THE HAGUE, Netherlands (CN) — Venezuela accused the International Criminal Court of overstepping its mandate on Tuesday, arguing that local authorities had already investigated a violent crackdown on anti-government demonstrations.
Caracas is appealing a ruling earlier this year from The Hague-based court that allowed prosecutors to move forward with an investigation into the security forces of President Nicolás Maduro for excessive force, arbitrary detention and torture of protestors.
The prosecutor is “driving a bulldozer through complementary protections,” said lawyer Ben Emmerson on behalf of Venezuela. The world’s only permanent court for atrocity crimes is only supposed to intervene in situations where the local authorities are unwilling and unable to do so.
A group of mostly South American countries asked the court to open an investigation in Venezuela in 2018. It was the first time ICC member states asked the court to look into events in another member state.
Years of economic recession and increasing authoritarianism under Maduro’s regime led millions to protest after the pro-Maduro Supreme Court dissolved the National Assembly, the country’s legislature, in 2017. Government forces responded harshly, leaving more than 100 dead.
In 2021, chief prosecutor Karim Khan announced he would formally open an investigation and Maduro’s government initially seemed willing to cooperate. A year later, Venezuela requested a delay in the proceedings, claiming it was looking into potential crimes on its own.
Khan opted to move forward anyway, asking a pre-trial panel to greenlight the probe. Judges agreed in June that it should proceed.
Venezuela argued that Khan is ignoring the domestic investigation and has failed to provide details about the crimes. Information about which specific incidents the ICC was looking into “was devoid of any relevant information that would enable Venezuela to respond,” Emmerson said.
Prosecutors pushed back, arguing they had provided sufficient information about dates, times and locations of potential crimes, beyond what was required. According to ICC appeals counsel Nivedha Thiru, the court isn’t obliged to provide “a detailed or prescriptive listing” of events.
Lawyers spent a substantial portion of Tuesday’s hearing arguing whether documents supplied by Venezuela needed to be translated.
Emmerson claimed that the pre-trial panel ignored evidence because it was presented to the court in Spanish. The court is required to “fairly consider all of the relevant evidence that either party puts forward,” Emmerson told the five-judge appeals panel.
The court's working languages are English and French and information submitted to the court is required to be made in one of those languages, unless an exception is granted. “The prosecution does not have an obligation to translate this information,” Thiru said.
Maduro’s presidency has been widely contested and critics have accused him of consolidating power and interfering in elections. More than 7 million Venezuelans have fled the country since 2015 to escape hyperinflation, government crackdowns and gang violence, according to the United Nations refugee agency.
Hearings will continue on Wednesday.
Follow @mollyquell
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
