Daniel Ortega Declares the End of Elections in Nicaragua
!!!
Issue Jul 01-31 2026: On July 19, 2026, Nicaragua President Daniel Ortega said that his country will no longer hold elections as a mechanism to impede the opposition from reaching power. “There will be no more elections here for them to try to seize the government, to seize power,” he declared during an event in Managua marking the 47th anniversary of the Sandinista uprising that overthrew Anastasio Somoza Debayle in 1979. Commentators and editorialists around the region had thoughts.
He Had His Reasons
MercoPress of Montevideo wrote that Ortega said he will pursue legal reforms to prevent the opposition from contesting power through the ballot box. Ortega, 80, has governed Nicaragua since 2007 and since 2017 has shared power with his wife, Rosario Murillo, named co-president in February 2025 following a constitutional reform pushed by the executive. That amendment extended the presidential term from five to six years and reorganized the structure of the state, meaning the next general elections would in theory be scheduled for November 2027. The reform was criticized by the UN, the Organization of American States, the European Union, and the United States. In his speech, Ortega announced that he would work with the National Assembly, which is controlled by his party, to pass laws that would “put up a wall” against parties seeking to reach the government through elections. He did not specify how the change would take shape. The statement does not immediately alter a known situation, since international observers have for years reported the absence of real competition in Nicaraguan elections. Yet it does mark an explicit shift in official rhetoric. In the 2021 presidential election, Ortega and Murillo jailed the main opposition candidates and claimed close to 76% of the vote, in a contest that the United States and other governments did not recognize.
Página/12 of Buenos Aires wrote that Ortega insisted he would not allow electoral processes that put the ruling party’s control at risk. “They—the opposition—have long wanted, while lying in wait, to win elections and get their hands on the schools. They can forget about it; there will never be elections here again,” said the Sandinista leader. “We must enact laws that put up a wall—a barrier—against the coup plotters and sellouts,” Ortega said, referring to the opposition, so that “no matter how much money the Yankees give them,” they cannot reach the Nicaraguan executive branch. “They have been conspiring… trying to organize parties so that, in an election they envision, those parties might win,” the leader stated before thousands of supporters gathered in a Managua plaza. The National Assembly, controlled by the ruling party, announced that it would hold special sessions with the Supreme Electoral Council (CSE) “to ensure the constitutional, legal, and formal steps underpinning the reforms, for a State and a path that guarantee the legal foundations of this crucial aspect of institutional order.” For his part, OAS Secretary General Albert Ramdin stated that “the Nicaraguan regime has now made explicit what its actions had long demonstrated: it has abandoned democracy, and even the appearance of it.” This stance “constitutes the definitive denial of the people’s sovereign right to choose their government,” Ramdin added on X.
La Jornada of Mexico City reported that the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, accused Nicaraguan authorities of “repressing the country’s civil and political liberties” and hindering the population’s “full exercise of rights” through threats that include the dismantling of the electoral process. “These recent events further exacerbate severe restrictions on fundamental freedoms, the dismantling of civic space, and the constant erosion of the rule of law,” Türk stated in a release, adding that power “is increasingly concentrated under the co-presidency” shared by Daniel Ortega and his wife, Rosario Murillo. He lamented that the ruling party “maintains total control over Parliament, municipalities, and regional councilors.” “Civil society organizations have also reported that up to a quarter of the 18 Indigenous territories have been affected by mining and extractive concessions, many of which were granted without any consultation,” he warned. Consequently, these concessions were made without the “free, prior, and informed consent of Indigenous peoples.” “Civic space is virtually closed, and the independent expression of ideas or opinions is systematically repressed,” Türk added.
