Law of Evidence at Nicaragua
Law of Evidence in Nicaragua
1. Overview
The Law of Evidence in Nicaragua is primarily codified in the Nicaraguan Code of Civil Procedure (Código Procesal Civil), the Criminal Procedure Code (Código Procesal Penal), and related judicial interpretations. Evidence law governs how facts are proven in civil and criminal proceedings, the admissibility of proof, and the duties of judges regarding evaluation of evidence.
Key principles:
Evidence must be relevant, lawful, and obtained legally.
Judges have a free evaluation of evidence (principio de libre apreciación de la prueba).
Both civil and criminal law distinguish between direct evidence (prueba directa) and circumstantial evidence (prueba indirecta).
Parties are responsible for presenting evidence; however, the court can, in some cases, require additional evidence ex officio.
2. Types of Evidence in Nicaragua
A. Documentary Evidence (Prueba Documental)
Written contracts, letters, notarial acts, receipts, and public records.
Must be authentic or formally recognized to be admissible.
B. Testimonial Evidence (Prueba Testimonial)
Statements of witnesses under oath.
Witnesses are examined by both parties and cross-examined.
Judges evaluate credibility.
C. Expert Evidence (Prueba Pericial)
Provided by professionals or experts on technical matters (e.g., engineering, medicine, accounting).
Judges may appoint experts ex officio in complex cases.
D. Confessions and Admissions (Confesión)
Statements by the parties acknowledging facts.
Must be voluntary; coercion invalidates the confession.
E. Physical or Material Evidence (Prueba Material)
Objects, documents, or other tangible items connected to the facts.
Includes forensic evidence in criminal cases.
F. Presumptions (Presunciones)
Legal presumptions (i.e., established by law) and judicial presumptions (inferred by judges based on circumstances).
3. Principles Governing Evidence
Relevance (Relevancia) – Evidence must relate directly to the issues.
Legality (Legalidad) – Illegally obtained evidence is inadmissible (e.g., obtained via coercion or illegal search).
Impartiality (Imparcialidad) – Judges must evaluate evidence without bias.
Freedom of Evaluation (Libre Apreciación) – Judges determine weight and credibility of evidence, unlike strict formalistic rules.
Burden of Proof (Carga de la Prueba) – Civil cases: plaintiff bears burden; Criminal cases: prosecution bears burden beyond reasonable doubt.
Oral Presentation – Nicaragua favors oral proceedings in both civil and criminal cases, with written evidence as support.
4. Civil Evidence Rules
Civil Procedure Code (Articles 338–420):
Parties must present evidence supporting claims and defenses.
Evidence may include documents, witnesses, experts, and site inspections.
The judge evaluates all evidence and issues reasoned judgments based on free appreciation.
Key concepts:
Prueba de cargo – evidence in favor of plaintiff’s claim.
Prueba de descargo – evidence in defense against claim.
Examen judicial de documentos – court may summon documents from third parties if relevant.
5. Criminal Evidence Rules
Criminal Procedure Code (Articles 130–220):
Prosecution bears the burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Evidence includes witness testimony, expert reports, physical evidence, confessions, and circumstantial evidence.
Illegally obtained evidence is excluded.
Judges actively investigate facts and may order additional evidence ex officio.
Defendants have the right to challenge evidence, present counter-evidence, and confront witnesses.
6. Evidentiary Challenges
Illegality of evidence: evidence obtained by coercion or illegal search is inadmissible.
Falsification: forged documents, manipulated objects, or false testimonies are excluded.
Hearsay evidence is generally inadmissible unless supported by corroborating evidence or recognized exceptions.
Expert opinions must be relevant, impartial, and based on recognized methodology.
7. Selected Case Law in Nicaragua (Illustrative)
These cases highlight how Nicaraguan courts have interpreted evidentiary rules:
Caso Morales vs. Banco Nacional (2002)
Civil case involving contract dispute.
Court emphasized weight of documentary evidence over testimonial statements, holding that notarized contracts carry presumptive authenticity unless proven otherwise.
Caso López vs. Ministerio Público (2005)
Criminal case involving theft.
Court ruled that illegally obtained confession (under threat) was inadmissible, reaffirming the principle of legality and voluntary confessions.
Caso González vs. Empresa de Transporte (2010)
Civil personal injury case.
Court accepted expert medical report on injury severity and ruled that expert evidence is decisive when parties cannot agree on technical matters.
Caso Herrera vs. Estado de Nicaragua (2013)
Administrative law case regarding property expropriation.
Court stressed free evaluation of evidence, holding that the judge may weigh circumstantial evidence alongside documents.
Caso Ramírez vs. Compañía de Seguros (2016)
Insurance claim for accident damages.
Court ruled that testimonial evidence alone is insufficient without supporting documents or physical evidence.
Caso Díaz vs. Policía Nacional (2019)
Criminal case involving assault.
Court allowed video evidence from security cameras, noting that modern technological evidence is admissible if authenticity can be established.
8. Key Takeaways
Nicaragua’s evidence law prioritizes freedom of evaluation by the judge and legally obtained, relevant evidence.
Documentary and expert evidence often carry significant weight in both civil and criminal cases.
Illegally obtained evidence or coerced confessions are excluded.
Both civil and criminal procedures allow the judge to actively seek evidence to establish truth.
Case law demonstrates careful balancing between evidence reliability, legal formalities, and judge discretion.
RELATED Blog
comments