CAN THE UNITED STATES FIND AN EXCEPTION TO HEAD-OF-STATE IMMUNITY FOR NATIONAL LEADERS, AND INDICT, DETAIN AND TRY THE FIVE EASTERN CARIBBEAN LEADERS OF CBI STATES?

In the aftermath of the action taken by the Government of the United States to capture the sitting President of Venezuela, and bring him to New York to stand trial in U.S. District Court, we have been repeatedly presented with an issue of great public importance to the citizens of the Eastern Caribbean states: Whether the law provides an exception to the Head-of-State Immunity Doctrine, to allow the United States to indict and try, on criminal charges, any or all of the five Prime Ministers of the five Eastern Caribbean states that sell economic citizenships, also known as Citizenship by Investment or CBI/CIP. The Five EC states are Saint Kitts & Nevis, Antigua and Barbuda, the Commonwealth of Dominica, Saint Lucia,  and Grenada. 

This an extremely complex legal issue, and it deserves an objective analysis, involving both explicit and implicit waivers of immunity. Of course, the legal argument supporting the Nicolas Maduro case can be disposed of easily; Maduro's status as a duly elected leader of Venezuela was bogus, as he conclusively lost the presidential election in 2024, to Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, who received twice the number of votes, but Maduro, fraudulently claiming 51% of the votes cast, illegally claimed victory. Inasmuch as the United States never accepted him as sitting president, his capture and removal were not subject to Head-of-State immunity. There is no dispute in that matter.

However, when you shift to the leaders of the five EC CBI-issuing states, the issues become far more complicated. The central reason that America wants these five Labour Party, left-leaning pro-China and pro-Cuba leaders out of power is that their national policies, led by their massive sales of CBI passports to Chinese nationals, have become a Clear and Present Danger to the National Security of the United States. Unfortunately, that in and of itself is not an exception recognized under the decisional case.

So we look to legal authorities for guidance; perhaps the leaders and most recent law review article on the subject, HEAD OF STATE AND FOREIGN OFFICIAL IMMUNITY AFTER SAMANTAR: A SUGGESTED APPROACH, 34 Fordham Intl. Law J. (2011),which takes us to the United States Supreme Court case of  Samatar vs. Yousuf, 560 U.S. 305 (2010), holding (1) The Court must look to the Common Law, not the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act for a solution, and (2) The position of the Department of State on the subject must be given great weight.

What about the grounds stated in support of the American Maduro capture, unlawful holder of elected office? In truth and in fact, the National Elections conducted in the Eastern Caribbean cannot be declared to be free and fair. They are marred by widespread and organized voter fraud, whether by cash payments made in advance to voters to guide their choice, the promise of other consideration, such as employment in a seriously dysfunctional economy, airfare and other gifts paid to impoverished and unemployed individuals, and several other types of voter fraud, all of which result in a skewed result in favor of what amounts to a one-party, non-democratic state. Could the American Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, determine that these five prime ministers are not lawfully in office? Most certainly.

Alternatively, One of the grounds cited in the case against General Manuel Noriega, the former Panamanian dictator, was the fact that his illegal activities, designed to amass great wealth through drug trafficking, private pursuit of personal enrichment, all linked to the charges filed against him, led the Executive Branch to deny him immunity. The massive fraud, money laundering and corruption of the five Eastern Caribbean Prime Ministers, which are part of what would be the charged misconduct in their indictments, qualify for a similar interpretation by the Secretary of State. 

Therefore, we find that the United States has sufficient legal authority to bring the appropriate criminal charges against these five sitting Caribbean leaders, and given the increasing National Security risks to America that they represent, there should be no delay in the Trump Administration filing indictments forthwith, taking them into custody, and prosecuting them; let it be done.  

MADURO AND SAAB MORAN CASES REMIND US THAT MALTA REMAINS THE UNDISTURBED MONEY LAUNDERING BAD BOY OF THE EU

In the Maduro and Saab cases now pending in the United States, We will be seeing reminders of the status of the Republic of Malta as the money laundering jurisdiction of choice for Venezuelan laundrymen. For those who are not familiar with this subject, a few examples are appropriate:

(1) Alex Saab's illicit Venezuelan supply chains and oil trades, to and through Malta-registered companies he and his associates controlled.

