Name: What comes next after the capture of Nicolas Maduro? | DW News
Uploaded: 2026-01-06T08:47:11.000Z
Duration: 23 min 56 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

Venezuela's ousted president Nicolas Maduro has made his first appearance in a U.S. federal court where he pleaded not guilty to narco trafficking charges.

Reflexive pronouns

Maduro declared himself a prisoner of war and insisted he was still Venezuela's leader.

Adverbs of manner

He and his wife were seized in a US Military raid early on Saturday in Caracas.

If convicted, the pair could face life sentences.

The former Venezuelan leader and his wife, Sia Flores, were taken from jail and helicoptered to court in Manhattan.

There, they were officially charged with narco terrorism and other related crimes.

Both pleaded not guilty, with Maduro saying he was still the president of his country.

And then shortly after, he was taken back to prison.

His next court appearance is set for March.

Meanwhile, across town, the United Nations Security Council met for an emergency session on Maduro's capture.

The US Was widely criticized for its actions, which most say violated international law.

Much of the criticism was coated in the language of diplomacy, though Russia's ambassador was less restrained.

The assault against the leader of Venezuela, compounded by the deaths of dozens of Venezuelan and Cuban citizens in the eyes of many, has become a harbinger of a turn back to the era of lawlessness and US Domination by force and chaos which continues to afflict dozens of states in various regions of the world.

Back in Venezuela, Maduro's replacement was sworn in as the country's new president.

His former deputy, Delsey Rodriguez, now has a daunting task ahead of her.

She's already made some more conciliatory signals towards Washington.

But whether or not that will be enough is largely down to Donald Trump.

She's a constitutional lawyer and associate professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

Thank you very much for being on the program.

So, Gloria, from an American point of view, can a leader of a foreign country who was forcibly detained outside of the United States be tried in a U.S. courtroom?

To answer your question, it's not just that it's a leader of another country, you could take a foreign national and under a subpoena have that foreign national tried in a U.S. courtroom.

In this particular case, because it's the president of another country, he's not just an average individual, but the law remains the same that an individual from another country, and we've had that happen in other instances as well, one of them being Noriega and other leaders who have been taken by US by force and tried in US Courts and actually had these trials go to full verdict and have them found guilty and serve time in U.S. prisons.

Now, as you were saying there, this action is legal by US Law, but at the same time, some have criticized the US Action as illegal under international law.

So the question is, is American law and international law at conflict in this situation?

Very often domestic law is in conflict with many parts of international law.

And in this particular instance, people have said, well, why isn't this person being tried in an International Criminal Court?

But the United States is not a member of the International Criminal Court.

The countries who are members that are members had to sign on and have their nations agree to be tried under that court and therefore be one who could bring that law to bear against another country.

Since the United States is not a member of the International Criminal Court, then if it is in fact in conflict with international law, then it's up to other bodies within the United nations to push back against the United States.

All right, now let's focus on Maduro's lawyers and his defense.

Now, his defense team are expected to contest the legality of his arrest, saying Maduro is immune from prosecution as a foreign head of state.

A person is not immune under US Law just because they are ahead of another state, president, prime minister, whatever that title may be.

That does not make them immune to prosecution based on U.S. law.

But once again, U.S. law can be in conflict with international law or policies under the United Nations.

But when you start looking at the actual charges against against him, you begin to see that these are somewhat antiquated.

Possession of machine guns, for example, or even with the very general phrase, narco terrorism.

Is he supposed to be the leader of an organized narcotics ring, an international narcotics ring?

Now, we know under international law that that would be a violation, but under US Law, how are we proving that he is the head of this narco terrorist?

R. So when you start to look at the charges against him, then you have to see under U.S. court that a person is innocent until they're proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Not beyond all doubt, but beyond a reasonable doubt.

So these charges within the indictment have to be proven in a court of law.

And then, of course, we get into the very sticky territory of can he receive a fair trial in the United States?

So it sounds like there are a lot of legal avenues for his defense team to pursue.

What more can you tell us about the legal team that will be defending the Venezuelan leader?

Well, Barry Pollak is the leader of the legal team at this point.

He has worked on many high profile international cases.

When Donald Trump first gained presidency for the second term, he did something that was unprecedented along with many other things he did that were unprecedented, unprecedented, probably an unpresidential in that he had these major law firms, international law firms, actually come to him and sign agreements that they would be under his control, that they would give him and people he desired to have free legal attention their all.

They would actually donate law hours and members of the legal team.

That means that when he went through and got the signatures of the major law firms signed on to his side.

That means there's going to be a void of those people here who have the qualifications and have the financial background and resources in order to defend the people that this Trump presidency is now going against.

That puts us in a very difficult situation because the United States is a litigious country and there are many lawyers, many law firms, but these are very, very keen, narrow issues of law that require a type of background that not every lawyer has and going to be at a deficit in many ways because the lawyers with this international law background are some of the very lawyers that are now part of the legal teams or at least under contract with the Trump presidency.

Those are truly some concerning developments.

I'm afraid we're going to have to leave it there.

That was Gloria Brown Marshall, a constitutional lawyer from New York City.

She is the president and CEO of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.

She works on international affairs and US Global engagement.

Leslie, to what extent do you believe Washington is trying to send a message to the world as much as it's sending one to Venezuela?

Well, first of all, I think the number one message that the US Is sending is most definitely to Venezuela.

Even for those of us, including myself, who were very surprised when we woke up to the news that Maduro had been captured.

If you walk this back, those signals had been sent by the fact that boats were being captured, that there was a military buildup in the region.

So I do think that the number one signal is to Venezuela.

Clearly, President Trump has a wider agenda in the Western Hemisphere and for the rest of the world.

And I know that in Europe, we're all worried about Denmark.

Spend more, be strong, be Tough and be aligned with this US President and his administration if you wish to preserve your sovereignty.

It's a very, very unsettling message for many people.

But I think the number one focus right now is on the Western Hemisphere and on Venezuela.

As you well know, over the years there's been a lot of discussion on both sides of the political aisle in the United States about Washington avoiding endless wars.

From the vantage point of your public opinion work, does this operation align with or cut against where Americans say they want US Power to be used in the world?

You know, we are running polling in the week ahead.

I think that I anticipate that people will be very concerned.

But you know, I think we have to be very clear about what's happening here.

A, nobody's entitled, sure what the next steps are, B, we've seen a leader removed, but we have not seen a regime change.

We've heard words articulated by the US President in that first press conference that America would be running the country that will send shivers and terror down the backbone of many Americans who fear US Occupation, the expenses, the personal costs associated with it.

What we're seeing right now is language threatening the current regime with complying with US Wishes.

But we have basically injected the United States tremendous uncertainty into Venezuela.

So far it's been a very limited, targeted from a military standpoint, highly effectively executed operation.

But clearly the rest of the world and many Americans will be deeply concerned that this is going to lead to something more serious, more long term.

I personally doubt that that will be the case there.

Certainly we're not seeing that kind of mobilization being prepared for a, for an actual occupation or takeover of Venezuela.

But I do want to ask you, how likely is it that we're witnessing, let's call it a Maduro Doctrine moment where Washington normalizes using military force plus the courts as tools of regime policy.

Subtitles ListPlay Video

What comes next after the capture of Nicolas Maduro? | DW News

sort

immune

situation

term