By Dan Kovalik
From Pittsburg, PA

On October 16, Colombian businessman and Venezuelan Special Envoy Alex Saab was in practical terms kidnapped for the second time, first by Cabo Verde under pressure from Washington, and now by the U.S., in flagrant violation of international law.

For nearly a year and a half, Saab had been imprisoned on the island nation of Cabo Verde, 400 miles off the northwestern coast of Africa in the Atlantic. As a Bloomberg article explains, “Saab was detained June 12 [2020] when the private plane he was traveling on from Venezuela to Iran made a fuel stop on the Cape Verdean island of Sal.”^[1]  What Bloomberg does not mention is that Saab’s plane was forced to land in Cabo Verde because two other nearby nations in mainland Africa, apparently under pressure from the US, refused to let him land.^[2]

There is no extradition treaty and there was no Interpol order

The capture of Saab was made without any proper legal basis. While Washington prevailed upon Cabo Verde to seize Saab based upon the pretext that the U.S. wanted to extradite him for alleged crimes, the United States has no extradition treaty with Cabo Verde.^[3] Moreover, while Cabo Verde authorities claimed that Saab was detained pursuant to a valid Interpol notice, a regional court in Nigeria found that the detention took place before the Interpol notice was issued, raising huge concerns about the legal validity of Saab’s detention and imprisonment.^[4]

The U.N. also demanded the extradition to be suspended

Indeed, this regional court, The Economic Community of West African States Court of Justice (ECOWAS), explicitly “ruled that Saab should be freed because he was detained before the Red Notice was issued.”^[5]  As Reuters explains, “decisions by that court are final and binding under a 1991 protocol.”

And then, on June 8, 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Committee issued a decision for preliminary measures demanding that the extradition of Saab be suspended and that Saab, who is suffering from cancer, be given the necessary medical attention which he has been denied in Cabo Verde.^[6]

On September 28, 2021, the African Bar Association issued a statement demanding “the immediate and unconditional release of Ambassador Alex Saab, respect for the ECOWAS Court and the Rule of Law in Africa by Cape Verde and all Governments and Institutions in Africa as the African Bar Association will continue to demand for the respect of treaty obligations and the independence of Judiciary in Africa.”^[7]

In spite of the foregoing and the overwhelming opposition to Saab’s extradition amongst the citizenry of Cabo Verde, the Constitutional Court of Cabo Verde approved the extradition of Saab to the U.S. in September of this year.^[8]  To put it simply, Saab was kidnapped in Cabo Verde nearly a year and a half ago, and there he was detained, until his “extradition” to the U.S. on October 16th, despite the lack of any valid extradition treaty and any valid arrest warrant at the time of capture.

While the allegations against him are hotly disputed, what is not in doubt is that Washington is behind his persecution. And it is also clear that the U.S. is interested in Saab, not because of any alleged crimes but because he may hold the key to Venezuela’s ability to circumnavigate Washington’s deadly illegal unilateral sanctions. First and foremost, the allegations against Saab involve alleged embezzlement from food and housing programs in Venezuela. Given that the U.S. is sanctioning Venezuela in an attempt, inter alia, to undermine the ability of Venezuela to maintain such programs, it is patently obvious that Washington has no real, bona fide concerns about someone allegedly taking kickbacks from such programs. And moreover, under established U.S. judicial doctrines of comity and forum non conveniens, it is Venezuela which, in the first instance, has the right to try to prosecute such crimes committed within its own domestic jurisdiction.

Sanctions against Iran: U.S. real reasons to harass Ambassador Saab

Bloomberg explains that Alex Saab was on his way to Iran to negotiate the exchange of Venezuelan gold for much needed gasoline supplies.^[9]  Due to U.S. sanctions, the oil-rich nation of Venezuela is unable to obtain the necessary chemicals and supplies to refine its oil into gasoline which is needed to generate electricity and to transport goods throughout the country.  In addition to gasoline, Saab was also attempting to negotiate the purchase of food, medicines and other critical supplies which have also been made scarce in Venezuela due to U.S. sanctions.^[10]

As explained by Alena Douma, U.N. Special Rapporteur on the unilateral use of coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights:

The hardening of sanctions faced by the country since 2015 undermines . . . the state’s capacity to maintain infrastructure and implement social projects. Today, Venezuela faces a lack of necessary machinery, spare parts, electricity, water, fuel, gas, food and medicine. Venezuelan assets frozen in United States, United Kingdom and Portuguese banks amount to US $6 bln. The purchase of goods and payments by public companies are reportedly blocked or frozen. . .

