Maduro and wife face US court amid dispute over legal fees

Former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and his wife have appeared in a New York courtroom as they seek to have their drug trafficking indictments thrown out over a geopolitical dispute over legal fees.

The defence and prosecution argued over whether Maduro should be allowed to use Venezuelan government funds to pay for his defence.

His lawyers have insisted the US is violating the deposed leader’s constitutional rights by blocking government money from being used for his legal costs.

Judge Alvin Hellerstein questioned why the prosecution’s argument to block the funds still stands, now that US and Venezuelan relations have warmed somewhat.

He did not immediately rule on the issue and did not give a timeline for the decision. A date for the next hearing was not set.

As supporters and opponents rallied outside, Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, made their first court appearance since a January arraignment at which he protested about his capture by US military forces and declared: “I am not guilty. I am a decent man, the constitutional president of my country.” Flores has also pleaded not guilty.

The couple sat at the defence table between their lawyers, wearing jail uniforms and headphones to listen to the translation.

In addition to drug trafficking, they are accused of ordering kidnappings, beatings and murders of those who owed them drug money or undermined their trafficking operation. That included the killing of a drug boss in Caracas, the indictment said. If convicted, they face life in prison.

Both are being held at a Brooklyn detention centre and neither has asked to be released on bail. Judge Hellerstein has yet to set a trial date.

Demonstrators gathered outside the courthouse both in favour of and against Maduro.

In a noisy scene, protesters and supporters chanted, blew horns and beat drums and cowbells. Among the anti-Maduro contingent, one person waved a sign reading “Maduro rot in prison”. On the other side of a metal barrier, people held signs reading “Free President Maduro.”

In Caracas on Thursday morning, a couple of hundred people gathered at a public plaza including ruling party supporters, state employees and civilian militia members.

Retiree Eduardo Cubillan said he was there to pray for Maduro and Flores and condemn the violation of Venezuela’s sovereignty during the January 3 operation.

“We hope that in the United States, if justice truly exists, a trial will be held that will lead to President Maduro’s freedom, because this kidnapping violated international legal principles, and we want justice to be served,” Mr Cubillan, 80, said.

Maduro, 63, and Flores, 69, continue to enjoy some support in Venezuela, with murals and billboards across the capital, Caracas, demanding their return.

While Maduro’s ruling party remains in power, he has slowly been erased from the government of Delcy Rodriguez, Venezuela’s acting president.

Ms Rodriguez has replaced senior officials including Maduro’s faithful defence minister and attorney general, reorganised agencies, appointed ambassadors and eliminated tenets of the self-proclaimed socialist movement that has ruled Venezuela for more than two decades.

Venezuela has since reestablished diplomatic relations with the US, which in 2019 cut ties with Maduro’s government and recognised the then-head of the National Assembly, a member of the opposition, as the country’s legitimate leader. The US has eased economic sanctions on Venezuela’s crucial oil industry and also dispatched a charge d’affaires to Caracas.

Prosecutor Kyle Wirshba argued on Thursday that if the reason for US sanctions on Venezuela was because Maduro and his wife were plundering their country’s wealth, “it would undermine the sanctions to allow them to access the same funds now to pay for their defence”. Maduro has said he does not have personal funds to pay his lawyers.

Judge Hellerstein questioned that argument, saying Maduro and Flores’s right to defend themselves “is paramount” over the government’s national security and foreign policy interests.

“I see no abiding interest of national security on the right to defend themselves,” the judge said.

Among his arguments, Maduro lawyer Barry Pollack contended that if Maduro got public defenders, investigating and preparing his case would sap legal resources meant for people who cannot afford their own attorneys, and that does not make sense in “a case where you have someone other than the US taxpayer standing ready, willing and able to fund that defence”.