Panamanian justice opens criminal case against former president Ricardo Martinelli

For the alleged commission of a crime against the economic order in the form of money laundering in the so-called “New Business” case, the third judge liquidating criminal cases of the First Judicial Circuit of Panama, Baloísa Marquínez M., decreed open a criminal case against the former president of Panama, Ricardo Martinelli Berrocal.

The facts of this case, according to the Judicial Branch, date from March 6, 2017, when the Prosecutor’s Office was able to identify that the purchase of the shares of Editora Panamá América, a public limited company dedicated to the publication of different newspapers with national circulation, was executed through a complex scheme in which legal and natural persons intervened, which carried out financial stratification maneuvers, through multiple national and international transactions, managing to collect between December 15 and 27, 2010, the sum of US$43,912,828.94 in an account bank belonging to the company New Business Services Limited, in an offshore bank.

Last Friday it was learned that by means of trial appeal No.23 of December 9, the main hearing date was set from April 17 to 28, 2023, and as an alternate date from May 23 to June 5, 2023, appointing a defender from the Public Defense Institute, in case the defense of former president Martinelli Berrocal does not attend.

A press release from the judicial entity indicates that after conducting the summary examination, Judge Baloisa Marquínez indicated that the procedural records incorporated established the existence of precedent crimes that prove that the investigated funds had an illegal origin.

The court, according to official information, established the connection of Martinelli Berrocal with the crime of money laundering, therefore, it decrees the opening of a criminal case as an alleged infringer of the legal provisions contained in Title VII, Chapter IV, Book II, that is, for the crime of money laundering.

Likewise, it decided to deny an incident of annulment for violation of the electoral criminal jurisdiction, which had been presented by the private technical defense, and established the common period of 5 days for the parties to adduce the evidence they deem appropriate.

With information from Bloomberg Línea