On October 14, 2019, Italian judge Francesca Ciranna ordered the preventive seizure of an apartment in Rome located at Via Condotti number 9, valued at €4,750,000. The order also included the sum of €1,733,731.50 from an account at Che Banca! controlled by Luis Alberto Saab Moran (brother of Alex Saab). In addition to the brother, Judge Ciranna also identified Camilla Fabri (Alex Saab’s partner), Lorenzo Antonelli (partner of Beatrice Fabri, sister of Camilla), Elisa Antonelli (sister of Lorenzo), and Sabrina Roberti (mother of Camilla) as involved parties. The English companies Kinloch Investments Ltd, Jamasa Properties Ltd, Marylins Capital Ltd, Glenmore Solutions Ltd, Nvayo Limited, and BSB Trust Limited Company Ltd; the Dubai company Pegasus Trading FZE; and the Italian company Gruppo Domano s.r.l. used accounts in Banco Sabadell, Erste Group Bank, Sberbank, Fineco, Allianz, Banca d’Italia, Multibank Inc., and UBS Switzerland AG to move funds and acquire assets and properties described in Italy.
Within the scope of investigations in Italy, the financial information unit of Banca d’Italia alerted the competent authorities about Luis Alberto Saab Moran when the Department of the Treasury sanctioned Alex Saab. The sanction against Saab stemmed from another action by the Department of Justice initiated by the DEA due to Saab’s failure to surrender, according to a cooperation agreement with that federal agency that stipulated Saab would surrender before May 30, 2019. From that moment on, Saab’s ordeal began.
Prior to May 2019, Saab had met with DEA agents on at least three occasions, and according to summary documents, Saab had agreed to be an informant for that federal agency. The reason the DEA was involved, rather than other federal agencies or the Department of Justice directly, is German Enrique Rubio Salas, a former leader of the Bogotá Cartel wanted for drug trafficking in Italy and Saab’s main associate since his arrival in Venezuela. Had Saab chosen another partner, it is likely that the DEA would never have taken an interest in him. Corruption in Venezuela does not pique the interest of that agency unless it involves drug trafficking. However, Rubio Salas is behind Saab’s entire situation. He was the one who introduced Saab to the Slebi De La Rosa brothers (experts in money laundering).
The criminal group’s failure was laundering over $350 million through corruption related to the SUCRE and Global Construction Fund contracts, using the U.S. financial system. However, this is by no means the only criminal act by the group. The order from Judge Ciranna indicates that at the time of the seizure of assets in Italy, Saab had outstanding legal issues in the United States, England, Bulgaria, Colombia, and Ecuador, in addition to those involving his partner Rubio Salas.
An interesting aspect of the Italian judge’s action was Fabri’s escape to Russia, followed by Cuba. Since then, Fabri has become a fugitive from justice in her country. She eventually arrived in Venezuela, where she is currently located. Fabri’s communications, as well as those of other individuals in Saab’s immediate circle like Rubio Salas, are not and have never been secret from the regimes for which Saab has worked. Therefore, the news of Saab’s cooperation with the DEA, in our opinion, was likely known to Russian, Cuban, and Venezuelan intelligence agencies. This is suggested by the letter from former Foreign Minister Arreaza to Saab following his arrest in Cape Verde, as well as the conditions surrounding the continuation of negotiations between the opposition and representatives of Nicolás Maduro in Mexico regarding the appointment and presence of Alex Saab, and Jorge Rodríguez’s announcement about it. Chavismo is fully aware of everything Saab has done in recent years. The excellent relations with Erdogan, Putin, and the Castros predate the approval of Saab’s role as the “zar” of the Bolivarian bourgeoisie.
What will be interesting now is, on one hand, the reaction of Jorge Rodríguez, who may argue that Saab’s cooperation agreement with the DEA is false. He will likely not mention the $12,650,697.70 that Saab transferred from his accounts to the DEA’s accounts. There is no better indication of guilt than those transfers. Rodríguez will also not discuss Saab’s admission of involvement in bribery and corruption, which necessitated the payments to the DEA described. In other words, without Saab’s admission of guilt, those funds would never have reached the DEA’s accounts, which now possesses precise information on some of the accounts controlled by Saab. But it’s not just the DEA that has that information. Chavismo will undoubtedly collaborate with its partners in Russia, Turkey, the Emirates, China, and Switzerland to secure funds. It should be noted, for example, that Saab used Evrofinance Mosnarbank in Russia (in which Chavismo holds 50% through FONDEN) as a petty cash source. Following the restructuring of that bank and the transfer of the other 50% to the Russian state, Saab and his associates can forget about what’s there.
On the other hand, the conflict between the groups of lawyers supposedly representing Saab appears to be the main event. The Department of Justice doubts that the law firm Baker Hostetler is truly working for Saab and has repeatedly communicated that it could be directed by the Chavista regime. In fact, summary documents indicate that since Saab’s arrest in Cape Verde, Baker Hostetler has never mentioned (until yesterday): the meetings between Saab and the DEA; the cooperation agreement; the admission of bribery and illegal activities; or the payments to the DEA. This will have serious repercussions: Baker Hostetler is not a reliable legal representative.
Baker Hostetler is in an impossible position from an argumentative standpoint, now admitting that their client did have meetings with the Department of Justice and federal agencies, but only to confirm that neither Saab nor his companies were involved in illegal activities. Baker Hostetler claimed that these meetings were known to the Venezuelan bolivarian government. However, Baker Hostetler did not mention the four payments of $12,650,697.70 that Saab made to the DEA. If he is innocent, why did he pay? One question Rodríguez should clarify is: if Chavismo was aware, as his lawyers claim, why did they approve the payment of $12,650,697.70 from Saab to the DEA?
The other group of lawyers, led by Neil M. Schuster, insists that publicly revealing the cooperation agreement between Saab and the DEA will endanger Fabri and her family in Venezuela. However, if Baker Hostetler now argues that Chavismo was already aware of meetings between Saab and American justice, why would Camilla Fabri be at risk? The meetings between Saab and the DEA began in August 2016, culminating in an agreement in July 2018. That is to say, years before Fabri became a fugitive and arrived in Venezuela, Saab was negotiating with the DEA with the supposed approval of Chavismo. Her social media profile indicates that, once in Venezuela, Fabri has the absolute support and protection of Chavismo.
Schuster’s arguments do not correspond with reality. Baker Hostetler’s do not either, but neither the Department of Justice nor the presiding judge would publicly disclose information about payments that did not take place. Saab, his masters, and lawyers tried to play with the justice system, and their gamble did not pay off.
Rodríguez is lying, as always. He spoke of “indecently” inflicted torture, of teeth being removed from Saab by “savagely beating” him, all this in Cape Verde. However, the ruling of the Economic Community of West African States Court (CEDEAO) clearly states that the plaintiff, i.e., Alex Saab, failed to prove that he was tortured on the night of August 29-30 as described. In other words, with two fewer teeth, Saab was unable to demonstrate that he had been tortured.
Rodríguez later added that Saab is being tortured in the US, yet none of Saab’s lawyers have made such a claim.
Rodríguez questioned the luxurious treatment the US gives to its spies (Cliver Alcalá, Christopher Figuera, and Rafael Ramirez). He forgot that Alcalá, Figuera, and especially Ramirez were men of the Chavista revolution, and enjoyed their absolute trust for decades.
Can Rodríguez be believed, as a representative of a regime that systematically tortures and kills with impunity? Just as much as one can believe in the alleged cancer that afflicted Saab.