US prosecutors argue Maduro ‘plundered’ Venezuelan wealth in court battle over legal fees
US prosecutors argue Maduro ‘plundered’ Venezuelan wealth in court battle over legal fees
Court Ruling on Legal Funds
On Thursday, a judge showed understanding toward the claim that former Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and his spouse Cilia Flores should be permitted to use government funds from Venezuela to cover their legal costs. Their lawyers requested the judge to dismiss the narco-terrorism charges against them, citing the U.S. refusal to allow access to those funds due to ongoing sanctions on the country. Prosecutors countered by asserting that Maduro had “plundered” Venezuela’s resources and should not benefit from them for defense expenses.
“The right to defence is paramount,” remarked the 92-year-old Judge Alvin Hellerstein, who decided not to drop the case over the dispute. He indicated a decision would be made in the future, including the next court session.
Arrest and Legal Proceedings
Maduro and his wife were apprehended in a bold nighttime operation in Caracas by U.S. forces on 3 January, transported to New York to face accusations of weapons and drug-related offenses. They have consistently denied these charges. During their Thursday appearance, the couple wore green khaki prison jumpsuits and remained silent, surrounded by several attorneys who listened to arguments via headphones. This demeanor contrasted sharply with their first court session, where Maduro delivered a lengthy speech insisting he was a victim of kidnapping and innocent.
Sanctions and Legal Dispute
Due to U.S. sanctions against Venezuela, the Maduros required a license to access government funds for legal expenses. The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) initially approved this but later withdrew it. Prosecutors argued the couple should not use Venezuelan money, highlighting national security risks and claiming they have personal funds to pay for their defense. The Maduros disputed this, insisting they lack sufficient resources.
Under U.S. law, Maduro would be entitled to a court-appointed attorney if he couldn’t afford one. Judge Hellerstein leaned toward the defense’s position, acknowledging the complexity of the case for a public defender to manage. However, prosecutors emphasized that OFAC’s actions were driven by sanctions imposed during Maduro’s leadership and the couple’s alleged exploitation of Venezuela’s wealth.
Public Reaction in Venezuela
Residents of Caracas expressed keen interest in the court’s developments. Ana Patricia, a 72-year-old retired lawyer, stated that government censorship couldn’t stop international media coverage. “They can control what Venezuelan media publish, but not what is shared globally,” she said. She admitted some sympathy for Maduro, noting his loss of fortune through greed and pride: “He is a man who had everything but lost it. I feel sorry for him, but I hope he gets a life sentence.”
Agustina Parra, a 67-year-old former nurse, voiced hope that Maduro would be released. “Despite his flaws, he has not been entirely unjust,” she claimed. The couple remains in Brooklyn’s federal Metropolitan Detention Center without bail, and a trial date has yet to be determined. During a Washington cabinet meeting, President Donald Trump mentioned the U.S. considering new charges against Maduro but assured a “fair trial” would be provided.
