No detention centre mapping data


Nicaragua Immigration Detention

One of the poorest countries in the Americas, Nicaragua nevertheless has specific immigration detention laws and policies and maintains a dedicated immigration detention in Managua, which it terms an albergue (or shelter). Asylum seekers can be subject to detention while other vulnerable groups, including children and victims of trafficking, tend to be housed in shelters.

Quick Facts


Immigration detainees (1995): 880
Immigration detention capacity (2015): 40
International migrants (2015): 40,300
New asylum applications (2016): 202

Profile Updated: August 2015

Nicaragua Immigration Detention Profile

One of the poorest countries in the Americas, Nicaragua nevertheless has specific immigration detention laws and policies and maintains a dedicated immigration detention in Managua, which it terms an albergue (or shelter). Asylum seekers can be subject to detention while other vulnerable groups, including children and victims of trafficking, tend to be housed in shelters.

Migratory context. With approximately 14 percent of its population living abroad—mainly in Costa Rica and the United States—Nicaragua is regarded as a key country of origin in Central America, having the second highest emigration rate in Central America (after El Salvador).[1] However, the country has also served as both a transit and destination country during different periods of its recent history. In the 1980s and early 1990s, civil wars in Guatemala and El Salvador forced large numbers of people to flee to Nicaragua. Since then, Nicaragua has become a destination for people fleeing poverty and gang violence in neighbouring countries.[2]

As of 2013, Nicaragua hosted 41,500 international migrants, representing 0.7 percent of the country’s total population.[3] Around 70 percent of migrants are from Central America, of whom 44.5 percent were from Honduras and 38.7 percent from Costa Rica. Nicaragua is also a transit country for people migrating north, mainly from countries in South America and the Caribbean (Peru, Ecuador, Cuba, and Colombia) but also from other continents (Somalia, Eritrea, India, Nepal, and Bangladesh).[4]

Legal framework. Nicaragua adopted its first foreigners law (Ley de Extranjeria) in 1894. In 1930, the Immigration Law (Ley de Inmigracion) was adopted, which provided the country’s migration regulatory framework for some five decades. The law provided for the expulsion of beggars, tramps, prostitutes, and anarchists. It was not until a new migration law was adopted in 1982 that immigration detention (internamiento) was formally introduced.[5]

The current legal framework for Nicaragua’s migration policy is provided in the 2011 Migration Law (Ley General de Migracion y Extranjeria). The Law regulates the entry, stay, and exit of foreigners in compliance with the country’s constitution and its international and regional obligations. The 2012 Migration Regulation (Reglamento a la Ley General de Migracion y Extanjeria) details the provisions of the Migration Law. In addition, the 2008 Refugees Protection Law (Ley de Proteccion a Refugiados) sets out the conditions for recognition of the status of refugees and applicable procedures.

Non-citizens who enter or stay in the country without authorization can be placed in detention (Migration Law, articles 160-161; Migration Regulation, article 154). Unauthorized entry or stay triggers deportation or rejection at the border and immigration detention can be ordered in the context of both procedures (Migration Law, articles 114 and 160-162; Migration Regulation, article 154). Additional grounds for deportation include the use of fraudulent documents or declarations to enter the country, conviction for offences, risk to public order and security, and vagrancy (article 171). Non-citizens who exit the country in an irregular way and are rejected in their destination country and sent back to Nicaragua are also subject to detention (Migration Regulation, article 141). 

