Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 6, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 6, 2020 Quote Un secuestro civil que viola los derechos humanos El Estado panameño tiene 20 años de desfase con los criterios de responsabilidad civil en casos de libertad de expresión. Hace 11 años, ya se decidió contra Panamá por un abuso similar. Rodrigo Noriega 06 jul 2020 - 12:00 AM La orden de secuestro impartida por el juzgado civil compromete la operación del diario. Gabriel Rodríguez Expertos internacionales en libertad de expresión han condenado el secuestro civil de las cuentas de esta casa editorial, no solo por violatorio de la libertad de expresión, sino como atentado contra los derechos humanos. La legislación procesal civil panameña permite interponer un secuestro patrimonial como medida cautelar para garantizar el cumplimiento de obligaciones y expectativas económicas. El secuestro civil se puede realizar con una fianza o caución presentada ante un juez del ramo que, sin mayor discreción, ordene esta acción judicial sin distingo de los impactos que pueda causar a los derechos humanos de terceros. Así, se puede secuestrar por igual una escuela, un orfanato, un asilo, un hospital y hasta un medio de comunicación sin mayor consideración al impacto que esto causa al resto de la comunidad. El secuestro civil de las cuentas de Corporación La Prensa fue condenado por José Miguel Vivanco, director ejecutivo de Human Right Watch para las Américas, quien se expresó a través Twitter en los siguientes términos: “Gravísima agresión contra la libertad de prensa en #Panamá: Expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares secuestra activos del periódico La Prensa en proceso judicial de hace 8 años, donde ‘no hay condena ni se ha probado la comisión de algún delito”. Por su parte, Edison Lanza, relator de la libertad de expresión de la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH), opinó a través de sus redes: “Demanda civil a @prensa.com de #Panamá por publicación que involucra a un ex Pte. y persona pública; 8 años después, sin sentencia aún, la justicia ordena inmovilizar fondos del medio como cautelar. Medida desproporcionada con impacto en libertad de prensa”. Igualmente, la jurista Catalina Botero, quien también fue relatora de la libertad de expresión de la CIDH, tuiteó: “Esa decisión judicial, de quedar en firme, compromete la responsabilidad internacional del Estado panameño. ¿Qué parte del caso Tristán Donoso c. Panamá no han entendido?”. En ese comentario, Botero expone la incongruencia entre la legislación vigente en Panamá y el fallo de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos de 2009, en el caso Tristán Donoso contra Panamá, en el cual dicha Corte consideró, entre otros aspectos, que Panamá debía adecuar su legislación para eliminar la sanción penal por afectaciones al honor y reemplazarlas por una compensación civil adecuada que no representara el cierre de un medio de comunicación, o la ruina económica de un individuo. Sobre este tema, el relator Edison Lanza, en el informe para la CIDH en 2017, “Jurisprudencia Nacional en Materia de Libertad de Expresión” detalla que desde el año 2000 los Relatores para la Libertad de Expresión de la ONU, la OEA y la Organización para la Seguridad y Cooperación Europea, (OSCE) acordaron que las sanciones civiles que se dictaminen por casos de abusos de la libertad de expresión “no deben ser de tales proporciones que susciten un efecto inhibitorio sobre la libertad de expresión, y deben ser diseñadas de modo de restablecer la reputación dañada, y no de indemnizar al demandante o castigar al demandado; en especial, las sanciones pecuniarias deben ser estrictamente proporcionales a los daños reales causados, y la ley debe dar prioridad a la utilización de una gama de reparaciones no pecuniarias”. Ese criterio se ha convertido en el patrón de los tribunales internacionales de derechos humanos y está entrando en la jurisprudencia de gran parte de los países latinoamericanos. El Estado panameño tiene 20 años de desfase con los criterios de responsabilidad civil en casos de libertad de expresión. Hace 11 años, ya se decidió contra Panamá por un abuso similar. Con estos precedentes, si el caso llega al Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos, el Estado panameño perdería y sería la responsabilidad de todos los panameños pagar por los daños innecesariamente causados por el secuestro civil a este medio. La falta de cumplimiento de las normas de derechos humanos, le da el poder a un ex presidente de la República para acallar a un medio de comunicación y dejar al país en tinieblas, abriendo el camino a la opacidad, al silencio sobre la corrupción y a la tiranía. Los panameños sabemos lo que eso significa. Moderator comment: Below is an unedited automated translation of the above news article. Quote A civil kidnapping that violates human rights The Panamanian State has 20 years of lag with the criteria of civil liability in cases of freedom of expression. 11 years ago, it was already decided against Panama for a similar abuse. Rodrigo Noriega Jul 06, 2020 - 12:00 AM <<P7BS25WHRFFOBOCRLCC7V5FV6M.jpg>> The kidnapping order issued by the civil court compromises the operation of the newspaper. Gabriel Rodriguez International experts on freedom of expression have condemned the civil kidnapping of the accounts of this publishing house, not only for violating freedom of expression, but as an attack on human rights. Panamanian civil procedural legislation allows the filing of a patrimonial kidnapping as a precautionary measure to guarantee compliance with economic obligations and expectations. Civil kidnapping can be carried out with a bail or bond presented before a branch judge who, without further discretion, orders this judicial action without distinguishing between the impacts that it may cause to the human rights of third parties. Thus, a school, an orphanage, an asylum, a hospital and even a media outlet can be kidnapped equally without much consideration of the impact this causes on the rest of the community. The civil sequestration of the accounts of Corporación La Prensa was condemned by José Miguel Vivanco, executive director of Human Right Watch for the Americas, who expressed himself via Twitter in the following terms: “Very serious aggression against press freedom in # Panama: Ex-president Ernesto Pérez Balladares kidnaps assets of the newspaper La Prensa in a judicial process 8 years ago, where "there is no conviction or proven commission of any crime." For his part, Edison Lanza, rapporteur for freedom of expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), expressed through his networks: “Civil lawsuit against @ prensa.com from # Panama for publication involving a former Pte and public person; 8 years later, without a sentence yet, the court orders the immobilization of funds from the environment as a precautionary measure. Disproportionate measure with an impact on press freedom ”. Likewise, the jurist Catalina Botero, who was also a rapporteur for the IACHR's freedom of expression, tweeted: “That judicial decision, to remain firm, compromises the international responsibility of the Panamanian State. What part of the Tristán Donoso case c. Panama have not understood? " In that comment, Botero exposes the inconsistency between the legislation in force in Panama and the 2009 Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruling, in the Tristán Donoso case against Panama, in which said Court considered, among other aspects, that Panama should adapt its legislation to eliminate the penal sanction for affectations to honor and replace them with adequate civil compensation that does not represent the closure of a media outlet, or the economic ruin of an individual. On this topic, the rapporteur Edison Lanza, in the report for the IACHR in 2017, "National Jurisprudence on Freedom of Expression" details that since 2000 the Rapporteurs for Freedom of Expression of the UN, the OAS and the Organization for European Security and Cooperation (OSCE) agreed that civil sanctions issued for cases of abuse of freedom of expression "must not be of such proportions that they have an inhibitory effect on freedom of expression, and must be designed in such a way way to restore the damaged reputation, and not to compensate the plaintiff or punish the defendant; in particular, pecuniary sanctions must be strictly proportional to the actual damage caused, and the law must give priority to the use of a range of non-pecuniary reparations. ” This criterion has become the standard for international human rights courts and is entering the jurisprudence of a large part of Latin American countries. The Panamanian State has 20 years of lag with the criteria of civil liability in cases of freedom of expression. 11 years ago, it was already decided against Panama for a similar abuse. With these precedents, if the case reaches the Inter-American Human Rights System, the Panamanian State would lose and it would be the responsibility of all Panamanians to pay for the damages unnecessarily caused by the civil kidnapping of this medium. The lack of compliance with human rights norms, gives power to a former president of the Republic to silence a media outlet and leave the country in darkness, opening the way to opacity, silence on corruption and tyranny. Panamanians know what that means. https://www.prensa.com/impresa/panorama/un-secuestro-civil-que-viola-los-derechos-humanos/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 6, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 6, 2020 Quote Freezing of newspaper assets reflects "a failed state" Posted 05/07/2020 The seizing of assets of Corporación La Prensa (Corprensa, publishers of La Prensa, recipient of multi awards for investigative reporting is a "sign of a failed state." said the National Journalism Council (CNP) “We are all in danger when justice is provided to curtail the fundamental principles and guarantees that it is called to protect. The ordered kidnapping of Corprensa's assets by the Fifteenth Civil Court is a sign of a failed State, by preventing the operation of the newspapers La Prensa and Mi Diario and hindering the payment of wages to 240 employees, ”the CNP said in a statement. The kidnapping of Corprensa assets “ is part of a judicial process started eight years ago by former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares, which is still in the first instance, which is pending evidence and in which there is no substantive decision. It is an unprecedented judicial decision that violates several fundamental principles and guarantees enshrined in our Constitution and in international regulations, ”says the CNP. The National Council of Journalism added that “in addition to being a direct attack on freedom of expression and the right to information that all citizens have, the kidnapping action puts at risk the livelihood of two hundred families amid the catastrophic economic damage that the pandemic has brought ”. For the CNP " with this we everyone loses: the citizens, the media, companies, justice, the image of the country, and even the former president has lost, who, trying to compensate his reputation, has ended up muddying it ." Faced with this scenario, the National Council of Journalism stated: First : We deplore the decision of the Fifteenth Civil Judge, Lina Castro De León, considering it to be a violation of freedom of expression and the right of access to information that all citizens have. Second : We call on President Laurentino Cortizo to rule on a fact that clearly violates freedom of expression that his government has repeatedly committed to defending. Third: We will proceed with all possible national and international actions in defense of the right of access to information for citizens and the safeguarding of freedom of expression. At the end, the CNP indicates that it is the responsibility of the justice administration to ensure "that its decisions do not jeopardize the normal functioning of the media. http://Freezing of newspaper assets reflects "a failed state" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 6, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 6, 2020 Quote Ex-president grabs $1.13 million newspaper assets Posted 05/07/2020 Former Panama President , Ernesto Pérez Balladares, has seized shares and bank accounts of Corporación La Prensa, SA (Corprensa),totaling $1.13 million.The actions are part of a civil lawsuit filed 8 years ago against the media for alleged damages. “The judicial action is a direct attack on freedom of the press and the right to information, since it suppresses the operational continuity of the company, given that with it they freeze the funds used to fulfill our contractual obligations, and carry out the payment of goods and services and, above all, the wages of the 240 associates of the corporation, ”said Diego Quijano, president of Corprensa, which publishes La Prensa and Mi Diario reports TVN The lawsuit refers to two publications on March 21 and 22, 2011 in which La Prensa reported that the former president could be the subject of a second criminal investigation for alleged money laundering for "alleged irregularities detected in a Bahamas bank account." When contacted by TVN Noticias, Pérez Balladares referred to a statement published on his website. He notes that La Prensa publications made "direct and unsubstantiated allusion" alleging that he was involved in a money laundering case investigated by the Public Ministry. "Despite the fact that these allegations were widely proven to be false, La Prensa was unwilling to back down. Consequently, in March 2012, the former president filed a civil lawsuit for $5.5 million against the La Prensa Corporation for damages. and prejudice, by linking it intentionally and insultingly to money laundering. Among its allegations not only is the moral damage and the national and international loss of reputation of his image, but also the possible undue media pressure on the judge who would attend a preliminary hearing to the that Pérez Balladares should go for that case, "the statement said. https://www.newsroompanama.com/business/ex-president-grabs-113-million-newspaper-assets Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 6, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 6, 2020 Quote Chamber of Commerce denounces move against La Prensa Posted 05/07/2020 Panama’a Chamber of Commerce, Industries and Agriculture (Cciap) has described the seizure of $1.3 million of assets of Corporación La Prensa by former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares as a "violation of freedom of expression" reports TVN. The decision comes after a legal process in which theex-president filed a civil lawsuit for damages against the media. "We understand the power given by the law to the plaintiff to defend his honor, however, an action of this type in the times we live in is not only a hard blow to the right to information of citizens, but also puts the livelihood of Corprensa's more than 240 collaborators is at risk, "said JeanPierre Leignadier, president of CCIAP The Chamber warns that this is a wake-up call to the justice administration system that took 8 years to resolve a civil case, which they indicate confirms the need for deep reform https://www.newsroompanama.com/business/chamber-of-commerce-denounces-move-against-la-prensa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 6, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 6, 2020 Quote Para ‘La Prensa’, callar no es una opción 06 jul 2020 - 12:00 AM La Prensa cumple 40 años. Ni en dictadura ni en democracia ha habido gobierno al que no se haya fiscalizado. Foto Gabriel Rodríguez El PRD ha vuelto a gobernar y, en menos de un año, sus blasones y mañas lucen intactos. El partido nacido a la sombra de esa dictadura tramposa y acostumbrada a silenciar a sus críticos, vuelve a la carga. La Prensa conoció bien a los gorilas de entonces, pues se atrevió a quitarle los grilletes a ese periodismo mancillado por la bota militar para así poder darle voz a los panameños. La democracia ha concedido al partido de la dictadura otras oportunidades. Sin embargo, algunos dirigentes jamás asimilaron las reglas de la democracia, aquellas que exigen de sus líderes probidad, rendición de cuentas y respeto a la crítica. La Prensa cumple 40 años. Ni en dictadura ni en democracia ha habido gobierno al que no se haya fiscalizado. No hemos cesado un solo día en esforzarnos por llevar adelante el rol crítico que nos corresponde y el periodismo investigativo que merece una sociedad informada. Al tan manido “Buen Gobierno”, ese que se nos vendió como el de un PRD renovado y transformado, sus ministros lo traicionan, sus diputados lo retratan, sus lúgubres conexiones lo desnudan y ahora su expresidente lo delata. La lista de investigaciones y escándalos de corrupción destapados durante la administración de Ernesto Pérez Balladares es demasiado larga para este espacio. A quienes estuvieron a la cabeza de la mayoría de las investigaciones que se hicieron bajo su período, que incluyeron donaciones de narcos, concesiones irregulares, los faros y boyas a la entrada del Canal, intereses en empresas privatizadas y casinos, así como las vergonzosas partidas discrecionales, no lo tuvieron fácil, y queda como símbolo su persecución contra el galardonado periodista investigativo Gustavo Gorriti. El ex presidente es una figura representativa de ese PRD que llenó la Corte Suprema de Justicia de copartidarios, incluyendo al esposo de su secretaria, que se empeñó en cambiar la Constitución para perpetuarse en el poder y que su último acto fue sancionar una ley para que La Prensa jamás pudiera operar un canal de televisión abierta. La acción obtenida por el expresidente tiene como víctima a la sociedad, no a este periódico, sino a la libertad de información, la que tenemos todos los ciudadanos de estar informados. Así hemos llegado a esta encrucijada, en la que la Patria se ha visto atrapada por una pandemia mientras es asaltada por una nueva generación de pillos. Y es ahora cuando se vuelven a encontrar las pretensiones de dos expresidentes. Uno ataca y el otro felicita. Uno avisa y el otro ejecuta. Se mueven al mismo ritmo con el que en el pasado trabajaron juntos, se pelearon, fueron enemigos mortales para terminar uniendo propósitos, con una coordinación tan envidiable que cuesta creer en coincidencias. Como el gatopardismo de Tomasi, ese que narra el truco siciliano de hacernos creer que las cosas cambian cuando lo que se quiere es que sigan igual, el PRD nos ha vuelto a engañar. Y, tal y como describe la novela, los supuestos enemigos mortales terminan pactando para seguir mandando, es parte del camuflaje. Este diario, junto a los demás periodistas independientes y un puñado de ciudadanos aguerridos, lucha denodadamente contra los abusos del poder, contra el miserable saqueo al que ha sido sometido este país y contra el inmenso vicio de la codicia. ¡No nos van a callar! Moderator comment: Below is an unedited automated translation of the above news article. Quote For ‘La Prensa’, keeping silent is not an option Jul 06, 2020 - 12:00 AM <<MJIOSSWWYNC65L3TM32E5TEPKA.jpeg>> La Prensa turns 40 years old. Neither in dictatorship nor in democracy has there been a government that has not been controlled. Photo Gabriel Rodríguez The PRD has returned to govern and, in less than a year, its blazons and tricks look intact. The party born in the shadow of that cheating dictatorship and accustomed to silencing its critics, returns to the fray. The Press knew the gorillas well then, as they dared to remove the shackles of that journalism tainted by the military boot in order to give Panamanians a voice. Democracy has given the dictatorship party other opportunities. However, some leaders have never assimilated the rules of democracy, those that demand honesty, accountability and respect for criticism from their leaders. La Prensa turns 40 years old. Neither in dictatorship nor in democracy has there been a government that has not been controlled. We have not ceased a single day in striving to carry out the critical role that corresponds to us and the investigative journalism that an informed society deserves. To the hackneyed "Good Government", the one that was sold to us like that of a renewed and transformed PRD, his ministers betrayed him, his deputies portrayed him, his gloomy connections undress him and now his former president betrays him. The list of investigations and corruption scandals uncovered during the Ernesto Pérez Balladares administration is too long for this space. To those who led the majority of the investigations that were carried out during his period, which included donations of drug traffickers, irregular concessions, lighthouses and buoys at the entrance to the Canal, interests in privatized companies and casinos, as well as shameful games Discretionary, they did not have it easy, and their persecution against the award-winning investigative journalist Gustavo Gorriti remains a symbol. The former president is a representative figure of that PRD that filled the Supreme Court of Justice with co-supporters, including the husband of his secretary, who insisted on changing the Constitution to perpetuate himself in power and that his last act was to sanction a law so that La Prensa could never operate an open television channel. The action obtained by the former president has society as a victim, not this newspaper, but freedom of