Internationally renowned Panamanian singer, songwriter and actor  Rubén Blades has come out with a strong denunciation of the trial and “not guilty” acquittal of ex-president Ricardo Martinelli, without once mentioning his name.

In his facebook piece “ The Aroma of the payoff? ”, Blades at all times refers to the“ ex ”.

He says that  “I cannot say that he was surprised by the recent ruling," but  what  surprised him " was the fact that he was accused and prosecuted “because in our country we are not accustomed to seeing silver, from the political world, or with social influences, in the dock"

He also said he did not expect a fair ruling, nor a happy ending" for decency"  for the country, and that so far, it seems that in Panama there is still no possibility of a ruling that is not vitiated, in some way.

“Within all the complex and gross stage in which the masterful work was developed, actions had already been raised that remind us of scenes taken from

a gangster movie,” he adds.

“ The dilation of the process, excuses, and invented diseases, absurd statements, circus acts, tantrums, tears, and noise. It should be noted that all this happened in Panama, not in Florida, a fact that reminded us of how different the dirty people behaved when they entered the Canal Zone when that colonial enclave still existed,” he said.

According to Blades, it is not unreasonable to say then that the problem of the judicial system in Panama was devised on purpose, and imposed through the anti-national powers and interests represented in centers of influence such as the National Assembly.

Example: why is it not prohibited to prescribe the crime against the national interest, including theft by public servants? There are not only omissions that look premeditated. Many laws have been created and endowed with the vagueness necessary to confuse arguments, or written in a language that allows all kinds of legal and/or legal interpretations that help evade criminal and/or civil liability, in the rare cases in which such anti - Panamanians are taken to a public trial.

Blades argued that what the “ ex ” case has done is simply to show, once again, the deterioration of the entire national justice system. "

Initial failures in the handling of some instances of the process, something that we do not even know if they were intentional or not, produced a legally entangled atmosphere that later neither the declaration of witnesses who participated in the alleged criminal acts, nor the impressive accumulation of circumstantial evidence they could dissipate, "he warned.

In his view, it was of no use that the accused himself admitted publicly to possess " dossiers " of all in Panama. Nor that a US diplomat received his bold request for help in spying on his political enemies, a request revealed through the “ Wikileaks ” platform. And the fact that a foreign government had objectively studied the objectives was not influenced by the ruling evidence presented to request the extradition of the ex, finding them sufficiently substantiated to grant such a request, with the same arguments. There yes, but here, no.