It has been reported that electricity lines are able to work at less than 20 per cent of their capacity today. . . .

An estimated 90% of households are connected to the national water distribution system. Numerous households, however, report frequent cuts because of electricity outages affecting water pumps and the maintenance of infrastructure, and because of the shortage of qualified maintenance staff. ^[11]

It appears that Alex Saab’s very adeptness in helping Venezuela to get around these sanctions – sanctions which Alena Douma notes are illegal under international law — is the real reason for Washington’s interest in having him detained and extradited.^[12]

As the New York Times explains, while the U.S. has brought vague “money-laundering” charges against Saab, “hard-liners at the Justice and State Departments, including Elliot Abrams, the State Department’s special envoy for Iran and Venezuela,” want to ensure Saab’s continued detention in Cabo Verde lest they “lose an opportunity to punish Mr. [Nicolás] Maduro.”  As the Times continues, the “months long detention of Mr. Saab has stripped Mr. Maduro of an important ally and a major financial fixer at a time when fewer countries are willing or able to come to Venezuela’s aid.  If Mr. Saab cooperates with American officials, he could help untangle Mr. Maduro’s economic web of support and assist the authorities in bringing charges against other allies of the Venezuelan government.”^[13]

And how did the U.S. ensure Cabo Verde’s compliance in all this?  It has used a carrot and a stick approach. The carrot is significant: U.S. economic development assistance to the island nation. In September of 2020, the U.S. embassy in Cabo Verde announced “the U.S. government would invest $1.5 million in Cabo Verde to support the country’s efforts to mitigate the economic crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.”^[14] And in June, 2021, the embassy announced a plan to build a new U.S. embassy adjacent to the government palace:

This year, July 4 will mark a new chapter in Cabo Verde-U.S. history as representatives of both countries dedicate 4.5-hectares of land adjacent to the Government Palace in Praia as the site for a new U.S. embassy.  This exciting, long-anticipated project represents a more than $400 million investment by the U.S. government in the bilateral relationship, with fully $100 million of that total going directly into Cabo Verde’s economy, benefitting local businesses and contractors and creating scores of construction jobs.^[15]

The stick is the deployment of old-fashioned “gun-boat diplomacy” — a term coined by President Teddy Roosevelt.  Thus, as the New York Times explains, the U.S. has anchored the Navy Cruiser San Jacinto off the coast of Cabo Verde to make sure that Saab did not escape somehow.  While U.S. officials claimed that they were doing this in response to “threats” by Venezuela to take all measures to protect Saab’s human rights, the presence of the gun ship appeared calculated as much to ensure no second thoughts by the government of  Cabo Verde as it was to prevent some rescue attempt by Venezuela or its ally Iran. ^[16]

Saab’s extradition case is currently before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11^th Circuit which is to decide whether the U.S. has proper cause to extradite Mr. Saab under U.S. and international law. Quite tellingly, the U.S. prosecution has twice postponed the initial hearing in which it was to present evidence and arguments in favor of extradition. And, it has asked for a third postponement.^[17]

The U.S. extracted Saab from Cabo Verde without court sanction

And, so, U.S. authorities, on October 16th, instead of waiting for the 11^th Circuit to decide the merits of the case – a case which they will surely lose — have kidnapped Saab a second time, flying him out of Cabo Verde to the U.S. without court sanction.  It is no coincidence that this kidnapping took place, moreover, the day before Presidential elections in Cabo Verde which brought to power a new leader opposed to Washington’s mistreatment of Saab.

Alex Saab is now sitting in a federal prison in Miami. This is a flagrant violation of both international and U.S. domestic law. In addition, this has already had huge international repercussions, with the government of Venezuela suspending scheduled talks with the opposition in response.

The actions of the U.S. and Cabo Verde against Alex Saab have dealt a serious blow to international law and the security of diplomats worldwide. It sets the dangerous precedent that an individual, and especially a foreign diplomat, can be captured and detained without warrant and then “extradited” to the US without a valid extradition treaty and without an U.S. court authorization. This type of action undermines the rule of law, and indeed establishes “the rule of the jungle” wherein powerful countries like the US can simply ignore rights of individuals to due process and to freedom from arbitrary detention to bully developing countries such as Venezuela.