information, which all citizens have to be informed. Thus we have reached this crossroads, in which the Homeland has been caught by a pandemic while being assaulted by a new generation of rogues. And it is now when the claims of two former presidents meet again. One attacks and the other congratulates. One warns and the other executes. They move at the same rhythm with which in the past they worked together, they fought, they were mortal enemies to end up uniting purposes, with such enviable coordination that it is hard to believe in coincidences. Like Tomasi's Gatopardism, the one that tells the Sicilian trick of making us believe that things change when what is wanted is that they remain the same, the PRD has deceived us again. And, as the novel describes, the supposed mortal enemies end up agreeing to continue to command, it is part of the camouflage. This newspaper, along with the other independent journalists and a handful of seasoned citizens, fights hard against the abuses of power, against the miserable plunder to which this country has been subjected and against the immense vice of greed. They won't shut us up! https://www.prensa.com/impresa/panorama/para-la-prensa-callar-no-es-una-opcion/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 6, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 6, 2020 Quote Pérez Balladares pretende silenciar a ‘La Prensa’ La operación intenta desestabilizar a esta empresa periodística, usando como excusa el aseguramiento, mediante el secuestro de acciones y cuentas bancarias. Hoy se llevará a cabo una conferencia de prensa sobre el tema, a las 10:00 a.m. Rolando Rodríguez B. 06 jul 2020 - 12:00 AM Esta foto fue borrada de la cuenta de Twitter de Pérez Balladares, pero fue replicada por otros medios. Tomada de internet El secuestro de acciones y cuentas bancarias de Corporación La Prensa, S.A. (Corprensa) por parte del expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares tiene efectos calculados que ponen en riesgo la estabilidad de la empresa y de su personal periodístico y administrativo. La operación para silenciar a este medio utilizó como herramienta legal el secuestro de activos, con el supuesto fin de asegurarse el pago de sus pretensiones –$5.5 millones– por un supuesto daño moral que afecta no solo el normal desenvolvimiento del medio, sino la estabilidad de todo su personal, justo cuando el país se encuentra en medio de una grave crisis social y económica producto de la pandemia. Numerosas voces se han alzado sobre este tema y expertos advierten que lo ordenado por el juzgado de la causa es abiertamente un ataque a la libertad de expresión y de prensa. El juicio civil incoado por Pérez Balladares apenas está en su etapa inicial, en primera instancia. Y su reclamo supone, a su juicio, que este medio no cumplió con los estándares éticos periodísticos, cuando un repaso de todo lo acontecido con sus reclamaciones revela no solo que Pérez Balladares se negó a dar declaraciones sobre su caso, sino que sus propios abogados, en comunicados emitidos en su momento, sostenían que el Ministerio Público cometió errores, los cuales no son atribuibles a este medio. Ello fue consignado en varias noticias publicadas por La Prensa. Igualmente, abogados del expresidente han expresado que la defensa de este medio ha retrasado intencionalmente el desarrollo del proceso civil. Sin embargo, el juzgado donde se ventila esta causa tardó siete años en admitir las pruebas y contrapruebas de las partes. Así mismo, la defensa de este medio ha tenido que interponer en dos ocasiones amparos de garantías constitucionales a fin de garantizarse su derecho a defenderse. Ambos recursos fueron resueltos este mismo año por tribunales superiores de justicia a favor de La Prensa. Lo que sí está claro en este momento es que dos expresidentes –Pérez Balladares (1994-1999) y Ricardo Martinelli (2009-2014)– tienen en común que el primero ha practicado el secuestro de importantes activos de la empresa, y el segundo ha anunciado –tres días antes de que lo hiciera el primero– medidas similares y con el mismo método: el secuestro de la administración del medio. Pronunciamiento El Consejo Nacional de Periodismo (CNP), que aglutina los principales medios de comunicación del país, emitió ayer un comunicado en el que deplora la acción de secuestro ordenada por el Juzgado Décimoquinto Civil, decisión que es calificada de“violatoria de la libertad de expresión y del derecho al acceso a la información que tienen todos los ciudadanos”. Pidió al presidente, Laurentino Cortizo, pronunciarse sobre este hecho, considerando que su Gobierno se comprometió a defender la libertad de expresión. “Procederemos –concluye– con todas las acciones nacionales e internacionales posibles en defensa del derecho de acceso a la información de los ciudadanos...”. El secuestro que pretende controlar y callar a ‘La Prensa’ Con sigilo, el expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares logró que un juzgado ordenara el secuestro de activos vitales de Corporación La Prensa, S.A., el holding que aglutina La Prensa y Mi Diario. Pérez Balladares reclama el pago, por supuesto daño moral, de $5.5 millones, tras la publicación, los días 21 y 22 de marzo de 2011, de noticias sobre su supuesta vinculación a cuentas millonarias en Bahamas. El caso se ventila desde hace ocho años en un juzgado civil, que autorizó el secuestro de bienes de Corprensa, a fin de garantizarle el pago de sus pretensiones, si ganara el pleito. La querella se refiere a noticias que pretendían “...establecer de manera irresponsable y sin fundamento alguno que existe una conexión ilícita entre los 176 millones de dólares que estuvieron depositados en la enunciada cuenta bancaria de Bahamas y los dineros que estuvieron bajo investigación procedente de las concesión otorgada para la explotación de juegos de suerte y azar, investigación que involucró a sociedades como Lucky Games y Shelf Holding”. La Prensa, citando fuentes oficiales, publicó sendas notas sobre el tema en las fechas señaladas. Lo que no dijo el acusador –José María Castillo– en la querella de su cliente fue que Pérez Balladares fue abordado por este medio al día siguiente de estas publicaciones –el 23 de marzo de 2011– para preguntarle, precisamente, sobre la intención del Ministerio Público de abrirle otra investigación por blanqueo, que era a lo que se referían las notas que motivaron la querella. Fue abordado al término del sepelio del exvicepresidente Guillermo Ford, quien en 1989 fue víctima de hordas de la dictadura militar, cuando Ford reclamaba el gigantesco fraude electoral perpetrado por la dictadura a favor del PRD, del que era y es parte Pérez Balladares. “En su momento, con mucho gusto hablaremos de esto, pero hoy es un momento especial, que no debemos hablar de esto”, respondió Pérez Balladares a La Prensa. Con todo, este medio publicó, no una, sino varias veces, la posición de la defensa de Pérez Balladares. Luis Carlos Cabeza, abogado del expresidente, dijo a La Prensa que el fiscal de la causa, Marcelino Aguilar, era “ignorante en materia financiera” y fue “instrumento de terceros” para afectar a su cliente. Cabezas indica que el Ministerio Público –y no el periódico– cometió “un grave error” en la interpretación de información que le suministró el banco HSBC y que sirvió de base para pedirle al juzgado abrir un nuevo expediente contra su cliente. Además, fue consignado que Cabezas dijo que los más de $176 millones que se manejaron entre mayo de 2009 y junio de 2010 en una cuenta bancaria de Banistmo Internacional, con sede en Bahamas, no eran de Pérez Balladares, sino que era el monto de todos los depósitos y cheques girados por todos los cuentahabientes de ese banco en ese período. Precisamente, de esa cuenta se giraron cheques a la sociedad Shelf Holding, de la que era firmante Pérez Balladares. Aun cuando quedó claro que, si hubo una mala interpretación de la información que dio el banco, la defensa de Pérez Balladares en ese momento indicó que era del Ministerio Público. Puntos de referencia Y mientras el secuestro de Pérez Balladares se concreta sobre importantes activos de esta casa editorial, La Prensa ha llevado a cabo investigaciones periodísticas en torno a la gestión del gobierno de Laurentino Cortizo (PRD) para controlar la pandemia. Estas investigaciones han girado en torno y en especial de connotados miembros del Gabinete, como el ministro de Obras Públicas, Rafael Sabonge, responsable del hospital modular en Albrook; la de un oneroso contrato para distribuir medicamentos de la Caja de Seguro Social, de $168 millones, suspendido por Cortizo; el desmesurado aumento de la planilla de la Asamblea Nacional, incluyendo contratos en medio de la pandemia. Las investigaciones también han incluido las gestiones de compra de equipos médicos por parte del vicepresidente y ministro de la Presidencia, José Gabriel Gaby Carrizo, así como la contratación directa que hizo este funcionario con la empresa Mercadeo Integral, en medio de la pandemia, por $1.7 millones, y otro de $900 mil. Carrizo no es un desconocido para Pérez Balladares. De hecho, se reconcilió con su partido luego de que Carrizo fue nominado a la Vicepresidencia por Cortizo. Y aunque esa postulación causó críticas entre viejos militantes del PRD, el efecto fue el contrario en el expresidente, que muestra públicamente su afinidad con Carrizo. Por ejemplo, Pérez Balladares posteó el 16 de febrero de 2019 –tres meses antes de las elecciones de 2019– una foto de él junto a Carrizo en la que decía: “Los jóvenes no son el futuro, son el presente”. La imagen que acompañaba su comentario fue eliminada, pero algunos medios llegaron a rescatarla (ver foto). Este comentario causó sorpresa. Tras su derrota en las primarias del PRD para convertirse en candidato presidencial en 2018, Pérez Balladares comentó molesto: “Muchas gracias! Yo he cumplido con mi responsabilidad histórica. Ahora que los miembros del PRD decidan y carguen con las consecuencias, positivas o negativas, de su decisión”. Incluso, llegó a prometer “Yo moriré en el PRD… hasta aquí llegamos”. Estas frases marcaron su distanciamiento con Cortizo… hasta que apareció Carrizo. “Yo creo que ha sido excelente la escogencia de @NitoCortizo en seleccionar a la @JuventudPRD11, abriéndole la puerta a la nueva generación con @GabyCarrizoJ”, comentó. La gestión de compra de equipos médicos con supuestos sobreprecios por parte del Ministerio de la Presidencia provocó que el general retirado Rubén Darío Paredes opinara que Carrizo debía renunciar. Pérez Balladares salió de inmediato en su defensa: Eso “es totalmente inconstitucional”, advirtió. Carrizo tiene otro admirador que públicamente lo ha elogiado: el expresidente Ricardo Martinelli, que, al igual que Pérez Balladares, también