerning the defense of sovereignty, administrative control, and the right of peoples to self-determination, which helps explain why the Special Committee on Decolonization, established by the UN in 1961, remains active in 2026.

The participation of delegations from countries such as the People’s Republic of China, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, South Africa, Algeria, and other nations also reflected that the seminar brought together governments with distinct political, historical, and diplomatic trajectories, yet united in discussions regarding national sovereignty and multilateral cooperation mechanisms. Co-President Rosario Murillo, welcomed the delegations during her daily address on the Citizen Power media, “I want to emphasize, comrades, that today we have inaugurated this event, and for us it is truly not only a pleasure but a genuine brotherhood that we demonstrate when we welcome to our country representatives of delegations from sister nations and peoples—47 sister nations and peoples.”

Topics discussed during the seminar included political developments in peoples under colonial administration, climate challenges, and the role of the United Nations system in monitoring resolutions related to these processes.

For his part, Deputy Foreign Minister Denis Moncada Colindres linked the seminar to historical references in Nicaraguan politics tied to resistance and interventionism, mentioning figures such as Augusto C. Sandino, Benjamín Zeledón, and Carlos Fonseca Amador. This historical component strengthened the event’s diplomatic discourse with a broader narrative centered on national sovereignty and self-determination—elements that have been part of the Special Committee on Decolonization’s agenda since its creation within the UN. See photos: https://radiolaprimerisima.com/2026/05/26/managua-se-convierte-en-epicentro-diplomatico-mundial/ (La Primerisima, 26 May 2026)