Dan Kovalik teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, and he is one of COHA’s Senior Research Fellows

COHA Senior Analyst William Camacaro provided research and editorial assistance for this article.

---

Sources

^[1] “Maduro Financier Faces Extradition to U.S. After New Ruling.” Bloomberg. Mar 17, 2021. https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/maduro-financier-faces-extradition-to-u-s-after-new-ruling-1.1578420 Accessed October 17, 2021.file:///C:UsersOwnerDocuments3953-2021-c-adocx.pdf

^[2] “Deal Maker for Venezuela’s Maduro Can Be Extradited to U.S., Court Rules.” Wall Street Journal. Jan 25, 2021. https://www.wsj.com/articles/dealmaker-for-venezuelas-maduro-can-be-extradited-to-u-s-court-rules-11609861512 Accessed October 17, 2021.

^[3] “U.S.-Indicted Dealmaker For Venezuela’s Maduro Detained On Way To Iran.” June 14, 2020. https://www.rferl.org/a/maduro-venezuela-money-laundering-iran-/30669592.html Accessed October 17, 2021.

^[4] “Maduro Financier Faces Extradition to U.S. After New Ruling.” Bloomberg. Mar 17, 2021. https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/maduro-financier-faces-extradition-to-u-s-after-new-ruling-1.1578420 Accessed October 17, 2021.

^[5] Ibid.

^[6] “UN Committee Rules on Detention of Venezuelan Diplomat Saab.” June 8, 2021.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/UN-Committee-Ruled-on-Detention-of-Venezuelan-Diplomat-Saab-20210608-0015.html Accessed October 17, 2021

^[7] “African Bar Association Statement on Venezuelan Diplomat Alex Saab.” Oct 22, 2021.

https://orinocotribune.com/african-bar-association-statement-on-venezuelan-diplomat-alex-saab/ Accessed October 17, 2021.

^[8] “Cape Verde Poll Shows Alex Saab Extradition Case will Harm Government in October Elections.” AllAfrica Info Wire. Sep. 20, 2021. https://allafrica.com/stories/202109201156.html Accessed October 17, 2021.

^[9] “Maduro Financier Faces Extradition to U.S. After New Ruling.” Bloomberg. Mar 17, 2021. https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/maduro-financier-faces-extradition-to-u-s-after-new-ruling-1.1578420 Accessed October 17, 2021.

^[10] Griffith, B. “Extradition of Alex Saab: US takes effort to starve Venezuelans to new lows.” People’s Dispatch. July 7, 2021. https://peoplesdispatch.org/2021/07/07/extradition-of-alex-saab-us-takes-effort-to-starve-venezuelans-to-new-lows/ Accessed October 17, 2021.

^[11] Preliminary findings of the visit to the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela by the Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights. Feb. 12, 2021. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=26747&LangID=E Accessed October 17, 2021.

^[12] Ibid.

^[13] Schmitt, E., and Turkewitz, J. New York Times. “Navy Warship’s Secret Mission Off West Africa Aims to Help Punish Venezuela.” Dec 22, 2020.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/22/us/politics/navy-cape-verde-venezuela.html Accessed October 17, 2021.

^[14] “The United States Provides Over $1.5 million to Help Cabo Verde Respond to COVID-19.” Press Release – September 3, 2020. US Embassy, Cabo Verde. https://cv.usembassy.gov/the-united-states-provides-over-1-5-million-to-help-cabo-verde-respond-to-covid-19/ Accessed October 17, 2021.

^[15] “Article by U.S. Ambassador to Cabo Verde, Jeff Daigle – Land Dedication.” June 30, 2021. US Embassy, Cabo Verde. https://cv.usembassy.gov/article-by-u-s-ambassador-to-cabo-verde-jeff-daigle-land-dedication/ Accessed October 17, 2021.

^[16] Schmitt, E. and Turkewitz, J. “Navy Warship’s Secret Mission Off West Africa Aims to Help Punish Venezuela.” New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/22/us/politics/navy-cape-verde-venezuela.html Accessed October 17, 2021.

^[17] “Defense of Alex Saab Rejects Request for New Extension by US.” Oct 6, 2021.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Defense-of-Alex-Saab-Rejects-Request-for-New-Extension-by-US-20211006-0023.html Accessed October 17, 2021.

By William Camacaro
New York

“There will be some who will remember Ramsey Clark as an outsider. There are many more who remember him as a friend of justice, the oppressed, the exploited, and the rule of law. Perhaps he himself would like to be remembered merely as someone who used the law to help others.”

Curtis Doebbler, International Law Attorney

During the heat of the Gulf War under the George H. Bush administration, I had the opportunity in New York to meet an extraordinary human being: Ramsey Clark. It was an event to protest the State Department and Pentagon’s arrogantly labeled “Operation Desert Storm.”

Ramsey was a quixotic figure admired by everyone on stage at the event. This former U.S. Attorney General, incredibly, opposed U.S. intervention in Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. On that occasion he gave a detailed speech about the conflict unfolding before our eyes, a war in living color brought into our homes courtesy of CNN. But we saw no blood or dead bodies, only fireworks in what looked like a Nintendo video game in which very little “collateral damage” was shown. It was a long-distance war for which television viewers were kept far removed from the pain and suffering of the Iraqi victims.

Ramsey Clark—a fighter for social movements

Ramsey Clark was an extraordinary anomaly within the U.S. establishment. A lawyer by profession, he rose to be Attorney General, an office which placed him at the forefront of many important struggles for civil and human rights. After leaving the pinnacle of power, he embraced progressive causes around the world, even if it brought him into direct confrontation with U.S. hegemony. This included his opposition to the strategy of applying illegal unilateral coercive measures (sanctions) against countries that did not fall in line with Washington’s foreign policy.

The second time I met Ramsey Clark I knew that he was traveling to Iraq to serve as a defense attorney for Saddam Hussein in a trial imposed by the Western world to convict almost the entire Iraqi cabinet—proceedings that many experts in international law considered illegal. Ramsey also opposed the death penalty as a matter of principle. I was able to overcome my feelings of intimidation before this renowned figure, and approached him. I asked, “Don’t you think it will be very hard for you to accomplish anything in that kangaroo court?”

He answered, “Yes, but it would be worse to do nothing. We must march into battle even though we know we will lose. We must go knowing that we are on the side of truth and justice.” We looked at each other and smiled.

At the top of the U.S judicial system

Ramsey served his country as the 66^th U.S. Attorney General from 1967 to 1969 during the Johnson administration. In his previous post as Assistant Attorney General he had been pivotal in the drafting of some of the most important environmental and civil rights legislation produced by any generation before or since. He contributed to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and legislation that later inspired the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA).

Support this progressive voice and be a part of it. Donate to COHA today. Click here

After leaving public office, he ran for President of the United States in 1972 and for Senate in 1974 and 1977. He was the son of Supreme Court Justice and former Attorney General, Tom C. Clark. Ramsey also founded the International Action Center with the idea of building a platform for social justice and creating a more just and equal world.

His activism took him to such countries as Vietnam, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Palestine, Sudan, and many others that were under attack or faced potential aggression from the United States, putting his life in danger countless times.

Lauded the world over

Ramsey opposed the Vietnam war from the outset and remained steadfast in his opposition to unilateral coercive measures imposed by the United States around the world.

He was awarded the Gandhi Peace Prize in 1992^[1] and the United Nations Prize in the Field of Human Rights on December 10, 2008, the sixtieth anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.^[2] He was also given the International Courage of Conscience Award from the Peace Abbey Foundation.^[3]

All of this not only garnered Ramsey tremendous admiration, but also the antagonism of those in the Establishment whom he challenged incessantly.

Solidarity with Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela

In Latin America he became very engaged in solidarity with Nicaragua, Cuba, and Venezuela. In 1984 the Sandinista government sued the United States at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the United Nations’ highest court, for its support of the contra army. But Washington withdrew its recognition of the Court’s jurisdiction. The case had both political and legal ramifications for the United States. Ramsey Clark served as an advisor at that time to a young attorney named Paul Reichler who was leading the case.

When he travelled to Nicaragua Ramsey stayed in the home of the revered priest and former Foreign Minister, Father Miguel d’Escoto, who had also served as President of the United Nations General Assembly. They were close friends. On these visits Fr. d’Escoto arranged gatherings with Latin American leaders, and the two of them worked together on a variety of issues for over 40 years, including the situations of Cuba and Nicaragua.

Personal memories of a meeting with a young Nicolás Maduro

Some of my personal experiences speak clearly to the very human nature of Ramsey Clark. In 2000 a young man just elected to the new National Assembly of Venezuela arrived in New York and asked me to arrange his itinerary. The first meeting that the newly elected Bolivarian legislator had in New York was with Ramsey Clark, at his law firm on 12^th Street in downtown Manhattan. This young legislator, Nicolás Maduro, was delighted with this very fraternal conversation with the former Attorney General. And I was able to arrange this even though I had contacted Ramsey at the last minute. He not only received us, but indulged us in a lengthy conversation about almost everything happening in Latin America.

