letters

In your article about Pereira Burgos, there is one point you did not take into account.

You state that "After the vote in the legislature, the question of whether the Faundes Law can be applied to high court judges came before the Supreme Court and it was held that it could not."

But there is a big difference between Justice Faundes and Justice Pereira Burgos, at least vis-à-vis the application of the "Faundes law." The differences is that Justice Faundes was named to the SCOTPAN for a fixed term when there was no legally pre-determined 75-year-old retirement age. However, when Pereira Burgos was named and ratified to the Supreme Court, the 75-year-old retirement age was (as it still is) legally in place (the "Faundes law" is Law 61 of 1998 --- Pereira Burgos was ratified for the SCOTPAN in December 1999).

Article 208 of Panama's Constitution states that "Los Magistrados y Jueces no serán depuestos ni suspendidos o trasladados en el ejercicio de sus cargos, sino en los casos y con las formalidades que disponga la Ley" (SCOT PAN Justices and judges will not be suspended or moved in the exercise of their posts, except in such cases and formalities as are established by Law).

Thus, when Pereira Burgos was nominated and ratified for the SCOTPAN, the Faundes law was already in place and was already binding on all 75-year-olds not expressly excluded by said very law from its effects (e.g., college professors, diplomats, etc.). This differs from the Faundes case itself, where Faundes could argue (with reason) that the "Faundes law" was not in place when he was nominated and ratified, that he had been nominated for a fixed 10-year term, and that the "Faundes law" was an ex post facto attempt to take him out of the SCOTPAN.

I haven't seen anybody write about the ad-quem effect of the "Faundes Law" and its incidence on Pereira Burgos, but that to me is the big reason why my legal opinion is that Pereira Burgos's dismissal is legally correct (don't take this to mean that I deny that there's a power play at stake here, since I'm not naïve enough to not realize that Martin Torrijos benefits from Pereira Burgos's ouster).

Juan Ramón Vallarino J.

I had just the pleasure of reading your editorial on Panamanian tourism as it relates to blacks's economic support of that industry. The editorial in question was forwarded to me by one of my cousins. I was particularly struck by this statement:

"But totally unrecognized by the old IPAT administration or by the AMCHAM tourism forum was the fact that last November's tourism triumph was mostly the result of tens of thousands of black people from the United States --- almost all of them of West Indian extraction and tracing roots through Panama --- coming down on charter flights, booking hotel rooms and spending money in this country. And yet it seems that our tourist promotion materials are designed to conceal the fact that there are black people in Panama. We don't advertise in black-oriented magazines or newspapers, on the US radio stations that African-Americans prefer, or on the Black Entertainment Television network. This country should show more respect for its best customers."

As a now US citizen and having lived in both worlds, so to speak, I can concur that the issue of marketing to blacks remains disheartening to say the least. It's as if racism has so blinded many of our leaders that not even the influx of large numbers of blacks, spending large amounts of money and thus strengthening the economy, is sufficient argument to "justify" investing in social and economic marketing to blacks. I wasn't able to make it to that great celebration, but by every account it sounded like an amazing experience.

However, I'm somewhat encouraged by Mr. Blades's attempts to garner public input and support to make this industry (tourism) both culturally responsive and economically competent. I'm also hopeful that Mr. Torrijos will to some degree follow in the footsteps of his father and challenge the old systems designed to perpetuate the unearned privileges of the rich and white.

Your suggestions and ideas to improve this industry are right on point. There needs to be a more focused and proactive management of human resources and a "surgical" removal of the "bodies" that are either not adding to the solution or are simply there for numbers' sake.

I was born, raised and educated in Panama, and have always been acutely aware of the racial and economic inequities there. While this is not unique to Panama, I think that as a nation Panama has the distinct advantage of being a focal and central point both figuratively as well as geographically. It's a place where cultural mergers are possible without the necessity of erasing anyone's cultural/ethnic identities.

As I see it, it's going to take an authentic commitment on the part of the political, social and religious powers to embrace the rich cultural, ethnic and racial diversity of Panama. This would set a clear and decisive compass to assist with an organic integration and celebration of all the contributions of its citizens, regardless of skin hue or name status.

Please continue to raise your voice and be a clarion for social justice. May God grant you the necessery wisdom, knowledge and courage to speak the truth to power.

Victor R. Pond
MOCHA project director
Chicago, Illinois

It's a locked situation, in which whoever is in the White House will pursue the same ideas, the same politics, which are doomed to fail. Moreover, the entirety of the system needs a revamp. Who can do it? More important ,will they regain consciousness in time? The system will change no matter what. Wall Street is outdated, and the issue is to manage the transition without great damage to the planet. The powerful have lost their grip. The military is useless --- only a nuclear holocaust can make the planet to bend to a particular dictum and by then there will be no globe to live on.

