letter

Practical concerns and poetry

Missed a diplomatic / environmental / maritime story

In August at the Marine Environmental Protection Committee meeting Panama announced that they had passed legislation to approve the Antifouling Treaty to ban harmful substances. I have been trying to find out more information on this but see no mention of it in your paper. As the 25th country to sign they will cause the treaty to enter into force and insure the elimination of TBT. I was surprised you did not comment on it.

Robert J. Martin

Global Business Director, Marine Paints

Arch Chemicals

Editor's note: Indeed, this is a story of note for a maritime country like Panama. Tributyltin, or TBT, is a tin-based organic compound that has been used in paints to keep barnacles and algae from growing on the hulls of ships and boats, but it is known to cause deformities in oysters and snails and to accumulate in the bodies of otters, dolphins and squid. Prior to TBT, the maritime used copper-based paints for these purposes, but the problem is that copper also creates certain unwanted environmental effects --- although not as severe as TBT --- and the old paints don't last as long as the ones that are being banned.

The International Maritime Organization agreed to a ban on TBT back in 2001 and a number of countries have acted on their own ahead of the treaty's ratification to phase out those paints. With Panama's ratification the treaties provisions will become binding on the parties, and given the number of ships that use this country's flag of convenience or pass through the Panama Canal, we will be in a far greater position to enforce this international anti-TBT rule than our size would suggest.

While there are pressures to create this or that exception to the TBT ban, it appears from industry publications that there will be a move back to copper-based paints alongside a race to develop effective and economical antifouling ship coating materials or devices. The treaty not only prohibits TBT but also sets up a technical committee to approve or reject new antifouling systems.

So who wins in the short run? Probably the drydock industry, as ships will have to be painted more often as they switch from TBT to copper-based paints.

Real estate reporting

Thank you for having the guts to at least mention the soft under belly of the Panamanian real estate boom, namely the fact that the majority of buyers may be speculators and have absolutely no intention of ever moving to Panama. There is no way that 40,000 American, Canadian, British, and Spanish buyers are going to retire in downtown Panama City.

I personally know two US buyers that have deposits at a project in the Obarrio/San Francisco area and both plan to sell at completion time, if not sooner. Some online articles indicate that the flipper/speculator percentage may be as high as two-thirds in Panama. What is going to happen if two thirds of today's buyers try to sell 40,000 condo units when these projects are done in 2008-09?

How many buyers from the above stated countries are going to put up with waiting in a steaming hot cab for 30 minutes in downtown traffic on Balboa Avenue just trying to go a half mile to the local mall? Very few in my estimation.

There is a growing sense that developers in Panama are playing fast and loose with whatever rules do exist regarding contracts, delivery times, price increase flexibility, etc. The five recent major project cancellations all point to one factor, greed. Developers of the Ice Tower and other condos canceled those contracts written back in 2004 and 2005 in order to sell the same $100,000 condos for double or triple the price. Cement, steel, and labor cost increases were just false justifications for the cancellations. Now, some developers are invoking clauses in contracts that allow for price increases at closing if their "building costs" increased during construction. Of course, these increases will serve to wipe out appreciation gained by buyers during the building phase.

I was recently made aware of a group of US investors that placed a $100,000+ deposit with a Panamanian seller on a multi-million-dollar piece of property. At time of closing the seller refused the cash-to-close funds, stating that they were not drawn on a Panamanian bank. The seller used this technicality or innocent mistake on the part of the buyers to cancel the contract, not return the deposit, and to sell the same property later that week for several million dollars more.

This story was told to me by someone that I know and actually trust in the Panamanian financial industry.

This summer I got jacked around by a seller of a property in the Canal Zone. My quoted price on a home increased by $6,000 the day that we were to sign the papers and do inspections. As a buyer and as an American I believe that I was treated as less than a human being during the buying process. I eventually decided to just wait until things cooled down and I could see how the meltdown in the US real estate and mortgage markets would affect other international markets.

