MartineIl lawyers stymied in embezzlement case

PANAMA’S  Supreme Court of Justice has nixed  the latest move by lawyers for ex-president Rivardo Martinelli to block investigation   of his bank accounts during an embezzlement investigation.

A constutional appeal was presented by lawyer Luis Eduardo Camacho. t which sought to annul the decision of Judge Jerónimo Mejía, which allowed his colleague Oydén Ortega. serving as prosecutor  to investigate Matinelli’s bank accounts in an investigation, for the alleged commission of the offense of peculation in the purchase of dehydrated food through the former National Assistance Program (PAN).

In the research, Mejía acts as  judge of guarantees of the cause, and Ortega functions as prosecutor.

The ruling of October 31, with  Judge Abel Zamorano, as rapporteur warns that the appeal filed by Camacho González “is not directed at the violation of a constitutional right or guarantee,” and has no place because it is based on “the questioning of the value or interpretative activity performed by the court, “so it does not represent the violation of a constitutional right. “

The judgment also states that the reading of the appeal does not allow the conclusion that the magistrate of guarantees, in this case Jerónimo Mejía, has committed a violation of the constitutional text, At the same time, it maintains that, in this case, the constitutional  objection details a disagreement with the decision taken by the judge of guarantees [Mejía] during the hearing held on March 8, 2016, but using as an argument that does  not apply to these cases.

At that hearing, Mejia rejected a petition filed by Martinelli’s defense to declare void the process followed for Martinelli as a deputy of the Central American Parliament, for having requested bank information from him without the authorization of the judge of guarantees.

During the hearing Mejía rejected the arguments presented by Martinelli’s lawyers, warning that prosecutor Oydén Ortega may conduct certain proceedings without prior authorization  of the judge.

“The proceedings in question are not judicial proceedings, which is what Article 199 [of the Code of Criminal Procedure] says, which was used by the defense to make the appeal.

During the hearing, prosecutor Ortega explained that all the banks contacted provided the necessary information to his office in a timely manner.

He added that no inspection, or seizures were carried out, “in which case the prior control of the judge of guarantees would  have been  required”.