Without Frontiers: International Law’s Grip on Nicholás Maduro

The recent prosecution of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro raises questions concerning the international community's ability to hold leaders accountable for violations of international law.

[1]

The tension between sovereignty and accountability is intensifying in the realm of international law, particularly when it comes to prosecuting political leaders for serious crimes. Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro is currently at the center of this debate.[2] Amid growing international scrutiny for alleged crimes against humanity, a recent ruling by an Argentine federal court has heightened the stakes for Maduro and his government.[3] This case not only raises questions about the future of international jurisdiction over sitting heads of state but also highlights the increasingly confrontational legal tactics being employed to address human rights violations in Venezuela.[4]

Argentina’s Arrest Warrant and the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction

In a landmark decision, an Argentine federal court “ordered the ‘immediate’ arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and [his] Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello for alleged crimes against humanity.”[5] This ruling came after Argentine prosecutor Carlos Stornelli appealed a lower court's decision to dismiss the complaint against the Venezuelan leaders.[6]  Following the dismissal, Argentine federal judges “ordered that ‘the arrest warrants for Nicolás Maduro and Diosdado Cabello be executed immediately, and that their international arrest should be ordered via Interpol [(usually done by issuing a Red Notice)] for the purposes of extradition to the Argentine Republic.’”[7] The charges against Maduro and Cabello stem from accusations of a coordinated campaign.[8]

The court’s decision to issue arrest warrants through Interpol and seek the extradition of both leaders is a powerful assertion of universal jurisdiction.[9] Universal jurisdiction is a principle in international law that allows states to prosecute individuals for serious crimes such as genocide or crimes against humanity, regardless of where those crimes were committed.[10] While the principle has historically been invoked, its application has been controversial.[11] Argentina itself took issue with its use when Israel covertly abducted Adolf Eichmann from Buenos Aires in 1960 to stand trial for Holocaust crimes, arguing that such actions violated national sovereignty.[12] However, in the decades that followed, universal jurisdiction gained traction, leading to high-profile prosecutions but also rising geopolitical tensions.[13] Nonetheless, Argentina has a history of utilizing the principle, particularly in cases involving human rights violations, which provides the legal foundation for the court’s action against Maduro.[14]

The International Criminal Court’s Role

Maduro has been under scrutiny since 2018, when six Latin American countries referred Venezuela to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for investigation into crimes against humanity.[15] The ICC’s preliminary examination has focused on human rights abuses linked to the Venezuelan government’s crackdown on political dissent.[16] The court is exploring whether there is sufficient evidence to move forward with a formal investigation, which could potentially lead to an indictment of Maduro and other senior officials.[17]

While the ICC remains a key player in international justice, the recent ruling in Argentina suggests that other jurisdictions are willing to take bold steps to address these alleged crimes independently.[18]  By taking direct action, Argentina could serve as a catalyst for further legal challenges against Maduro in other countries, particularly those that are part of international human rights frameworks.[19] Argentina’s action could influence other states to exert greater control over accountability efforts and avoid the procedural hurdles that can delay or obstruct justice on an international level.[20]

Challenges to Enforcement and Geopolitical Tensions

While the arrest warrants issued by Argentina are a significant legal development, enforcing them remains a complex challenge.[21] Venezuela, which has routinely been investigated by the ICC and withdrew from the Organization of American States, a peace policy organization, in 2017, has consistently rejected international jurisdiction over its internal affairs.[22] Maduro’s government has framed these legal actions as politically motivated attacks on Venezuela’s sovereignty, especially as diplomatic tensions with Argentina have escalated following the recent election of far-right Argentine President Javier Milei.[23]

Hours before the Argentine court’s ruling, Venezuela’s Supreme Court issued an arrest warrant for President Milei in response to the detention of a Venezuelan cargo plane in Argentina.[24] This exchange has led to the breakdown of diplomatic relations between the two nations, complicating the likelihood of extraditing Maduro to Argentina.[25] Additionally, Maduro enjoys the backing of powerful allies like Russia and China, who may oppose any attempts by Western-aligned countries to prosecute him.[26]

Balancing Sovereignty and Accountability in Latin America

The case against Maduro is a pivotal moment for Latin America’s engagement with international law. The region has a complex and nuanced history with the principle of non-intervention, and many Latin American countries remain cautious about allowing foreign courts to exercise jurisdiction over their political leaders.[27] Yet, the use of universal jurisdiction in this case signals a shift toward greater accountability, especially for crimes against humanity.[28]

This move follows a broader trend in the region, where courts and international bodies are increasingly willing to tackle high-profile human rights violations.[29] Venezuela’s case may pave the way for future prosecutions of other leaders who engage in similar abuses.[30] However, the tension between respecting national sovereignty and the need for international justice continues to be a central concern for countries like Venezuela. [31]

Implications for International Law and the Future of Accountability

The Argentine court’s ruling has intensified the legal and political pressure on Maduro and marks a significant step in the international community’s efforts to hold political leaders accountable for crimes against humanity.[32] The use of universal jurisdiction in this case highlights the expanding reach of international law in addressing grave human rights violations, even when national borders and political power complicate the enforcement of such rulings. [33]

If successful, the case could set a powerful precedent for how the international legal system deals with sitting heads of state.[34] It could also encourage other jurisdictions to invoke universal jurisdiction in similar cases, reinforcing the idea that no leader is beyond the reach of international justice.[35] However, with significant geopolitical and diplomatic hurdles to overcome, the actual enforcement of these arrest warrants remains uncertain, and it will likely be years before the full implications of this decision are realized.[36]

By continuing to refine and apply legal tools such as universal jurisdiction, the international community can better ensure that political leaders are held accountable for the gravest crimes against humanity, regardless of their position or power.[37]

---

[1] Federico Parra, Photograph of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro addressing the press, in Nicolás Maduro Fast Facts, CNN (Feb. 21, 2025, 5:01 PM), https://www.cnn.com/2013/04/26/americas/nicolas-maduro-fast-facts/index.html.