This world revolution depends more on time than on its participants, who need a lot of luck to pull it off. Moreover there's the urgent need of a reassembling force, which does not seem to be recognized by any of the world leaders, if you can call them leaders. They are more individuals in the hands of fate, waiting for the unexpected, the same way a rat is waiting for the disastrous earthquake to manifest itself. The future is a gamble these days. Hopefully the understanding of time and its nature will be grasped before it's too late.

Alfredo Bremont
Venezuela

I read your article about four more years of Bush. It was unflattering. I read how Europeans and other countries hate Bush.

Yet in the USA Bush has at least a 50 percent favorable rating, and the outlook from polls, is that he will get re-elected.

So I ask myself, as an American citizen and one concerned for the future happiness and prosperity of my country, what is more important: the USA choosing a president it believes will lead it to a bright future, or the likings of a snobbish, left wingish and ill informed gaggle of foreigners.

My personal impression is to say the hell with the foreigners and just move ahead proudly with our duly elected president. There are no other countries in the world where this attitude can exist. That is what makes America a wonderful country.

Matthew Borg
USA

I read your article on who would be a better president in the United States. Your liberal ideas are completely out of line in regards to Bush. Four more years of George W. Bush would be best for the United States and the rest of the Americas.

You claim the United States is the dominant force within our hemisphere. Well in a way it is try, but for facts whenever there has been a Republican president they have brought stability in our hemisphere such as preventing communism from spreading, terrorism and so forth. Kerry will be just like Carter making major mistakes in making things getting out of control. I feel that President Bush has done an excellent job of being our commander in chief for the following reasons.

Bush is on the offense against terrorism. These terrorist do not care for life so our President is doing something about it before it hits our shores again. I still have not heard what Kerry plan is to protect our country. These terrorist that we let from Cuba are back fighting against us. I say screw the human rights on this because like I mentioned that are going to fight us. They need to go to a military tribunal and be punished for their actions. You really think that Bush wants to fight just to fight. He is fighting so that future generation presidents do not have to inherit this problem. All you have to say is remember September 11th and that is where our war against terrorism started and there is no stopping.

The economy is growing at the best rate since the Reagan years. Bush also inherited a recession plus September 11th which people blame him. It really started from the Clinton years.

Our military is definitely better then the Clinton and Carter years. They were one of the worse Commander in Chief to lead this country. Eric I do not know where your patriotism is for the United States, but it is not there.

You are not in the US, but what Bush is doing here is having tax cuts which benefit everyone. Why would you want the government control the people? The government controls the people in Panama and you know that half the population works for the government. By having tax cuts the people can spend their own money rather than Uncle Sam.

Any way those are some key points.

Thanks for having the website and keeping us Zonians posted in the US. We all have different opinions, but you will have to admit most Zonians are to the right in the political spectrum.

Mike
USA

PS: As you can see President Bush won and he was voted by the American people to lead the United States as our President. As you can see the liberal media is out of touch with the American people and I think you and Dan Rather, Walter Cronkite should join together as a team since you are also out of touch.

Your editorial stating that President George W. Bush will be disastrous for Latin American Countries is not a given! If it were I would ask you to pick my next lottery numbers.

The president did not win reelection without the Latino vote. In fact he captured the highest number of popular votes in United States history.

Since a picture is worth 10,000 words as stated in an old Chinese proverb, let me provide you with a picture. This comes from http://www.newsmax.com. [Editor's note: the picture is a map of the United States by county, showing far more that voted for Bush than for Kerry. Viewed that way, the Republicans' narrow win in the national popular vote shows up as complete domination in the rural parts of the USA.]

Let me again reiterate, President George W. Bush won the 2004 Election with the greatest number of popular votes in United States history.

So, again we are witnessed to the bias media being out to lunch as it was during the presidency of Teddy Roosevelt and their comments on the Panama Canal.

The above picture from NewsMax.com gives positive one the amount of the loss suffered by John Kerry and his entourage.

The best thing to do now for those still in denial is to accept it and move on... dwelling on it is not healthy.

All leaders of the Free World need our prayers. Instead of poor mouthing President George W. Bush, we should pray that the next four years will be the best for all the God fearing countries and Freedom loving people in the world.

God Bless you and yours,

Louis Barbier
Largo, Florida

Editor's note: The American people have made their choice --- for the United States of America. Bush won some 51 percent of the popular vote and some 36 percent of the Latino vote --- in the United States. NewsMax.com, which does not maintain a journalistic presence here but nevertheless has published paranoid fantasies about Panama such as how the "Red Chinese" are running our canal, is the news medium of choice for many ill-informed people --- in the United States. Now George W. Bush and his supporters can and do in so many ways say "to hell with the foreigners," as Mr. Borg does. And this attitude, as the editorial in the last issue of The Panama News argued, contains the makings of several years of strained relations between the United States and the other countries of the Americas. It's not that matters can't be improved, but as long as the dominant faction in US politics openly despises the 95 percent or so of the world's population who are not Americans, things are not likely to get much better soon.

Back to top