ha anunciado que pretende secuestrar este medio. Fue el 30 de enero pasado, un día después de un discurso de Carrizo, en la inauguración de Expo Inmobiliaria Acobir 2020. Martinelli dijo: “Hoy escucho a un estadista. Vamos bien y cosas cómo estás [sic] de reflejarse en hechos concretos, ayudan [a] la inversión y a mejorar la calidad de vida. Felicitaciones @gabycarrizoj”. ¿Qué mereció la felicitación de Martinelli?: “Los tiempos de la desconfianza –decía Carrizo– porque se generó y se utilizó el poder político para perseguir, para satisfacer propósitos personales y en el camino se le hizo mucho daño a nuestra sociedad, a nuestro país y a nuestro futuro. Al pasado, nunca más, debemos dejarlo atrás”. Dos expresidentes elogiando a Carrizo, cuyo repudio es notorio en redes, en corrillos políticos, artículos, grupos de noticias. Ambos celebran y entre los dos pretenden controlar Corprensa. Moderator comment: Below is an unedited automated translation of the above news article. Quote Pérez Balladares intends to silence ‘La Prensa’ The operation tries to destabilize this journalistic company, using underwriting as an excuse, through the hijacking of shares and bank accounts. A press conference on the subject will be held today at 10:00 a.m. Rolando Rodríguez B. Jul 06, 2020 - 12:00 AM <<3SWC2JC3QJDC7FUVRNO2V3Q7PQ.jpg>> This photo was deleted from Pérez Balladares's Twitter account, but was replicated by other means. Taken from the internet The hijacking of shares and bank accounts of Corporación La Prensa, S.A. (Corprensa) by former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares has calculated effects that put the stability of the company and its journalistic and administrative staff at risk. The operation to silence this medium used the kidnapping of assets as a legal tool, in order to ensure the payment of its claims - $ 5.5 million - for alleged moral damage that affects not only the normal development of the medium, but the stability of all its personnel, just when the country is in the midst of a serious social and economic crisis due to the pandemic. Many voices have been raised on this issue and experts warn that what the court ordered is openly an attack on freedom of expression and of the press. The civil trial initiated by Pérez Balladares is only in its initial stage, in the first instance. And his claim supposes, in his opinion, that this medium did not meet journalistic ethical standards, when a review of everything that happened with his claims reveals not only that Pérez Balladares refused to give statements about his case, but that his own lawyers In communications issued at the time, they maintained that the Public Ministry made mistakes, which are not attributable to this medium. This was recorded in various news published by La Prensa. Likewise, the former president's lawyers have expressed that the defense of this medium has intentionally delayed the development of the civil process. However, the court where this case is being heard took seven years to admit the parties' evidence and counter-evidence. Likewise, the defense of this medium has had to lodge constitutional guarantees on two occasions in order to guarantee its right to defend itself. Both appeals were resolved this year by higher courts of justice in favor of La Prensa. What is clear at this time is that two former presidents - Pérez Balladares (1994-1999) and Ricardo Martinelli (2009-2014) - have in common that the former has kidnapped important company assets, and the latter has announced - three days before the first one - similar measures and with the same method: the kidnapping of the media administration. Pronouncement The National Council of Journalism (CNP), which brings together the country's main media, yesterday issued a statement in which it deplores the kidnapping action ordered by the Fifteenth Civil Court, a decision that is described as “violating freedom of expression and the right to access to information that all citizens have ”. He asked the president, Laurentino Cortizo, to rule on this fact, considering that his government promised to defend freedom of expression. "We will proceed," he concludes, "with all possible national and international actions in defense of citizens' right of access to information ...". The kidnapping that tries to control and silence ‘La Prensa’ With secrecy, former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares managed to get a court to order the kidnapping of vital assets of Corporación La Prensa, S.A., the holding that brings together La Prensa and Mi Diario. Pérez Balladares claims the payment, of course, moral damage, of $ 5.5 million, after the publication, on March 21 and 22, 2011, of news about his alleged connection to millionaire accounts in the Bahamas. The case has been aired for eight years in a civil court, which authorized the seizure of Corprensa's assets, in order to guarantee the payment of its claims, should it win the lawsuit. The complaint refers to news that "... irresponsibly and without foundation established that there is an illicit connection between the 176 million dollars that were deposited in the aforementioned Bahamas bank account and the monies that were under investigation from the concession granted for the exploitation of games of luck and chance, an investigation that involved companies such as Lucky Games and Shelf Holding ”. The Press, citing official sources, published separate notes on the subject on the appointed dates. What the accuser –José María Castillo– did not say in his client's complaint was that Pérez Balladares was approached by this means the day after these publications –March 23, 2011– to ask him, precisely, about the Ministry's intention Public to open another investigation for money laundering, which was what the notes that motivated the complaint referred to. He was approached at the end of the funeral of former Vice President Guillermo Ford, who in 1989 was the victim of hordes of the military dictatorship, when Ford claimed the gigantic electoral fraud perpetrated by the dictatorship in favor of the PRD, of which Pérez Balladares was and is a part. "At the time, we will gladly talk about this, but today is a special moment, that we should not talk about this," Pérez Balladares replied to La Prensa. However, this medium published, not once, but several times, the position of the defense of Pérez Balladares. Luis Carlos Cabeza, the former president's lawyer, told La Prensa that the prosecutor in the case, Marcelino Aguilar, was "ignorant in financial matters" and was a "third-party instrument" to affect his client. Cabezas indicates that the Public Ministry - and not the newspaper - made "a serious error" in the interpretation of information provided by the HSBC bank and that served as the basis for asking the court to open a new file against his client. In addition, it was recorded that Cabezas said that the more than $ 176 million that was handled between May 2009 and June 2010 in a bank account of Banistmo International, based in the Bahamas, was not from Pérez Balladares, but was the amount of all deposits and checks drawn on all account holders of that bank in that period. Precisely, checks were made from that account to the Shelf Holding company, of which Pérez Balladares was a signatory. Even though it was clear that, if there was a misinterpretation of the information that the bank gave, the defense of Pérez Balladares at that time indicated that it was from the Public Ministry. Points of reference And while the kidnapping of Pérez Balladares is materialized on important assets of this publishing house, La Prensa has carried out journalistic investigations into the management of the government of Laurentino Cortizo (PRD) to control the pandemic. These investigations have revolved around and especially of renowned members of the Cabinet, such as the Minister of Public Works, Rafael Sabonge, responsible for the modular hospital in Albrook; that of an onerous contract to distribute medicines from the Social Security Fund, of $ 168 million, suspended by Cortizo; the excessive increase in the payroll of the National Assembly, including contracts in the midst of the pandemic. The investigations have also included the efforts to purchase medical equipment by the Vice President and Minister of the Presidency, José Gabriel Gaby Carrizo, as well as the direct hiring that this official made with the company Mercadeo Integral, in the midst of the pandemic, for $ 1.7 million, and another of $ 900 thousand. Carrizo is not unknown to Pérez Balladares. In fact, he reconciled with his party after Carrizo was nominated for the Vice Presidency by Cortizo. And although this post caused criticism among old PRD militants, the effect was the opposite in the former president, who publicly shows his affinity with Carrizo. For example, Pérez Balladares posted on February 16, 2019 - three months before the 2019 elections - a photo of him with Carrizo in which he said: "Young people are not the future, they are the present." The image that accompanied his comment was removed, but some media came to rescue him (see photo). This comment caused surprise. After his defeat in the PRD primary to become a presidential candidate in 2018, Pérez Balladares commented annoyed: “Thank you very much! I have fulfilled my historical responsibility. Now that the members of the PRD decide and bear the consequences, positive or negative, of their decision. " He even promised to "I will die in the PRD ... we have come this far." These phrases marked his estrangement from Cortizo ... until Carrizo appeared. "I believe that the choice of @NitoCortizo in selecting @ JuventudPRD11 has been excellent, opening the door to the new generation with @GabyCarrizoJ", he commented. The management of the purchase of medical equipment with alleged surcharges by the Ministry of the Presidency caused the retired general Rubén Darío Paredes to believe that Carrizo should resign. Pérez Balladares immediately came to his defense: That "is totally unconstitutional," he warned. Carrizo has another admirer who has publicly praised him: former President Ricardo Martinelli, who, like Pérez Balladares, has also announced that he intends to hijack this media. It was last January 30, a day after Carrizo's speech, at the opening of Expo Inmobiliaria Acobir 2020. Martinelli said: “Today I am listening to a statesman. We are doing well and things how are you [sic] to be reflected in concrete facts, help [to] investment and improve the quality of life. Congratulations @gabycarrizoj ”. What did Martinelli's congratulations deserve ?: “The times of mistrust - Carrizo said - because political power was generated and used to persecute, to satisfy personal purposes and along the way much harm