(2) Saab frequently relied on Malta's offshore banking system and opaque corporate transparency to divert hundreds of millions of dollars from low-cost housing and food welfare programs in Venezuela, into safe destinations abroad.

(3) Maduro's alleged use of a private Maltese investment firms and PORTMANN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT to move €160m in a money laundering conspiracy connected to embezzlement from the government oil agency, PDVSA.

(4) The abuse of Malta's financial system for President Maduro's three stepsons' illicit activities, involving massive food import fraud, facilitated by Saab.

And while we are on the subject, American compliance officers who were aware of the activities of the money laundering Maltese entity, PILATUS BANK, and who anxiously awaited indictments in the United States after the election of Joe Biden, only to be acutely disappointed when the DOJ failed for charge the Iranian owner, are still wondering whether politics played a role. The ability of Malta's money launderers to act with impunity, free from law enforcement action against what amounts to a racketeering enterprise masquerading as a sovereign state, continues to confound observers, as the US and UK pointedly ignore major criminal operations originating in Malta.

Anyway, a lot of it will come out, once again in the Maduro and Saab cases; all the cases of American law enforcement malpractice, regarding Malta, will be front and center once more. We wonder what the DOJ will say now.

MARKET VALUE OF VENEZUELAN GOVERNMENT JUNK BONDS INCREASES TO 40-50%, AFTER THE COUNTRY'S FINANCE MINISTER ANNOUNCES A "COMPREHENSIVE AND ORDERLY PROCESS" FOR RESTRUCTURING SOVEREIGN AND OIL COMPANY DEBT

Venezuelan government bonds, of which approximately USD$150bn are in default, are to be exchanged for new government obligations, according to an announcement made on May 13, by the country's Economics and Finance Ministry. On the basis of this positive official news, the market value of the bonds has reportedly soared to as high as 50% of face value, according to speculators known to be investing in those instruments. Previously, the market only supported 20-30% sales.

The ministry spokesman stated that holders of the bonds would most likely have to take an up to fifty per cent "haircut," or discount, when the replacement bonds are exchanged for the original instruments, which will have a 10-20 year maturity; more details are expected to be released later this month.

WHAT EFFECT WILL THE COLOMBIAN PRESIDENTIAL RACE RUNOFF HAVE ON ALEX SAAB MORAN'S COOPERATION WITH U.S. AUTHORITIES?

Attorney ABELARDO DE LA ESPRIELLA has received 43.9 % of the votes in the recent election, making him the probable next President of Colombia; The runoff election is scheduled for June 21. Of interest to observers of the pending Federal case against the accused money launderer, ALEX SAAB MORAN, is the fact that he was the lawyer for Saab for many years in Colombia.

Given that Saab is facing a very long prison sentence in his pending Miami case, with the strong possibility of a second indictment, there is a strong likelihood that he will wisely choose to render substantial assistance to US law enforcement, especially regarding his previous Caribbean money laundering and terrorist financing operations; the issue is just how far his cooperation will reach. That unknown is reportedly making several senior government officials in the Eastern Caribbean states very uneasy at the moment.

A complicating factor is a case against him pending in Colombia, since 2018. With De La Espriella's likely election, and given his longtime relationship with Saab, it is definitely possible that he could drop those charges, and accept Saab after his eventual release from an American prison, which would insulate him from the Caribbean leaders he testified against. It is also possible that Saab's arrangement with the DOJ could result in a short sentence, as a favor to Colombia's new President, who is a known supporter of the Trump Administration.

All of those could be very bad news for the individuals who facilitated Saab's money laundering in Antigua and Dominica, including those in both the public and private sectors. If something more favorable to Saab is the end result of his Federal criminal case, it will be interesting to see if it due to political, and not legal, factors.