Opinion and Commentary
In El Universal of Mexico City, Germán Martínez Cázares noted that the “destroyer of democracy,” Daniel Ortega, alongside his “co-president” wife Rosario Murillo, had “hijacked the verb ‘to vote’ from the dictionary of Rubén Darío’s homeland.” The Sandinista National Liberation Front, led by Ortega, came to power through armed struggle; yet, in an act of democratic commitment, it relinquished power via the ballot box when the Americas’ first female president, Violeta Chamorro, won in 1990 and defeated Daniel Ortega himself. “Now, 47 years after the triumph of the Sandinista Revolution, the man who sexually abused his stepdaughter, Zoilamérica Narváez Murillo, is putting an end to Nicaraguan elections. He is destroying the very ladder he helped build.”
In Razónpública of Bogotá, Lucas dAuria noted that although Ortega came to power legitimately in 2007, the consolidation of the Ortega-Murillo regime has been built upon the systematic dismantling of democratic infrastructure. The suppression of press freedom, the expulsion of international humanitarian organizations, and the criminalization of dissent are not merely acts of traditional repression; rather, they reflect the establishment of “post-truth” as state policy. In this parallel reality manufactured in Managua, any alternative political group is—by ontological definition—an agent of U.S. imperialism or a remnant of Somocista coup-mongering. Factual truth (the existence of a legitimate civilian opposition) is replaced by unconditional loyalty to the official narrative. Within this framework, the definitive cancellation of elections is marketed not as the heavy-handed blow of an authoritarian regime, but as a prophylactic measure to protect sovereignty against a phantom threat from the United States.
In Confidencial Magazine of Nicaragua, Rafael Rojas noted that Sandinismo began as an electorally competitive political option following Ortega’s return to power in 2007, but now, through the imprisonment, exile, and disqualification of opponents, it has become virtually a single-party system. In the elections of 2021, that party secured 75 percent of the vote. Several of Ortega’s rivals in that contest, such as Félix Madariaga, Christiana Chamorro, Juan Sebastián Chamorro, and Miguel Mora, were arrested prior to the election. Others, like Walter Espinoza, went into exile, despite polling around 15 percent of the vote. The “reform” called for in Ortega’s announcement could further criminalize civil society, non-governmental organizations, the student movement, human rights activism, and the Catholic Church, sectors that, in recent years, have fueled growing public discontent and the subsequent repression of dissent in Nicaragua.
Also in Confidencial Magazine of Nicaragua, Félix Maradiaga insisted that “Ortega’s statements during the July 19 event do not constitute a show of strength, but rather a confession of fear. By asserting that there ‘will never be elections again’ in Nicaragua, Ortega publicly acknowledged what has always been his true intention: to prevent his tyrannical project from being subjected to any form of democratic competition.” “Authentic elections have long ceased to exist in Nicaragua. What the regime organizes are controlled votes devoid of freedoms or guarantees, and with predetermined results. Yet, driven by paranoia and fear, Ortega seeks even greater control. He knows that even in an imperfect contest, provided there is even a minimal margin of freedom, Sandinismo would stand no real chance of winning.” In Nicaragua, “the democratic opposition remains alive. Ortega particularly fears those of us who continue to organize clandestinely within Nicaragua, as well as those of us who continue our work from exile. They are concerned that opposition movements might constitute themselves as political parties, because speaking of parties implies clearly expressing an intent to serve as a democratic alternative for power and a determination to gain office through the exercise of citizen sovereignty.”
In La Prensa of Managua, Gina Montaner noted that “Daniel Ortega is no fan of subtlety. The Nicaraguan leader has always been crude in both manner and substance. When the Sandinistas overthrew dictator Anastasio Somoza in 1979, the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) debuted in power with a communist-style revolution that sought to replace a despotic regime with another authoritarian model. Even back then, images of revolutionaries celebrating in the presidential bunker’s ostentatious bathtub raised red flags, reminiscent of the Cuban guerrillas who toppled Fulgencio Batista in 1959 (a feat made easy by the fact that Batista simply fled, laden with suitcases of cash to ensure a comfortable exile).” Is the octogenarian Sandinista leader leaning toward an apocalyptic end to his regime, one that diverges from the Cubans’ negotiations with Washington and Delcy Rodríguez’s slavish obedience in Venezuela, in a desperate bid to save his own skin? The psychological profile of the Ortega-Murillo couple bears an unsettling resemblance to that of the Ceaușescus: ruthless and addicted to the cult of personality. This odd couple presides over a sort of feudal, absolutist reign.
