Blog Post | Persona Non Grata and Political Rupture: The Spain–Nicaragua Diplomatic Crisis
The recent reciprocal expulsions of ambassadors between Spain and Nicaragua are not merely political gestures but legally structured acts grounded in the framework of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961) (VCDR). The episode illustrates how the persona non grata mechanism - a classical instrument of diplomatic law - can be used as a tool of political signalling in contexts of deep bilateral tension and broader international isolation.
The bilateral diplomatic context
The diplomatic relationship between Spain and Nicaragua has entered a new phase of intense strain following the reciprocal expulsion of ambassadors, a relatively rare and unequivocal signal of political rupture. Managua ordered the withdrawal of Spain’s ambassador, Sergio Farré Salvá, and his deputy, Miguel Mahiques Núñez, only weeks after Farré assumed his post. Madrid responded in kind by expelling Nicaragua’s ambassador to Spain, Maurizio Carlo Gelli, along with another accredited diplomat.
The Government of Nicaragua has not provided a detailed official rationale for expelling the Spanish ambassador. Nevertheless, the move is consistent with an established pattern: invoking “interference in internal affairs” to justify diplomatic reprisals against states that have been critical of the Ortega–Murillo regime. President Daniel Ortega publicly threatened to expel any diplomat that “interferes in the internal affairs” of Nicaragua during a public event in June 2025, signalling a policy of diplomatic reprisals against foreign missions that comment on or condemn domestic human rights abuses. Specific examples include previously expelling the Brazilian ambassador and rejecting the credentialing of an appointed U.S. ambassador. The Nicaraguan government declared the European Union’s ambassador persona non grata and expelled her after EU representatives publicly criticised Nicaragua’s human rights situation and called for the release of political prisoners, framing this in terms of “foreign interference in internal matters”.
Spain’s response has been rhetorically measured yet definitive in practice. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has emphasised that the expulsion of the Nicaraguan ambassador is an act of “strict reciprocity,” a classical principle of diplomatic law intended to prevent imbalances and to register that discriminatory treatment will not be accepted.
A striking feature of this episode is that the expelled Spanish envoy, Sergio Farré Salvá, had been in Managua for less than two months and presented his letters of credence in early January. His limited time in post suggests that Managua’s action is aimed more at conveying a broad political message than at responding to any specific or recent bilateral dispute.
Historical fragility and broader international isolation
This episode must be understood against the backdrop of previous tensions.
Since the 2018 socio-political crisis in Nicaragua, numerous international reports have documented increasing repression and persecution of dissent, including incidents affecting opposition figures in exile (see here and here). Some NGOs, such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty, have characterised these actions as forms of “transnational repression.” While Spain has not formally linked the ambassador’s expulsion to this context, it forms the political background against which diplomatic relations unfold.
From 2021, Spain and Nicaragua have experienced cycles of diplomatic friction, including the recall of ambassadors, refusal of agreement, and delayed reappointments. The partial normalisation achieved in 2023 now appears fragile and tactical rather than reflective of genuine political rapprochement.
More broadly, as mentioned above, Nicaragua has in recent years limited or terminated the presence of representatives from the European Union, the OAS, the United Nations, and humanitarian organisations. The frequent resort to Article 9 VCDR has become part of a wider pattern of diplomatic retrenchment.
A particularly sensitive issue in the bilateral relationship was Spain’s decision, on 10 February 2023, to grant nationality to over one hundred Nicaraguan dissidents stripped of their citizenship, a lawful sovereign act that Managua interprets as a hostile political gesture.
The legal framework
At the heart of this episode lies Article 9 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which provides:
“The receiving State may at any time and without having to explain its decision, notify the sending State that the head of the mission or any member of the diplomatic staff of the mission is persona non grata… In such a case, the sending State shall, as appropriate, either recall the person concerned or terminate his functions with the mission.”
This provision grants the receiving State an unfettered discretionary right. No justification is legally required, and no prior misconduct must be demonstrated. The declaration of persona non grata is thus one of the most powerful unilateral prerogatives available in diplomatic law.
