Lawyers have criticised the move by the United States government to try the captured Venezuelan President, Nicolas Maduro, in a Washington court, describing the development as lawless and an act of illegality.
They held that a sitting president has sovereign immunity, which excuses his trial in another country, and that trying Maduro in the U.S. would be a violation of sovereign immunity.
“The U.S. is perpetrating lawlessness and illegality by their action, an Abuja-based lawyer and rights activist, Okueyelegbe Sylvanus Maliki, said.
According to the U.S. government, the deposed Venezuelan leader was scheduled to appear in a New York City courtroom on Monday to face drug and weapon charges.
But some lawyers have frowned on the development in Venezuela, which began Saturday with the airstrike and capture of Maduro and his wife by the U.S. military.
A lawyer and public affairs analyst, Mr Ikenna Morgan Enekweizu, however, noted that while international laws grant immunity to a sitting president, enforcement by a stronger country is a different matter.
He said that while America’s action is illegal, it is necessary to understand, in the prevailing circumstance, that the legality of an action is one thing, but the possibility of perpetuating such action is another thing.
“Whether it can be done is another thing. If you ask me whether it is legal to capture a sitting president and take him to another country for trial, my straight answer is “no”.
“Under international law, the president of every country has a legal immunity from prosecution in another country. And then, the invasion of another country’s president by a more powerful country runs contrary to all international laws.
“So, it is wrong for one country to invade another country and capture its president. As I said, international law is one thing, but enforceability is another thing. Who enforces international law is another big question.
“We find ourselves in a situation where the reason for which the League of Nations was founded is the same reason the United Nations is already failing. It has become a toothless bulldog. It can bark but cannot bite.
The lawyer said the idea of establishing the UN was to forestall such incidents under international law.
“Although it has condemned the action but what else can it do? The greatest financier of the UN is America and it is acting currently under Donald Trump as a policeman of the world, rightly or wrongly.”
Enekweizu said the development in Venezuela is a lesson for leaders all over the world. He added that there is no uniform opinion on the matter internationally because while some people condemned it, others felt it was an appropriate punishment for Maduro.
“Even in Venezuela, where this action took place, some people were jubilating that their president was removed.
“There is a lesson for leaders all over the world. When the Venezuelan president started doing the things he did to his people, he made himself vulnerable to things like this, because if the people were with him politically, I don’t think America would want to go to Venezuela and remove their president.
“So, if I were to cut the answer short, it is wrong, but the question of international law is more of a ‘might against right.” America has all the power to do what they do, and there is nobody on earth today that can stop them”, Ezekweizu said.
In his reaction, Dr Yemi Omodele described the development as unlawful and an international disgrace for such a country.
“What happened in Venezuela, where the American government arrested and took a sitting president to the USA, is strange and funny under international law. It is totally against the spirit of international relations. I know that the entire world is watching America and they will act in due cause. “
Omodele believed that the U.S. would be sanctioned in more ways than it imagined, and the impact would be felt.
“Trump will not go unpunished for his actions and inaction. To try a sitting president of a country in another country is not in line with international law at all. It is an international disgrace for such a country.
“Internationally, a sitting president is immune against all crimes while in office, and I say this with all due respect to the U.S. action.”
However, Mr Oyebanji Abuloye believed that while a serving head of state enjoys absolute immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction, US domestic law is a radical departure from the law.
Under the Ker-Frisbie doctrine, American courts can try a foreign leader regardless of how they were brought to US soil, even if the captor violated International law”, Abuloye said.
