letters

Included in this note to the Afro-Panamanian community at home and in the Diaspora are three documents. First, the original letter sent by Panama Vote 2004 on June 29, 2004 by fax, email, and FEDEX, to Juan Carlos Navarro, Mayor of Panama City. Second, an email and attached letter sent on 3 July 2004 from the Mayor's office to Raymond Grant. The attached letter from the Mayor's office, addressed to Dr. George Priestley, Chairperson of Panama Vote 2004, was never sent directly to him by fax, email or FEDEX; rather, Dr. Priestley received a copy of the email and letter sent to Mr. Grant by the Mayor's office, clearly a lack of efficiency, respect, and accountability. The third and last document is Panama Vote 2004 final remarks on what is known as "Alberto Barrow's Dismissal from the Mayor's Office" but what in reality is a much larger and important issue: The defense of Afro-Panamanian dignity, self-respect and our need to emulate Mr. Barrow in speaking "Truth to Power."

Raymond Grant

27 June 2004

Juan Carlos Navarro, Mayor
Panama City

Dear Mayor Navarro:

Panama Vote 2004, an organization of Afro-Panamanians in New York City which provided much financial and political support to the president-elect Martín Torrijos Espino, is deeply concerned over the recent dismissal of Lic. Alberto Barrow from his position as Responsable de la Oficina Pro Igualdad de Oportunidades y de Acción Ciudadana de la Alcaldía de Panamá (Office of Equal Opportunity and Citizen Action at the Mayor's Office in Panama City).

It is our understanding that by all objective standards Lic. Alberto Barrow, who came aboard your office in May 2001, did a credible and outstanding job of making and promoting public policies to deal with widespread discourses and practices of racial, gender and other forms of discrimination and exclusion in the District of Panama. Furthermore, it is our understanding that until before his disapproval of a political ad with racial overtones in March of 2004, he was considered one of your most valuable employees, receiving strategic assignments in Panama, Latin America, the United States, and Europe. It is for these reasons that we are puzzled by his sudden and unexpected dismissal, a situation made worse by your silence about the matter.

On the other hand, there is not total silence about the issue in your office, for there are many rumors emanating therein that attempt to justify the dismissal of Mr. Barrow on administrative grounds. For example, some rumors state he was relieved of his position because of incompetence and inefficiency, while others alleged that his dismissal was due to systematic tardiness and unauthorized absences. But even assuming, for the moment, that these are in fact your reasons for his dismissal, why did these "administrative facts" become relevant immediately after Mr. Barrow's highly commented disapproval of the aforementioned political ad of March 2004? Why was his dismissal "postponed" until after the general elections of May 2, 2004?

Mayor Navarro, undoubtedly these allegations are disconcerting to the Afro-Panamanian community in the Diaspora and prejudicial to the search for the truth behind the firing of Alberto Barrow. Mr. Mayor, you must clarify this matter, for we have already heard from Lic. Alberto Barrow, who in a public letter issued June 8, 2004, made it clear that his dismissal was due to differences with you over the policy of Zero Tolerance to Racism in the District of Panama. It is apparent from Mr. Barrow's letter that this policy, previously approved by you, was tested when he publicly condemned a racist political ad aired on national television in early March of 2004. Furthermore, his letter affirms that although his action was consistent with your administration's supposed policy of Zero Tolerance to Racism, he was eventually fired.

Mayor Juan Carlos Navarro, Panama Vote 2004 reiterates its preoccupation over the attempt to silence Lic. Alberto Barrow, a respected and credible champion of civil rights in Panama, one who has gained the respect and admiration of a wide cross-section of Panamanians at home and abroad, and the esteem and friendship of many within the hemispheric circuit of human rights organizations.

Mr. Mayor, Panama Vote 2004, and Afro-Panamanians in the Diaspora, exhort you to give us a prompt, honest and detailed public explanation for the dismissal of Lic. Alberto Barrow from his position as Responsable de la Oficina Pro Igualdad de Oportunidades y de Acción Ciudadana de la Alcaldía de Panamá.

Dr. George Priestley, Chair
Melinda Del Rosario, Recording Secretary

From: Alcalde
Subject: Re: CARTA ABIERTA: ALCALDE DE PANAMA Y EL SR. BARROWS.