I hope that you will update readers concerning project cancellations, developer schemes, and the general mistreatment of foreign buyers that is going on in Panama. I know that not all sellers mistreat buyers in Panama, but the current situation is out of control.

Thanks again for your articles. I read every one.

Kraig Zeh

Orlando FL

Trump Ocean Club

I enjoyed reading the interesting piece by Mr. Jackson regarding the Trump Ocean Club and their recently publicized effort to finance the project, in part, through the issuance of Panamanian bonds. I was especially intrigued by the suggestion that the financing was packaged as a Panamanian bond offering in order to qualify as an eligible investment for the Seguro Social and the public pension funds. If this is in fact the case, not sure why he believed the business community would be split about having these regulated entities invest in these bonds, provided they satisfy the relevant eligibility criteria and have a fair market return. Is there a concentration or other limit that would be breached by such an investment? Given the critical importance of the project to the entire market of Panama, why should support of this project by the public retirement funds pose greater risk to the system when compared to the existing investments these funds have made in local corporate bonds? If the Trump Ocean Club project were halted, this would certainly have an adverse impact on the value of the privately and publically issued Panamanian bonds already in these public portfolios. Therefore, in it own self-interest, the government of Panama should be committed to ensuring that appropriate financing for the Trump Ocean Club is obtained and that the project is a tremendous success. Any other approach would leave the Panamanian economy in quite a vulnerable position.

A Realist,

R. Salaman

Boston's not that way anymore

I just read your conversation with Panama's Tourism Minister Ruben Blades (Panama News 8/5/07) in which you make mention of the Via Veneto scene in Panama and compare it to Boston's Combat Zone. I don't know when was the last time that you visited Boston but the Zone is now a thing of the past.

A number of factors contributed to its demise. Rising property values made that area of downtown more attractive to real estate developers. In the 1980s the former Playboy Club and the old strip clubs in the Park Square area were replaced by the building of the posh Four Season Hotel (home to the Rolling Stones and others when they are in town) and the State Transportation Building. Emerson College built a new dormitory and relocated it's entire campus to what used to be the Combat Zone. Suffolk University built its administrative offices in that area as well and the State relocated the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles in the heart of the Zone. A new $300 million development that includes the Ritz-Carlton Hotel and Towers (home to Boston Red Sox players including Manny Ramirez) and a Loews cinema complex and a newly renovated Boston Opera House. All of this was taking place during the late 1990s and early 2000s. New luxury apartment buildings and towers along Washington Street have made the area one of the chic places for the young nouveau rich of the city. The happening club scene, restaurants and theater district also contribute to a change in the quality of life along that area. Chinatown residents became actively engaged in grassroots activism and successfully zoned out the adult movies, strip clubs and the red light district.

The city has provided aggressive police work in the area and massive urban renewal projects under the direction of the Boston Redevelopment Authority... all of this helping to stem the crime and close down the adult businessess. All that remains is a new up-scale gentleman's club called Centerfolds on LaGrange Street. Not to say that prostitution, drugs and crime are no longer an issue...  just in a much, much smaller scale.

The holistic approach to urban development that included partnerships between the City, State, institutions of Higher Learning, Hotels, businesses, cultural organizations and neighborhood activist have demonstrated that change is possible and that in fact you can "de-institutionalize" areas such as the Combat Zone and New York's Times Square/42nd Street. The last time that the honorable Minister of Tourism performed in Boston (2002) with his group Editus (before his duties in the public sector of Panama) he spent the night at the Hyatt Regency Boston on One Avenue de Lafayette in the heart of the old Boston Combat Zone. I ask that you please consider sharing this with nuestro amigo Ruben.

Un abrazo,

Jose Masso

www.consalsa.org

Complaint about an encroachment on public property

Today (August 29) I address all of the news media, as for a couple of weeks I have been noting that a company named Grupo Suarez has been building a new business on Via Argentina. It's up from Manolo's restaurant, on the other side of the street.

As a Panamanian citizen with the right to freedom of expression, I think that this business is committing legal faults. In the photograph, not the lines now made, and ribbons and signs posted for three parking spaces in front of the future busienss, which say "parking for the business premises."

I understand that our fair city has a shortage of parking spaces, which along with other things makes for chaos. My question is: Since when can public avenues be made private? I think that this is the height of excesses. If now they can take away our PUBLIC parking spaces, then we who use this popular street surely should expect more from this government that hasn't considered what has been done.

Teresita Tapia Arias

(see photo above)

Driver's license renewals for foreigners

There seems to be a lot of confusion for those who have residency but are not Cedula holders example: Pensionados, regarding renewal of their Panamanian licenses. Apparently worse still is in the interior as supposedly the photo data base apparently comes from the Tribunal Electoral. Just thought it might be nice to print the facts rather than all the bochinche and or uninformed "por gusto" funcionarios. Some have been told they can now only renew in Panamá if this is true it's a great disservice time and expense for many. See if you can get the facts and print it out for all to see thanks again.

Jeffrey Hopkins

Pedasi, Panama

Editor's note: See the lead story in our travel section, but understand that this account is about the metro area and acknowledges that different people are getting different stories out of Transito. I don't think it will be possible to get the complete and accurate story out until the government decides what to do, if in fact it has not already made a positive decision to leave things nebulous so that payoffs might be extorted amidst the confusion.

Indian breeze!!!

I am an Indian, just came to Panama a few weeks ago. Not here for Long though. Ever since I have reached here, I have been thankful to reach before the traumatic Hurricane Dean started and Peru struck earthquake.

I have been quiet shocked that from India we could not see pain and devastation that went all across the earth, much contained in our continents It was to my surprise that countries maybe geographically different but socially so alike, as it is truly said that it is nothing but ‘Spaces Between Us.’

I would however, want to dedicate a poem in expressing my views to the people through your esteemed paper, not great piece of work but just my views.

Right on the top of the mountain I sit

to see below,

If I can see a world

Or world can see above, God glow.

Neither the world nor could I see each other as I thought,

Cause humans are too scattered

And my view was too short,

Alike, the world could not see me,

As it's too busy keeping what it's got.

But the view below was beautiful and calm,

everyone seemed happy, focused and charmed.

Maybe a misconception I formed from above,

And maybe God assumes the same

So doesn’t feel the need to come on earth.

I hope my views could convey what I truly felt all this time along.

Thanks for your time and patience.

Regards

Anupriya Agrawal

Amnesty International wrong on abortion

I wish to commend the Vatican, and more recently Catholic Bishop Michael Evans of East Anglia for condemning Amnesty International’s new pro-abortion policy. Amnesty has fallen victim to a distorted rationale that tends to place a higher priority on human suffering than on life itself. Contrary to Amnesty’s new position, human welfare depends upon a shared responsibility that involves moral limits. There are no "small" murders. The respect for every human life is an essential condition if a societal life worthy of the name is to be possible. When man’’s conscience loses respect for life as something sacred, he inevitably ends by losing his own identity.

While the term "choice" may sound democratic the person who opts for abortion is neglecting to consider the fundamental right to life of the mother’’s unborn fetus. We must help those who are suffering, but we may not use a good end to justify an evil means. Human beings are not raw materials to be exploited or commodities that can be bought and sold. To suggest otherwise is to endorse a macabre interpretation of progress. To claim the right to abortion and to recognize that right in law, means to attribute to human freedom a perverse and evil significance: that of an absolute power over others and against others. This is the death of true freedom.

Paul Kokoski

Hamilton, Ontario

Canada

International opposition to dam in Panama

The Center for Biological Diversity, along with more than 50 indigenous and environmental groups representing over a million people from around the world, has sent a letter to Virginia-based AES Corporation demanding it withdraw from three controversial hydroelectric projects that are threatening La Amistad International Park in Panama, dependent wildlife, and local communities slated to be displaced by flooding.

La Amistad International Park, designated a World Heritage site by the United Nations, forms part of the La Amistad Biosphere Reserve, one of the most biologically diverse areas on the planet. It is home to at least 40 species of fish, 250 species of reptiles and amphibians, 215 species of mammals, and 600 species of birds, including the resplendent quetzal and the harpy eagle.

