opinion

Constitutional proposal for a national conversation

by Miguel Antonio Bernal

Fifteen years ago, a few weeks after the invasion, I proposed some reflections, in draft, that attempted to contribute an addition to the search for solutions to problems that were aggravating in Panama. These revolved around the constitution and we hoped that they would be useful for a national conversation that, would put us on the road along which we would see a better country. But the partisan system and gluttony for power by the most conceited exponents of the power brokers preferred to ignore it, and in so doing, these have been the consequences to date: the people have not been permitted to do anything for themselves and in this way it has been possible to keep civic participation absolutely kidnapped and blackmailed.

What I outline then I come back to again outline, but adapted to our times:

1. First, understand me that, after 21 years of an autocratic military regime (and 15 years of a farce democracy) the actions of each and every one of us must be directed toward the establishment of a true constitutional state as soon as possible. The key point for this is the calling for and sentiment in favor of a democratizing and constitutionalist sensibility that must guide all those who govern and those who are governed, despite the many differences they have about how this or that thing should be done.

a) A democratic calling means, above all, not to leave unused any resource that permits us to move toward the construction of a democracy, which requires in the first place the eradication of the environment of fundamental danger that impedes its germination: the rule of all the bad habits, as if they were normal, of the military or legal standards that serve as a straitjacket.

b) A constitutionalist calling is nothing more than the full conviction that we must be governed by laws and not me, because laws are less passionate than men (as Aristotle said). In our context, it’s illusory to think that we can build and run a democratic system with a constitution that was made during, by and for an autocratic militarist system, even as often reformed as it has been or could be. This constitution we have (the one of ’72, reformed in ’78 and in ’83, and now, moreover, in ’94 and 2004!) is warped from its very origin. It has to be changed --- as soon as possible!

2. I’m not going to get into enumerating or detailing the innumerable arguments in favor of a constituent assembly. I only want to stress that the problem today is not, I believe, that we must center the debate on whether or not we should go on with the constitution of 1972, but of the most expeditious manner of getting rid of it, as it is the true obstacle to the democratization that the country requires.

3. Proposed procedure:

A1) The executive, acting as such (and on the basis of article 314 of the constitution) creates in March of 2006 a constitutional study commission, composed of five persons. This commission will take charge of making the pertinent framework for a new constitution, consulting all the economic, political and social sectors. The commission show be made up of a certain number of constitutionalists, as its task is to “study” a project, which will not necessarily be the constitution, as there wil be a constituent assembly freely elected by the people to do that. What it’s about is that the constituent assembly, like in 1946, will come with a document of reference.

A2) This commission should deliver the results of its studies and its project or draft of a constitution, in May 2006 at the latest. For this date, the executive will convene an election by universal direct suffrage of a constituent assembly to debate and propose a new constitution. This election would be in January of 2007 so that the people whould have time to read, debate and study the proposals.

a) No member of the commission will be able to be a candidate for the constituent assembly, as the commission as such must remain at the service of the constituent assembly.

b) The members of the constituent assembly (no more than 45) will be elected at the provincial and national level as in 1945.

c) As it’s a constituent assembly, all who who obtain a minimum of 1,000 signatures (at the provincial level) and 10,000 at the national level, can run. This is so that it will be participatory and not exclusively for the political parties.

d) The constituent assembly will be installed on March 1 of 2007 and finish its work by June 1 of 2007.

There would then be a call for municipal elections in February of 2008, of the National Assembly in May of 2008 and of the president in May of 2009, who would be inaugurated on July 1 of 2009. (All of this is relative and depends on the commitments of the political forces.)

e) A commitment could be made that the constituent assembly will ratify the present executive until July of 2009, so as to avoid bad interpretations.

4) What happens to the legislature from now until the constituent assembly process is done?

Once the constituent assembly is installed, the National Assembly would go on recess and resume its function on June 1, under a new constitution approved by the process, until July 1 of 2008, when the newly elected assembly would take up its functions.

Draft of a calendar for constitutionality:

March 2006: naming of a constitutional study commission

March 2006-May 2006: Work period for the study commission

June 2006: Delivery of the proposal by the study commission

June 2006-January 2007: National public debate on the proposal

January 2007: Election of a constituent assembly

March 2007: Installation of the constituent assembly

June 2007: End of the constituent assembly and its dissolution

February 2008: Election of mayors and city councils

May 2008: Election of the National Assembly

May 2009: Elections for president

June 2009: Start of a new presidency

The need for a total constitutional restructuring of the country can no longer go on being avoided. I hope that these notes will serve as the basis for a frank, open, serious and responsible debate among citizens. Let’s not let the constitution of ’72 continue to be our Procrustean bed.