Nicaragua’s decision to expel Spain’s ambassador, Sergio Farré Salvá, and his deputy, Miguel Mahiques Núñez, falls squarely within this legal framework. The absence of an official explanation is not an omission but a feature expressly contemplated by the Convention.
Spain’s immediate response - expelling Nicaragua’s ambassador Maurizio Carlo Gelli and another diplomat - is not mandated by the Convention but is deeply rooted in customary diplomatic practice through the principle of reciprocity, which operates as an informal stabilising mechanism in diplomatic relations.
The political use of a legal prerogative
Although legally neutral, the persona non grata mechanism is rarely politically neutral in practice. Its invocation often signals a deterioration of political confidence rather than a response to a specific operational dispute.
A notable element in this case is the profile of the expelled Spanish ambassador. Having presented his credentials only weeks earlier, Farré Salvá had minimal opportunity to engage in substantive diplomatic activity. This suggests that Nicaragua’s decision was not tied to any concrete diplomatic incident but rather aimed at conveying a broader political message to Spain and, indirectly, to other critical states.
This pattern is consistent with Nicaragua’s repeated invocation of the argument of “interference in internal affairs” when addressing states and organisations that have expressed concern over the country’s human-rights situation.
Reciprocity as a diplomatic countermeasure
Spain’s response was framed explicitly in terms of “strict reciprocity.” While not codified in the VCDR, reciprocity is a foundational principle of diplomatic intercourse. It functions as a self-help corrective mechanism to prevent asymmetry and to signal that discriminatory measures will not go unanswered.
From a legal standpoint, Spain’s expulsion is an entirely lawful act under Article 9. From a diplomatic standpoint, it transforms a unilateral act into a mutual downgrading of relations.
Diplomatic representation at the lowest level
Following the expulsions, Spain’s embassy in Managua is headed by a chargé d’affaires ad interim, a solution expressly foreseen by Article 19 VCDR. This arrangement preserves formal diplomatic relations while clearly signalling political cooling. It is a typical configuration when ambassadorial-level trust has eroded but a complete rupture is deemed undesirable.
From a political perspective, the reciprocal declarations of persona non grata reduce bilateral relations to their lowest operational level short of rupture. They signal a profound erosion of political trust and a relationship sustained only by the minimum legal scaffolding of diplomatic law.
Conclusion
The Spain–Nicaragua crisis demonstrates how the persona non grata clause of the VCDR, conceived as a technical safeguard of diplomatic sovereignty, can become a central instrument of political signalling. The law permits silence; politics fills that silence with meaning.
While diplomatic relations formally persist, their substance has been severely diminished. Any meaningful normalisation will depend not on legal mechanisms, which remain intact, but on substantive political change in the bilateral climate.
The growing recourse to persona non grata declarations in Nicaragua’s recent diplomatic practice reflects not merely episodic friction but a deeper erosion of confidence in the architecture of diplomatic engagement. Confidence in diplomatic relations rests on a tacit understanding that disagreement, even sharp and public disagreement, can coexist with continued representation, dialogue, and institutional presence. When criticism of domestic policies, especially regarding human rights or democratic governance, is reframed as illegitimate interference warranting expulsion, the shared premises of diplomatic tolerance begin to fracture. The repeated removal or rejection of envoys in response to political statements signals that diplomatic space itself has narrowed: what was once considered part of normal intergovernmental discourse is reinterpreted as hostility. In this environment, diplomacy shifts from a channel for managing disagreement to a conditional privilege contingent upon political alignment.
Reciprocal expulsions further accelerate this deterioration by institutionalising mistrust. Each act of expulsion reduces the density of communication, weakens informal channels, and amplifies symbolic confrontation over quiet negotiation. Over time, the normalisation of diplomatic reprisals cultivates a climate in which representation is precarious and engagement is defensive. This dynamic does not simply reflect bilateral tension; it reveals a structural thinning of diplomatic confidence, where states increasingly anticipate bad faith rather than dialogue. The result is a more brittle diplomatic order — one in which the vocabulary of sovereignty displaces the language of cooperation, and where the erosion of confidence becomes both cause and consequence of escalating diplomatic estrangement.
Ricardo Arredondo is Adjunct Professor of International Studies (Simon Fraser University). Personal website.