La Amistad stretches from the Talamanca mountain range, from which rivers such as the Changuinola and its major tributary the Teribe flow through the largest intact tropical rainforest left in Central America into indigenous Naso and Ngobe territory, emptying into the Changuinola estuary and the Caribbean Sea. Both the rivers and the estuary harbor important fishery resources utilized by indigenous and non-indigenous Panamanians.

AES Corporation, based in Arlington, Virginia, has been financing three proposed dam projects on the Changuinola River, located on the border of the park, and its subsidiary in Panama, AES Changuinola, SA, would operate the three dams. A fourth dam would be operated by Hidroecologica del Teribe, SA, a subsidiary of the Colombian-owned Empresas Publicas de Medellin, on the Bonyic River, a tributary of the Rio Teribe.

Stream monitoring studies have shown that the construction of even one of the dams would be catastrophic for aquatic biodiversity. Many of the fish and all shrimp species living in these rivers must migrate between the ocean and freshwater to complete their life cycles; the dams would block their migration and effectively extirpate up to 11 aquatic species from the Biosphere Reserve. Such a loss would likely have devastating and cascading consequences for indigenous culture and livelihoods and for biodiversity throughout the area. (Click here to read a “technical paper” detailing the potential consequences.)

Thousands of Ngobe people stand to have their villages flooded, and will be forced to relocate. The Center has been working with indigenous leaders from both the Naso and Ngobe communities and with other environmental groups to send a strong message to AES Corporation, its partners, shareholders, and the Panamanian National Environmental Authority. The dams are widely opposed by the people living near the construction sites as well as by public-interest groups around the world. Three letters were sent to AES Corporation, including one endorsed by over 50 non-governmental organizations, one explaining a recent violation of indigenous Ngobe rights relating to the dams, and one from the Ngobe imploring the corporation and its shareholders to cancel the dam projects. In their letter, the Ngobe ask AES: “Will you facilitate the elimination of our lifestyles … Will you allow the flooding of our homes and families?” The letter was signed by 144 people, representing many from the villages which would be flooded. (For copies of the three letters, click here.)

Over the past several years, and particularly in recent months, AES Corporation has had negative publicity relating to its global operations. The corporation is a self described “global power company” that operates in 28 countries. It has faced lawsuits in the Dominican Republic for alleged dumping of rock-ash on beaches there, and eventually pulled out of the controversial Bujagali dam project in Uganda for issues similar to those in Panama. Protests were held in July 2007 in El Salvador when more than 5,000 people marched in opposition to a proposed electric plant in that country. (For a link to these articles, click here.) The Center for Biological Diversity and its associates, through these letters, are urging AES to live up to its “commitment to be environmentally responsible.”

Controversy has persuaded other financiers to move away from the Panama dam projects. In 2005, the Inter-American Development Bank pulled its funding of the Bonyic Hydroelectric project following environmental and social concerns raised by the indigenous Naso community and environmental groups.

Said Peter Galvin, conservation director at the Center for Biological Diversity, “We are hoping to demonstrate to AES and its partners that the international community supports local efforts to preserve indigenous livelihoods and the extraordinary biodiversity of the La Amistad Biosphere Reserve. We urge AES to follow the Inter-American Development Bank’s example and pull out.”

Furthermore, recent studies have begun to demonstrate that while hydroelectric projects are often promoted as “clean” and “green” energy sources, the resulting impounded reservoirs above the dams are likely to be large contributors of methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Thus, hydroelectric dams may actually increase global warming.

The threats to the La Amistad Biosphere Reserve are serious and immediate. Only by raising the level of international awareness and commitment to protect biodiversity and to help indigenous people ensure their future can this extraordinary Biosphere Reserve be preserved.

For more information on the Center for Biological Diversity’s work in Panama, click here (link to http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/swcbd/press/la-amistad-06-26-2007.html).

Center for Biological Diversity