was done to our society, to our country and our future. To the past, never again, we must leave it behind ”. Two former presidents praising Carrizo, whose repudiation is notorious in networks, in political circles, articles, and news groups. Both celebrate and between the two they try to control Corprensa. https://www.prensa.com/impresa/panorama/perez-balladares-pretende-silenciar-a-la-prensa/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 6, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 6, 2020 Quote ‘Una vez más un juez olvida que su deber es garantizar la justicia’, excolaboradores de Corprensa ‘Consideramos que esta es una nueva tentativa de callar y cerrar el diario La Prensa’, destacó el comunicado de exasociados. Manuel Vega Loo 06 jul 2020 - 06:58 AM Los exasociados de Corprensa deploran “la decisión que apoya los reiterados intentos de acallar a un medio de comunicación que un grupo considera hostil porque no dobla la rodilla ante su poder”. Foto/Gabriel Rodríguez Un total de 113 de antiguos asociados de la Corporación La Prensa, S. A. (Corporensa) expresó en un comunicado que “una vez más un juez de la República olvida que su deber es garantizar la justicia”. “Una vez más un juez de la República olvida que su deber es garantizar la justicia como un derecho de todos los ciudadanos a acceder a la información necesaria para conocer, decidir y participar de la vida en sociedad”, enfatizó el grupo. La reacción de los excolabores surge luego que se conociera que el expresidente de la República Ernesto Pérez Balladares secuestrara cuentas y bienes de Corprensa, que edita los periódicos La Prensa y Mi Diario. Ese secuestro fue decretado por la juez Decimoquinta Civil, Lina E. Castro De León, como parte de una demanda civil que presentó hace ocho años, por presuntos daños y perjuicios Pérez Balladares. Este proceso está en una primera instancia y está pendiente de la práctica de pruebas y aún no se ha dictado una condena ni se ha probado que Corprensa ha cometido un delito. Según los firmantes, la gravedad del secuestro de los activos de Corprensa, por un expresidente del partido en gobierno actualmente, sin existir un fallo de un caso que tiene ocho años va más allá de ideas políticas u opiniones a favor o en contra de la línea editorial del medio. “Hoy esta acción es contra el diario La Prensa, pero mañana puede ser contra cualquiera. Lo peligroso del hecho trasciende además por el abuso del poder político, porque siembra miedo y produce la autocensura del ejercicio del periodismo libre”, afirmó el grupo. “Nosotros, los que abajo firmamos, antiguos colaboradores de La Prensa, repudiamos la intimidación a la prensa libre, a la libertad de expresión y la libertad de prensa, que es la más importante de todas las libertades y que además es la base de la democracia, que en este país costó la vida de una cantidad aún no confirmada de panameños”, destacó el grupo en su comunicado divulgado este domingo 5 de julio. “Consideramos que esta es una nueva tentativa de callar y cerrar el diario La Prensa”, destacó el comunicado de exasociados. También deploran “la decisión que apoya los reiterados intentos de acallar a un medio de comunicación que un grupo considera hostil porque no dobla la rodilla ante su poder”. Moderator comment: Below is an unedited automoated translation of the above news article. Quote ‘Once again a judge forgets that his duty is to guarantee justice’, former collaborators of Corprensa "We consider this to be a new attempt to shut up and close the newspaper La Prensa," the ex-associate statement said. Manuel Vega Loo Jul 06, 2020 - 06:58 AM <<press.jpg>> Former Corprensa associates deplore "the decision that supports repeated attempts to silence a media outlet that a group considers hostile because it does not bend its knee at its power." Photo / Gabriel Rodríguez A total of 113 of former associates of the La Prensa Corporation, S.A. (Corporensa) expressed in a statement that "once again a judge of the Republic forgets that his duty is to guarantee justice." "Once again a judge of the Republic forgets that his duty is to guarantee justice as a right of all citizens to access the information necessary to know, decide and participate in life in society," emphasized the group. The reaction of the ex-collaborators arises after it was known that former President of the Republic Ernesto Pérez Balladares kidnapped Corprensa's accounts and assets, which publishes the newspapers La Prensa and Mi Diario. That kidnapping was decreed by the Fifteenth Civil Judge, Lina E. Castro De León, as part of a civil lawsuit that she filed eight years ago, for alleged damages Pérez Balladares. This process is in the first instance and is pending the practice of evidence and a conviction has not yet been issued, nor has it been proven that Corprensa has committed a crime. According to the signatories, the severity of the kidnapping of Corprensa's assets, by a former president of the ruling party, without a ruling in a case that is eight years old, goes beyond political ideas or opinions in favor or against the line. publisher of the medium. "Today this action is against the newspaper La Prensa, but tomorrow it can be against anyone. The danger of the fact also transcends due to the abuse of political power, because it sows fear and produces self-censorship in the exercise of free journalism, ”the group affirmed. "We, the undersigned, former collaborators of La Prensa, repudiate the intimidation of the free press, freedom of expression and press freedom, which is the most important of all freedoms and which is also the basis of democracy, which in this country cost the lives of an as yet unconfirmed number of Panamanians, "the group said in its statement released this Sunday, July 5. "We consider this to be a new attempt to shut up and close the newspaper La Prensa," said the ex-associate statement. They also deplore "the decision that supports repeated attempts to silence a media outlet that a group considers hostile because it does not bend its knee before its power." https://www.prensa.com/sociedad/una-vez-mas-un-juez-olvida-que-su-deber-es-garantizar-la-justicia-excolaboradores-de-corprensa/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 6, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 6, 2020 Quote CIAM expresa rechazo del uso del sistema judicial para ‘cercenar la libertad de información’ Manuel Vega Loo 05 jul 2020 - 06:37 PM El CIAM recordó a las autoridades que la República de Panamá debe actualizar el marco jurídico de tutela de los derechos humanos. Foto Gabriel Rodríguez El Centro de Incidencia Ambiental de Panamá (CIAM) expresó este domigo 5 de julio su rechazo al uso del sistema judicial panameña para cercenar la libertad de información. La reacción del CIAM surge por el secuestro de cuentas y bienes de la Corporación La Prensa, S. A., que edita los diarios La Prensa y Mi Diario, el pasado 22 de junio. Ese secuestro fue decretado por la juez Decimoquinta Civil, Lina E. Castro De León, como parte de una demanda civil que presentó hace ocho años, por presuntos daños y perjuicios, el expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares. Este proceso está en una primera instancia y está pendiente de la práctica de pruebas y aún no se ha dictado una condena ni se ha probado que Corprensa ha cometido un delito. “Las medidas y amenazas contra un medio de comunicación representan acciones contra la sociedad en su conjunto”, destacó el comunicado del CIAM, el cual fue firmado por Brooke Alfaro. “En el ámbito ambiental la libertad de expresión e información ejerce un papel vital que permite divulgar las infracciones y abusos qué constantemente se cometen en perjuicio de los ciudadanos”, destacó el centro. El CIAM recordó a las autoridades que la República de Panamá debe actualizar el marco jurídico de tutela de los derechos humanos en materia de acceso a la información y libertad de expresión, “incluyendo la protección de los comunicadores sociales y los medios de comunicación”. “Cuando se secuestra a un medio de comunicación, y lo aceptamos, se secuestra a toda la sociedad”, enfatizó el CIAM. Moderator comment: Below is an unedited automated translation of the above news article. Quote CIAM expresses rejection of the use of the judicial system to "curtail freedom of information" Manuel Vega Loo Jul 05, 2020 - 06:37 PM <<JT5AKIQHLJH63FXGQAVXG3S2OY.jpeg>> CIAM reminded the authorities that the Republic of Panama must update the legal framework for the protection of human rights. Photo Gabriel Rodríguez The Environmental Advocacy Center of Panama (CIAM) expressed this Sunday, July 5, its rejection of the use of the Panamanian judicial system to curtail freedom of information. The reaction of CIAM arises from the seizure of accounts and assets of Corporación La Prensa, S.A., which publishes the newspapers La Prensa and Mi Diario, on June 22. That kidnapping was decreed by the Fifteenth Civil Judge, Lina E. Castro De León, as part of a civil lawsuit filed eight years ago, for alleged damages, by former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares. This process is in the first instance and is pending the practice of evidence and a conviction has not yet been issued, nor has it been proven that Corprensa has committed a crime. "The measures and threats against a media represent actions against society as a whole," said the CIAM statement, which was signed by Brooke Alfaro. "In the environmental field, freedom of expression and information plays a vital role that allows the disclosure of the infractions and abuses that are constantly committed to the detriment of citizens," said the center. CIAM reminded the authorities that the Republic of Panama must update the legal framework for the protection of human rights in terms of access to information and freedom of expression, "including the protection of social communicators and the media." "When a media outlet is kidnapped, and we accept it, the entire society is kidnapped," CIAM emphasized. https://www.prensa.com/sociedad/ciam-expresa-rechazo-del-uso-del-sistema-judicial-para-cercenar-la-libertad-de-informacion/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 6, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 6, 2020 Quote ‘Esto es señal de un Estado fallido', advierte el CNP sobre el secuestro de Corprensa a solicitud de Pérez Balladares Mónica Palm 05 jul 2020 - 03:17 PM Ernesto Pérez Balladares. El secuestro de los activos de Corporación La Prensa, S.A. (Corprensa), ordenado por un juzgado civil, es señal de un “Estado fallido”, al impedir la operatividad de los periódicos La Prensa y Mi Diario y dificultar el pago de salarios a 240 colaboradores, advirtió el Consejo Nacional de Periodismo (CNP). El secuestro, por una concurrencia de hasta $1.13 millones, fue decretado formalmente el pasado 22 de junio, por la juez Decimoquinta Civil, Lina E. Castro De León, como parte de una demanda civil que presentó hace ocho años, por presuntos daños y perjuicios, el expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares (1994-1999). El proceso está en primera instancia, pendiente de la práctica de pruebas, y todavía no se ha dictado una condena ni se ha probado que Corprensa ha cometido delito alguno. Para el CNP, la orden de la juez Castro es una decisión judicial sin precedentes que violenta varios principios y garantías fundamentales consagrados la Constitución y en normativas internacionales. “No nos equivoquemos, con esto perdemos todos: los ciudadanos, los medios, las empresas, la justicia, la imagen del país, e incluso ha perdido el expresidente, que intentando resarcir su reputación, ha terminado por enlodarla”, remarca el CNP, al tiempo que pide un pronunciamiento de parte del expresidente Laurentino Cortizo. Lea aquí el comunicado del CNP “Este pronunciamiento lo hacemos en consonancia con los principios que siempre ha defendido el CNP: que el periodismo está sujeto al escrutinio de todo ciudadano que considere su honra afectada, sin embargo le corresponde a la administración de justicia asegurar que sus decisiones no pongan en riesgo el normal funcionamiento de los medios de comunicación violando la libertad de prensa consagrada en la Constitución”. Moderator comment: Below is an unedited automated translation of the above news article. Quote ‘This is a sign of a failed state ', warns the CNP about the kidnapping of Corprensa at the request of Pérez Balladares Monica Palm Jul 05, 2020 - 03:17 PM <<balladeres.jpg>> Ernesto Pérez Balladares. The kidnapping of the assets of Corporación La Prensa, S.A. (Corprensa), ordered by a civil court, is a sign of a "failed state", by preventing the operation of the newspapers La Prensa and Mi Diario and hindering the payment of wages to 240 collaborators, warned the National Council of Journalism (CNP) . The kidnapping, for a concurrence of up to $ 1.13 million, was formally decreed on June 22, by the Fifteenth Civil judge, Lina E. Castro De León, as part of a civil lawsuit that she filed eight years ago, for alleged damages , former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares (1994-1999). The process is in the first instance, pending the practice of evidence, and a conviction has not yet been issued, nor has it been proven that Corprensa has committed any crime. For the CNP, Judge Castro's order is an unprecedented judicial decision that violates several fundamental principles and guarantees enshrined in the Constitution and in international regulations. "Make no mistake, with this we all lose: the citizens, the media, companies, justice, the image of the country, and even the former president has lost, who trying to make up for his reputation has ended up muddying it," remarks the CNP, at the same time that he asks for a statement from former President Laurentino Cortizo. Read here the CNP statement "We make this pronouncement in accordance with the principles that the CNP has always upheld: that journalism is subject to the scrutiny of every citizen who considers their honor affected, however it is up to the administration of justice to ensure that their decisions do not put them at risk the normal functioning of the media, violating the freedom of the press enshrined in the Constitution ”. https://www.prensa.com/judiciales/esto-es-senal-de-un-estado-fallido-advierte-el-cnp-sobre-el-secuestro-de-corprensa-a-solicitud-de-perez-balladares/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 7, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 7, 2020 Quote The shadows of the dictatorship Posted 06/07/2020 The PRD has returned to govern and, in less than a year, its blazons and tricks look intact. The party born in the shadow of that cheating dictatorship and accustomed to silencing its critics, returns to the fray. La Prensa knew the gorillas well then, as they dared to remove the shackles of that journalism tainted by the military boot in order to give Panamanians a voice. Democracy has given the dictatorship party other opportunities. However, some leaders have never assimilated the rules of democracy, those that demand probity, accountability and respect for criticism from their leaders. La Prensa turns 40. Neither in dictatorship nor in democracy has there been a government that has not been supervised. We have not ceased a single day in striving to carry out the critical role that corresponds to us and the investigative journalism that an informed society deserves. To the hackneyed "Good Government", the one that was sold to us like that of a renewed and transformed PRD, his ministers betrayed him, his deputies reflect him, his gloomy connections undress him and now his former president betrays him. The list of investigations and corruption scandals uncovered during the Ernesto Pérez Balladares administration is too long for this space. To those who led the majority of the investigations that were carried out during his period, which included donations of drug traffickers, irregular concessions, lighthouses and buoys at the entrance to the Canal, Interests in privatized companies and casinos, as well as the shameful discretionary games, were not easy for him, and his persecution against the award-winning investigative journalist Gustavo Gorriti remains a symbol. The former president is a representative figure of that PRD that filled the Supreme Court of Justice with co-supporters, including the husband of his secretary, who insisted on changing the Constitution to perpetuate himself in power and that his last act was to sanction a law so that La PrensaI could never operate an open television channel. The action obtained by the former president has society as a victim, not this newspaper, but freedom of information, which all citizens need to be informed. Thus we have reached this crossroads, in which the Homeland has been caught by a pandemic while being assaulted by a new generation of rogues. And it is now when the claims of two former presidents meet again. One attacks and the other congratulates. One warns and the other executes. They move at the same rhythm with which in the past they worked together, they fought, they were mortal enemies to end up uniting purposes, with such enviable coordination that it is hard to believe in coincidences. Like Tomasi's cat leopardism, the one that tells the Sicilian trick of making us believe that things change when what you want is for them to stay the same, the PRD has deceived us again. And, as the novel describes, the supposed mortal enemies end up agreeing to continue to command, it is part of the camouflage. This newspaper, along with the other independent journalists and a handful of seasoned citizens, fights hard against the abuses of power, against the miserable plunder to which this country has been subjected and against the immense vice of greed. They won't shut us up! He fights hard against the abuses of power, against the miserable plunder to which this country has been subjected and against the immense vice of greed. They won't shut us up! He fights hard against the abuses of power, against the miserable plunder to which this country has been subjected and against the immense vice of greed. They won't shut us up! – LA PRENSA, Jul.6 https://www.newsroompanama.com/opinion/the-shadows-of-the-dictatorship-1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 9, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 9, 2020 Quote Panama’s signal to the world Posted 08/07/2020 The Nation seeks political leadership and democratic commitment. This week, the country's reputation reissues the worst signals to the world. The international media and the organizations that watch over freedom of expression in the hemisphere have received a new alarm: a politician, dissatisfied with the coverage that a newspaper made of a judicial process, can calmly compromise the survival of that media outlet, putting a bond to hijack its funds and assets. Panama has already been warned, repeatedly, that our legislation is decades behind in terms of the minimum standards that guarantee freedom of expression, of the press, and of information. Does the Government intend to adapt our legislation to the evidence that the actions of one of its former presidents has made evident? Regardless of the basic decision of the courts, our country needs to strengthen and promote the search for information, transparency and the dissemination of ideas that strengthen democracy. Today the attack is against La Prensa. Tomorrow it will be against any means of communication that inconveniences the political, economic or those that have filled their pockets with public funds. LA PRENSA, Jul 8 https://www.newsroompanama.com/opinion/panamas-signal-to-the-world Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 11, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 11, 2020 Quote OPINION: Panama a failed democracy? Posted 10/07/2020 "Justice" is working like never before and at breakneck speeds. But not for everyone. While some receive the magnanimous tolerance of a hypochondriac with excuses for illness, others are treated with the rigor of a gangster in front of an informer. This same person is the one who sets the Government's agenda –managed by the faint-hearted and genuflexes–; of judges who betray the most elementary principles of justice, and mythomaniac deputies, committed only to the master and with their pockets. Panama is the living expression of a failed democracy, close to that of Nicolás Maduro or Daniel Ortega. This is not a two-handed government. Every day it becomes more evident who is in charge, who is doing what they want and who are their employees in the Government. He did not have to compete for the Presidency of the Republic; he had it secured without obtaining a single vote. And justice is making it easier for him to govern like an autocrat: without opposition, crushing and curtailing freedoms and rights; with absolute impunity, as the dictator does; without critics, executed by judges at his service, and without respect for the law and the Constitution, because the State is him and only he.LA PRENSA, Jul. 10 https://www.newsroompanama.com/opinion/opinion-panama-a-failed-democracy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 11, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 11, 2020 Quote Proposal to modify asset seizure law Posted 10/07/2020 A proposal to amend the judicial code when it comes the seizure of property arrived at the Narional Assembly on Tuesday. July 7. It was presented by the lawyer Ernesto Cedeño , who states that