Apreciado Señor Grant:

Adjunto le envío copia de la cartaque envió en el día de ayer la Secretaría General de la Alcaldía de Panamá, Lic. Norberta Tejada, sobre el tema en referencia, contestando y aclarando las inquietudes que usted menciona en su atenta carta de hoy.

Reciba los más cordiales saludos del Alcalde Navarro.

Atentamente,

Lexa Flores
Asistente Ejecutiva del Alcalde

Panamá, 2 de julio de 2004

Dr. George Priestley
Presidente, Panama Vote 2004

Estimado Dr. Priestley

Muchas gracias por su atenta nota del 29 de junio de 2004, dirigida al Alcalde Navarro y que aprovechamos para contestar de inmediato.

Tal cual quedó completamente aclarado en una amplia reunión de trabajo entre el Alcalde Navarro y la Coordinadora de la Etnia Negra Panameña el pasado 30 de junio, el Sr. Barrow fue destituido por no cumplir con sus tareas administrativas con responsabilidad ni eficacia dentro de la Alcaldía de Panamá. El Alcalde Navarro ha solicitado la renuncia y ha destituido a otros funcionarios en días recientes a fin de conformar su equipo de trabajo para el periodo 2004-2009, como es normal (y necesario) en un periodo de transición.

Debo aprovechar para informarle que no hay ninguna otra motivación, ni política ni de ninguna otra índole, detrás de un trámite administrativo normal como lo es el reemplazo de un funcionario cuyo desempeño no ha llenado las expectativas del cargo.

Finalmente, el Alcalde Navarro se mantiene comprometido a redoblar sus esfuerzos con entusiasmo y dedicación a favor de la lucha contra el racismo y la igualdad de oportunidades, por lo que ha invitado a la Coordinadora de la Etnia Negra Panameña a enviar los curriculae de los profesionales que recomienden a fin de considerarlos dentro del proceso de b&Mac250;squeda del nuevo director de la Oficina Pro Igualdad de Oportunidades y Acción Ciudadana de la Alcaldía de Panamá.

Atentamente,

Norberta Tejada Cano
Secretaria General

Over the past several years, Panamanians and particularly Afro-Panamanians have benefited from the diligent and daily advocacy of several organizations, groups and individuals in Panama, who have worked tirelessly to unveil and challenge racial discourses and discriminatory practices on the Isthmus. None has done so as conscientiously, persistently and effectively as Alberto Barrow, spokesperson for the Comité Panameño Contra el Racismo, and until a month or so ago director of the Office of Equal Opportunity and Civilian Participation at the Mayor's office in Panama City, Republic of Panama.

In our above letter dated June 27, 2004 and sent to the Mayor's office on 29th June 2004, we pointed to the fact that the Mayor had approved the policy of "Zero Tolerance of Racism" in the District of Panama, and there is no doubt about that.

However, it seems that as a direct result of Alberto Barrow's denunciation of a racist political advertisement on March 4, 2004 on RCM-TV, the Mayor changed policy directions, moving from "ZERO TOLERANCE OF RACISM" to one of "ZERO TOLERANCE OF RACISM AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT AFFECT HIS POLITICAL INTEREST."

Notwithstanding the abovementioned, there is no doubt that the Mayor has a right to change his policy on racism. However, he should state this clearly, loudly and publicly. Instead, in the above letter allegedly sent to Dr. Priestley, he simply argues that he has a right to make personnel changes in his office, and while this may in fact be the case, said right should not extend to the slanderous campaign against the professional reputation of policy makers/implementers, such as Alberto Barrow. In our opinion, this campaign is merely a political smokescreen to justify the Mayor's policy shift on racism in Panama City.

Panama Vote 2004 is very clear about the issues surrounding the dismissal of Alberto Barrow from the Mayor's office on June 1, 2004. It is our view that Mr. Barrow's removal from office has nothing to do with his so-called lack of responsibility or lack of efficaciousness, two unsubstantiated allegations made in the Mayor's letter to Dr. Priestley. In fact, while the Mayor attempts to shroud his decision in administrative privilege his circuitous response to our inquiries is vague at best and dubious at worst.

Undoubtedly, Mr. Barrow's dismissal brings to light the tension between the old clientele politics that still lingers in Panamanian political culture and the politics of ethics and democratic values signaled by Martin Torrijos's Patria Nueva. The first is the politics of cooptation, disrespect and political clientelism, while the latter holds the possibility of challenging the politics of subordination, rousing all self-respecting Panamanian citizens to speak "Truth to Power."

