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.
In Frank De Lima’s case, his attorney, Antonio Quan, also requested an acquittal, arguing that there is no concrete evidence showing that his client received illicit funds. The defense particularly challenged the statements made by José Luis Saiz Villanueva and Olmedo Méndez Tribaldos, who told prosecutors that they had allegedly acted as front men for the former minister.
Prosecutors claim that De Lima funneled unlawful capital from Andorra into Panama utilizing Herzone Overseas Limited, Ralfim Limited, and Inversiones Joluma. Moreover, André Rabello, who formerly represented Odebrecht in Panama, stated under oath that he had reached an arrangement with both De Lima and Saiz regarding financial disbursements connected to contracts granted to the Brazilian engineering firm.
Based on evidence shown during the court proceedings, Saiz reached a deal with prosecutors and confessed to taking bribes that were supposedly meant for De Lima. Méndez, on the other hand, leveled accusations against the former minister and admitted that he signed blank documents relying entirely on the trust he had 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 is part of the broader case involving bribes that Odebrecht acknowledged paying in Panama to politicians, government officials, and front men in order to secure public contracts. The positions presented by the defense teams represent the arguments of the accused and must be assessed by the court alongside the evidence submitted during the proceedings.
Source: La Prensa Panamá — https://www.prensa.com/judiciales/papadimitriu-culpa-a-sus-padres-y-de-lima-niega-vinculos-con-testaferros-en-juicio-odebrecht/