In an editorial, El Espectador of Bogotá insisted that Ortega no longer even pretends that Nicaragua is not a dictatorship. “Modern dictatorships are rarely so brazen. They usually seek to mask their authoritarianism, shielding themselves with ‘elections’ that, however rigged, allow them to claim they are upholding democracy and that their hold on power is the direct result of the popular will. Daniel Ortega, perhaps weary from age and health issues, decided to cast aside even that thin veil he had been wearing.” Thus, Nicaragua sinks fully into a tyranny that has turned the presidency into a family business and seeks to leverage a financial windfall from China to ensure that no one can challenge them. They argued that “any observer with a modicum of intellectual honesty knows that Nicaragua is not a democracy. That is why it was so painful to see León Fredy Muñoz—now a congressman and, at the time, Colombia’s ambassador to Nicaragua—so openly celebrate the regime. That same regime is currently providing a haven for Carlos Ramón González, a fugitive from Colombian justice, while President Gustavo Petro looks on passively. Will the segment of the domestic Left that yearns for the era of revolutions finally acknowledge that Ortega is nothing more than a cruel, heartless dictator?”
In La Nación of Buenos Aires, Daniel Lozano noted the “North Korean drift” of Ortega’s Nicaragua. Convinced that the ballot box poses the greatest threat to the Nicaraguan dictatorship, the regime seeks to consolidate the transition between the presidential couple. “Ultimately,” Lozano wrote, “the Sandinista leader never forgot the advice given to him by Fidel Castro, who had opposed his friend’s participation in democratic elections against Violeta Barrios. Ortega lost power in 1990 but regained it in 2007 through political and electoral maneuvering, and has held to it ever since.”
In El Mostrador of Santiago, Gilberto Aranda B. wrote that while democracy in Nicaragua had already suffered a mortal blow long ago, the final death throes of the electoral façade were officially put to rest during the 47th-anniversary celebrations of the Sandinista Revolution. It had ceased to be a civilian regime based on elections and had become a form of “competitive authoritarianism,” that political hybrid typical of post-Cold War Latin America, exemplified by figures ranging from Alberto Fujimori Pando and Hugo Chávez Frías to, more recently, Nayib Bukele. It follows a formula of populism at its inception that gradually transitions toward democratic backsliding, manifesting as a new brand of authoritarianism. Unlike the military dictatorships of the 1970s and 1980s—which were rooted in “national security” doctrines, these regimes maintain alliances with the military while cultivating a direct relationship with their grassroots base and, above all, resting on a network of complicity and corruption involving bureaucracies and a newly enriched bourgeoisie. She proposed that the Ortega-Murillos are seeking a direct dialogue—likely with the head of the State Department, Marco Rubio—that would guarantee them impunity regardless of the scenario. In any case, the Nicaraguan Army will be a decisive actor, both in endorsing any potential deal with external powers and in making a way out feasible.
And finally, in an editorial, La Estrella de Panamá of Panama City wrote that Nicaragua no longer lives under the guise of a deteriorating democracy. Daniel Ortega has stopped pretending. When he announced that there would “never again be elections” in the country, he was not issuing a threat; he was confessing the nature of a regime that can only retain power by eliminating the vote. The ballot boxes had already been emptied. In 2021, seven presidential hopefuls were imprisoned, the opposition was shut out of the race, and Ortega declared himself the winner without any real adversaries. Then came exile, confiscations, the closure of organizations, persecution of the press, and a constitutional reform that turned the State into the personal property of the Ortega-Murillo family. Yet, the gravity of this challenge demands more than diplomatic statements. The OAS, the UN, and democratic governments must move beyond the bureaucratic management of condemnation and instead exert sustained pressure: through extraordinary sessions, human rights mechanisms, targeted sanctions, and support for civil society and persecuted Nicaraguans.