Statistics. Data regarding the number of people placed in detention are not systematic or current. According to statistics from the Immigration Directorate (Dirección General de Migración y Extranjería, or DGME), between 1990 and 2003, 5,624 migrants were detained, of whom 2,113 were from Peru, 563 from Ecuador, 472 from Colombia, 282 from India, 210 from Dominican Republic, and 123 from Costa Rica. In that period, the highest number of detainees was registered in 1995 (880), while the lowest in 1990 (72).[6]

Between December 2004 and June 2005 181 persons were detained—65 from Peru, 56 from Ecuador, 21 from Colombia, 16 from Cuba, 12 from Guatemala, 4 from El Salvador, 3 from Bolivia, China, Costa Rica, and the US, and 1 from Argentina, the Dominican Republic, Italy, Mexico, and Spain.[7]

The proportion of migrants and asylum seekers from other continents (mainly Eritrea, Somalia, and Ethiopia) intercepted or detained increased from 18 percent in 2006 to 60 percent in 2009.[8] In August 2011, 710 migrants from Asia and Africa were detained.[9] More recently, some observers confirmed that the majority of detainees in the country are from other continents, including South America (Colombia and Cuba). On rare occasions citizens from Central American countries, such as Honduras or El Salvador, are also detained.[10] 

Length of detention. The law does not establish a maximum length of immigration detention. Rather, the Migration Law provides that people are to remain in detention until deported (Migration Law, article 161). In practice, the average length of detention tends to be approximately three months.[11]  

Vulnerable groups. Asylum seekers are not exempt from detention. However, in contrast to detainees awaiting deportation, asylum seekers are to be detained for no more than seven days (Refugees Protection Law, article 10(b)).

The Migration Regulation establishes that minors are not to be detained. Rather, they are accommodated in shelters, which are under the authority of the Ministry for the Family. If they travel with their parents, the entire family is to be housed at a shelter (article 155). Observers report that in practice children who migrate with their mothers or female guardians are accommodated together in shelters. However, when they are travelling with their father or male guardians they are placed alone in a shelter while the fathers placed in detention.[12]

Other vulnerable persons are placed in shelters, including pregnant women, female victims of trafficking or violence. The law also provides that in exceptional cases and for humanitarian reasons migrants with physical or psychological disabilities, confirmed by a physician, will not be detained (Migration Law, article 160).

Procedures. Immigration detention is ordered by the Migration Directorate (Migration Law, article 10(14)). According to the Migration Law, the reasons for detention should be notified to the detainee (Migration Law, article 163). There appears to be no automatic review of detention by a judicial body and migration authorities enjoy broad discretion to order detention.[13]

The Migration Law provides two kinds of administrative remedies against decisions adopted by the Migration Directorate, which can be sought by immigration detainees. First, persons whose rights were prejudiced by decisions of the Migration Directorate can seek review. Second, detainees can seek to appeal decisions considered unjustified. Both remedies are to be decided within 15 days. If rejected they allow the detainee to seek amparo relief (Migration Law, article 180-182).

In practice these remedies are rarely sought. The reason for this may be the lack of legal or linguistic assistance provided by a state. Frequently the sole providers of these kinds of assistance are civil society organizations, whose resources are limited.[14] In addition, there have been cases when detainees were reportedly not granted access to a lawyer even when they were prepared to pay for the legal assistance themselves.[15]

Alternatives. The Migration Law provides for alternatives to detention. Based on a request by the detainee or a non-governmental organization and after payment of a guarantee, the Migration Directorate can place a detainee with a non-governmental association. The person is to remain under the organization’s guardianship and custody. If they fail to abide by the measures, civil or penal sanctions can be applied (Migration Law, article 161). It appears that these alternatives to detention are rarely used in practice. One of the reasons for this may be a high proportion of migrants in transit amongst detainees.[16]  

Criminalisation. The Migration Law does not appear to establish irregular entry as a punishable offense. However, people who enter the country in this way can be fined 2,000 Nicaraguan cordobas (approximately 75 USD). In addition, they can be fined 25 cordobas (approximately 1 USD) per day for each day they remain in the country. These sanctions are applicable to all migrants in an irregular situation, irrespective of whether they are placed in immigration detention. Migrants are to pay this fine before being released from immigration detention (Migration Law, article 122, 165, and 166). Migrants often perceive the fine in combination with immigration detention as double peine.[17] Until the mid-2000s’, the country penalized irregular entry or stay with imprisonment.[18]

