By Mustapha Babalola Toheeb.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/TheNigerialawyer-WhatsApp-Channel1.jpg")
1.0 Introduction
On the 3rd of January 2026, United States special forces reportedly captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro from his residence in Caracas and forcibly removed him from Venezuelan territory. Shortly thereafter, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores would face federal narco-terrorism charges in New York.
This incident marks one of the most extraordinary and dangerous uses of force in contemporary international law involving the abduction of a sitting head of state by a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council outside any recognized legal framework. For observers familiar with the long history of U.S. interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean, unfortunately, the pattern is depressingly familiar.
The United States has previously intervened directly or indirectly in the removal or seizure of leaders in the past. In 1953, the British government suspended the constitution of British Guiana and removed the democratically elected government of Cheddi Jagan, fearing threats to colonial economic interests.
In 1989, the United States launched a full-scale invasion of Panama involving approximately 24,000 troops to remove General Manuel Noriega, who, like Maduro, had been indicted on drug-related charges. Noriega was captured, flown to the United States, tried and imprisoned.
Similarly, in 2004, Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was removed from power and flown into exile in what he described as a U.S.-orchestrated coup and kidnapping, an account later corroborated by French and Haitian officials.
Yet Venezuela in 2026 is not Grenada in 1983 or Panama in 1989. It is a state of over 30 million people with significant armed forces and years of preparation against external intervention. More importantly, this operation took place in a radically different global legal and political environment, one in which the legitimacy of the international legal order itself is already under strain.
2.0 International Legal Framework On The Prohibition on the Use of Force
The modern international legal order rests on a clear and categorical rule. Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. This prohibition is mirrored in customary international law and is widely regarded as a jus cogens norm, permitting no derogation.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has repeatedly affirmed the centrality of this rule. In the Corfu Channel Case, the Court warned that intervention by powerful states against weaker ones would “pervert the administration of international justice itself,” affirming that respect for territorial sovereignty is an “essential foundation of international relations.”
In Nicaragua v. United States, the ICJ confirmed that the prohibition on the use of force forms part of customary international law. The Court reiterated this position in the Wall Advisory Opinion and described Article 2(4) as a “cornerstone of the United Nations Charter” in Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (DRC v. Uganda).
Exceptions to the Prohibition on the Rule of Force
International law recognizes only two narrow exceptions to the prohibition on the use of force provided above:
- Security Council authorization under Chapter VII of the Charter; and
- Self-defense under Article 51, following an armed attack.
Neither applies here. There was no Security Council authorization nor was the United States under an armed attack or imminent threat of one from Venezuela. Allegations of drug trafficking even if assumed to be true do not constitute an armed attack under international law, as clarified in Nicaragua v. U.S (supra).
Other suggested justifications such as humanitarian intervention or rescue of nationals are dead on arrival. Humanitarian intervention remains highly contested and is rejected by the majority of scholars as a lawful exception. There is no evidence that U.S. nationals faced imminent danger requiring forcible rescue. The abduction of a head of state cannot be shoehorned into any recognized legal category neither can it be legally justified.
Aggression and Individual Criminal Responsibility
Beyond state responsibility, the U.S. actions may amount to aggression, defined under Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as the use of armed force by a state against the sovereignty, territorial integrity, or political independence of another state.
Aggression is a leadership crime implicating those in positions of political or military control. An invasion, military attack or the sending of armed forces into another state’s territory squarely fits within the Statute’s definition. If the operation was ordered at the highest political level, it theoretically exposes U.S. leadership to individual criminal responsibility however remote the prospects of actual prosecution may be.
3.0 Conclusion
There is little doubt that the United States, by attacking Venezuela and abducting its sitting president, has violated Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and its customary international law corollary. The acts constitute an armed attack and amount to aggression under international criminal law.
More troubling, however, is what this signifies for the future of international law itself. Repeated violations by powerful states have steadily desecrated the principle of prohibition on the use of force. Unfortunately, these powerful states have been at the forefront of international law’s advocacy and enforcement over the years. As a result of this, it increasingly risks becoming a charade, a facade, a dog that can bark but no longer bites. I will end on this note by saying that when law bind only the weak and yield instantly to power, law ceases to be law. It becomes theatre. And once that happens, the international order does not merely weaken. It ends.
Interesting times ahead!
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Mustapha Babalola Toheeb is a Lagos based lawyer with interest in Dispute Resolution Practice and Taxation. He can be reached via whatsapp-08106244073 and mail-toheebmustapha15@gmail.com
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR LAWYERS: A COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE
Reimagine your practice with the power of AI “...this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic.” — Ohio Books Ltd
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe, Esq., ACIArb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director, Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
Bonus:
Get a FREE eBook titled “How to Use the AI in Legalpedia and Law Pavilion” with every purchase.
How to Order: 📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878 📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com 🌐 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access directly online at: https://selar.com/prv626
________________________________________________________________________ The Law And Practice Of Redundancy In Nigeria: A Practitioner’s Guide, Authored By A Labour & Employment Law Expert Bimbo Atilola
_______________________________________________________________________
New Year Promo: Get Five Maritime Law Books For N150,000 — 63% Discount
The promotion, which commenced on January 8 and runs until February 8, 2026, offers five core maritime law books authored by Dr. Emeka Akabogu, SAN, ordinarily valued at N405,000, for just N150,000 — a 63% discount.
Interested buyers can place their orders through the following channels:
Phone: 0704 329 3271
Online Store: https://paystack.shop/aa-bookstore
Website: www.akabogulaw.com
______________________________________________________________________
