Businessman Alex Saab
John Philpot, a human right lawyer has cautioned that there would be a dangerous precedent should businessman Alex Saab be extradited.
Philpot, speaking at a webinar organized by the Alliance for Global Justice on May 19, pointed out that there would be ‘extraterritorial judicial abuse’ and ‘violation of diplomatic status’ if Mr. Saab is extradited and prosecuted in the United States on charges of money laundering and corruption, stressing that the business mogul is a diplomat.
Saab was arrested by Cape Verde en route to Iran in June 2020. He has since been in custody in the island country. The 49-year-old was arrested on the orders of the U.S on allegations of corruption. The U.S wanted him extradited to face charges of corruption, but Venezuela took a stance against that decision as Mr. Saab’s lawyers fought in an attempt to stop the process.
On March 15, the ECOWAS Court ruled that the detention was inappropriate. It said Cape Verde had no arrest warrant nor a Red notice from Interpol for the arrest of the businessman hence ordered Saab’s immediate release.
The court further asked Cape Verde to pay $200,000 to the business as compensation. Cape Verde was also asked to stop processes that would lead to the extradition of Alex Saab to the US.
On March 16, however, the Supreme Court of Cape Verde gave a counter ruling, saying Saab should be extradited.
In its ruling, it dismissed many of the averments of Alex Saab's defence team, amongst them being the fact that he was a special envoy of the government of Venezuela and that his arrest was a violation of that status – a development which triggered the petition including a request that ECOWAS withholds its support to Cape Verde and a call for the country to be stripped of its privileges of presenting candidates for top positions within the ECOWAS as well as its participation in activities in the Community.
While backing Philpot’s position on the matter, Stansfield Smith of Chicago ALBA Solidarity said Saab’s case is part of a larger US effort to use “lawfare” to impose its illegal sanctions, which the United Nations condemns as “unilateral coercive measures.”
