254
Country reports on judicial corruption
Purge of the public prosecutor’s office The public prosecutor’s office contributed to the deterioration of the image of the justice system, as evidenced by a national survey published in the daily La Prensa in February 2002. Respondents were asked: ‘What image does the general attorney’s office have?’ According to one in two people the image was ‘bad’ or ‘very bad’. These ratings remained constant while José A. Sossa (1994– 2004) held the position of general attorney. Commentators suggested that one reason for the low opinion of the prosecutor’s office was its reluctance to prosecute. The founder of La Prensa, I. Roberto Eisenmann Jr., was sued for defamation by Sossa for writing in his weekly column: ‘The prosecutor, whose obligation is to fight against crime, is dedicated to protecting criminals and suing journalists and complainants.’9 When Eisenmann was taken into custody and interrogated by prosecutors over the defamation charge, international organisations rallied to his defence. Journalists against Corruption called the prosecutors’ action ‘an attack on freedom of expression’ and Journalists without Borders said that ‘in Panama the principal threat to freedom of the press is judicial harassment’.10 In January 2005 Ana Matilde Gómez took over from Sossa and carried out a series of investigations that led to the dismissal of a number of prosecutors. The best known case concerned Arquímedes Saéz Castillo, a former circuit prosecutor from La Chorrera, who was caught in flagrante in July 2005 while accepting a bribe in exchange for temporary protection measures (medida cautelar).11 More than 13 prosecutors and junior officials have been removed in an attempt 9 10 11 12 13
to counter the perception of corruption in the office.12
Pact for Justice is inconclusive The above cases show how political influence, business or family ties and control of the Supreme Court undermine the independence of the judiciary. Judicial officials are seldom disciplined. One of the rare occasions when this did occur was in May 2006 when Superior Court Judge Dulio Arrocha was dismissed over a disciplinary complaint lodged in 2005. The judge was accused of soliciting money from a party in a case and forcing his staff to ask for loans on his behalf. Hardly a new phenomenon, this was described in detail by Enriqueta Davis13 who reported that 70 per cent of judges, public defenders, public prosecutors, local ombudsmen and lawyers surveyed said there is ‘rarely’ or ‘never’ independence in sentencing in Panama. At a conference on judicial reform organised by the Citizens’ Alliance for Justice, lawyers Damaris Caballero de Almengor and Aida Jurado identified as reasons for judicial corruption and lack of judicial independence:14
● Ties between judges and political parties ● Nomination of the judiciary is controlled by the executive
● Supreme Court judges are excluded from judicial career regulation
● Political and social cultures of disrespect for the concept of judicial independence. As a consequence of the crisis in Panama’s judicial system, President Torrijos invited representatives of the judiciary, the national prosecutor’s offices, congress, the ombudsman, the Citizens’ Alliance for Justice15 and the Ecumenical Committee to
La Prensa (Panama), 11 February 2004. Panama News, vol.10, no. 7, 17 April 2004. La Prensa (Panama), 7 December 2005. El Panamá América (Panama), 2 January 2006. Enriqueta Davis, Situación Actual del Sistema de Administración de Justicia en Panamá, Centro de Investigación Jurídica, Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Políticas (Universidad de Panamá: Panama City, 1993). 14 Diario Panamá América (Panama), 14 August 2000. 15 Alianza Ciudadana Pro Justicia. See www.alianzaprojusticia.org.pa/