Solidarity with Venezuela based on respect for the rule of law

Ramsey was a leading figure in solidarity with the Bolivarian Revolution of Venezuela at many key moments. His support was not ideological, but based on principle. He refused to accept the illegal sanctions policy or any interventionism that violated the sovereignty of other countries. For this reason, he did not hesitate to defend the people and denounce wrongdoing.

On November 8, 2005 at the historic Town Hall of Times Square, New York, we held the biggest event the United States had seen in support of the Venezuelan Revolution, called “Night of Solidarity with Bolivarian Venezuela.” The large venue was near capacity and a Miami Herald journalist in attendance wrote, “Chávez must have a lot of supporters to fill a venue like that in the heart of Manhattan… it must mean that the Bolivarian Revolution has thousands of followers.”

On Saturday, September 23, 2006, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, who was part of Venezuela’s delegation attending meetings at the United Nations, was detained by authorities at JFK International Airport for 90 minutes as he was boarding a plane to return home. I was broadcasting live on Radio Pacifica at that time when the Foreign Minister’s assistant called me to explain the situation. I immediately called Ramsey and told him what was happening, asking whether he could help us and go to the Venezuelan mission to the UN. I did not expect him to be able to help at that late hour with such a sudden request, but I was to learn that day about his commitment and devotion to justice. Arrive he did. I was shocked to see him waiting calmly, unrecognized by the Venezuelan diplomats scurrying to and fro. When then Foreign Minister Nicolás Maduro arrived, he saw Ramsey and greeted him outside the Venezuelan mission. Roy Chatterton, who was Venezuela’s ambassador to the OAS at the time, served as interpreter for them as they found a quiet place to talk about what to say or not say to the press. The future President of Venezuela listened attentively. Ambassador Chatterton ended it by saying, “A very important suggestion.” Ramsey’s opinions were highly regarded.

Later, on September 13, 2013, I invited Ramsey to another protest, this time before the United States’ diplomatic mission to the United Nations. He attended, without fail, as always. At that event we were going to deliver a document denouncing U.S. intervention in Venezuela. I asked Ramsey if he would mind wearing a tricolor coat with the colors of the Venezuelan flag. He responded, “If I am going to represent Venezuela, I had better put on that coat and it will be an honor.” From a distance we were able to observe the disgruntled face of the First Secretary of the U.S. Embassy to the UN.

Ramsey accompanied us in countless activities, not only in New York city, but also in Washington, DC and Boston. He was an unconditional ally.

Support for the independence and sovereignty of Cuba

Ramsey not only supported Venezuela’s sovereignty, but Cuba’s as well. He was a strong critic of the legal proceedings against the “Cuban Five,” denouncing all the judicial irregularities in the trial. “If I were Attorney General today and learned about this propaganda campaign during the trial of the Cuban Five, I would have to dismiss the charges. Any Attorney General should do the same,” he said.

He had always appreciated the Cuban Revolution. He told the press that, “Fidel has shown that a country in the midst of struggle and short on resources can educate, house, and provide healthcare, jobs, and everything that humanity needs. And look at the rest of the world. We need that model.”

Ramsey Clark died on April 9, 2021 at his home in New York city at the age of 93. He was an example of love for one’s neighbor, respect for life, and passion for justice.

As Curtis Doebbler, colleague and friend to Ramsey Clark for some 30 years, put it,

“There will be some who will remember Ramsey Clark as an outsider. There are many more who remember him as a friend of justice, the oppressed, the exploited, and the rule of law. Perhaps he himself would like to be remembered merely as someone who used the law to help others.”

William Camacaro is a Senior Analyst at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs in Washington, DC (COHA).

This article was edited by Patricio Zamorano, Director of COHA

Translation by Rita Jill Clark-Gollub, Assistant Editor/Translator, COHA

---

Sources

^[1]  “Ramsey Clark”, https://www.amacad.org/person/ramsey-clark

^[2]  “United Nations Human Rights Prize 2008”, https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NEWSEVENTS/Pages/UNHRPrize2008.aspx

^[3]  “International Courage of Conscience Award”, https://www.peaceabbey.org/list-of-award-recipients/