Detention centre. Nicaragua operates one long-tern dedicated immigration detention facility, called the Centro de Albergue de Migrantes. It is managed by the Migration Directorate and located on its premises in Managua. The centre was opened in 1997. Before the adoption of the current Migration Law in 2011, the facility was called Centro de Retencion. It has a capacity to hold approximately 40 persons. The centre usually confines on average between 10 and 20 persons; however, it has at times held more than 100 persons.[19]

Men and women are detained separately and have joint access to a common area. The centre has three cells, one for women and two for men. While the men’s cells are opened during the day, the females, besides being allowed to the above space, are locked in their cell. Often the centre has relied on NGOs to provide detainees with the articles of personal hygiene.[20]

In general, authorities do not allow independent bodies to visit the facility. In recent years some independent associations, including Jesuit Refugee Services, lost visitation rights. The only association that still has access is an Evangelical group called the Consejo de Iglesias Evangélicas Pro Alianza Denominacional (CEPAD), which is the UNHCR implementing partner. However, CEPAD focuses only on detained asylum seekers and visits the centre following a notification by the personnel of the centre. The ombudsman (Procuraduría para la Defensa de los Derechos Humanos) can also visit the centre but it reportedly rarely does so. Detainees have reported cases where during visits the ombudsman’s personnel reprimanded instead of assisted them.

At least two people have committed suicide at the Managua centre since 2010.[21]

In addition to the dedicated detention centre, migrants who are intercepted in the border areas may be detained for a short period of time at the airport or police stations before being transferred to Managua.[22]

 


[1] Leonor Zúñiga Gutierrez. “Estudio Migratorio de Nicaragua.” In Instituto Centroamericano de Estudios Sociales y Desarrollo (INCEDES) and Sin Fronteras (Eds.), Estudio comparativo de la legislación y políticas migratorias en Centroamérica, México y República Dominicana. 2011. http://www.sinfronteras.org.mx/attachments/article/1292/INTRODUCCI%C3%93N.pdf, p. 440-441. Heydi José Gonzalez Briones. Perfil Migratorio de Nicaragua 2012. International Organization for Migration Nicaragua. 2013. http://nicaragua.iom.int/sites/default/files/Publicaciones/perfil_migratorio_de_nicaragua%20%281%29.pdf. , p. 18 and 36.

[2] Leonor Zúñiga Gutierrez. “Estudio Migratorio de Nicaragua.” In Instituto Centroamericano de Estudios Sociales y Desarrollo (INCEDES) and Sin Fronteras (Eds.), Estudio comparativo de la legislación y políticas migratorias en Centroamérica, México y República Dominicana. 2011. http://www.sinfronteras.org.mx/attachments/article/1292/INTRODUCCI%C3%93N.pdf, p. 442-444. Heydi José Gonzalez Briones. Perfil Migratorio de Nicaragua 2012. International Organization for Migration Nicaragua. 2013. http://nicaragua.iom.int/sites/default/files/Publicaciones/perfil_migratorio_de_nicaragua%20%281%29.pdf. , p. 18

[3] UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA). International Migration 2013 Wall Chart. http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/migration/migration-wallchart-2013.shtml

[4] Heydi José Gonzalez Briones. Perfil Migratorio de Nicaragua 2012. International Organization for Migration Nicaragua. 2013. http://nicaragua.iom.int/sites/default/files/Publicaciones/perfil_migratorio_de_nicaragua%20%281%29.pdf. , p. 32. Undisclosed source. 2015. Email exchange with Izabella Majcher (Global Detention Project). August 2015.

[5] Leonor Zúñiga Gutierrez. “Estudio Migratorio de Nicaragua.” In Instituto Centroamericano de Estudios Sociales y Desarrollo (INCEDES) and Sin Fronteras (Eds.), Estudio comparativo de la legislación y políticas migratorias en Centroamérica, México y República Dominicana. 2011. http://www.sinfronteras.org.mx/attachments/article/1292/INTRODUCCI%C3%93N.pdf, p. 450-452.

