|
|
|
|
|||
|
| |||
newsBe well informed --- try these online news and talk radio alternatives:
Also in this section:
Assembly in end-of-term squeeze, may hold a special session The Torrijos - Alemán Zubieta Plan to expand the Panama Canal is front and center in the national debate, but with less than two weeks before the end of the 2005-2006 legislative year it hasn't been submitted to the National Assembly and that adds a variety of potential twists to the usual end-of-session legislative squeeze. All proposals not passed on third and final reading by the deputies as of midnight on June 30 die. They might be brought up again in another session, regular or special, but the committee hearing and adoption process must start again from square one. Meanwhile there is all manner of legislation, some of it routine and necessary and some of it nefarious, in the pipeline for a last minute legislative binge. The canal expansion This particular assembly is no slouch at the old tradition of jamming far-reaching and usually obnoxious measures through the process in the middle of the night without debate, even if the members of the previous legislature were defeated in their bids for re-election. Recall that the Torrijos administration's promise not to privatize the management of Social Security Fund assets was broken in this manner last year, providing much of the spark for the ensuing turmoil. With so many things undone at the end of a session, there would be little time for a grand debate on such a transcendental project as the canal expansion plan. However, the Electoral Tribunal is warning that if legislative consideration of the measure that will surely end up before the voters as a referendum is delayed, it will drive the cost of holding the referendum up. The law provides that a referendum can be held no sooner than 90 days after it is approved by the legislature, and once that scheduling requirement gets into November holidays start to complicate the scenario and would likely require some election officials to get extra pay for working on them. All appearances are that despite a massive publicity blitz, the "yes" side is not picking up more voter support, although it may still enjoy a substantial lead over the "no" side. A prominent legislative debate would give an opportunity for skeptical legislators to put the case against the plan before the public in a way that so far has been avoided, so a maneuver to rush the plan to the ballot with little opportunity for debate might have its advantages for the "yes" side. However, that sort of tactic will offend many voters and lead some who are sitting on the fence to conclude that the government has something to hide with respect to this matter. The calling of a special session to consider the canal expansion proposal would be one way out of the jam that election officials are warning against, while avoiding the ugly implications that some people would read into just about any vote on the matter in the regular session, given that there really isn't time for a debate that a consensus of Panamanians would consider legitimate. The most probably thing is that there will be a special session in July or August. The legislature itself, however, can't call such a thing. That's a presidential prerogative. Impunity for political corruption The current National Assembly has a near-perfect record of voting for public corruption at every opportunity. Before that power was shifted to the Supreme Court, for example, they voted against lifting legislators' immunity from investigation or prosecution in even the most flagrant cases. They also voted to can any investigation of judicial corruption, declaring an amazing pseudo-legal principle that the National Assembly, which has the power to impeach a high court magistrate, lacks the power to hold an investigation that might lead to an impeachment vote. Now the legislation flying through the assembly with little debate is a procedural law to strengthen the guarantees that deputies who pad their wealth by such standard tactics as bribery and phantom employees on their staffs will be able to enjoy their ill-gotten gains without ever having to account for such crimes. The measure would prohibit prosecutors from investigating legislators --- and of course, the Supreme Court, which is in charge of deciding whether to strip a deputy of immunity, won't consider such an action without a prosecutor's recommendation after looking into the matter. The proposed law would also raise the number of Supreme Court votes needed to strip a legislator of immunity from a simple majority to two-thirds (from five to six votes with the current nine-member court). On June 13 the legislature's Government Committee approved the new impunity law by a unanimous vote. The pro-corruption deputies who pulled that stunt were committee chair Jerry Wilson (PRD - Panama City), Raúl Rodríguez (PRD- Chiriqui), Juan Hernández (PRD - Panama City), Jorge Hernán Rubio (Partido Popular - Panama City), José Blandón (Panameñista - Panama City), Dalia Bernal (Cambio Democratico - Ngobe-Bugle Comarca) and Wigberto Quintero (MOLIRENA - Panama City). Although prosecutors, the press and the general public all object to such legislation, the assembly probably has the votes to pass it. However, it would still have to be signed by the president who ran on a "zero corruption" pledge, at a time when he's facing a canal expansion referendum that many voters will take as a vote of confidence on his performance. Liborio García Faced with a full-scale women's revolt within the ruling PRD - Partido Popular alliance as well as throughout society over an old domestic assault complaint and subsequent creepy statements on the subject of men's violence against women by the national ombudsman (Defensor del Pueblo) Liborio García, a special legislative committee earlier unanimously recommended García's removal --- not for the reason that has so many people angry, but for allegedly violating