[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 86 (Friday, June 26, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1248-E1249]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    DISTURBING PANAMANIAN REALITIES

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, June 25, 1998

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, the U.S. has been intimately connected to 
events in Panama for one hundred years. If anything, this relationship 
has intensified in recent years, as the time approaches for the 
reversion of the Canal Zone back to the people of Panama on the last 
day of this century. But rather than it being a happy occasion, 
considerable apprehension seems to exist among the average Panamanian 
whether local authorities will be able to effectively administer the 
Canal. Anna M. Busch, a researcher with the Washington-based Council on 
Hemispheric Affairs has authored an article scheduled to soon appear in 
COHA's biweekly publication. The Washington Report on the Hemisphere. 
In her article, Busch cites the disturbing case of Dr. Miguel Antonio 
Bernal, a highly regarded Panamanian professor of international law, 
who has had an exemplary history of being a gadfly in defense of 
democracy against a long line of authoritarian figures, including 
General Manual Noriega, for which he had to flee the country.
  Because of the transcending importance to the U.S. of the well being 
of the Panamanian people, and the desire of all Americans to see an 
effective transition in the return of the Canal Zone to Panama as 
stipulated under the terms of the Carter-Torrijo Treaty of 1977, I urge 
my colleagues to closely examine the Council on Hemispheric Affairs 
article authored by Anna M. Busch for its important insights into a 
series of issues, including the multinational drug facility, which is 
now being negotiated with Panamanian authorities.

                    Disturbing Panamanian Realities

                         (By Anna Marie Busch)

       As a result of the 1977 Carter-Torrijos Canal treaties, the 
     U.S. is in the middle of the process of handling over the 
     last vestiges of control over its Canal Zone facility, which 
     must be transferred to local authorities by December 31, 
     1999. As it readies to do so, thousands of U.S. military 
     personnel have left the country and the Southern Command 
     already has moved its headquarters to Miami. But, the 
     questions being raised by many Panamanians are whether 
     Panamanian President Ernesto Perez Balladares, whose 
     government has been plagued by charges of nepotism, drug 
     cartel links, and human rights violations, is capable of 
     taking charge of canal operations, or, for that matter, 
     deserves to remain in office for another term. Apparently, 
     many Panamanians have grave doubts, at least on the first 
     point, with recent polls indicating that 70% of the 
     population favors the facility to remain under some form of 
     U.S. supervision.


                       Petty Panamanian Politics

       Former Vice-President Richardo Arias Calderon observed in 
     the New York Times last September, ``whoever is in power for 
     the next term will have the opportunity to take some big 
     decisions and grant some important contracts. That 
     generates economic power, and if not done transparently, 
     offers ways to favor certain economic interests and law 
     firms.'' Arias' prophesy and the poll regarding the future 
     status of the canal, reflect genuine misapprehensions by 
     Panama's citizens over the country's lack of civic 
     rectitude and the grave doubt which many of them entertain 
     regarding the personality and performance of President 
     Perez Balladares.
       Although the Panamanian constitution bars any incumbent 
     from serving two consecutive terms and mandates a ten year 
     interval before a candidate could qualify for reelection, 
     Perez Balladares, following the disquieting trend among Latin 
     American presidents like Peru's Fujimori, Brazil's Cardoso, 
     and Argentina's Menem, is moving a proposed referendum 
     through the legislature, which is controlled by his party. 
     The supplemental bill, expected to pass in August, would 
     allow him to run for reelection when the canal's transfer 
     takes place. Not leaving matters to chance, four of the 
     eleven board of directors chosen by the ruling Democratic 
     Revolutionary (PRD) leader to oversee the control of the 
     canal, are relatives of either Perez Balladares or his wife.
       The referendum, which many Panamanians consider 
     unconstitutional, has caused a vocal outcry among many 
     scholars and other critics of the Perez Balladares 
     government. One prominent analyst, Dr. Miguel Antonio

[[Page E1249]]

     Bernal, a distinguished university professor and popular 
     radio commentator, who repeatedly has voiced his negative 
     opinions on the referendum, and has made allegations 
     concerning government excesses and wrong-doings, has now been 
     indicted by the state attorney after he had suggested that 
     the National Police had bungled an ongoing case in which four 
     prisoners had been decapitated. Though Dr. Bernal has long 
     been viewed as a perpetual irritant by the authorities (just 
     as he had been under the Noriega regime when he was forced to 
     flee into exile) for his outspoken criticism of corrupt 
     government practices, official Panamanian sources predict 
     that the new charge against him may again result in enforced 
     exile.
       Dr. Bernal's case was suspended by the judge at the end of 
     its June 19 preliminary hearing due to a motion presented by 
     defense attorneys requesting that legal basis of charges 
     against the defendant be declared as unconstitutional. The 
     trial will be postponed indefinitely until a higher court 
     rules. Although the defendant's highly visible profile and 
     fame drew wide support for him, the average Panamanian 
     dissident could never hope for such a crowd and such 
     widespread attention. This is why the final disposition of 
     the Bernal case is so important to the future of Panamanian 
     democracy.
       Despite the fact that the Panamanian constitution 
     guarantees freedom of expression, that same document also 
     contains clauses which the authorities intentionally entered 
     into it in order to silence its would-be critics. For 
     example, article 33 allows for the State to ``fine or arrest 
     any person who offends or shows disrespect to them 
     [government officials] when they are in performance of their 
     duties or because of their performance of the same.'' In the 
     country's Penal Code, a charge of ``slander and offense'' can 
     bring about fines or imprisonment. Long controversial Law 67 
     of 1978 forbids the practice of journalism by people who do 
     not have ``professional competence.''


                    Removing the Checks and Balances

       On February 5 of last year, Perez Balladares signed a bill 
     creating a new office, ``Defender of the People'' (Human 
     Rights Ombudsman). This official, even though working on a 
     pathetically meager budget, was initially given broad powers 
     to investigate accusations of human rights abuses and to 
     disseminate his findings. The terms of the position also 
     allowed the ombudsman to step in and negotiate complaints 
     having to do with the Attorney General's office, and the 
     proper functioning of the Electoral Tribunal. But, in a 
     troubling ruling by the Court last February, his latter 
     powers were revoked. The Perez Balladares government 
     originally had set up the Human Rights Ombudsman office as a 
     way to placate international human rights groups, but as time 
     passed, more and more of its powers have been yanked away. 
     The ombudsman, (constitutional law scholar Italo Antinori), 
     now must learn to cope with hundreds of complaints, a low 
     budget, and an office whose powers largely have been 
     retrenched.


                   Perez Balladares' Eye on the Prize

       Though the transfer of the canal is certainly on the minds 
     of U.S. government and Panamanian officials, this issue does 
     not exhaust their bilateral agenda. Slow negotiations over a 
     multinational anti-drug center still must be successfully 
     concluded, the legality of the proposed referendum allowing 
     for Perez Balladares to seek reelection confirmed, and the 
     accusation that basic civil rights are being trampled on must 
     be resolved. A long list of brutality charges against the 
     National Police remain to be investigated; a Supreme Court, 
     which according to the State Department is ``subject to 
     corruption and political manipulation,'' must be reformed and 
     governmental links to drug cartels and money laundering 
     schemes investigated. Perez Balladares' current mildly anti-
     U.S. stance is being seen as a form of self-serving 
     demagoguery, in which he artfully wraps himself in the 
     nation's flag to gain support for his August referendum from 
     the nationalist core of his party's rank-and-file. Thus far, 
     he has turned down U.S. transitional assistant funds for the 
     canal, preferring to accept aid from Asian or EU sources, in 
     order to lessen Washington's presence and influence. 
     Regardless, if current practices remain, any ongoing 
     mismanagement of the canal could result in a huge 
     disappointment for the country, both in terms of shortfalls 
     in shipping revenue, and also due to impediments to the 
     Canal's tourist and industrial development potential. Any 
     slowdown in growth could also present a springboard for his 
     many political adversaries to savage any dreams he might have 
     had of reelection.

     

                          ____________________