As the Odebrecht trial in Panama enters its final stage, the defense teams of former ministers Demetrio “Jimmy” Papadimitriu and Frank De Lima have requested that their clients be acquitted, while challenging the evidence presented by the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office. Both former officials served in the administration of Ricardo Martinelli between 2009 and 2014.
During closing arguments on February 26, attorney Arturo Sauri, who represents Papadimitriu, argued that prosecutors failed to prove his client’s involvement in money laundering. According to the defense, Papadimitriu did not participate in business or contractual operations with Odebrecht while serving as Minister of the Presidency from 2009 to 2012.
The defense detailed that the corporate entities connected to Odebrecht were directed by the former minister’s late parents, Diamantis Papadimitriu alongside María Bagatelas de Papadimitriu. Sauri indicated that these businesses participated in the lawful trade of sand. Furthermore, he dismissed the assertion that Papadimitriu held executive control concerning Line 1 of the Panama Metro, maintaining that accountability belonged to the Metro Secretariat.
The attorney also maintained that Papadimitriu had previously been investigated for facts that, according to the defense, overlap with those examined in the Odebrecht case. The request based on protection against double prosecution is connected to an investigation launched in 2015 into alleged unjustified enrichment, which ultimately resulted in a final dismissal. However, the Supreme Court had previously rejected an appeal based on similar arguments and determined that the former minister should stand trial before Judge Baloisa Marquínez.
Regarding Frank De Lima, his legal counsel, Antonio Quan, additionally petitioned for an acquittal, contending that zero tangible proof exists to demonstrate that his defendant obtained unlawful money. The defense specifically questioned the testimonies provided by José Luis Saiz Villanueva and Olmedo Méndez Tribaldos, both of whom stated to prosecutors that they had purportedly functioned as straw men for the ex-minister.
Prosecutors allege that De Lima used the companies Herzone Overseas Limited, Ralfim Limited, and Inversiones Joluma to introduce illicit funds from Andorra into Panama. André Rabello, Odebrecht’s former representative in Panama, also testified that he had an agreement with De Lima and Saiz concerning payments linked to projects awarded to the Brazilian construction company.
According to evidence presented during the trial, Saiz reached an agreement with prosecutors and admitted to receiving bribes that were allegedly intended for De Lima. Méndez, meanwhile, made allegations against the former minister and acknowledged that he had signed blank documents based on the trust he placed in him.
De Lima’s defense argued that the remarks made by the two individuals fail to establish that the funds were genuinely handed over to the former minister. Furthermore, Quan pointed out that Saiz appears as the ultimate beneficiary of the money routed by Odebrecht to Herzone, as opposed to De Lima. He also raised questions regarding the decision to summon Méndez to the proceedings as a witness, noting that the latter ultimately neglected to show up and give testimony.
The trial forms part of the wider legal proceeding concerning bribes that Odebrecht admitted to handing out in Panama to politicians, state officers, and straw men to secure public works contracts. The arguments put forward by the defense lawyers embody the claims of the defendants and are to be evaluated by the tribunal together with the proof introduced throughout the hearings.
Source: La Prensa Panamá — https://www.prensa.com/judiciales/papadimitriu-culpa-a-sus-padres-y-de-lima-niega-vinculos-con-testaferros-en-juicio-odebrecht/
