“They say that there is no evil that lasts more than a hundred years, but there is still my ex-father-in-law who does not set foot in a grave,” expresses the artist in her new song. From that episode of placing a witch on the terrace focusing on her mother-in-law's house before leaving Spain to the lyrics of her songs, from the Twingo and the Casio to the grave of the latter, increasingly thicker and unpleasant, they constitute a pure provocative exercise in which they are not going to fall. And not for lack of desire but to prevent children from seeing how their father's family sues their mother. For the interest of the two minors, they prefer to accept the invectives by gnashing their teeth without addressing the court.
But could they do it? Lawyer Carlos Carretero believes that with the single that she released with Bizarrap and the subsequent You left it big, the Colombian has played her cards very well and the balances that she makes in her lyrics allow her to avoid legal action . However, with El Jefe it would be possible to take the civil route.
“The mere fact of not citing a person is no excuse for not making them the object of an attack on their honor, although there must be data or clues that allow them to be clearly identified. And this is not a play on words. 'There's still my ex-father-in-law who doesn't set foot in the grave' can be none other than Joan Piqué, grandfather of his children. He adds in another stanza that the 'boss' he refers to is a son of a bitch who drives a Mercedes Benz: if Gerard Piqué's father regularly drove a vehicle of that brand, he could file a lawsuit for interference with the right to honor and request an indemnification". Naturally, Shakira is anything but clumsy: precisely that part of the song is not sung by her but by someone else.
The other person named in the song, this time expressly, is Lili Melgar, Milan and Sasha's babysitter. She accuses her boss of having fired her without compensation and regarding this, the Piqués do want to explain what the reality is. We have spoken with those closest to the former soccer player and this is what they say: “It was Shakira who required the services of the nanny but it was Gerard who had her registered with Social Security. When she decides to go to Miami, he offers to take her with him to continue her work. Nobody actually fires her but by choosing to leave with Shakira, she changes employers but she continues doing exactly the same job, with the same boss and the same children. That is why she was not compensated: because she left voluntarily. Just missing". In Barcelona she earned just over 3,000 euros, an amount that is possibly doubled in the US, according to what they understand.
