← POLITICS 1/6/2026

Nicolás Maduro’s defense team may be looking to a decades-old case for guidance: that of former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega. As Maduro pleads not guilty to US charges of drug trafficking, the specter of Noriega’s 1989 trial looms large.

Noriega, like Maduro, claimed he was a legitimate head of state illegally targeted by the US. His defense centered on arguing that the US lacked jurisdiction and that his capture was a violation of international law. While ultimately unsuccessful, this strategy created significant legal challenges for prosecutors and prolonged the proceedings.

Maduro is currently asserting similar claims, stating he remains the President of Venezuela and alleging he has been ‘kidnapped’ and brought to the US illegally. His dramatic court appearance saw him maintain his presidential status, a key element in potentially challenging the court’s authority.

The parallels aren’t lost on legal observers. The US successfully argued against Noriega by demonstrating his direct involvement in criminal activity, regardless of his official position. Prosecutors in Maduro’s case will likely attempt the same, focusing on evidence linking him directly to drug trafficking operations.

However, the political context differs. Noriega’s Panama was seen as a strategic asset the US needed to control; Venezuela’s situation is more complex, involving broader geopolitical considerations. The 92-year-old Judge Alvin Hellerstein presiding over the case will navigate these complexities as the trial unfolds, potentially drawing lessons – and avoiding pitfalls – from the Noriega precedent.