Imagine this scenario: during a recent visit to Washington, I suggested to Pedro Burelli – a dear friend for many years – that, since Juan Guaidó’s interim administration was seeking to recover lost funds to aid in the reconstruction of Venezuela, the legal advisor for PDVSA in Geneva should file lawsuits against Helsinge, Trafigura, Glencore, Lukoil, Vitol, and others. The reason is simple: the current advisor (Canonica) was appointed thanks to Wilmer Ruperti. Pedro mentioned that José Ignacio (Nacho) Hernández González was the key legal figure, and this strategy could be elaborated further to see how to achieve the goal. I asked Pedro to make email introductions. But then a source reminded me that Mr. Hernández was, in fact, the legal expert employed by Lukoil, Glencore, Trafigura, Colonial, and Vitol in their defense against the lawsuit filed by PDVSA US Litigation Trust in Florida, presented by David Boies. Rafael Badell Madrid played the same role for Helsinge in Florida.
@ignandez I have some questions about your involvement with @LUKOIL_int #Colonial @Glencore @vitolgroup & @Trafigura re @PDVSA Litigation Trust case v Helsinge. MD. pic.twitter.com/YL42jXPJwb
— alek boyd (@alekboyd) February 9, 2019
This site has likely provided the most extensive research/coverage on the topic of the PDVSA litigation trust in the U.S. Our stance on the (il)legality of David Boies’ trust has been firm from day one. Mr. Hernández’s legal opinion strongly aligns with what we believe to be just one of the latest displays of the completely corrupt regime of Nicolás Maduro.
The issue here is not whether Mr. Hernández’s legal opinion is right or wrong, but the fact that he hired his professional services in Florida from the same defendants he will have to face in Geneva, should he become involved in replacing Canonica.
Sources report that the involvement of Mr. Hernández and Badell came at the request of Francisco Morillo, the head of Helsinge, who has plenty of friends among the opposition leadership. Helsinge’s legal strategy was quite aligned with that of the other defendants in the Florida case. When a Geneva court ruled against Helsinge, Trafigura, Glencore, Lukoil, and others on December 4 last year, this site pointed out the obvious foolishness of repeating in Geneva – where PDVSA presented a criminal case directly through Canonica – valid legal arguments used in Florida, where the case is civil and PDVSA acts through David Boies’ litigation trust.
Unfortunately, Morillo is not the only corrupt bolichico salivating at the prospects of Guaidó’s transition. There is also a recent amnesty law, which basically promises a free pass to all corrupt individuals in Venezuela between 1999 and 2015. This is totally unacceptable. We can agree that perfection is the enemy of good and all that, but Guaidó lacks the mandate to implement such a blanket pardon.
Moreover, such an inexcusable pardon is impracticable. All international criminal cases brought against Venezuela’s corrupt have occurred despite the fact that almost none have been investigated in Venezuela. Past and present Attorney Generals have been characterized precisely by their inaction on corruption. The real-world credentials of Luisa Ortega Díaz and Tarek William Saab are tools of political persecution against those whom chavismo considers “enemies of the revolution,” with notable examples including Guaidó’s own mentor, Leopoldo López, and his supporters, María Corina Machado, Julio Borges, and Antonio Ledezma.
We understand that Venezuelans are absolutely desperate. Such desperation breeds unrealistic expectations. Rampant corruption and a fluid stance on this issue by the Venezuelan political class as a whole are the progenitors of the current humanitarian crisis. Juan Guaidó should begin to make unavoidable decisions: the corrupt and their political employees, legal advisors, spin-doctors, bankers, facilitators, etc., have no place in a Venezuela striving to heal from injustice. There are enough pristine individuals who can restore Venezuela to the rule of law and a democracy that criminalizes corruption wherever it occurs.