Venezuela’s National Assembly President reaffirmed sovereign control over the country’s oil revenues and reported 71 active energy agreements alongside 44 contracts under negotiation, framing the figures as evidence of a sector revival after years of financial restrictions.

---

The statements came amid what officials called a strategic reconfiguration of the Venezuelan hydrocarbon industry. After years of intense global financial restrictions, the gradual operational reactivation of agreements between state-owned oil company Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) and international firms aims to restore a steady flow of foreign currency into the national treasury.

“No foreign agency or international financial entity administers or safeguards the public funds that enter the country from hydrocarbon sales,” National Assembly President Jorge Rodriguez said.

RELATED: Venezuela’s Acting President Reviews Wage Consensus With Business, Unions

Rodríguez detailed that the money enters the public treasury under the supervision of authorized national banks, and he ruled out any external trust or any management of accounts by third parties outside the country’s institutions. In this sense, he called autonomy over foreign currency “a non-negotiable principle” for the country’s macroeconomic stability.

71 agreements are currently in force, while another 44 contracts are being negotiated. For the government, that volume confirms an operational momentum geared toward diversifying investment across the country’s main extraction fields.

The National Assembly President presented this dynamism as the result of a deliberate push to reopen the sector to international capital without surrendering control. Over the past several years, sweeping financial measures limited Venezuela’s ability to sell crude, collect payments and maintain production infrastructure. The current wave of deals represents a step-by-step return to commercial activity.

#EnVideo📹 | Coordinador del diálogo por el Gobierno Nacional, Jorge Rodríguez, aseveró que Venezuela mantiene el control sobre los recursos financieros obtenidos a través de la comercialización de petróleo hacia distintos países del mundo. pic.twitter.com/MUoEuwKXQI

— Ministerio de Comunicación e Información (@mippci_ven) October 22, 2026

Text reads: “Coordinator of the dialogue by the National Government, Jorge Rodríguez, asserted that Venezuela retains control over financial resources obtained through the marketing of oil to different countries in the world.”

Each reactivated agreement carries a single objective, officials indicated, the capture of hard currency for the public coffers. That revenue is meant to fund the productive apparatus and national infrastructure rather than remain subject to outside oversight.

By spreading investment across the country’s principal extraction zones, the government seeks to reduce dependence on any single field or partner.

Sovereign Control Defended

Reaffirming sovereign control over monetary flows stands as a central pillar of the government’s message. The leadership projected institutional stability at a moment when Washington continues to review and adjust the licenses it grants for oil operations.

Rodríguez also denounced continuous pressure and unilateral coercive measures against the country’s financial system by foreign powers. He said that, despite what he described as an economic siege, the government has consolidated alternative mechanisms to receive payments directly for oil-product exports.

Against that backdrop, the government is working to shield energy agreements legally, dismiss any suggestion of foreign tutelage and guarantee direct financing for public budgets.

Official strategy insists that autonomous management of oil income is an indispensable guarantee for preserving fiscal balance, defending the national currency and sustaining social development programs.

For the Bolivarian government, legal protection of the energy agreements goes hand in hand with financing priorities. The revenue is meant to flow directly toward the productive apparatus and public infrastructure, a framework that Rodriguez described as essential to institutional stability.

The European Parliament has awarded the 2026 Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and its officials, recognising the Hague-based tribunal’s work in investigating and prosecuting war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.

Announcing the decision in Strasbourg on Thursday, 22 October, European Parliament President Roberta Metsola said the award reflected the European Union’s commitment to multilateralism and international institutions.

Metsola praised the Court for its work in upholding international law and justice. The announcement was met with a standing ovation in the parliamentary chamber.

The decision comes amid an escalating confrontation between the European Union and the administration of US President Donald Trump over the ICC’s jurisdiction and independence.

Washington’s sanctions against the Court

On 9 October, the United States imposed sanctions on the ICC as an institution, extending measures previously directed against individual judges and prosecutors.

The restrictions place the Court under the US Treasury’s sanctions regime, limiting financial transactions involving American individuals, businesses and institutions. Washington has issued several temporary and limited exemptions intended to allow specified operations to continue.

The measures followed earlier sanctions against senior ICC officials, including Court President Tomoko Akane, and form part of Washington’s campaign to prevent the tribunal from exercising jurisdiction over American personnel.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has argued that the ICC threatens American sovereignty by asserting authority over nationals of countries that have not accepted its founding treaty.

The Court rejected the latest restrictions, describing them as an attempt to obstruct the administration of international justice.

Established under the Rome Statute, the ICC operates independently of national governments and investigates serious international crimes where its jurisdictional requirements are satisfied.

Neither the United States nor Israel is a party to the Rome Statute.

Arrest warrants involving Russia and Israel

The dispute with Washington has intensified since the ICC issued arrest warrants in November 2024 for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity connected with military operations in Gaza.

