VZCZCXYZ0018
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHMU #2006/01 2421649
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 301649Z AUG 07
FM AMEMBASSY MANAGUA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1124
INFO RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHINGTON DC
RUEHZA/WHA CENTRAL AMERICAN COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS MANAGUA 002006 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE PASS USTR 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EINV ECON USTR KIDE NU
 
SUBJECT: NICARAGUANS SEEK NEW GROUND RULES FOR PROPERTY CLAIMS 
 
REF: MANAGUA 1359 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary.  In an August 23 meeting with Econoff, Attorney 
General Estrada said that in processing property claims, his 
government will now distinguish between those who were U.S. citizens 
at the time of expropriation and those who were not.  In the 
meeting, Nicaraguan officials alleged that U.S. citizens have filed 
innumerable fraudulent claims, and these should be removed from the 
U.S. Embassy property registry.  Finally, they asked us to remove 
cases from the registry once a government resolution on a case is 
issued, rather than wait for a final contract signed by both the 
claimant and the government, as is current practice.  We have pushed 
back on these proposals and suggested that the Nicaraguan government 
focus on resolving specific claims rather than attempting to 
renegotiate the ground rules for working with us on this issue.  End 
Summary. 
 
¶2. (SBU) In an August 23 monthly "working-level" meeting on property 
claims, Attorney General Hernan Estrada, Property Superintendent 
Mireya Molina, and Member of the Attorney General's National 
Confiscation Review Commission (CNRC) Alfonso Solorzano sought to 
renegotiate the ground rules for resolving U.S. citizen property 
cases.  Estrada, who attended the first half of the meeting, sought 
U.S. acquiescence on a proposal to differentiate between claimants 
who were U.S. citizens at the time of expropriation and those who 
have acquired citizenship since expropriation.  He argued that 
citizenship should not be applied retroactively.  Estrada declared 
that the Nicaraguan government will prioritize claims filed by U.S. 
citizens at the time of expropriation, with all other claims handled 
as if they were filed by Nicaraguan citizens.  He contended that 
those cases filed by U.S. citizens who were Nicaraguan at the time 
of expropriation should not be included in the list of waiver cases 
maintained by the U.S. government. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Econoff replied that the United States does not 
differentiate between those who were citizens at the time of 
expropriation and those who were not.  We will continue to press for 
the resolution of all registered cases.  He noted that Section 527 
of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, which prohibits economic 
assistance to countries that have not compensated U.S. citizens for 
confiscated property, makes no distinction between those who were 
U.S. citizens at the time of expropriation and those who were not. 
Econoff made it clear that all U.S. citizens, regardless of how or 
when they acquired citizenship, will receive support from the U.S. 
Embassy in securing compensation for confiscated property.  Econoff 
also pointed out that Nicaraguan law establishes the same set of 
procedures for the resolution of expropriation cases whether or not 
the claimant is Nicaraguan. 
 
¶4. (SBU) In separate meetings with Minister of Foreign Affairs 
Samuel Santos, the Ambassador has been on the receiving end of a 
similar complaint regarding citizenship at the time of 
expropriation.  The Ambassador has responded that the U.S. Embassy 
will continue to provide support and guidance to claimants without 
distinction, as is consistent with U.S. and Nicaraguan law.  On 
several occasions, Santos has noted his displeasure with the waiver 
process, alleging that he was once tortured by an individual who is 
a claimant on the U.S. Embassy registry.  Santos has declined to 
offer additional details on this issue. 
 
¶5. (SBU) In the August 23 meeting with Econoff, CNRC Member 
Solorzano claimed that there were "innumerable irresolvable cases in 
the U.S. Embassy's registry."  Solorzano and Property Superintendent 
Molina, who together led the Nicaraguan side after Estrada's 
departure, argued that many U.S. citizens have sought compensation 
for property never expropriated or already returned.  Others have 
manipulated the value of their assets to demand higher compensation, 
according to Solorzano and Molina. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Econoff replied that he doubted that there were 
"innumerable" cases of fraudulent claims filed by U.S. citizens.  He 
acknowledged that with 678 claims still unresolved, it is possible 
there are a few who have misrepresented their claims.  He cautioned 
Solorzano and Molina against sweeping judgments against all U.S. 
claimants.  Econoff added that the U.S. Embassy does not condone 
fraud and will cooperate with Nicaraguan authorities in 
communicating with claimants when fraud is suspected in specific 
cases.  The Embassy has already notified three claimants of 
purported irregularities identified by the Attorney General's 
Office. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Molina claimed there are many cases where claimants had not 
met legal requirements to continue processing their cases.  She and 
her staff said that claimants often lack clear title, proof of 
expropriation, powers of attorney for local legal representation, or 
financial information required to assess the property's value. 
Econoff offered assistance in communicating these issues to 
claimants, as they have done with previous administrations.  Econoff 
proposed renewing working-level communications with Nicaraguan 
officials to facilitate this process.  Molina agreed and said her 
staff would be available to exchange information on specific cases. 
[Note: In response to telephone inquiries made by Embassy staff 
since the August 23 meeting, Molina's staff has claimed to be too 
busy reviewing already resolved claims for "irregularities." End 
Note.] 
 
¶8. (SBU) Molina asked Econoff to revise the criteria for removing 
cases from the U.S. Embassy registry.  She suggested that when the 
CNRC issues a resolution on a case and the claimant agrees to the 
resolution, the case is resolved and should be removed.  Molina 
claimed that the current administration had resolved at least 55 
cases that fit into this category.  She said that claimants are 
responsible for delays in preparing a final contract or "finiquito," 
executed between the government and the claimant, because they fail 
to provide necessary documentation.  She thought that it may be 
necessary to establish a deadline for the preparation of finiquitos 
to hasten the process. 
 
¶9. (SBU) In response, Econoff recognized the government's effort in 
resolving 55 cases, but noted that the U.S. Embassy would remove 
from the registry only those cases for which a finiquito has been 
signed.  In many cases, finiquitos are delayed because other 
government agencies have not provided necessary documentation.  He 
cautioned that any deadline for the preparation of finiquitos must 
accommodate circumstances beyond the control of the claimant. 
Econoff concluded by reminding his Nicaraguan counterparts that it 
would be more productive to concentrate on successfully resolving 
the many cases still included in the registry rather than attempting 
to pare down the list of claims by other means. 
 
¶10. (SBU) Comment: Rather than focus on resolving specific claims, 
the Sandinista Administration is attempting to renegotiate the 
ground rules for working with us on these cases.  They ignore the 
fact that this is a problem of their own creation and resent our 
intrusion in Nicaraguan affairs.  U.S. citizen claimants, no doubt, 
recognize the irony that they must now negotiate for the return of 
their property with those who took it from them in the first place. 
We will continue to push back on attempts to renegotiate the ground 
rules for property claim resolutions.  We will also seek to revive 
working-level communication on specific cases.  End Comment. 
 
TRIVELLI