ONE year after Alex Saab’s detention, the Attorney General admitted that the June 29 2020 arrest warrant attached to the extradition request from the United States, which serves as the basis for Alex Saab’s extradition, was in the name of …. someone else.
In his counter arguments to the Constitutional Court, the Prosecutor General requested the rectification in the following terms “it was mentioned that there is an international arrest warrant against the applicant issued by the judiciary authorities of the USA. At this point we take this opportunity to request the rectification of the manifest error consisting in the attachment of the warrant in the name of Álvaro Enrique Pulido-Vargas”.
Arguing the case for Saab, the Madrid-based law firm of former Spanish judge Baltasar Garzón said: ‘The Prosecutor General further explains that warrants were issued in the names of Alex Saab and Álvaro Enrique Pulido-Vargas, but “by mistake, in the extradition request sent to Cape Verde, the requesting state annexed the first page of the original warrant in the name of Álvaro Enrique Pulido-Vargas, but the following pages of the warrant and the translations into Portuguese and Spanish are in the name of Alex Saab.”’
‘What is certain and what is proven is that on June 12 when Alex Saab was arrested he was not presented with a Red Notice and could not have been as it was only issued later after the arrest. Furthermore, the Red Notice against Alex Saab did not contain the arrest warrant and was issued in breach of INTERPOL own Rules of Processing Data (IRPD) which require “reference to a valid arrest warrant” as per Article 83 (2) (v) about minimal data required for publication of Red Notices. It is not surprising as the Director of the Office of Legal Affairs of INTERPOL (who processes requests for publications of INTERPOL Notices) is Mary D. Rodriguez, an American who was seconded from the US Department of Justice, same organisation which is prosecuting and persecuting Alex Saab,’ his lawyers said.
Venezuela successfully challenged the illegality of the Red Notice which was cancelled on 25 June 2020. This fact, along with the request for release, were immediately communicated to Cape Verdean Prosecutor General, Minister of Justice, Barlavento Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of Justice. But so far to no avail.
On what basis Cape Verde continued to detain Alex Saab?
On June 29 the United States submitted its extradition request to Cape Verde. It contained the arrest warrant in the wrong name, not Alex Saab. Same Minister of Justice and Prosecutor General approved the extradition request despite all screaming factual and legal evidence against it. These facts were relevant for the ECOWAS Court in its decision to consider the detention illegal.
Ambassador Saab’s defence team reported the absence of the arrest warrant on numerous occasions to the Cape Verdean judicial and law enforcement authorities but to no avail.
‘Alex Saab has been arrested, detained illegally and must be released immediately. His extradition must be cancelled. The law has been blatantly violated by the United States and Cape Verde which was confirmed by honourable justices of the ECOWAS Court of Justice,’ the lawyers said.
In a related development, Venezuela has rejected UK’s decision to impose sanctions on Saab.
The Venezuelan government, in a strongly-worded statement on July 22, expressed its ‘categorical rejection of the British Government’s decision on seeking to impose unilateral sanctions against the citizen Alex Saab, the Venezuelan diplomat subjected to judicial persecution by the United States government.’
It said: ‘This decision, contrary to International Law, reflects the immorality of the British Government in establishing itself as a supposed anti-corruption judge in the world, while acting as one of the main elements responsible for the theft of assets belonging to all Venezuelan citizens.
The damage in human lives and limitations for the attention to the pandemic as a consequence of the seizure and confiscation of resources of Venezuela in the United Kingdom, must be investigated and punished. The current British Government is the main party responsible for this assault, and sooner or later, will have to be accountable and render accounts before international justice.’
Venezuela added that,‘The imposition of sanctions on citizens who were dedicating themselves to facilitating access to food for the Venezuelan people bypassing and circumventing the limitations of the United States inhumane blockade, is a criminal act that corresponds to the failed strategy of generating damage to the institutional framework of Venezuela, leaving in evidence, once again, the erratic British policy towards Venezuela.
‘The Government of the Bolivian Republic of Venezuela will continue to denounce the shameless and brazen action of the British Government before the International Community. Their current actions are nothing short of its pirates and corsairs, always coveting the resources of others, outside of International Law and civility.’