Israel rejects the Court’s jurisdiction and disputes the allegations. Washington has similarly opposed the proceedings against Israeli officials.

The ICC has also pursued investigations into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In March 2023, its judges issued arrest warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova, Russia’s commissioner for children’s rights, over the alleged unlawful deportation and transfer of Ukrainian children.

Further warrants followed in 2024 against senior Russian military commanders and officials in connection with attacks on Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure.

The proceedings demonstrate the geographical scope of the Court’s investigations, although its ability to secure arrests depends heavily on cooperation from individual states.

The ICC has no independent police force and relies on national authorities to execute its warrants.

European Parliament backs international justice

The ICC’s nomination for the Sakharov Prize was submitted by the Socialists and Democrats group in the European Parliament.

Its selection comes as European lawmakers examine how the EU should respond to American sanctions affecting the Court and organisations supporting its activities.

The October restrictions have raised practical questions about access to banking, technology services and other infrastructure required by the tribunal.

European governments must also consider how to support an institution established through an international treaty while maintaining relations with Washington.

The Sakharov Prize carries no legal authority to reverse American sanctions or compel governments to cooperate with ICC investigations. Nevertheless, the award represents an explicit institutional endorsement of the tribunal at a time when its operations face increasing external pressure.

Other nominees and award ceremony

The ICC was selected from three finalists announced earlier this month.

The other nominees were Tanzanian opposition leader Tundu Lissu and Iranian sisters Taraneh and Romina Rahimi, whose cases have attracted international attention over political persecution and judicial proceedings.

The Sakharov Prize, established by the European Parliament in 1988, is named after Soviet physicist, dissident and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Andrei Sakharov.

It recognises individuals and organisations defending human rights, freedom of expression and fundamental liberties. The award includes €50,000.

Previous recipients include Nelson Mandela, Malala Yousafzai and imprisoned journalists.

In 2025, the prize was awarded jointly to Belarusian journalist Andrzej Poczobut and Georgian journalist Mzia Amaglobeli.

The formal presentation of the 2026 prize is scheduled for 16 December at the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

The award places the ICC alongside previous Sakharov laureates while drawing further attention to the unresolved dispute between Washington and European governments over international criminal jurisdiction.

An explosion hit the 75th Arsenal, a Russian army plant in Serpukhov south of Moscow, overnight on 22 October, Russian Telegram channel Astra reported. Russian officials also claimed drone attacks on the Moscow region, Tula, and Lipetsk that night.

As Russia presses its full-scale invasion, Ukraine’s long-range drones and missiles keep hitting military plants and refineries deep inside Russia. Ukrainian outlet Militarnyi says this plant specializes in repairing Buk and S-300 air defense systems. Astra describes it more broadly, as making weapons and ammunition and repairing military equipment. If Militarnyi is right, the blast hit a site that fixes Russian air defenses. It came the night Moscow’s mayor credited air defenses with stopping hundreds of drones.

Blast at the arsenal

An Astra OSINT analyst placed the explosion inside the site from a video, the channel said. Residents claimed in local chats that blasts followed passing drones, then at least three missiles. Astra did not confirm the missile count. Serpukhov lies about 99 km south of Moscow. Ukraine has sanctioned the plant, and the US Treasury has listed it too. As of the morning of 22 October, no Russian official had confirmed the blast.

More footage of the attack on the arsenal in Serpukhov. We are awaiting satellite images. pic.twitter.com/tTsgc18W3L

— Exilenova+ (@Exilenova_plus) October 22, 2026

630 drones, by Moscow’s count

Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin claimed that 630 drones flew toward the Moscow region from 20:30 on 21 October to 04:00 on 22 October. He claimed most were destroyed far out and 163 were neutralized on approach to Moscow. Two people were injured in Voronovo, in New Moscow, he stated.

Tula Oblast Governor Dmitry Milyaev claimed air defenses downed 70 Ukrainian drones over his region. Private homes were damaged in Tula and the Zaoksky district, he stated.

Lipetsk governor claims homes and a clinic damaged

Earlier in the night, Ukrainian monitoring channel Exilenova+ posted footage of commotion in Lipetsk after explosions. Lipetsk Oblast Governor Igor Artamonov claimed a drone strike damaged homes, apartment blocks, and a closed polyclinic. A man born in 2001 was injured and hospitalized, Artamonov claimed.

Lipetsk, moment of the explosion. https://t.co/wCX6GVThQr pic.twitter.com/bGwGLbUm2d

— Exilenova+ (@Exilenova_plus) October 21, 2026

In May, Ukrainian intelligence said Russia was deploying more regiments against strike drones. In September, Ukrainian units hit more Russian air defense systems and radars than in any month since 2024, Ukraine’s Defense Ministry said. Analyst Oleksandr Kovalenko counted 76 destroyed in September with days of the month still to go and argued Russia cannot replace such losses. If Militarnyi’s description holds, losing repair capacity would deepen that gap.