## Facts

- The Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community, an indigenous community in Nicaragua’s Northern Atlantic Autonomous Region, used and occupied a defined territory under a traditional collective land-tenure system.
- The community’s subsistence and cultural life depended on communal agriculture, gathering, hunting, and fishing conducted within its traditional territory.
- The community lacked formal title, and the State had not established or implemented an effective process to delimit, demarcate, and title indigenous communal lands.
- Overlapping land claims existed among the State, the community, and other indigenous groups in the region.
- In 1995–1996, Nicaragua granted a logging concession to a private company (SOLCARSA) covering a large area that overlapped lands traditionally used by the community.
- The community requested that the State not proceed with the concession absent an agreement with the community, but the State proceeded.
- Community members pursued domestic petitions and an *amparo* action seeking protection and recognition of their land rights, but proceedings failed to provide effective relief and were not resolved within a reasonable time.
- A petition was filed before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which later submitted the case to the Inter-American Court alleging violations of the American Convention on Human Rights.

## Issues

1. Whether Nicaragua’s failure to recognize, delimit, demarcate, and title the community’s traditional lands, and its grant of a logging concession affecting those lands without the community’s consent, violated the right to property under Article 21 of the American Convention.
2. Whether the lack of adequate procedures and the ineffective, untimely handling of the community’s domestic legal actions violated the right to judicial protection under Article 25, in conjunction with Articles 1(1) and 2.

## Decision

- The Court rejected Nicaragua’s preliminary objections and reached the merits.
- The Court held Nicaragua violated Article 21 (right to property), in relation to Article 1(1), by failing to recognize and secure the community’s communal property rights and by granting a logging concession over traditionally used lands without the community’s consent.
- The Court held Nicaragua violated Article 25 (judicial protection), in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2, by failing to provide an effective and timely remedy and by failing to adopt domestic legal measures enabling delimitation, demarcation, and titling of indigenous lands.
- The Court ordered Nicaragua to establish an effective mechanism for delimitation, demarcation, and titling consistent with the community’s customary law and practices.
- The Court ordered Nicaragua to delimit, demarcate, and title the community’s lands within a reasonable period and to refrain from new natural-resource concessions in the relevant area until completion.
- The Court ordered compensation for material and moral damages and payment of costs and expenses.

## Legal Principles

- Article 21 protects indigenous communal property; property rights may arise from traditional possession and use even without formal title.
- States have affirmative obligations, under Articles 21, 1(1), and 2, to recognize and secure indigenous communal land rights through effective legal and administrative measures, including demarcation and titling.
- Authorizing natural-resource exploitation on indigenous traditional lands without the community’s consent can violate communal property rights protected by the Convention.
- Article 25 requires judicial remedies that are effective in practice and resolved within a reasonable time; failure to provide a workable remedial framework for indigenous land claims may breach Article 25 together with Articles 1(1) and 2.
- Reparations for indigenous land-rights violations may include structural measures (creation of mechanisms and procedures), injunctive relief (suspending concessions), and monetary compensation.

## Conclusion

The Court recognized indigenous communal property rights as protected by the American Convention and held Nicaragua responsible for failing to demarcate and title the Awas Tingni Community’s traditional lands and for permitting logging there without consent, ordering legal reforms, titling measures, limits on concessions, and compensation.


Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Cmty. v. Nicaragua, Case No. 11.577, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (Ser. C) No. 79 (2001)