Despite Withdrawal Of Money Laundering Probe Against Alex Saab By Swiss, Cape Verde Refuses To Comply With ECOWAS Ruling

The withdrawal of the money laundering probe against Venezuelan diplomat, Alex Saab by Switzerland has strengthened the position of ECOWAS Court that there was no red notice in place during the time of his arrest.

Meanwhile, Cape Verde authorities have continued to hold Venezuelan diplomat, Alex Saab in detention despite the withdrawal of a three-year long money laundering probe by Switzerland over lack of evidence.

Saab was arrested and detained by Cape Verde authorities on the request of the Donald Trump led United States government.

The Venezuelan diplomat was arrested during a stop over while on his way to Iran over allegations of money laundering, a move the Venezuelan government faulted with claims that the businessman is its special envoy on a humanitarian mission.

However, a spokesman for Geneva’s prosecutor announced on Thursday that it has shut a probe into Alex Saab over suspected money laundering via Swiss offshore accounts

According to the government Office tasked with evaluating suspicious funds, the investigation into Saab was sparked by several banks lodging reports with MROS.

Prosecutors said the now-shuttered Genevan investigation focused on a single vehicle tied to Saab noting that the evidence from this was insufficient to bring formal charges against him.

On March, 15, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) court ruled that the continued detention and push for extradition of Venezuelan diplomat, Alex Saab by the Cape Verde government is illegal.

The judgement of the ECOWAS court is based on the absence of a Red Notice when Saab was arrested in June last year.

However, Cape Verde authorities have refused to obey the order and a ruling by the Cape Verdean Supreme court
on Tuesday March 16 that Saab be extradited to the United States has strengthened this position.

In its ruling, the Cape Verdean Supreme Court explained that it refused to comply with earlier decisions of the ECOWAS court because “it considers
itself as not legally bound to the said protocol.”