[6] Cited in Heydi José González Briones. Marco jurídico que controla el tráfico ilícito de migrantes y la trata de personas en Nicaragua. Estudio de caso: Puesto Fronterizo Peñas Blancas. Encuentro 2007, No. 78, 19-46, http://165.98.12.83/353/1/encuentro78articulo2.pdf, p. 33.

[7] Heydi José González Briones. Marco jurídico que controla el tráfico ilícito de migrantes y la trata de personas en Nicaragua. Estudio de caso: Puesto Fronterizo Peñas Blancas. Encuentro 2007, No. 78, 19-46, http://165.98.12.83/353/1/encuentro78articulo2.pdf, p. 33.

[8] Leonor Zúñiga Gutierrez. “Estudio Migratorio de Nicaragua.” In Instituto Centroamericano de Estudios Sociales y Desarrollo (INCEDES) and Sin Fronteras (Eds.), Estudio comparativo de la legislación y políticas migratorias en Centroamérica, México y República Dominicana. 2011. http://www.sinfronteras.org.mx/attachments/article/1292/INTRODUCCI%C3%93N.pdf, p. 447.

[9] Heydi José Gonzalez Briones. Perfil Migratorio de Nicaragua 2012. International Organization for Migration Nicaragua. 2013. http://nicaragua.iom.int/sites/default/files/Publicaciones/perfil_migratorio_de_nicaragua%20%281%29.pdf. , p. 35.

[10] Undisclosed source. Email exchange with Izabella Majcher (Global Detention Project). August 2015.

[11] International Detention Coalition (IDC). INFORME REGIONAL DETENCIÓN MIGRATORIA Y ALTERNATIVAS A LA DETENCIÓN EN LAS AMÉRICAS. October 2014. 

[12] Leonor Zúñiga Gutierrez. “Estudio Migratorio de Nicaragua.” In Instituto Centroamericano de Estudios Sociales y Desarrollo (INCEDES) and Sin Fronteras (Eds.), Estudio comparativo de la legislación y políticas migratorias en Centroamérica, México y República Dominicana. 2011. http://www.sinfronteras.org.mx/attachments/article/1292/INTRODUCCI%C3%93N.pdf, p. 469. Undisclosed source. Email exchange with Izabella Majcher (Global Detention Project). August 2015.

[13] Undisclosed source. Email exchange with Izabella Majcher (Global Detention Project). August 2015.

[14] Undisclosed source. Email exchange with Izabella Majcher (Global Detention Project). August 2015.

[15] Leonor Zúñiga Gutierrez. “Estudio Migratorio de Nicaragua.” In Instituto Centroamericano de Estudios Sociales y Desarrollo (INCEDES) and Sin Fronteras (Eds.), Estudio comparativo de la legislación y políticas migratorias en Centroamérica, México y República Dominicana. 2011. http://www.sinfronteras.org.mx/attachments/article/1292/INTRODUCCI%C3%93N.pdf, p. 478. Undisclosed source. Email exchange with Izabella Majcher (Global Detention Project). August 2015.

[16] Undisclosed source. Email exchange with Izabella Majcher (Global Detention Project). August 2015.

[17] Undisclosed source. Email exchange with Izabella Majcher (Global Detention Project). August 2015.

[18] Leonor Zúñiga Gutierrez. “Estudio Migratorio de Nicaragua.” In Instituto Centroamericano de Estudios Sociales y Desarrollo (INCEDES) and Sin Fronteras (Eds.), Estudio comparativo de la legislación y políticas migratorias en Centroamérica, México y República Dominicana. 2011. http://www.sinfronteras.org.mx/attachments/article/1292/INTRODUCCI%C3%93N.pdf, p. 453.

[19] Undisclosed source. Email exchange with Izabella Majcher (Global Detention Project). August 2015.

[20] Undisclosed source. Email exchange with Izabella Majcher (Global Detention Project). August 2015.

[21] Undisclosed source. Email exchange with Izabella Majcher (Global Detention Project). August 2015.

