Complications in the Odebrecht Case in Panama

The jurist Guillermina McDonald agreed with Carrillo that the hearing has been 'very complicated' due to the prosecutor's office, as it has not met the expectations it created in the public before starting on January 12. In addition, the prosecutor's office has been unable to locate its witnesses to sustain the accusation despite the existence of prior collaboration agreements, and those who testified demonstrated with their statements that there is no documentary or probatory basis to corroborate the alleged crime. The hearing in the Odebrecht case, according to the accusing party, reveals a supposed harm to the State; however, a few days before the start of the final arguments phase, its witnesses have generated more questions than answers, delegating the responsibility to the Tribunal, which, in the opinion of lawyer Carlos Carrillo, should not value the statements of people who were not cross-examined and lack legal basis because it would be 'shameful' in a case of international transcendence to try to convict any of the alleged defendants by taking these testimonies into consideration. He indicated that the lack of contradiction will represent a problem for Judge Baloisa Marquínez because she should not give procedural value to these testimonies, especially after once deciding to reschedule the hearing considering this right to be inviolable; however, he hopes that her balance, facing the final phase of the trial, remains neutral. According to McDonald, the Public Ministry must set a precedent, reinforcing sanctions against those who accept to be collaborators of the prosecutor's office and fail to comply with what was agreed, affecting the development of the hearing. For this Friday, it is planned to continue with the appearance of expert Manuel Erasmo Moreno, who could not finish his presentation yesterday, Thursday. She pointed out that the case itself is an irregularity because while in Panama a trial is being invoked, in Brazil, the country of origin of the Norberto Odebrecht construction company, the case was declared null and most of the evidence dismissed; however, locally it is insisted that they be valid. The Supreme Court of Justice must reflect and guarantee any person, be it Ricardo Martinelli or whoever, that they can have a defense and debate in a public hearing before preconstituted courts, she stressed. She reiterated that her client, former President Ricardo Martinelli, wants to be involved in the case for having accepted the company's donations; however, there was no suspicion or commercial questioning about the company itself, but what most calls her attention and should concern the population is that an attempt is made to judge a person without having the right to due defense, as is happening with the elimination of cross-examination. The defense will also call Edulo Castillo Him and Tatiana Chérigo to the stand to continue with the presentation of evidence. 'If they present witnesses and are not allowed to examine them, that cannot be used in a sentence, let alone a conviction (…).'