VENEZUELA CRISIS | SUPREME COURT DECLARES DELCY RODRÍGUEZ AS INTERIM PRESIDENT AMID MADURO’S DETENTION — LEGAL & CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS

The political crisis in Venezuela intensified after the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Chamber ordered that Vice President Delcy Rodríguez assume the role of Acting President following the detention of President Nicolás Maduro during a US-led military operation in Caracas. The Court framed this intervention as necessary to ensure “administrative continuity, state sovereignty and national defense.”

This development raises significant constitutional, geopolitical, and governance questions — particularly regarding succession of executive authority, legality of forced absence, and legitimacy of interim power transfer.

---

BACKGROUND OF THE CRISIS

According to court summaries and media reporting:

• Nicolás Maduro was detained during a US forces operation in Caracas
• The Venezuelan Supreme Court invoked emergency continuity provisions
• The Court declared that Delcy Rodríguez would act as interim head of state
• It announced further deliberations on the legal governing framework
• Rodríguez has demanded proof of life for Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores
• The US administration has asserted conflicting claims about interim control

The ruling emphasized that Rodríguez’s appointment was aimed at safeguarding the continuity of governance structures and avoiding an institutional power vacuum.

---

PROFILE OF DELCY RODRÍGUEZ — POLITICAL BACKGROUND

Delcy Eloína Rodríguez Gómez
Born: May 18, 1969 | Caracas, Venezuela

Daughter of left-wing political figure Jorge Antonio Rodríguez, founder of Liga Socialista.

Career Highlights

• Minister of Communication & Information (2013–2014)
• Foreign Minister of Venezuela (2014–2017)
• President of the pro-government Constituent Assembly (2017)
• Appointed Vice President in June 2018
• Placed in charge of oil and economic policy (2024)
• Key negotiator on sanctions, economy and state revenue frameworks

She works closely with her brother Jorge Rodríguez, President of the National Assembly — making the Rodríguez family highly influential within Venezuelan state power structures.

---

LEGAL BASIS FOR INTERIM PRESIDENCY — CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

The Venezuelan Constitution contains provisions governing presidential absence, incapacity, and succession.

Relevant provisions typically cited in such circumstances include:

Article 233 — Absolute Absence of the President

Covers circumstances such as:

• death
• resignation
• removal by Supreme Court judgment
• permanent physical or mental incapacity
• abandonment of position
• recall referendum outcome

In such cases, interim succession normally passes to:

• the President of the National Assembly (in some contexts), or
• the Executive Vice President, depending on timing and context

Article 234 — Temporary Presidential Absence

Permits delegation of executive authority to the Vice President
for temporary or involuntary absence.

This appears closest to the legal framing adopted by the Supreme Court — especially given its emphasis on “forced absence.”

Article 335 — Authority of the Constitutional Chamber

Grants the Constitutional Chamber power to:

• interpret constitutional provisions
• issue binding rulings in constitutional emergencies
• safeguard continuity of state institutions

The Court’s decision therefore functions as:

• a constitutional interpretation
• a stabilizing power intervention
• a judicially enforced transfer of executive functions

pending further determination of legal conditions.

---

STATUTES AND LEGAL DOCTRINES POTENTIALLY ENGAGED

The Court’s order may be grounded in:

• Venezuelan Constitutional Law of State Emergency & Continuity
• Internal Security & Sovereignty Protection Statutes
• Constitutional jurisprudence on “institutional continuity”
• Precedents regarding temporary presidential succession

The doctrine of State Continuity and National Defense is particularly relevant — allowing constitutional bodies to prevent institutional collapse in moments of crisis or external intervention.

---

RELEVANT JUDICIAL & POLITICAL PRECEDENTS

Comparable precedents in Venezuela include:

• Constitutional Chamber decisions during 2017 Constituent Assembly conflict
• Prior rulings affirming presidential mandate continuity
• Crisis-era jurisprudence amid sanctions and governance disputes

Internationally comparable precedents:

• transitional executive delegation cases in Latin American constitutional courts
• emergency constitutional activation during forced absence of leaders
• judicial validation of interim power transfers to avoid power vacuums

The Court appears to be reinforcing institutional legitimacy through judicial ratification of succession — rather than allowing extra-constitutional power transfer.

---

CONFLICTING CLAIMS OF AUTHORITY — US vs VENEZUELAN POSITION

Delcy Rodríguez maintains that:

• Maduro remains the legitimate elected president
• His detention constitutes illegal forced deprivation of liberty
• The interim order is solely for continuity and administration
• The executive government remains sovereign

Meanwhile:

• US President Donald Trump claimed Rodríguez had been “sworn in”
• He suggested the US would exercise temporary governing authority
• US officials indicated elections are “premature”
• Policy framing suggests a stabilization-control transition model

This creates competing narratives:

• constitutional succession vs. external intervention
• interim administration vs. regime transition control
• sovereignty defense vs. security operation justification

---

STRATEGIC & DIPLOMATIC IMPLICATIONS

Key implications include:

• judicial assertion of sovereignty
• political consolidation of internal executive structures
• legal challenge to international force intervention narrative
• heightened geopolitical stakes in the region

The reference to a potential “second strike” and speculation about Colombia intensifies regional security sensitivities.

The Supreme Court ruling signals:

• no recognition of external authority over internal governance
• prioritization of continuity of state institutions
• judicial insulation of state leadership framework

Pending legal deliberations may further clarify:

• whether Rodríguez remains temporary custodian
• whether executive emergency powers will expand
• whether an institutional succession or reinstatement follows

---

CONCLUSION — A JUDICIALLY CONSTRUCTED CONTINUITY REGIME

The Venezuelan Supreme Court decision marks:

• a constitutional intervention to stabilize executive authority
• a judicially structured interim succession mechanism
• a firm sovereignty-anchored legal response to external disruption

In constitutional terms, the Court has treated Maduro’s detention as:

• a case of temporary forced absence, not vacancy

and therefore invoked continuity provisions rather than succession transfer.

The evolving deliberations will determine whether this remains:

• a transitional emergency power assignment, or
• the legal basis for a longer-term interim governance regime.