a ban on political activity once he assumed the office. However, since then National Assembly president Elías Castillo has kept the matter from coming before the full legislature. The problem may be truly procedural rather than a matter of Castillo protecting one of the good old boys. Although there are lawyers arguing that García's participation in an event with deputy Sergio Gálvez and his tardy resignation as a director of several corporations amount to an abandonment of his post and thus a vacancy could be declared with a simple majority vote (40 deputies), the law that created the position requires that it takes a two-thirds vote (52 deputies) to remove and ombudsman for cause. The PRD-Partido Popular caucus has 43 votes. Members of the ruling coalition complain that they can't get the commitments of enough opposition deputies to be sure that there would be 52 votes for removal, while some opposition deputies complain that the PRD lacks the will to reverse an embarrassing appointment by the majority caucus. It's an acute political problem because the women whom García has infuriated include First Lady Vivian de Torrijos and all of the PRD members who are disgusted with the appointment are not female. Surely the president doesn't want to go into a referendum campaign with his party split largely along gender lines, but then this is a legislative rather than a presidential appointment and this particular assembly doesn't seem to care about how its actions look to the rest of Panamanians. Also, the opposition deputies probably like to see the ruling coalition squirm over an unpopular thing that it did and would thus have reason to insist that Castillo bring the matter to the floor without any prior guarantees. It does seem, however, that if this matter gets to the National Assembly floor there would be tremendous pressure on deputies of all parties to, as it would be put, take a stand against domestic violence. Capital gains tax As this article was written a change in the Tax Code had passed on a third and final legislative vote with support from both government and opposition deputies by a 52 - 2 margin with two absentions, but with great pressure from some powerful people for the president to veto it. The problem? The law creates a 5 to 10 percent capital gains tax and business groups are complaining that this would effectively destroy Panama's Bolsa de Valores stock and bond exchange. The Bolsa is all but moribund anyway because there is very little transparency in Panamanian business culture. The main reason why anyone would deal in securities through that entity is that there have been tax incentives to do so. It seems that the new capital gains tax would neutralize that advantage if it becomes law. There are the usual complaints that the legislation is sloppily written and confusing. Whether the confusion is real or contrived is a genuine question that would probably have to be answered in regulations to be issued later by the Ministry of Economy and Finance, assuming that the president signs the law. It appears that this tax increase is not aimed at all capital gains, but mainly transactions in commercial paper. Were it to be interpreted as more inclusive, those who speculate in Panamanian real estate might have reason for concern. Criminal law reform Presidential commissions studying the Penal Code and rules of criminal procedure have issued their reports, and there are some highly controversial recommendations. The press is, as would be expected, screaming loudest about some new anti-press provisions which include prison terms for journalists who produce true stories which, however, some complainant and some judge agree were not investigated with sufficient diligence (that is, deference of the "right" of the rich or powerful to kill any unflattering news coverage. However, there are also proposed changes in sentences for many crimes and in procedures that in many instances mean whether there will be imprisonment of innocent people for a long time while awaiting trial under hellish conditions, complete impunity for criminal activity by those with the right influence and courts that do or do not get their work done. There are a lot of hot button issues in these reports. President Torrijos has not yet sent these recommendations to the assembly and it is doubtful that they could be addressed in what remains of the legislative session, as these are massive texts with many provisions. Moreover, he has said that he wants a period of public study and comment to precede any legislation. It may turn out that a special legislative session will be called to deal with these politically sensitive matters. It's also quite possible that the recommendations will be left to the next regular National Assembly session, which begins in September. Other business The assembly has passed a new national school textbook law, after a prior one was vetoed by the president. It has also kept Martín's promise to repeal Law 44 of 1999, which created the Panama Canal's Western Watershed and aroused the fear and wrath of farmers who live within it. It has also declared the empty tomb of the president's father, General Omar Torrijos, a protected national landmark. The deputies may or may not get to a bizarre proposal to ban all depiction of nudity. A proposed rollback of senior citizen discounts appears unlikely to happen. A $2.3 million subsidy for developers of homes for lower-income families may pass. The Panama Canal Authority's $1.567 billion 2007 budget will almost certainly be approved. And what else might the legislators do in the middle of a late June night? By the time we know, it may very well be too late.
Also in this section:
News |
Business
|
Editorial
|
Opinion
|
Letters
|
Arts
|
Review
|
Community
|
Fun
|
Travel
Make the
Executive Hotel your headquarters in Panama City --- http://ww.executivehotel-panama.com Find the boat of your dreams through Evermarine --- http://www.evermarine.com |
||||||||||
|
