The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has described the reported arrest of Venezuela’s President, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife by the United States government as a stark lesson for governments that emerge from illegitimate electoral processes, warning that contrived mandates no longer enjoy safe haven in the international system.
In a statement issued on Monday and signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, the ADC said the development should serve as a cautionary signal to Nigeria and other countries where democracy is undermined by electoral fraud and repression.
“The action taken against the Maduro regime sends a strong and unmistakable message to governments that lack legitimacy,” Abdullahi said. “While the ADC firmly supports the sanctity of national sovereignty and the principle of non-interference as enshrined in Articles 2(1) and 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, these principles must never be twisted into a shield for tyranny, electoral fraud, or the systematic denial of the people’s right to freely choose their leaders.”
The party noted that the 2024 Venezuelan presidential election was widely condemned by governments across Latin America, the European Union, and international democratic institutions, citing allegations of fraud, repression, and exclusion.
“It is public knowledge that political opponents were barred from contesting, peaceful protests were violently suppressed, and state institutions were weaponised against the very citizens they exist to serve,” Abdullahi stated. “The result has been mass migration on a scale that threatens regional stability.”
According to the ADC, although the U.S. intervention raises serious questions under international law, the popular reaction within Venezuela reveals a deeper legitimacy crisis.
“When citizens pour into the streets in celebration, it exposes more than approval of an intervention; it lays bare the moral and political bankruptcy of the regime that has been upended,” the statement said.
The opposition party also criticised the Nigerian government for failing to respond to the situation more than 48 hours after the development, describing the silence of the APC-led administration of President Bola Tinubu as damaging and telling.
“It is deeply embarrassing that Nigeria has remained silent,” Abdullahi said. “This silence further confirms that Nigeria, under President Tinubu, has lost both its voice and standing on the international stage. At a time when the world is grappling with the balance between sovereignty, democracy, and accountability, Africa’s most populous nation is conspicuously absent.”
The ADC argued that the silence has nothing to do with neutrality but reflects a deeper moral crisis.
“Let us be clear: this silence does not signify neutrality; it reveals a government that lacks confidence because it lacks integrity,” Abdullahi added.
Reaffirming the party’s ideological position, the ADC stressed that sovereignty must ultimately derive from the will of the people, not merely the survival of a regime.
“Democracy must mean more than ballots and electoralism,” the statement said. “It must translate into freedom, fairness, and a better life for citizens—in Nigeria, in Venezuela, and across the world.”
The party concluded that the Venezuela situation should serve as a warning to dictators and election riggers everywhere.
“The world is watching,” Abdullahi declared. “Contrived mandates will no longer find a place to hide.”
Venezuela is not merely a Latin American story; it is a warning flare—and Nigeria must read it carefully. History shows that global power rarely moves without rehearsal: first come labels like failed state, human rights concerns, religious persecution, and security risk; then sanctions, diplomatic pressure, and economic strangulation, until internal weakness becomes the excuse for external arbitration. Nigeria already sits uncomfortably within this narrative—battling terrorism, religious fault lines, contested elections, institutional fragility, and deepening poverty—conditions that have previously invited “international concern” in other nations before sovereignty was quietly negotiated away. Libya thought it was a humanitarian intervention; today it is a cautionary tale. Iraq heard the language of security; history recorded the cost. The danger is not invasion alone but internal decay that licenses foreign moral authority. When governance fails, unity fractures, and justice collapses, sovereignty becomes conditional. Venezuela is not the end of the story—it is the mirror. And Nigeria must decide whether to fix itself or be “fixed” by others.