in the process of precautionary measures, the plausibility of the law and the danger of harm must be justified in documents, without the need for full proof. The move was inspired by recent seizures of assets by two former Panama presidents involved in cases that have not yet been decided The proposal says , "that whoever asks for a seizure of assets must prove the signs of plausibility, as happens in contentious administrative jurisdiction," It was addressed to the President of the Assembly, Marcos Castillero , deputy of the ruling Democratic Revolutionary Party. Likewise, Cedeño proposes to prohibit the seizure of property in the case of officials for acts executed in the exercise of office and members of the boards of directors of horizontal properties for acts executed in the exercise of office. Likewise, in the case of persons who report acts of corruption, arbitrariness or violation of laws, based on the provisions of the Constitution , for the consequences of the acts specifically denounced; and for the assets and assets of the media. According to Cedeño, there are those who will be able to pay the exorbitant bail figures that are imposed, but there are those who cannot. "If tomorrow you do not agree with what is stated in the media, but if all the plaintiffs begin to kidnap, a media bankruptcy breaks the freedom of expression. Activists, people in demand are destroyed, ”said the lawyer. He indicated that the issue of kidnapping of assets is a matter of concern, so there is an urgent need to act. "The tiger eats us or we do something," he assured. So far this month, two seizures of property have already been made public. The kidnapping of Corporación La Prensa SA (Corprensa) by former president Ernesto Pérez Balladares , who seized shares and bank accounts of the company that publishes La Prensa and Mi Diario, as part of a civil lawsuit he filed eight years for alleged damages. The kidnapping, for a concurrence of up to $1.13 million, was formally decreed on June 22 by the Fifteenth Civil Judge, Lina E. Castro De León . The action was repudiated at the national and international levels. Meanwhile, yesterday, the former Attorney General , Kenia Porcell, posted a bond of $145,000 to suspend the seizyure of her furniture by former President Ricardo Martinelli , after a court endorsed it. In the request for changes to the Judicial Code , Cedeño asks the president of the National Assembly to transfer the note to all the legislative benches, but, to date, none of the 71 deputies has ruled on it. The proposal should be analyzed in the Government Commission. So far, the Legislative working committees have not been formed reports La Prensa. https://www.newsroompanama.com/news/proposal-to-modify-asset-seizure-law Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 11, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 11, 2020 Quote "You can take my house but not my dignity" - Martinelli target Posted 10/07/2020 Officials of the Judicial Branch carried out an investigation for the seizure of the property of former Attorney General, Kenia Porcell, as part of an investigation, requested by former President Ricardo Martinelli, in a lawsuit for damages to his image. This proceeding ended after Porcell's attorneys posted a bond of $150,000. The kidnapping measure does not mean that the former attorney is guilty of the case she faces reports TVN. It is a judicial action that the judge took, according to an [outdated] Panamanian law, without having admitted or rejected the lawsuit. "The diligence was $150,000 and a bond could be posted, thanks to the lawyers, so that the assets of his house will not be taken," said the former Attorney General. “Everybody knows the role I played as an Attorney and that they have brought that many police officers for a civil kidnapping is an abuse of power. I trusted the rule of law and I am going to defend myself , ”said Porcell, after completing the procedure. Porcell said that she has warned the security forces that she was threatened with phone calls that "something is going to happen to her." "At the time I represented an institution, where the work I did on the part of the Public Ministry and some courageous judges, is paying off," said Porcell. “As Attorney General of the Nation, I gave an interview and in the [Martinelli] wiretapping case, it was emblematic, but I represented the Public Ministry and informed the country of what was happening, ” said the former attorney, who said that, if they want to sue, they should do it for her work as an official and not as a citizen. “I am going to defend the few assets I have, and my children and I know that the message is we are going against the system. “Don't be afraid, fight for Panama, fight for the country, ”said Porcell, who acknowledged that she is currently defending herself against more than 15 complaints reports TVN. "In my house nothing wrong and illegal has been found I am the person they have chosen to intimidate and frighten others, but the office of Attorney must only fear God and obey the law. "You can take away my house and car, but the dignity with which I carry each case no one takes away from me," the former attorney general said. https://www.newsroompanama.com/news/quotyou-can-take-my-house-but-not-my-dignityquot-martinelli-target-1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 11, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 11, 2020 Quote Juez rechaza liberar excedente de secuestro El secuestro civil contra Corprensa tiene aspectos llamativos que reclaman la corrección de la decisión de la juez Lina Castro De León, por parte de tribunales superiores. Rodrigo Noriega 11 jul 2020 - 12:00 AM El lunes 6 de julio, a primera hora, la defensa legal de esta empresa consignó una fianza de aseguradora por la totalidad del monto del secuestro civil; la jueza Lina Castro de León decidió no levantar el secuestro. Archivo - LP Hasta la tarde del miércoles 8 de julio, la juez Lina Castro De León, del Juzgado Decimoquinto de lo Civil, solo había recibido confirmaciones de efectivo y valores cautelados por $964 mil 829. Las cautelaciones obedecen al Oficio de Secuestro contra Corporación La Prensa, S.A. (Corprensa), por $1 millón 131 mil, y que solicitó el expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares, en el contexto de una demanda presentada en marzo de 2012 -aún en primera instancia-, en la que este reclama $5.5 millones. En horas de la mañana del lunes 6 de julio, Corprensa presentó una fianza de seguro por $1 millón 131 mil, junto a una petición de levantamiento del secuestro. Al culminar la jornada laboral del lunes, el juzgado aún no había recibido ninguna confirmación bancaria de montos cautelados. Esto ocurrió en la mañana del martes 7. Pudiendo haber levantado el secuestro el mismo lunes en que se presentó la fianza, la juez demoró hasta la tarde del miércoles para fallar. La juez rechazó el levantamiento del secuestro y, a pesar de haber un faltante por cautelar de $166 mil 171, ordenó la cancelación de la fianza. Toda vez que ya el juzgado tenía la cantidad antes mencionada y que la fianza cubría el faltante, Corprensa solicitó el levantamiento del secuestro por el excedente. La juez también rechazó esta solicitud el jueves 9 de julio. Diego Quijano, presidente de Corprensa, informó que “la empresa estará presentando los recursos para impugnar dichas decisiones”. Respecto al efecto del secuestro en las operaciones, Quijano señaló que tras 6 días sin poder recibir o girar pagos, “se logró una solución para el pago de esta quincena. Aunque más costosa, nos da cierta flexibilidad para continuar”. La ruta kafkiana del secuestro de ‘La Prensa’ Una demanda civil por daños y perjuicios, interpuesta por el expresidente de la República Ernesto Pérez Balladares (1994-1999), en contra de Corporación La Prensa S.A., no solo ha implicado el secuestro civil de cuentas bancarias y activos de esta empresa, sino que ha expuesto el laberinto kafkiano que es la justicia civil en Panamá. La legislación panameña protege a los medios de comunicación televisivos y radiales contra secuestros civiles, no así a los medios impresos ni digitales. Esa diferencia se acentúa con un régimen de secuestro civil que permite en una demanda extracontractual secuestrar sin que exista una sentencia judicial favorable y, en este caso, sin que se hayan evacuado las pruebas en este proceso. Ordenando un secuestro La jueza civil del Juzgado Décimoquinto de Circuito, Lina Castro de León, concedió el 22 de junio el secuestro civil solicitado por Pérez Balladares, por 1 millón 131 mil dólares en contra de Corporación La Prensa. Los oficios despachados a los bancos, ordenando la retención de fondos llegaron el viernes 3 de julio a las primeras instituciones financieras, y estas informaron del secuestro a la corporación el sábado 4 de julio. El lunes 6 de julio, a primera hora, la defensa legal de esta empresa consignó una fianza de aseguradora por la totalidad del monto del secuestro civil. En ese momento, la jueza Castro de León no había recibido respuesta alguna a los oficios enviados por su juzgado a las instituciones bancarias. Lo que cabía, según la ley, artículo 546 del Código Judicial, era levantar el secuestro en el acto. En su lugar, la jueza esperó varios días a la llegada de las notas provenientes de las instituciones financieras. Si alguna de las notas decía que se habían retenido fondos a Corporación La Prensa S.A., eso le bastaría para invocar el numeral 4 del artículo 536 del mismo Código Judicial, y reconocer que el secuestro se había ejecutado. El rechazo de la fianza Efectivamente, las notas bancarias llegaron a su juzgado, por lo que se dio fundamento para decir que el secuestro se había cumplido “antes” de que Corporación La Prensa consignara su fianza. Así, el miércoles 8 de julio la jueza civil Castro de León ordenó cancelar la fianza liberatoria de Corporación La Prensa. Aquí se dieron dos situaciones que exponen lo irracional de las normas procesales. El primer fenómeno es el de la asimetría entre las partes de un secuestro civil. Según la legislación, la fianza que se debe consignar para realizar un secuestro puede ser en efectivo, bonos y valores del Estado, fianzas de empresas aseguradoras o bancarias y hasta las llamadas fincas “saca presos”. Sin embargo, una vez ejecutado el secuestro de dinero, ya sea en cuentas bancarias u otros equivalentes, el secuestro civil solo se puede levantar con el monto total de lo secuestrado en dinero efectivo. No valen garantías u otros instrumentos. La segunda situación peculiar del secuestro civil es su contradicción entre medios y fines. Se supone que el secuestro es una medida cautelar para asegurarse el pago lo más completo posible de las deudas que se quieren cobrar. En el caso del