[22] Undisclosed source. Email exchange with Izabella Majcher (Global Detention Project). August 2015. International Detention Coalition (IDC). INFORME REGIONAL DETENCIÓN MIGRATORIA Y ALTERNATIVAS A LA DETENCIÓN EN LAS AMÉRICAS. October 2014. 

Centres List

No detention centres data available

Statistics Expand all



880

Total number of immigration detainees by year

1995

  • Total number of immigration detainees by year
NumberObservation Date
8801995
721990


40 - 40

Estimated total immigration detention capacity

2015

  • Estimated total immigration detention capacity
NumberObservation Date
40 - 402015


1

Number of dedicated long-term immigration detention centres

2015

  • Number of dedicated long-term immigration detention centres
NumberObservation Date
12015


40

Estimated capacity of dedicated long-term immigration detention centres

2015

  • Estimated capacity of dedicated long-term immigration detention centres
NumberObservation Date
402015


0

Number of dedicated medium-term immigration detention centres

2015

  • Number of dedicated medium-term immigration detention centres
NumberObservation Date
02015


0

Number of immigration offices

2015

  • Number of immigration offices
NumberObservation Date
02015


0

Number of transit facilities

2015

  • Number of transit facilities
NumberObservation Date
02015


0

Number of criminal facilities

2015

  • Number of criminal facilities
NumberObservation Date
02015


0

Number of ad hoc facilities

2015

  • Number of ad hoc facilities
NumberObservation Date
02015


10,569

Criminal prison population

2014

  • Criminal prison population
NumberObservation Date
10,5692014
9,1682012
6,7732007
6,2332004
6,3952001
6,5351998
4,5861995
3,3751992


2.9

Percentage of foreign prisoners

2014

  • Percentage of foreign prisoners
PercentageObservation Date
2.92014
2.92006


171

Prison population rate (per 100,000 of national population)

2014

  • Prison population rate (per 100,000 of national population)
NumberObservation Date
1712014
1532012
1192007
1112004
1232001
1341998
1031995
851992



6,082,000

Population

2015

  • Population
NumberObservation Date
6,082,0002015
6,000,0002012


40,300

International migrants

2015

  • International migrants
NumberObservation Date
40,3002015
41,5002013


0.7

International migrants as a percentage of the population

2015

  • International migrants as a percentage of the population
PercentageObservation Date
0.72015
0.72013


325

Refugees

2016

  • Refugees
NumberObservation Date
3252016
3302015
2802014


0.05

Ratio of refugees per 1000 inhabitants

2014

  • Ratio of refugees per 1000 inhabitants
NumberObservation Date
0.052014


202

Total number of new asylum applications

2016

  • Total number of new asylum applications
NumberObservation Date
2022016
1352014


0

Stateless persons

2016

  • Stateless persons
NumberObservation Date
02016

Domestic Law Expand all

Legal tradition Show sources
NameObservation Date
Civil law

Constitutional guarantees? Show sources
NameConstitution and ArticlesYear AdoptedLast Year Amended
YesPolitical Constitution, articles 25(1) and 3319871987
Core pieces of national legislation Show sources
NameYear AdoptedLast Year Amended
Ley General de Migración y Extranjería, No. 761. March 2011. 2011
Ley de Protección a Refugiados, No. 655. June 2008. 2008
Regulations, standards, guidelines Show sources
NameYear Published
REGLAMENTO A LA LEY No. 761, LEY GENERAL DE MIGRACIÓN Y EXTRANJERÍA2012

Immigration-status-related grounds Show sources
NameObservation Date
Detention to effect removal2015
Detention after readmission2015
Detention for unauthorised entry or stay2015
Detention for unauthorized stay resulting from criminal conviction2015
Non-immigration-status-related grounds providing for administrative detention in immigration legislation. Show sources
NameObservation Date
Detention on public order, threats or security grounds2015

Does the country provide specific criminal penalties for immigration-related violations? Show sources
FinesIncarcerationObservation Date
YesNo2015
Has the country decriminalized immigration-related violations? Show sources
Has the country decriminalized immigration-related violations?Observation Date
Yes2006

