‘False accusations’: Maduro, wife rejects fresh torture allegations in New York court

The court appearance formally began the couple’s response to a revised indictment. Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein entered not-guilty pleas for Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores. The case accuses them of overseeing a Venezuelan system of repression involving alleged torture. This matters because the allegations now form part of a US criminal prosecution against a former foreign president and his wife.

Maduro appeared in ankle shackles and spoke through an interpreter. When asked to plead, he twice challenged the charges as “false accusations and false testimony.” Flores also denied the allegations, saying, “I am completely innocent. I am not guilty.” Prosecutors allege beatings, asphyxiation, and electric shocks against scores of victims, including three Americans.

The next major step is the trial. Lawyers for both sides asked to move its start from June 1 to June 14. The couple’s lawyers also argue that their former government positions should provide immunity. They previously pleaded not guilty in a separate cocaine-trafficking case.

Under international law, torture generally means intentionally causing severe physical or mental pain or suffering for a particular purpose, such as punishment, intimidation, or obtaining information. It can be committed by officials or with official approval. The article states that torture is a crime under international law. It does not provide a formal legal definition, so this explanation uses the established general meaning.

The difference from ordinary mistreatment or excessive force is severity and purpose. A harsh or unlawful act may involve abuse without reaching torture’s extreme level or without a torture-related aim. Prosecutors allege that Maduro’s system used beatings, asphyxiation, and electric shocks. They also allege psychological torture, including a threat to kill a prisoner’s child.

That distinction matters because torture can trigger international and domestic criminal proceedings. The article says it may be prosecuted outside the country where it occurred, regardless of victims’ nationality. The US case therefore focuses on organized, severe abuse rather than a single isolated incident.

The indictment describes alleged torture affecting scores of victims. “Scores” means many people, but the article does not provide a precise number. It does identify three alleged victims as Americans. That combination shows both the scale of the alleged repression and the connection prosecutors draw to the United States.

The alleged abuse included beatings, asphyxiation, and electric shocks. Prosecutors also describe psychological torture, including an alleged threat to kill one prisoner’s child. The indictment covers alleged torture dating back to 2013, when Maduro became president after Hugo Chávez. It therefore describes an alleged system operating over years, not just one incident.

The exact number matters for understanding the case’s scope, but it remains unspecified in the article. The three American victims may help explain why US prosecutors brought the case, although the article says torture can be prosecuted abroad regardless of victims’ nationality. The allegations remain contested, and Maduro and Flores pleaded not guilty.

Prosecutors portray Maduro and Flores as leaders of an organized repression system, not merely people who failed to stop abuse. The revised indictment alleges that the couple oversaw state-sponsored repression in Venezuela. This matters because prosecutors are linking senior political authority to specific acts of torture and to the system that enabled them.

According to the indictment, Maduro personally recommended torture methods and received updates about how particular victims were being treated. Prosecutors also say he threatened to kill one prisoner’s child as psychological torture. Flores, described as a former attorney general, allegedly helped develop the repressive system and ordered torture against specific individuals.

The allegations cover conduct dating from 2013, when Maduro succeeded Hugo Chávez as president. Both defendants deny wrongdoing. Maduro called the charges false accusations, and Flores said she was completely innocent. A US trial, if it proceeds, would test the prosecution’s claims about their roles and the evidence supporting them.

The United States can prosecute alleged torture committed in Venezuela because torture is a crime under international law. The article says such crimes may be prosecuted outside the country where the abuse occurred. This principle allows a national court to address exceptionally serious abuses even when the conduct and victims are mainly connected to another country.

The New York indictment applies that idea to allegations against Maduro and Flores. Prosecutors say their repression system tortured scores of victims, including three Americans. The alleged conduct included beatings, asphyxiation, electric shocks, and psychological threats. The case therefore concerns alleged conduct in Venezuela, but it is being heard in a US court.

That power does not guarantee a conviction. The defendants have pleaded not guilty, and their lawyers argue that the case should be dismissed on immunity grounds. The article also notes that US prosecutions of foreign officials for torture are rare. Earlier examples involved Liberia, Ukraine-related war crimes, and Syria.

Maduro and Flores are seeking dismissal on immunity grounds. Their lawyers argue that Maduro was the leader of a foreign country and Flores was its first lady. The basic claim is that official status should protect them from prosecution for conduct connected to their government roles. This matters because the court must consider immunity before the case can fully proceed.

The defense position contrasts with the indictment’s theory. Prosecutors accuse the couple of directing or helping develop a state-sponsored repression system. They allege that Maduro recommended torture methods and received updates about victims, while Flores allegedly helped organize the system and ordered specific torture. The alleged actions are therefore tied to their public positions, but prosecutors treat them as criminal conduct.

The judge has not, according to the article, resolved the immunity argument. Both defendants entered not-guilty pleas and deny the allegations. The case may move toward trial, with lawyers asking to shift the date from June 1 to June 14. Whether immunity blocks the prosecution remains a key legal issue.

These proceedings address different alleged conduct and operate under different legal authorities. The New York criminal case is a US court prosecution based on the revised indictment’s torture allegations. It accuses Maduro and Flores of overseeing repression in Venezuela. A US judge entered their not-guilty pleas, and the case may go to trial.

The International Criminal Court investigation is an international proceeding concerning alleged crimes against humanity linked to the Venezuelan government’s crackdown on political opponents. The article says Maduro has been investigated there for years and has consistently denied wrongdoing. It does not say that the ICC has reached a verdict or describe a completed prosecution.

The separate drug-trafficking case is also in the United States, but it concerns an alleged conspiracy to flood the country with cocaine. Maduro and Flores had already pleaded not guilty in that case. Thus, the torture case concerns alleged repression, the ICC matter concerns alleged crimes against humanity, and the drug case concerns alleged narcotics trafficking.