Controversial judges decisions in the spotlight

THE DECISION to release Ignacio Fabrega, former director of supervision of the Superintendency of Securities from preventative detenion in March during investigation of the Financial Pacific scandal allowing him to become a fugitive of justice until two days ago, has once again put the spotlight on the controversial verdicts of First Criminal Court judge Rolando Quesada Vallespi.
That decision, was reversed by the Second Court, and the Supreme Court ordered a judicial audit of his office.
It was the same judge, who on June 3, 2013 ordered the discontinuance of the investigation into the alleged payment of bribes for the construction of modular prisons in Panama, linking [now jailed] Italian Valter Lavítola and Francisco Frankie Martinelli, cousin of then president Ricardo Martinelli.
In his rulings, politicians, businessmen and officials almost always got favorable decisions says La Prensa.

In 2009 he surprised with a shock decision: alleging lack of evidence, and closed a case against Jean Figali’s International F. Group, alleging crimes against the environment as a result of landfill in Amador. “There is no evidence to show that the F. Group breached the environmental impact study,” he said.
Vallespi Quesada, 75, has worked in the judiciary for 25 years. He graduated with a degree in law and political science at the University of Panama in 1964. He grew up in El Chorrillo, and some of his fellow students remember him as “intelligent and serious,” says La Prensa.
In 2006 he was dismissed by the Supreme Court as deputy judge of the Second Court for having backed a ruling of December 15, 2004, which declared the invalidity of the anti-drug operations “Buenaventura” and ” Estero “.
In 2004 he jumped to the front pages,when  the then anti-corruption prosecutor, Daniel Batista, accused him of “stretching the law” to declare invalid the file on an investigation against the former manager of the Savings Bank,  Carlos Raul Piad, a member of the inner circle of former president Mireya Moscoso..
Quesada argued that he had immunity as general secretary of [the ruling] Arnulfista party (now Panameñista).
“I know he is very well protected because he has served so long in the judiciary , but the  truth is that I don’t have high regard for the criminal judges. I consider them “criminal”” judges, because it is impossible that they will not be,  in the middle of so much corruption, “said lawyer Miguel Antonio  Bernal.