📝Asset freezing in the legal saga between American power and Venezuelan wealt

The saga of events between the United States and Venezuela over the past decades and the power struggles between successive heads of State, the latest spectacular one involving the kidnapping of the latter by the former, are often presented as if the Law were meaningless.

It is true that the law may appear to be a 'masquerade' (I). But in this power struggle and spectacle played out for all to see, the role of the Law remains, albeit underestimated (II). Furthermore, one element has played a role and continues to do so today: the legal technique of asset freezing, a tool of Compliance Law, which failed and partly explains the difficulties to come (III).

I. LAW AS PURE MASQUERADE

Presenting Law as pure masquerade is widely reported, so there is no need to elaborate at length : The removal of the incumbent president of Venezuela by the incumbent president of the United States has nothing to do with the Law. It is simply a case of the stronger party removing the weaker one.

Given this observation, everyon deplores it to the point of asking whether the United States remain a democracy and a constitutional state. We can also deplore it and ask the same political and institutionnal question.

From an external perspective, with regard to Public International Law, and from an internal perspective, with regard to the respective powers of the head of the executive branch and Congress.

Therefore, unless to be foolish, any legal perspective would be dismissed, except to laugh or cry about it.

II. THE REMAINING ROLE OF LAW IN THE POWER BALANCE ESTABLISHED BY THE UNITED STATES IN THE FIELD OF ENERGY

But this analysis is undoubtedly too radical, for two reasons: firstly, because it follows Trump's own presentation (A), and secondly, because energy issues have always played a major role in public policy and interraction of international relations (B).

A. DO NOT FOLLOW TRUMP WHEN HE ASSERTS THAT HIS WILL IS THE ONLY LEGITIMATE STANDARD FOR ACTION, AND WAIT FOR THE JUDGE

Trump's hypnotic personality means that everyone, while claiming that his rhetoric is delusional, believes what he says. Thus, he asserts that the only standard that matters is his personal morality (and therefore punishing evil dictators who wastes oil that Americans are deprived of), to the exclusion of other standards (the legal system), which seems to be enough to make us look away from the Law.

But he cannot prevent the troublesome Nicolás Maduro (because he did not kill him) from now being on American soil. He did not make him disappear. He did not lock him up in a secret location.

He did indeed have him imprisoned, but Maduro was provided with lawyers and is awaiting trial before a renowned judge. Specific charges have been brought. The two defendants, Nicolas Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores, are free to communicate with the press, which they are doing a lot. The first hearing will take place on 17 March 2026.

It is possible that the trial is just a facade, but it is also possible that it is not. Because it is taking place in New York, a city of open opposition, because it is public, because global social media reign also supremely, and because the judge does not appear to be captured.

B. THE ROLE OF POLITICS AND INTERNATIONAL COMPANIES IN THE ENERGY SECTOR

Besides, the issue specifically addressed is the production, transportation, distribution and sale of oil. Technical analyses and so many studies recount decades of strategies employed by US and Venezualan governments and their respective companies in this regard. We will not describe them here, but American and Venezuelan leaders, like companies from both countries, have successively clashed and allied themselves.

Even though we are now in a situation of extreme tension, as on another geographic zone between states and companies regarding the Russian Federation, more usually any territory that is a source of energy naturally attracts this articulation between state and companies (local or not). It should be noted that the energy sector is still, in Law, organised totally or partially in distance from Competition Law.

Energy, such as oil, gas and electricity, is governed by Regulatory Law, which differs from Competition Law, to which it is subject.

There are always public policies, which are expressed through specific regulations implemented by governments or regulatory authorities (for example, in France, the Commission de Régulation de l'énergie - Energy Regulatory Commission - CRE).

Energy was inherently built on production, transportation, distribution and sales; international companies have always had a place in this sector. This is why there are international contracts, which are signed, for example, between a national state-owned monopoly and a competing foreign private company. This was the case in Venezuela, but it is also the case in many other parts of the world.

In these international contracts, the prospect of a dispute is anticipated by the planned organisation of Arbitration, as in most cases the buyer, who often has to make long-term investments in infrastructure without acquiring ownership, which remains with the State, and does not have sufficient confidence in the State's courts.

This was the case in Vénénuala, and it is a very common occurrence, as Regulatory Law and International Arbitration work well together.

🧱M.-A. Frison-Roche, 📝Arbitration and Regulatory Law, in M.-A. Frison-Roche (ed.) 📕 The risks of regulation, 2005

Thus, when ExxonMobil lost the contractually granted authorisation from the Venezuelan state-owned company to operate in 1997 due to a change in Government, the American company initiated international arbitration proceedings to obtain compensation for this.

This brings us to the question of the legal effectiveness of international arbitration in Energy Regulatory and Compliance Law and, more specifically, asset freezing, because if it had worked, perhaps there would be no need to remove Nicolás Maduro.

II. THE CRUCIAL ISSUE OF FREEZING ASSETS AND COMMITMENTS, COMPLIANCE LAW TOOLS

ExxonMobil asked various arbitration tribunals to freeze the assets of the state-owned company PDVSA, amounting to several billion dollars. After several years of legal proceedings, the American company obtained a ruling in its favour for a compensation payment of 18 billion dollars, guaranteed by a freeze on the assets of the national company.

However, the London Court of Appeal overturned the ruling, considering that there was insufficient connection between the dispute and British territory.

Continuing the litigation in various countries, notably the United States, but also in the Netherlands, for example, the company obtained convictions, but for smaller sums and after many years of legal proceedings.

Here we can see that the freezing of assets, which is mainly carried out by banks but on the orders of judges, is often the ultimate guarantor of international commitments which, even in the field of regulated sectors, take the form of international contracts.

What's happening today?

Less than 10 days after US President Trump's confident statements that American oil companies would rebuild Venezuela's dilapidated oil infrastructure, the president of ExxonMobil said he believes it is "impossible as things stand" to invest in Venezuela.

One might think that the state of positive law has something to do with it.

Trump is now threatening to deny him access to the country, but in the liberal system that the United States remains, the legal principle is that of freedom, particularly freedom of enterprise, and the first expression of this freedom is that of not acting, for example, not going to a country in which the company has been contractually deprived of its rights to operate but has not been able to obtain the compensation due for what amounts to expropriation.

It is shown that the legal issue of asset freezes, commitments and the link with international arbitration is present in practice in what is happening and will happen.

____

🧱mafr, 📝In Compliance Law, the legal consequences for Entreprises of their commitments and undertakings, in mafr (ded.) 📕L'Obligation of Compliance (Compliance Obligation), 2025

🧱Marie Lamoureux, 📝The Vigilance Obligation of the Energy Operators, in mafr (ed.) 📕L'Obligation of Compliance (Compliance Obligation), 2025

🧱mafr, 📝Arbitration consideration fo Compliance Obligation for a sustainable Arbitration Place, in mafr  (ed.) 📕L'Obligation of Compliance (Compliance Obligation), 2025

________