Maximum length for administrative immigration detention in law. Show sources
Number of DaysObservation Date
No Limit2015
Average length of detention Show sources
Number of DaysObservation Date
902014
Maximum length of detention for asylum-seekers Show sources
Number of DaysObservation Date
72015

Provision of basic procedural standards Show sources
NameIn LawIn PracticeObservation Date
Information to detaineesYes2015
Access to free interpretation servicesNo2015
Compensation for unlawful detentionNo2015
Independent review of detentionNo2015
Access to asylum proceduresYes2015
Complaints mechanism regarding detention conditionsNo2015
Right to appeal the lawfulness of detentionYes2015

Types of non-custodial measures Show sources
NameIn LawIn PracticeObservation Date
Release on bailYesinfrequently2015
Provision of a guarantorYesinfrequently2015

Is the detention of vulnerable persons provided in law? Are they detained in practice? Show sources
NameIn LawIn PracticeObservation Date
Accompanied minorsProhibitedNo2015
Unaccompanied minorsProhibitedNo2015
Persons with disabilitiesProhibited2015
Asylum seekersProvidedYes2015
RefugeesNot mentionedNo2015
Stateless personsNot mentioned2015
Pregnant womenNot mentionedNo2015

Re-entry ban Show sources
NameObservation Date
Yes2015

International Law Expand all

International treaties Show sources
NameRatification Year
CRSSP, Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons2013
OPCAT, Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment2009
CRPD, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2007
CTOCSP, Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime2006
CAT, Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment2005
ICRMW, International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families2005
CTOCTP, Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children2004
CRC, Convention on the Rights of the Child1990
CEDAW, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women1981
CRSR, Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees1980
ICCPR, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights1980
ICESCR, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights1980
PCRSR, Protocol to the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees1980
ICERD, International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination1978
VCCR, Vienna Convention on Consular Relations1975
Ratio of relevant international treaties ratified
  15/19
Individual complaints procedure Show sources
NameAcceptance Year
CRPD, Optional Protocol to o the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities2010
ICCPR, First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 19661980
Ratio of complaints procedures accepted Show sources
NumberObservation Date
2/8
2/8
Relevant recommendations issued by treaty bodies Show sources
NameRecommendation ExcerptRecommendation Year
Committee on Migrant Workers§ 38. ensure that its national laws, policies and practices adequately respect the right to liberty and the prohibition of arbitrary detention of migrant workers and members of their families and in particular that it: (a) Amend the Migration and Alien Affairs Act to include, as a priority response to irregular migration, alternatives to detention for migration-related administrative infractions and ensure that detention of migrants is used only as an exceptional measure of last resort, in line with the Committee’s general comment No. 2 (2013) on the rights of migrant workers in an irregular situation and members of their families; [...]; (c) Provide detailed information on the number of migrant workers arrested, detained and expelled for immigration-related infractions, the reasons for the detention and expulsion of these migrant workers and the detention conditions, including the length of detention. § 40. The Committee recommends that the State party: (a) Ensure that migrants are not detained beyond the 48-hour period provided for in article 160 of the Migration and Alien Affairs Act; (b) Expeditiously and completely cease detaining children on the basis of their or their parents’ immigration status and adopt alternatives to detention that allow children to remain with family members and/or guardians in non-custodial, community-based contexts while their immigration status is being reviewed, consistent with the principle of the best interest of the child and the child’s right to family life; (c) Allow for the independent monitoring of the migrants centre by civil society organizations and ensure that the Office of the Human Rights Advocate has the independence and sufficient resources to regularly supervise all the facilities used for the detention of migrants based on their immigration status. § 62. The Committee recommends that the State party take the steps necessary to ensure that repatriated migrant workers and members of their families are guaranteed due process by law enforcement authorities; that they are not subjected to arbitrary detention and to inhuman or degrading treatment; that they have access to legal counsel and are provided with appropriate information regarding their case; and that they are not exposed to the media.2016
Committee against Torture

§12. The Committee urges the State party to ensure that there is an effective system for inspecting detainees’ detention conditions and treatment and, in particular, to extend the mandate of the Procurator for Prisons to include visits to migrant custody centres [...] and to facilitate access by NGOs to such places. The Committee requests that information be provided in the next report on the number of visits made, complaints received from detainees and the outcome thereof.

