The trial in London of the Venezuelan gold ancestor: the British government reiterated its support for Guaido

System lawyers Nicolas Maduro and discount management Juan Guaidó This Tuesday they defended their power over Venezuela’s gold deposited in the Bank of England, in It is a case that sets a precedent in the United Kingdom.

Nick Fennell, on behalf of the Maduro-appointed Central Bank of Venezuela (BCV) board, and Andrew Fulton, representative of the parallel board organized by Guaido, presented their arguments in The second day of the trial before the British Supreme Court, the highest court in the country.

The Supreme Court, which is analyzing an appeal by Guaido against a previous unsupported ruling, must do so To rule, on a date to be determined, who the British CEO truly considers to be the all-purpose ruler of Venezuela – whose council the BCV in principle has power over gold.

If it ends at last, based on English jurisprudence –And it’s not just what London executives say– That the leader is Guaido, the five judges will have to decide If they accept their political appointments (including the painting), although it was على Overturned by the Supreme Court of Caracas.

The Supreme Court’s decision will ultimately be the Supreme Court Determine which board you delegate to manage the gold, which Maduro claims under the pretext of transferring funds to the United Nations to obtain equipment and medicines to combat the epidemic.

London supports Guaidó

James Eddy, Legal Adviser to the British Foreign Office, intervened today, confirming the “clear and unambiguous” position presented on Monday that His government recognizes only Guaido, not Maduro, As head of state of Venezuela and his powers to act as such.

Contrary to what is being demanded by Maduro’s side, Eddy urged the court to accept this position based on the so-called “one-vote” principle – which urges state authorities to act unified in foreign policy. Without going into a “context study” of who actually controls the institutions in Venezuela.

Likewise, it considers that the court should not take into account the fact that the Venezuelan judge It does not recognize Guaido’s status or political appointments that have been rescinded.

Fulton agreed, on the part of the leader of the opposition, that the English doctrine of the actions of a foreign state obliges the Court to takeValid s effective“, Regardless of whether it is “legal or not”, Guaido’s appointments to Venezuelan soil, Since he was recognized as head of state by the British government.

Maduro challenges the British government

Nick Fennell, of the Maduro BCV Board of Directors, is skeptical about “constitutional status الوضعIn this lawsuit against Guaido, who in January ceased to lead the Venezuelan National Assembly in Do not run for the 2020 elections in your country.

The lawyer argued that although the British government recognized him as head of state, it did not do so as head of government because the opponent “He doesn’t have any kind of controlinside Venezuela, so it would not be advisable to leave it responsible for Gold reserves estimated at $2 billion.

For example – in his opinion – that the recognition of London is puzzling, Fennell noted that the British government had refused to grant diplomatic credentials to Vanessa Neumann, Juan Guaido’s former ambassador to London, while maintaining relations with Maduro’s representatives.

Eddy, a State Department attorney, has argued that it is not appropriate or important for the executive branch to continue to operate Relationship “in limited areas” With the management of Chavista.

A lawyer for Maduro’s board warned that he would hand the gold over to Guaido only because the London government, due to his geopolitical motives, had recognized him as Venezuela’s leader. It could damage the reputation of the Bank of England and the UK as custodian of foreign assets.

Fennell stressed that if the “ad hoc” council of the opposition leader receives the assets, given that he does not exist as an organization on the ground, Their transactions will not be duly audited and there will be no guarantees that they will benefit citizens.

(by Judith Mora – EFE)

Read on: