Canal expansion must be transparent

Certain things should be obvious to everybody. The first thing is that we must modernize the Panama Canal, or watch it become a commercially irrelevant anachronism much like the Erie Canal is today. The second thing is that hardly anybody wants to be displaced from his or her home under any circumstances, and if those who are forced to move also feel cheated they are likely to cause big problems for the project that obliges their change of residence.

The canal watershed's westward expansion into Colon's Costa Abajo and northern Cocle province was approved in legislation at the end of the Pérez Balladares administration. The Panama Canal Authority board of directors has approved a schedule that would have the studies done by the end of this year, with bidding and groundbreaking to follow.

However, some of the farmers who will be forced to move are skeptical, and the Catholic Caritas social ministry has criticized the way the project is moving forward. A great national undertaking that could create a lot of jobs and help solve some of Panama's economic problems in the short term, and assure our longer-term future as an important maritime route, is in danger of becoming a terrible political mess.

The main reasons for this are a perception that there’s too much secrecy at the Panama Canal Authority and a public expectation of corruption from this government. These obstacles to the third locks and new lake can and should be easily removed. All it takes is some leadership.

The organic law that created the Panama Canal Authority provided that there would be a freedom of information policy. The regulations passed to implement the law do nothing to promote transparency, and both Caritas and people who fear that they will be displaced by the project complain that they can't get their questions answered. The Panama Canal Authority insists that many issues are being studied, and that the decisions that will affect many residents’ lives can’t be made until the information needed to make good choices has been collected.

Meanwhile, rumors are flying around about Canal Affairs Minister Ricardo Martinelli or his relatives buying land that will be flooded, for resale at inflated prices. He denies it, but because all information about every aspect of this project is not available, such talk is likely to persist. Similarly, some mining concessions are also likely to be flooded, and if there is an effort underway to make independent fair assessments of the concessions' value, rather than relying on the concessionaires' estimates, information about that undertaking is not yet in the public domain.

If the canal is to be successfully upgraded, such doubts must be allayed. There must be no corruption, nor even the appearance of possible corruption. Assuming that there's a will to do an honest job — and we have no reason to believe that the Panama Canal Authority's management has anything but honorable intentions — the way to dispel suspicions is government in the sunshine.

The canal's management used to operate under the US Freedom of Information Act, without any major problems. Now the US administration is history and the canal runs under Panamanian laws, as should be the case in the post-colonial era. Still, the Panama Canal Authority should enact regulations similar to the system that worked well in the past, and regardless of laws and regulations should share all information about the canal enlargement project with anybody who wants to know. A little more transparency would go a long way toward uniting Panamanians behind this effort.