news

La Estrella's headline concluded that First Lady Vivian Fernández de Torrijos suspects the Panameñistas, and she responded with a blistering letter pointing out that she didn't say that in her interview that was published in that daily.

It was, rather, Ninth Penal Court judge Diego Fernández who ordered the Public Ministry prosecutors to investigate the Panameñistas for the 2001 transfer of the statues from the government to a private foundation that Mireya Moscoso's administration most scandalously set up to receive all aid to Panama from Taiwan. Much of the aid disappeared into that foundation, headed by the former president's sister Ruby, in the form of unjustifiable executive salaries and othewise. But by and large the statues did not disappear like so much of the money that went into that foundation, nor were they "privatized." They were left in the public domain, outside the museum in Curundu when the government changed hands.

There remain a few questions about some of the smaller pieces of the bronze set --- some of the doves --- that seem to have been missing from an early date. There are also allegations that the Colombian sculptor ordered a bit more bronze than he actually used to cast the statues, although it's not entirely clear whether, if these are true, the discrepancy amounted to anything more than an ordinary precaution to avoid running short.

But wait a minute --- why are the Panameñistas and the sculptor's actions being reviewed? Aren't the salient facts rather simple?

When the Torrijos administration took office the First Lady's office received from its predecessor an empty museum, with Los Juegos de Antaño, a set of bronze scultures with a combined weight of some 35 tons, set up outside. The outgoing administration had intended a children's museum but, in keeping with tradition, the new first lady quickly decided to trash her predecessor's intentions and INAC moved its anthropology museum to the new premises instead. Under somebody's orders, the set of sculptures was moved to a storage building in Parque Omar, the keys to which were in the possession of the First Lady's Office under the charge of Office Special Projects Director Mingthoy Giro. The park and its contents are guarded by the Institutional Protection Service (SPI) presidential guards. The SPI and the First Lady's Office are parts of the Ministry of the Presidency. It was noticed sometime in late August or early September that the sculptures were missing. There were no signs of forced entry into the storage building. Also missing was most of the documentary record of the sculptures' movements.

So why is a judge ordering an investigation of the Panameñistas? Why are certain reporters dwelling on whether the sculptor is a crook, and others barking down the former administration's trail?

Gabriel Soto, the Panameñista candidate for mayor of Arraijan, told El Panama America that it's simply a matter of the PRD distracting attention from an embarrassing scandal. The fundamental assumptions behind that statement, that the Panamanian judiciary is highly politicized and that the PRD has sufficient control over many journalists so as to be able to plant stories that have the effect of slanting the news, are so well accepted among people who know the score or think they do as to not be controversial in Panama.

Ah, but it seems that the Torrijoses may not have the control over Attorney General Ana Matilde Gómez, whom Martín appointed, that they'd like to have. But that might be a show, too.

The first lady complains that the investigation is based on gossip, and both she and her husband are vouching for Mingthoy Giro's innocence. But Gómez says that she has a definite hypothesis about what happened and complains that Giro is stalling the investigation.

How's that? Well, the former TV show host and old personal friend of the first lady ran for PRD convention delegate last January, and in an unprecedented decision the PRD-controlled Electoral Tribunal gave candidates for party offices immunity from criminal investigation or prosecution. This immunity has no basis in law, but is purportedly a regulation issued by the tribunal interpreting the legally established immunity for candidates for public offices. But what it means is that the prosecutors can't open an investigation that names Giro as long as the immunity holds.

(That January election? On election night it appeared that Giro lost her race, but recall that the vote count took weeks and at the end of the process she was declared the winner of a seat at the PRD conventions.)

Giro did appear before prosecutors to answer questions on September 7, but she asserted her immunity. Meanwhile she has been making public statements about being willing to take a lie detector test, fully cooperating with the investigation and so on. She has tried to negotiate conditions on an investigation, such as being able to limit the questioning to queries that she herself writes, but Gómez isn't buying it. Anti-corruption prosecutor Ramsés Barrera has petitioned the Electoral Tribunal to lift Giro's immunity.

And the first lady? Well, she hasn't been called in to answer questions yet, either.

She has, however, assured the public that members of the presidential guard are going to lose their jobs over the theft.

So does that apply to those who know and speak up, to those who don't know and allegedly should have known, or to those who were involved?

It would seem that the time may be upon us when, just as Richard Nixon must have come to rue the day when he threw John Dean to the wolves, corrupt public officials turn on their partners in crime only at great risk.

This might also explain talk of  a constitutional amendment that, if passed by this National Assembly and the new one that gets elected next May, would cut Gómez's term in office from 10 years to five.