Bribery and Corruption in Panama: Acquittal of 28 Defendants Raises Questions About Anti-Corruption Efforts
The recent acquittal of 28 defendants facing money laundering charges related to the Panama Papers scandal has sparked concerns about the effectiveness of anti-corruption efforts in Panama. The country’s new president, José Raúl Mulino, welcomed the verdict, calling the original journalistic investigation a “hoax” aimed at undermining Panama’s image and competitiveness.
A Blunder by Prosecutors?
However, legal experts argue that the acquittal raises questions about the progress of anti-corruption efforts in Panama and beyond. The case was centered around the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca, which was accused of creating shell companies to facilitate money laundering and cover up embezzlement and misappropriation.
- According to Carlos Barsallo, a Panamanian attorney and former president of Transparency International’s Panama chapter, the decision reflected a blunder by prosecutors. “From a global perspective, it shows the difficulty of these cases and the necessity for the prosecution to have more resources - not just economic, but also human resources and technical know-how,” he said.
The Significance of the Case
The case was significant because it sought to hold dozens of defendants, including the founders of Mossack Fonseca and other former employees, accountable for their alleged roles in creating shell companies linked to money laundering and corruption scandals in Germany and Brazil. The trial began nearly eight years after the first revelations from the Panama Papers were published in 2016.
Not a Referendum on the Panama Papers
Despite the acquittal, legal experts argue that the case is not a referendum on the Panama Papers as a whole nor on Mossack Fonseca. “This case is really about two cases that originate in Germany and in Argentina,” said Barsallo. “This case is about two cases, where it was alleged that the firm helped those who committed crimes in those two countries to launder the money involved in those crimes.”
Questions About Panama’s Judicial System
The acquittal has also raised questions about the role of Panama’s judicial system in addressing corruption. U.S. federal judge Mark Wolf, who chairs the advocacy group Integrity Initiatives International, said the case reinforces the argument for the establishment of an international anti-corruption court. “Based on what I’ve read in media reports, there is reason to be concerned that Panama is not able to prosecute major corruption cases properly,” he said.
The Need for Greater Resources and Expertise
The case may still go to a tribunal, and judges at each point in the process may overturn the acquittal. However, for now, the acquittal has sparked concerns about the effectiveness of anti-corruption efforts in Panama and the need for greater resources and technical expertise to prosecute complex cases like this one.
In conclusion, while the acquittal of 28 defendants may be a setback for anti-corruption efforts, it is not a reason to give up on the fight against corruption. Instead, it highlights the need for greater resources and expertise to effectively prosecute these types of cases.