Dr. George Priestley, Chairperson
Panama Vote 2004

In terms of energy use, how efficient will be the third locks design working, and the the new lake reservoir to be located west of the Canal ?

After reading the article "Does a Panama Canal expansion plan exist?" one must ask how efficient, in energy use, will be the third locks design for using water tanks to recycle the water? In the future, hopefully more information will become available to see the net difference of energy needed to pump the water into the tanks (located parallel to the third locks) and the energy saved by spilling less water into the oceans.

When the Canal was originally designed, the lock's chamber had to be filled in a certain amount of time (8 and 1/2 minutes) and some of energy also had to be dissipated in the culverts so that the amount of kinetic energy left in the water would, then, be diminished as the water flowed into the lock's chamber, to reduce any possible damage to the ship in transit through the locks. However, up to the present time, all the water needed by the Canal flowed by gravity.

By the same token, if an additional water reservoir were constructed to the west of the Canal, will any water pumping be needed to transfer the water from the new western reservoir into the Gatun Lake, or will the water flow by gravity ? Because the Madden Lake's water level is above the level of the Gatun Lake, water flows by gravity from Madden Lake (Lago Alejuela) into Gatun Lake. So, the key question is: Will the new lake reservoir west of the Canal, be also above or at the same level as the level of the water in Gatun Lake? If the water level of the new reservoir should be lower than the level of Gatun Lake, some water pumping will be needed to transfer the water from the artificial lake west of the Canal to Gatun Lake.

One of the parameters to keeping the Canal competitive in the transportation market is that the amount of energy needed to operate the third locks and any additional water reservoir must be kept within the same marginal effiency (or better) of the original design of the Canal.

Mac C

Thank you for Eric Jackson's excellent coverage of recent narcotics arrests in Panama of alleged members of FARC and NVC. I found the articles extremely well written and insightful.

US media coverage of narcotics prosecution is not generally as well-informed or reported. For example, following the arrest of Luis Hernando Gomez Bustamante in Cuba this week, a CNN article online read:

"Bustamante is one of the top three leaders of Colombia's Norte Valle Cartel (NVC), heir to the now defunct Medellin and Cali cartels.

"Wilmer Varela, 46, was expelled to the United States from Panama earlier this year. Arcangel de Jesus Henoa Montoya, 49, remains a fugitive in Colombia."

Unless a major development has gone widely unreported, I believe the statement in the CNN article regarding Mr. Henao is an error. By comparison, your publication, with far fewer resources or even responsibility, gave far greater detail and insight to the story.

Thank you for your outstanding journalism and best of luck in future endeavors.

Michael Jarosik

Editor's note: To be candid, this paper's coverage of that story was based on articles in the Panamanian dailies and reports on Panamanian television.

This was so, and is so with briefs and some of the rest of this paper, because one full-time journalist with a few contributors would not possibly cover all the stories that need to be mentioned in any reasonably comprehensive summary of Panama's news. Thus the briefs and some of the feature stories are more in the nature of a chronicle than original journalism. (The rule here is to identify such sources when the specific information comes from only one of them, but a news or business brief that mentions no source is usually based on multiple mainstream reports that say the same thing.)

But meanwhile the US-based multinational news corporations like AOL/Time/Warner/CNN and the major American television networks have downsized their foreign desks and reduced their coverage of much of the world, particularly the non-industrialized countries. Nowadays they cover the planet by sending in celebrity reporters. Although the good ones do their homework, these reporters often have very little background knowledge about the situations they are supposed to cover. Instead these well-paid TV stars work with producers who are usually from their home studios and often don't speak the local language, and Panamanian fixers who are well connected with many of the local elites, who are their advance teams.

To me one of the saddest things about CNN and its corporate parents in particular but also CBS/Viacom and several of the other TV channels as well is that these corporate operations have Spanish-language sister channels and they don't seem to pool the resources of their English and Spanish news operations so as to better cover Latin America.

Usually the TV networks only cast a glance this way, or any little country's way, when there is a crisis that meets that persistent newsroom criterion, "if it bleeds it leads." The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Miami Herals and several other major US newpapers give us somewhat more frequent and diverse reportage, and every now and then a worthy Reuters or AP story from here gets picked up by media in the states. But mostly the major corporate media don't pay much attention to the Latin America or the Caribbean.

