Menu

International Law

The Maduro Case and the Fractured Foundations of Immunity

, , , , , 0

When National Power Defies International Law On January 5, 2026, Nicolás Maduro stood in a Manhattan federal courtroom, flanked by U.S. marshals, and uttered four words that reverberated far beyond the walls of the courthouse: “I am still president.” The statement was not a boast—it was a legal assertion rooted in one of the oldest and most universally accepted principles of international law: absolute immunity for sitting heads of state. In a dramatic and legally fraught episode, the United States appears to have cast that principle aside, raising urgent questions about the rule of law, the integrity of international norms, and the dangerous precedent of unilateral action. Under customary international law (CIL)—binding on all states, including the United States—a sitting head of state enjoys personal immunity (immunity ratione personae) from the jurisdiction of foreign courts. This immunity is not a courtesy. It is a structural necessity of a world composed of sovereign equals. It ensures that leaders can carry out their functions without fear of politically motivated prosecutions or detentions abroad. The U.S. president benefits from this same shield when traveling overseas. This immunity is so entrenched that it needs no treaty—it is affirmed by the International Court of Justice, the United Nations, and even the U.S. State Department. Crucially, it applies regardless of the nature of the alleged crimes. Even accusations of drug trafficking, corruption, or war crimes do not strip a sitting head of state of this protection while in office. So why did Maduro invoke his status? Because, under […]

More

Lex Fortioris in Practice

, 0

Throughout human history, the arc of domination has rarely bent toward justice—unless justice served the interests of the powerful. From the Assyrian Empire’s brutal vassalage systems to European colonial extraction, from the transatlantic slave trade to Cold War proxy interventions, dominant social groups, kingdoms, tribes, and nation-states have consistently leveraged their strength not to uphold law, but to reshape it in their image. The principle often unspoken but ever-present is lex fortioris—the law of the stronger. In this doctrine, might does not merely make right; it rewrites the rules entirely, rendering legality a flexible tool of control rather than a shield for the vulnerable. The recent U.S.-led military operation to abduct Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro stands as a stark, modern manifestation of this ancient practice—where a superpower, cloaked in the language of justice, violates international law with impunity, exposing the hollowness of a global order that binds only those without the means to resist. The abduction of President Maduro on January 3, 2026—conducted by U.S. military forces without Venezuelan consent, UN authorization, or Congressional approval—was not a law enforcement operation. It was an act of international aggression disguised as judicial accountability. Over 150 aircraft descended upon Caracas. Venezuelan military installations were bombed. The sitting head of state was seized from sovereign territory and flown to the United States to face charges of “narco-terrorism” in a federal courtroom. Simultaneously, U.S. officials declared that Venezuela’s vast oil reserves would now be “made available” to American companies, and that Washington would effectively oversee […]

More