"But as American prosecutors pursue the ousted leader on drug and weapons trafficking charges, a pressing question remains: Will it ultimately matter if the administration's Saturday morning capture of the Venezuelan leader was illegal? On the international plane, there's simply no argument to be made for what the administration is doing, said Brad Roth, an international law professor at Wayne State University."
"If law enforcement were the real rationale, then the logical conclusion from that would be the moment Maduro was apprehended, this would be over, said Jeremy Paul, a professor at Northeastern University School of Law. He was a criminal. We arrested him. He's in custody. He's going to go on trial. Trump, however, claimed in the wake of the arrest that the U.S. intends to run Venezuela."
U.S. forces conducted a deadly raid that captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores. American prosecutors unsealed a superseding indictment charging Maduro, Flores, and Venezuelan officials with partnering with drug traffickers and the FARC to use cocaine as a weapon against the United States, alleging drug and machine-gun offenses. Maduro and Flores pleaded not guilty at their Manhattan arraignment and maintained they remain the rightful leader and first lady. International law experts say the capture lacks any articulated legal basis and argue the law enforcement rationale is inconsistent with military intervention and U.S. statements about governing Venezuela and its oil fields.
Read at www.amny.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]