[2] Débora Rey, A Court in Argentina Orders the Arrest of Venezuela's President and His Right-Hand Man, AP (Sept. 23, 2024, 10:28 PM),https://apnews.com/article/argentina-court-maduro-arrest-c9eb994d71c4f58744e7c74137ac5768.

[3] Id.

[4] Id.

[5] Id.

[6] Id.

[7] Id.

[8] Id.

[9] Id.

[10] Universal Jurisdiction, Int’l Just. Res. Ctr., https://ijrcenter.org/cases-before-national-courts/domestic-exercise-of-universal-jurisdiction/ (last visited Feb. 24, 2025).

[11] Wenjing Liu, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Study of the Legitimacy of Jurisdiction Based on Universal Interests, 13 Beijing L. Rev. 496 (2022), https://www.scirp.org/pdf/blr_2022080416032467.pdf.

[12] Id.

[13] Id.

[14] Argentina and the Rome Statute, Parliamentarians for Glob. Action, https://www.pgaction.org/ilhr/rome-statute/argentina.html (last visited Feb. 24, 2025).

[15] Stephanie Nebehay, Maduro Security Forces Committed Crimes Against Humanity: U.N., Reuters (Sept. 16, 2020, 5:07 PM), https://www.reuters.com/article/world/maduro-security-forces-committed-crimes-against-humanity-un-idUSKBN2671UP.

[16] Venezuela I, Int’l Crim. Ct., https://www.icc-cpi.int/venezuela-i (last visited Feb. 24, 2025).

[17] Rey, supra note 2.

[18] Nebehay, supra note 15.

[19] Argentina Asks ICC to Issue Maduro Arrest Warrant, Buenos Aires Herald (Sept. 6, 2024), https://buenosairesherald.com/world/international-relations/argentina-asks-icc-to-issue-maduro-arrest-warrant.

[20] Id.

[21] Daniela Pulido, Argentina and Venezuela Issue Tit-for-Tat Arrest Warrants for Presidents, JURISTnews (Sept. 24, 2024, 5:56 PM), https://www.jurist.org/news/2024/09/argentina-and-venezuela-issue-reciprocal-arrest-warrants-for-presidents-amid-diplomatic-tensions/.

[22] Jennifer L. McCoy, Venezuela Withdraws from the Organization of American States After Being Cited for Violation of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, Scholars Strategy Network (May 30, 2017), https://scholars.org/brief/venezuela-withdraws-organization-american-states-after-being-cited-violation-inter-american.

[23] Daniel Politi & David Billier, Fiery Right-Wing Populist Javier Milei Wins Argentina’s Presidency and Promises ‘Drastic’ Changes, AP(Nov. 20, 2023, 2:36 AM), https://apnews.com/article/argentina-election-president-milei-massa-a4811c5229d35551f8dbf7056d87aae6.

[24] Rey, supra note 2.

[25] Id.

[26] Carlos Eduardo Piña, China: A Silent Ally Protecting Venezuela’s Maduro, Diplomat (July 25, 2024), https://thediplomat.com/2024/07/china-a-silent-ally-protecting-venezuelas-maduro/.

[27] Ciara Nugent, Why the Threat of U.S. Intervention in Venezuela Revives Historical Tensions in the Region, TIME (Jan. 25, 2019, 6:18 AM), https://time.com/5512005/venezuela-us-intervention-history-latin-america/.

[28] Venezuela: Crimes Against Humanity Require a Vigorous Response from the International Justice System, Amnesty Int’l (May 14, 2019), https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2019/05/venezuela-crimes-against-humanity-require-response-from-international-justice-system/.

[29]  El Salvador Violated Woman’s Rights in High-Stakes Abortion Case, Court Rules, Reuters (Dec. 20, 2024, 8:09 PM), https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/el-salvador-violated-womans-rights-high-stakes-abortion-case-human-rights-court-2024-12-20/.

[30] Venezuela: Persecution Builds Relentlessly for Civil Society and Dissidents, Amnesty Int’l (Apr. 16, 2024) [hereinafter Venezuela: Persecution Builds], https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/04/venezuela-civil-society-dissident-voices-face-incessant-escalation-persecution/.

[31] Venezuelans Must Resolve Crisis Themselves, Security Council Delegates Agree while Differing over Legitimacy of Contending Parties, United Nations (Feb. 26, 2019), https://press.un.org/en/2019/sc13719.doc.htm.

[32] Rey, supra note 2.

[33] Id.

[34] Pulido, supra note 21.

[35] Luis Moreno-Ocampo, Statement by Mr. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Int’l Crim. Ct. (May 31, 2010), https://asp.icc-cpi.int/sites/asp/files/asp_docs/RC2010/Statements/ICC-RC-statements-LuisMorenoOcampo-ENG.pdf.

[36] Venezuela: Persecution Builds, supra note 30.

[37] Id.