Washington accuses Maduro of torture — but who will judge Washington?
Nine months after American troops forcibly removed Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores from Venezuela, prosecutors in Manhattan have added torture-conspiracy charges against the couple. The new indictment raises a glaring question: why does a government with its own extensively documented torture record claim the exclusive right to judge the leaders it seized?
U.S. prosecutors alleged Thursday that Maduro and Flores orchestrated abuses against political opponents. The indictment describes beatings and electric shocks, including alleged abuse of U.S. citizens. These are serious accusations that must be examined fairly, with the defendants able to contest the evidence. The couple have pleaded not guilty to their previous charges.
The January raid and its death toll
The legal proceedings cannot be separated from January 3, when American forces attacked Venezuela and captured Maduro and Flores in Caracas. Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello reported that 100 people were killed in the operation, a government figure reported by Reuters. Washington brought the couple to a Brooklyn jail following the military intervention, not a voluntary extradition.
That extraordinary seizure raises questions about the use of force, sovereignty and due process. Calling the resulting case a criminal prosecution does not automatically settle the legality of the operation that put the defendants in U.S. custody.
Flores seeks medical release
Flores, 69, has also sought release for medical treatment. According to court papers described by EFE, her lawyers report episodes of ventricular tachycardia, severe chest pressure, significant weight loss and two lost molars in detention. Other reporting puts her weight loss at approximately 25 pounds. These are the defense's medical claims, not a confirmed diagnosis of a heart attack.
A federal judge rejected Flores's request for supervised release after prosecutors argued she posed a flight risk. Her lawyers say she needs suitable conditions to recover from a possible cardiac procedure; in earlier filings, her legal team also acknowledged respectful treatment by detention-center medical staff. Neither the charges nor the dispute over release extinguishes her right to appropriate medical care.
Washington's detention record
Washington's public defense of human rights must also confront the historical record of U.S. detention. A Senate Intelligence Committee investigation documented a CIA program of secret prisons and abusive interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, sleep deprivation and other mistreatment.
One peer-reviewed study of publicly available records identified 112 deaths in U.S. military detention in Iraq and Afghanistan from 2002 to early 2005: 105 in Iraq and seven in Afghanistan. Forty-three of those deaths were classified as homicides. Those figures include deaths with different causes and are not a count of prisoners killed in CIA black sites.
One standard of justice
The lesson is not that allegations against Venezuelan officials should escape scrutiny. It is that credible justice cannot be selective. Torture must be investigated whether it is alleged against a Latin American government or documented in detention facilities operated by the United States.
And it is difficult to take Washington's moral lectures at face value while senior officials connected to its secret-detention program largely escaped criminal accountability.
Maduro and Flores deserve a fair trial, meaningful access to legal representation and adequate medical treatment. Venezuela's sovereignty and the legality of their capture deserve examination as well. Those principles are not concessions to any government; they are minimum standards of justice.
If torture is a crime when Washington accuses its adversaries, it must also be a crime when Washington commits it.
Who puts the United States on trial?
Comments