LET'S LOOK AT ALEX SAAB MORAN'S LONG HISTORY OF COOPERATING WITH U.S. LAW ENFORCEMENT, WHEN ASKING WHETHER HE WILL GIVE UP HIS MONEY LAUNDERING RELATIONSHIPS IN ANTIGUA AND DOMINICA

Readers having doubts regarding whether ALEX SAAB MORAN is likely to give evidence against the leaders of Antigua and Dominica may want to understand what has gone on before. Individuals facing long terms in Federal Prison for money laundering often wisely choose to become what are known as Cooperating individuals, or CIs, with U.S. law enforcement agencies, to mitigate the length of their ultimate sentence. This cooperation is generally rendered very privately, for CIs correctly fear not only violent retaliation from those against whom they give incriminating evidence, they also are concerned about rumors of their cooperation affecting their ongoing businesses and assets. Therefore, they conceal it as best they can, although sometimes details subsequently slip out into the public domain, or are released during court proceedings,

Regarding the Colombian money launderer, who was a close associate of the now detained and indicted former Venezuelan President NICOLAS MADURO MOROS, filings in U.S. District Court unsealed during court proceedings tracked Saab's extensive history as a cooperator. During 2016, Saab is known to have participated in two debriefings with the DEA or FBI, during meetings conducted covertly in Bogota.

There were what have been described as continued discussions until 2018, when he executed a cooperating source agreement, making him an active, documented informant. He thereafter supplied both information and criminal profits totaling several million dollars, to the DEA in Europe, but later unilaterally terminated his cooperation early in 2019, and subsequently declined to voluntarily surrender to United States law enforcement, resulting in his formal termination as a CI, and indictment on money laundering charges later in 2019.

Given his history as a cooperator, and his present exposure to a twenty year sentence (he is 54 years old), it is reasonable to assume that he will resort to assisting American law enforcement in the investigation and indictment of individuals who he worked with, while laundering narcotics proceeds, and the proceeds of corruption, into and through Antigua and Dominica. The senior leaders of both of those Caribbean states, who facilitated his money laundering operations, are the logical targets of his cooperation.

WHAT IS THE PRIME MINISTER OF ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA DOING WITH ALL THESE SHELL COMPANIES??

According to a reliable Antiguan businessman, with inside information, Prime Minister GASTON BROWNE owns and controls all these shell companies. We would surely like to know how he can find the time to run the affairs of Antigua, the reason that he was elected to public office, whilst carrying all these corporations in his personal portfolio. Perhaps someone might like to ask him, during his next press conference.

1. A & B GLOBAL DEVELOPMENTS LTD.
2. A & B GLOBAL INVESTMENTS LTD.
3. SECURITY COMPANY LTD.
4. A & B COMMERCIAL CONSULTANCY LTD.
5. A & B INVESTMENTS DEVELOPMENT LTD.
6. GLOBAL DUTY FREE LTD.
7. CARIBBEAN ROYAL COMPANY LTD.
8. GLOBAL ENTERPRISE HOLDING LTD.
9. GLOBAL RESL ESTATE LTD.
10. GLOBAL ENERGY LTD.
11. CARIBBEAN CIGARETTE LTD.
12. CARIBBEAN TOBACCO LTD.
13. CARIBBEAN E CIGARETTE LTD.
14. A & B DEVELOPMENT FUND LTD.
15. A & B INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT GROUP LTD.
16.A & B INVESTMENT HOLDING LTD.

WILL A SAINT LUCIA MINISTER, FALSELY CHARGED WITH NARCOTICS TRAFFICKING BY PHILLIP J. PIERRE AND KENNY ANTHONY, WREAK HIS REVENGE UPON THE PRIME MINISTER AND THE CORRUPT SLP?

PM Phillip K. Pierre

Once upon a time, senior Saint Lucia Labour Party officials KENNY ANTHONY and PHILLIP J. PIERRE falsely accused a rival politician, the current SLC Minister Richard Frederick, of narcotics trafficking, resulting in the loss of Frederick's U.S. visa, by Secretary of State Hilary Clinton. Frederick's attorney at the time, now a prominent former attorney for Donald Trump, was appointed a Counselor to the Attorney General of the United States in April, which is an extremely powerful and influential position in the DOJ. We trust you understand the political implications regarding Minister Frederick; he may now want to extract payback for that backstabbing.

