The defense of Ricardo Martinelli challenged the legality of the Odebrecht case in Panama. Attorney Carlos Carrillo alleged violations of the principle of the natural judge, the principle of specialty, and the right to a fair trial. He argued that the ad hoc court appointed for this case contradicts international standards. Carrillo also contested evidence obtained from Brazil, invoking the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine, asserting it was unlawfully obtained. The defense stated that during part of the investigation, Martinelli held immunity as a deputy of the Central American Parliament (Parlacén), and some procedural steps were taken without respecting this status. Furthermore, the attorney claimed the prosecution failed to present expert reports on money laundering, citing an audit report certifying that funds were used for campaign donations. Ultimately, the defense requested the exclusion of Brazilian evidence, the annulment of the proceedings, and Martinelli's acquittal, as his guilt has not been proven.