2009

Regional legal instruments Show sources
NameYear of Ratification (Treaty) / Transposed (Directive) / Adoption (Regulation)
ACHR, American Convention on Human Rights1979
IACPPT, Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture2009
CBDP, Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women (Convention of Belem do Para)1995
APACHR, Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights2009

Visits by special procedures of the Human Rights Council Show sources
NameYear of VisitObservation Date
Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance20042015
Working Group on arbitrary detention20062015
Relevant recommendations of the UN Universal Periodic Review Show sources
Recomendation IssuedYear IssuedObservation Date
No20102017
No2014

Institutions Expand all

Federal or centralized governing system Show sources
Federal or centralized governing systemObservation Date
Centralized system2015
Centralized or decentralized immigration authority Show sources
Centralized or decentralized immigration authorityObservation Date
Centralized immigration authority2015

Custodial authority Show sources
AgencyMinistryMinistry TypologyObservation Date
Direccion General de Migracion y ExtranjeriaMinisterio de GobernacionInterior or Home Affairs2015
Direccion General de Migracion y ExtranjeriaMinisterio de GobernacionInterior or Home Affairs2007
Detention Facility Management Show sources
Entity NameEntity TypeObservation Date
Direccion General de Migracion y ExtranjeriaGovernmental2015
Direccion General de Migracion y ExtranjeriaGovernmental2007
Formally designated detention estate? Show sources
Formally designated immigration detention estate?Types of officially designated detention centresObservation Date
YesDedicated immigration detention facilities2015
Types of detention facilities used in practice Show sources
Immigration detention centre (Administrative)Immigration field office (Administrative)Transit centre (Administrative)Reception centre (Administrative)Offshore detention centre (Administrative)Hospital (Administrative)Border guard (Administrative)Police station (Criminal)National penitentiary (Criminal)Local prison (Criminal)Juvenile detention centre (Criminal)Informal camp (Ad hoc)Immigration detention centre (Ad hoc)Surge facility (Ad hoc)Observation Date
Yes2015

Authorized monitoring institutions Show sources
InstitutionInstitution TypeObservation Date
Procuraduría para la Defensa de los Derechos HumanosNational Human Rights Institution (or Ombudsperson) (NHRI)2015
Consejo de Iglesias Evangélicas Pro Alianza Denominacional (CEPAD)Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO)2015
Does NHRI carry out visits? Show sources
Does NHRI carry out visits in practice?Observation Date
No2015
Do NGOs carry out visits? Show sources
Do NGOs regularly carry our visits?Observation Date
No2015

Socio Economic Data Expand all

Gross Domestic Product per capita (in USD) Show sources
Gross Domestic Product per capita (in USD)Observation Date
1,9632014
Remittances to the country Show sources
Remittances to the country (in millions USD)Observation Date
1,1402014
7502011
Unemployment Rate Show sources
Unemployment RateObservation Date
5.32014
Net official development assistance (ODA) (in millions USD) Show sources
Net official development assistance (ODA) (in USD)Observation Date
430.42014
Human Development Index Ranking (UNDP) Show sources
Human Development Index Ranking (UNDP)UNDP four-tiered rankingObservation Date
125Medium2016

Additional Resources


Immigration Detention in Nicaragua

One of the poorest countries in the Americas, Nicaragua nevertheless has specific immigration detention laws and policies and maintains a dedicated immigration detention in Managua, which it terms an albergue (or shelter). Asylum seekers can be subject to detention while other vulnerable groups, including children and victims of trafficking, tend to be housed in shelters.

Submission to the Committee on Migrant Workers: List of Issues Prior to Reporting: Nicaragua

Back To Top