A Panama court has overturned the prison sentence for Mario Martinelli in a major corruption case. The ruling also declared a significant portion of the investigation against him legally null and void.
The Superior Tribunal for the Settlement of Criminal Cases issued its decision on Monday, December 22. The court revoked a 40-month prison sentence Martinelli had agreed to with prosecutors and invalidated investigative actions taken after February 27, 2015.
Court Finds Fundamental Legal Violations
The three-judge panel ruled that the prosecution’s case was built on flawed foundations. Magistrates José Hoo Justiniani, Eyda Amarilis Juárez, and Dida Esther Ruiz found that the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office violated key procedural guarantees.
Their decision modified an earlier ruling from Judge Águeda Rentería. While she had nullified part of the investigation, she upheld the plea agreement. The tribunal superior went further, throwing out the entire deal.
“The plea agreement signed with the Prosecutor’s Office is declared null,” the court stated in its ruling. It determined the agreement “was based on procedural pieces that were declared null for infringing fundamental guarantees.” [Translated from Spanish]
Martinelli’s plea deal had included a requirement to repay $3.2 million to the state. That restitution order is now vacated alongside his prison term.
Prosecution Missed Critical Legal Deadline
Central to the court’s decision was the prosecution’s failure to adhere to statutory time limits. The judges focused on Article 2033 of Panama’s Judicial Code.
That article mandates investigations must be completed within four months of initiation. Courts may grant a single two-month extension for complex cases involving multiple defendants. Prosecutors must request judicial authorization for that extension.
This investigation into the National Aid Program (PAN) grain purchases began on February 27, 2015. The court found prosecutors continued ordering inquiries and conducting procedures after that date without ever seeking the required extension from the overseeing judge.
“We do not understand the actions of the Public Ministry in omitting legal procedures,” the magistrates wrote. “They are aware that the law must be strictly followed. These omissions are what force judges to annul the proceedings.” [Translated from Spanish]
The ruling creates a significant precedent for how Panama’s Public Ministry (Prosecutor’s Office) must manage complex corruption investigations. Legal experts note the strict application of procedural deadlines can sometimes clash with the practical challenges of uncovering financial crimes.
Case History and Unclear Next Steps
This case, commonly known as the “grain case,” involved allegations of Peculation related to food aid purchases. Judge Rentería had previously nullified parts of the investigation starting from page 8,598 of the case file in March 2025 while keeping Martinelli’s sentence intact.
The recent appellate ruling completely unravels that outcome. During the trial earlier last year, prosecutors had sought convictions for 25 defendants and acquittals for 19 others. The status of those other defendants may now be in question following this decision.
It remains unclear whether prosecutors will appeal to the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court. Such an appeal, known as a recurso de casación, would be the final legal recourse in this matter. The Public Ministry has not publicly announced its next move.
The court’s emphasis on procedural rigor highlights the ongoing tension between efficient justice and defendants’ rights. This ruling suggests Panama’s judiciary is taking a strict view of statutory deadlines, a principle deeply embedded in its digo judicial. For observers like Juan Manuel, the decision underscores how technical legal arguments can determine the fate of high-profile corruption cases.