Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores, willing to present evidence of financial incapacity before the New York court

The lawyers of Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores, Barry Pollack and Mark E. Donelly, stated in a document sent to the judge today, on behalf of their clients, that, according to the defense, the Prosecutor’s Office recognizes the right of both to request that the government of Venezuela pay for their defense.

In addition, they included sworn statements from Maduro and Flores in which they claim to be unable to afford their lawyers and express their willingness to present financial evidence if the court requires it.

This statement, filed today in the federal court of the Southern District of New York, comes just a few days before his next hearing, scheduled for on the 26th of this month.

Until now, the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which administers and imposes economic and trade sanctions, has not authorized the Government of Venezuela to pay its lawyerswhich, they allege in a document sent to federal judge Alvin Hellerstein, interferes with the right of both to choose their own legal team.

OFAC has imposed economic sanctions on Venezuela since 2015 that sought to pressure Maduro to bring about political change, and the US Government does not recognize Maduro as the legitimate president of Venezuela.

In the brief, the defense highlights that the refusal to allow Venezuela to pay legal fees violates the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution, which establishes the right to choose a defense, and the Fifth Amendment, which protects due process.

The lawyers also recall that OFAC has on other occasions allowed “a third party subject to sanctions to pay the legal fees of a person also sanctioned”, something they consider inconsistent with their case.

They also point out that the Government’s proposal that they accept a public defender “does not constitute a remedy at all”, since they would be forced to accept defense that they did not choose.

“Forcing defendants to accept a court-appointed lawyer who is not of their choice is not, by definition, a solution to the violation of their right to choose their own lawyer,” they note.

For these reasons, the defense asks Judge Hellerstein to dismiss the charges as an “unconstitutionally flawed” process or to hold a hearing to discuss the case.

“The only remedy is dismissal, given that this court cannot allow the present case to proceed in violation of the constitutional rights of Mr. Maduro and Ms. Flores de Maduro,” the legal document indicates.