Kenny Anthony

We are hearing rumors that Frederick, who understandably wants his visa status restored, will be cooperating with the DOJ, regarding PJP, who is now the sitting Prime Minister of Saint Lucia, involving alleged money laundering and corruption, particularly as it pertains to China's role in the Citizenship by Investment (CIP) program, as well as corruption in the Saint Lucia Labour Party (SLP). We will be closely watching future developments in this matter, and report back to our readers on all developments. Meanwhile PM Pierre might want to consult with one of Miami's better criminal defense attorneys, in an overabundance of caution, lest he too receive a visit from U.S. Navy SEALS at home one night.

MONTREAL MANAGEMENT FAILS TO INCLUDE RANGE FROM ITS DISMISSAL OF THE CONTROVERSIAL SUIT AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF DOMINICA; ERROR OR DECEPTION?

We have been closely analyzing certain unusual aspects of the "Notice of Discontinuance," which amounts to a voluntary dismissal, without prejudice, in the MMCE action against the Government of Dominica, and others, alleging that Montreal Management owns and holds a monopoly on CBI projects in the Caribbean state. Our previous article disclosed that the Government was still a party to the pending action, and therefore not dismissed from the case, as the MMC Press Release appeared to intimate. Confusing? you bet it is.

We find that to be disingenuous, and misleading. See WE UNSCRAMBLE THE DISINFORMATION FROM MONTREAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING ITS DOMINICA LITIGATION
https://lnkd.in/ecniauPD
and THE REAL STORY BEHIND HOW MMCE TRIED TO OBTAIN A CBI MONOPOLY IN DOMINICA, AND THAT THE BATTLE IS NOT OVER
https://lnkd.in/eVZ9cNxt

Further analysis reveals something even more disturbing; the principal Range Dominica corporate entity, RANGE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS (DOMINICA) LIMITED, was NOT dismissed from the civil litigation, although one other Range entity (Range Marina Developments Ltd.) was dropped on May 22, 2026, in the Notice. 

We cannot attribute this to a scrivener's error, as attorneys always carefully draft such pleadings. What on earth is going on with this litigation? Some defendants are dismissed, yet others technically remain in the case. Who is seeking to fool whom here? More to follow.

WILL CUBA BE FORCED TO GIVE UP THE HUMAN TRAFFICKING OF PHYSICIANS AND MEDICAL STAFF TO THE CARIBBEAN?

As history appears to be repeating itself (cf. Gunboat Diplomacy, circa 1898), with an American armada of warships cruising in racetrack patterns just of the coast of Cuba, plus drones flitting continuously over its territory, we wonder aloud whether the Trump Administration will, as part of any negotiated arrangement with Cuba's autocratic leadership, force the country to terminate what is essentially a human trafficking operation in the Eastern Caribbean. The American position is that the onerous conditions surrounding the placement of Cuban doctors and media staff to the Eastern Caribbean states has been, and is, Human Trafficking, and that it must cease forthwith.

Given the reluctance of both Cuba and several of the Caribbean states that are recipients of these services, which the U.S. holds is little more than indentured servitude, bordering on legalized slavery, to cease this arrangement, America has taken a strong position. Will it be a major factor in any Trump deal with Cuba's leaders? We believe it will.

What the effect will be on the availability of medical care in the Eastern Caribbean states, whose own nationals who become doctors often end up abroad permanently, we cannot say, but they may have to make hard choices if they want adequate levels of care for their citizens.

Given that, at present, and due to in part to severe energy shortages, there is presently a backlog of 100,000 Cubans waiting for surgery, including 12,000 children. Perhaps the Cuban Government might consider recalling the all doctors that they have dispatched abroad, in exchange for hard currency, so that they can care for their needy patients at home. It's high time to repatriate them; take care of your own first.