US Capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro: Was The Operation Legal Under International Law? Explained

US forces captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, flying them to New York to face criminal charges. Legal experts weigh in on the legality of the operation under US and international law.

US forces captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in a military operation early on Saturday, flying him to New York to face criminal charges. The operation, which also involved the detention of his wife, Cilia Flores, drew widespread international condemnation and raises complex questions about its legality under US and international law.

According to US officials, Maduro was seized on a Venezuelan warship bound for New York. The operation came after months of pressure from the Trump administration, which has repeatedly called on Maduro to relinquish power and accused him of supporting drug cartels allegedly responsible for thousands of US deaths linked to illegal narcotics.

Since September, US forces have reportedly conducted at least 30 strikes on vessels suspected of drug trafficking from Venezuela in the Caribbean and Pacific, resulting in more than 100 deaths. Legal experts have questioned the legality of these strikes under both US and international law.

How Did US Justify Operation?

The Justice Department requested military assistance to apprehend Maduro, who, along with his wife, son, two political figures, and an alleged gang leader, had been indicted by a New York grand jury on charges including drug trafficking, narco-terrorism, and weapons offences.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said on social media that the defendants “will soon face the full wrath of American justice on American soil in American courts.”

At a press briefing, President Trump suggested that Venezuela had stolen US oil interests and indicated that Washington planned to take control of the country for a period, though he did not provide specific details.

As per the media reports, experts in international law say the Trump administration muddied the legal justification by presenting the operation as both a targeted law enforcement mission and a potential precursor to US governance in Venezuela.

What Does Law Say?

Under the US Constitution, Congress has the authority to declare war, while the president serves as commander-in-chief. Historically, presidents have authorised limited military actions when deemed in the national interest.

Trump’s former Chief of Staff, Susie Wiles, told Vanity Fair that any US-authorised activity “on land” in Venezuela would require Congressional approval. Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed that Congress was not notified prior to Saturday’s operation.

International law generally prohibits the use of force in foreign nations except under narrow conditions, such as UN Security Council authorisation or self-defence. Experts argue that drug trafficking and gang activity, while criminal, do not meet the threshold for armed conflict that would justify military intervention.

The US has not recognised Maduro as Venezuela’s legitimate leader since 2019, following an election the US deemed rigged.

Is There A Precedent?

The US has previously apprehended criminal suspects abroad, such as General Manuel Noriega of Panama in 1989, but typically with consent from local authorities. In Noriega’s case, the US argued that Panamanian forces had threatened American lives, and it recognised an alternative Panamanian leader as legitimate.

More recently, former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández was extradited to the US in 2022, convicted on drug charges, and sentenced to 45 years in prison before being pardoned by Trump in December.

Legal experts remain sceptical that the US would face consequences for the Maduro operation, given the limited enforcement mechanisms in international law.

Paul of Northeastern University observed: “It’s hard to see how any legal body could impose practical consequences on the administration.”