Moreover, in those corporations there tends to be this insufferable cult of denial, born mainly of journalists' fear of being fired for making a mistake. In this part of the journalism subculture, even the most glaring errors are rarely admitted or corrected.

(Do not take these observations as a blanket condemnation of all journalism from the mainstream corporations. Of course there is a substantial majority of conscientious professionals working for those companies, and there are many honorable exceptions to the trends I described. But I do suggest that these are real trends and cause for concern.)

So both the corporate mainstream like CNN and little independent media like The Panama News have shortcomings, the bases of which can usually be figured out by looking at the economics of the respective situations. That CNN botched the tale is an example of the weakness of their corporate culture. To the extent that The Panama News got it right, however, it was mainly a reflection of Panamananian mainstream journalists getting the story and me summarizing the main points of their various reports in English.

But I'm always glad to hear that someone compares The Panama News favorably to the big guys.

Just wanted to say that my friends and I love and appreciate your work.

Best wishes,

Scott Doggett
(Former Lonely Planet writer,
current staff writer at the LA Times)

According to a new opinion poll conducted in Iceland by the IMG Gallup for Greenpeace and the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), support for the resumption of whaling has declined.

The poll asked: "Are you in favor or against Icelanders starting whale hunting again?" Results show that over a third of Icelandic people, traditionally a whaling nation, no longer support whaling.

Since April 2003, the percentage of Icelandic people in favor of whaling has dropped from 74.6% to 67.3%. During the same period, the number of people opposed to whaling has increased from 12.3% to 15.2% and the proportion of those who are undecided has increased from 13.1% to 17.4%

"This shows that domestic opinion on whaling in Iceland is changing and is on the decline. Whale meat consumption is rapidly decreasing and the domestic tourism industry is coming out strongly against whaling," said Frode Pleym of Greenpeace International.

The Icelandic Government recently announced that it will put its so-called 'scientific' whaling program on hold and limit this year's take to 25 minke whales, down from the planned quota of 250 minke, sei and fin whales. "The Government of Iceland should react wisely to public opinion and cancel its 'scientific' whaling program altogether," added Pleym.

For many years, Greenpeace was considered an enemy of Iceland, following earlier controversial actions to stop Icelandic whaling. By contrast, this year the Greenpeace ship, MV Esperanza, which is currently in Iceland urging people to "Choose the future, not whaling," has been visited by the President of Althingi, the Icelandic Parliament.

Last autumn, Greenpeace launched the "Pledge" campaign to show the potential economic and environmental gains to be had by choosing sustainable tourism over whaling. Over 57,000 people around the world have pledged to seriously consider a vacation in Iceland, rather than elsewhere, if it stops whaling.

Matilda Bradshaw
Greenpeace International

Glad I discovered your online paper. I may be moving there. Are you the only English online paper in Panama? How often does it change, weekly?

John Bisceglio
Costa Rica

Editor's note: We upload two issues per month. In those rare instances when everything done is on time, it's all posted by the first and third complete weekend of the month (when a month starts on a Saturday or a Sunday --- as does August 2004 --- we don't count those first days as a "complete weekend"). Okke Ornstein has his "Noriegaville" website, Carmela Gobern has her bilingual subscription Panama Cyberspace News, and the Panama Canal Society of Florida website is home to Art Mokray's regular columns about current events in Panama.

My father a Mexican national and journalist by the name of Francis King worked in El Diario de Hoy in the country of El Salvador around 1940-41. Later he went to Panama, I assume on assignment. After my birth there he and my mother (Helea Cardona Fuentes, Salvadorean national and deceased) separated and never heard from him again. I have been searching for him and I do believe he is alive. If you know of any way that I can begin tracing his steps through the newspapers circuit or journalists clubs or associations I would be for ever grateful. He must be 85 at this point. Thank you.

Antonieta Cardona King
agimeno@earthlink.net

Back to top

Panama Information, Hotels of Panama - Executive Hotel
Panama Information, Real Estate in Las Cumbres - Villa Concordia
Panama Information - Online guide to information about Panama - www.panama-information.executivehotel-panama.com
Panama Tourism - Online info for the Tourist Panama - www.travel-to-panama.com
Panama Pictures - Collection of pictures of Panama - www.panama-pictures.com