secuestro de Corporación La Prensa S.A., la jueza Castro de León canceló la fianza de Corporación La Prensa que cubría la totalidad del monto secuestrado, porque una de las notas enviadas a una institución bancaria decía que tenía una cuenta de la empresa con fondos (que eran inferiores al monto total del secuestro civil). En otras palabras, se cancela el único medio de pago cierto que podía responder por la totalidad del secuestro civil, porque existía una cuenta con fondos retenidos, que no completaban el monto secuestrado. ¿Qué le conviene más al demandante? Otra sorpresa desagradable fue la decisión del 9 de julio de la misma jueza. Con la fianza liberatoria, y con la certeza de que junto con lo retenido ya alcanzaba lo secuestrado, Corporación La Prensa pidió que se devolviera el excedente de los fondos, que superaban a lo pedido por el demandante. La respuesta de la jueza fue “no”, porque todavía estaba esperando todas las cartas de los bancos. Esto pudiera tardar semanas, pero eso no importa a la justicia, ya que 240 familias, cientos de repartidores y canillitas que aún con la pandemia llevan el sustento de su hogar vendiendo este diario, están enfrentando un serio riesgo económico. Ello sin contar que la libertad de expresión de los panameños está amenazada. Moderator comment: Below is an unedited automated translation of the above news article. Quote Judge refuses to release kidnapping surplus The civil kidnapping against Corprensa has striking aspects that demand the correction of the decision of judge Lina Castro De León, by higher courts. Rodrigo Noriega Jul 11, 2020 - 12:00 AM <<IEMQJ6Z3MRGMZPEXTGFVIL5YXE.jpg>> On Monday, July 6, first thing in the morning, the legal defense of this company posted an insurance bond for the entire amount of the civil kidnapping; Judge Lina Castro de León decided not to lift the kidnapping. Archive - LP Until the afternoon of Wednesday, July 8, Judge Lina Castro De León, of the Fifteenth Civil Court, had only received cash and security confirmations for $ 964 thousand 829. The precautions are due to the Office of Kidnapping against Corporación La Prensa, S.A. (Corprensa), for $ 1 million 131 thousand, and requested by former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares, in the context of a lawsuit filed in March 2012 -even in the first instance-, in which he claims $ 5.5 million. In the morning hours of Monday, July 6, Corprensa presented an insurance bond for $ 1 million 131 thousand, along with a petition to lift the kidnapping. At the end of the working day on Monday, the court had not yet received any bank confirmation of cautious amounts. This occurred on the morning of Tuesday 7. Being able to have lifted the kidnapping the same Monday that the bail was presented, the judge took until Wednesday afternoon to rule. The judge rejected the lifting of the kidnapping and, despite having a shortage of $ 166 thousand 171 for precautionary measures, ordered the cancellation of the bond. Since the court already had the aforementioned amount and the bail covered the shortfall, Corprensa requested the kidnapping be lifted for the surplus. The judge also rejected this request on Thursday, July 9. Diego Quijano, president of Corprensa, reported that "the company will be presenting the resources to challenge these decisions." Regarding the effect of the kidnapping on operations, Quijano pointed out that after 6 days without being able to receive or transfer payments, “a solution was achieved for the payment of this fortnight. Although more expensive, it gives us some flexibility to continue. ” The Kafkaesque route of the kidnapping of 'La Prensa' A civil lawsuit for damages, filed by former President of the Republic Ernesto Pérez Balladares (1994-1999), against Corporación La Prensa SA, has not only involved the civil seizure of bank accounts and assets of this company, but He has exposed the Kafkaesque labyrinth that is civil justice in Panama. Panamanian legislation protects television and radio media against civilian kidnappings, but not print or digital media. This difference is accentuated with a civil kidnapping regime that allows in a non-contractual lawsuit to kidnap without a favorable court ruling and, in this case, without the evidence having been evacuated in this process. Ordering a kidnapping On June 22, the civil judge of the Fifteenth Circuit Court, Lina Castro de León, granted the civil kidnapping requested by Pérez Balladares, for $ 1,131,000 against Corporación La Prensa. The notices dispatched to the banks, ordering the withholding of funds, arrived on Friday, July 3, at the first financial institutions, and they reported the hijacking to the corporation on Saturday, July 4. On Monday, July 6, early in the morning, the legal defense of this company posted an insurance bond for the entire amount of the civil kidnapping. At that time, Judge Castro de León had received no response to the letters sent by her court to the banking institutions. What was possible, according to the law, article 546 of the Judicial Code, was to lift the kidnapping on the spot. Instead, the judge waited several days for the notes from the financial institutions to arrive. If any of the notes said that funds had been withheld from Corporación La Prensa S.A., that would suffice to invoke number 4 of article 536 of the same Judicial Code, and recognize that the kidnapping had been carried out. The rejection of the bond Indeed, the bank notes reached her court, so it was found to say that the kidnapping had been carried out "before" Corporación La Prensa posted her bail. Thus, on Wednesday, July 8, the civil judge Castro de León ordered to cancel the release bond of Corporación La Prensa. Here there were two situations that exposed the irrationality of procedural rules. The first phenomenon is that of the asymmetry between the parts of a civil kidnapping. According to the legislation, the bond that must be consigned to carry out a kidnapping can be in cash, bonds and government securities, bonds of insurance or banking companies and even the so-called “take prisoners” farms. However, once the money has been seized, whether in bank accounts or other equivalents, the civil seizure can only be lifted with the total amount of the seized in cash. No guarantees or other instruments are valid. The second peculiar situation of civil kidnapping is its contradiction between means and ends. Kidnapping is supposed to be a precautionary measure to ensure the most complete payment of the debts you want to collect. In the case of the kidnapping of Corporación La Prensa SA, Judge Castro de León canceled Corporación La Prensa's bail that covered the entire amount kidnapped, because one of the notes sent to a banking institution said that she had a company account with funds (which were less than the total amount of the civil kidnapping). In other words, the only true means of payment that could answer for the entire civil kidnapping is canceled, because there was an account with retained funds, which did not complete the kidnapped amount. What is best for the plaintiff? Another unpleasant surprise was the same judge's July 9 decision. With the release bond, and with the certainty that together with what was retained, the kidnapped had already reached, Corporación La Prensa asked for the surplus funds to be returned, which exceeded the request of the plaintiff. The judge's answer was "no", because she was still waiting for all the letters from the banks. This could take weeks, but that does not matter to the justice, since 240 families, hundreds of delivery men and booths that even with the pandemic take the sustenance of their home selling this newspaper, are facing a serious economic risk. This without counting that the freedom of expression of Panamanians is threatened. https://www.prensa.com/impresa/panorama/juez-rechaza-liberar-excedente-de-secuestro/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 12, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 12, 2020 Quote ‘Estamos éticamente tan enfermos…’ Flor Mizrachi Angel 12 jul 2020 - 12:00 AM Olga de Obaldía. Archivo Olga de Obaldía, directora ejecutiva del capítulo panameño de Transparencia Internacional, da un repaso de las últimas noticias, tan surreales como preocupantes. ¿Se puede marcar una diferencia, más allá del estilo, entre Ricardo Martinelli y Juan Carlos Varela, ambos imputados por presunto blanqueo de capitales? No. Ambos deben responder por igual ante la ley. Aquí estamos éticamente tan enfermos, que cuando es poca cantidad pensamos que no es tan grave. La diferencia, en corrupción, entre los gobiernos Martinelli y Varela es... En el gobierno Martinelli vimos la institucionalización de la gran corrupción. Con Varela, se rompió por primera vez el pacto de los presidentes entrantes y salientes, pero hubo muchos retrocesos. Hay quienes, por no perder la fe, se aferran a la posibilidad de que Laurentino Cortizo no sea un corrupto más, sino preso de corruptos. ¿Qué piensa usted? Debe poner acciones a su discurso para que su liderazgo se sienta real. La clave es cómo maneja a las personas y los posibles actos de corrupción. Evadiendo, maquillando y pensando que con relaciones públicas se arregla, no funciona. Hasta ahora… Hay falta de liderazgo, planes y rumbo. ¿Qué le parece el plan de recuperación económica que publicó el gobierno, después de cuatro meses? Le falta estructura, metas, presupuesto y vías de acción. Pareció más bien una carta aspiracional. Ojalá al menos exista. Hay 7 investigaciones en el Ministerio Público y 2 en la Procuraduría de la Administración. ¿Les ve futuro? Quiero pensar que sí. Pero no sé cómo habrá investigación independiente con las personas involucradas en los puestos. ¿Cómo vio que el presidente les haya tirado un salvavidas a los dos ministros cuestionados? El salvavidas real que tenía que tirar era transparentar todo, cosa que siguen sin hacer. No por la vía del rejuego político. ¿Qué hay detrás de la movida de Ernesto Pérez Balladares: impulso de soberbia o acto premeditado para silenciar un medio? Hostigamiento judicial, que siempre tiene el objetivo de evitar que la empresa o la persona cumpla con su labor. Si no la cierra, la distrae tanto que igual la desvía de su labor. Es premeditado. ¿Cuál es el peligro de lo que hizo Pérez Balladares para los ciudadanos? La primera de las libertades es la de expresión y derecho a la información. Sin ellas no podemos defender ninguna otra libertad. Y frente al estado de emergencia, donde hay libertades suspendidas, hay otras que cobran un rol aún más importante. El Judicial no funcionó hasta hace una semana, el Ejecutivo no tiene control del Legislativo… Por eso, nunca ha sido más importante la libertad de expresión. ¿Ese es un problema de una persona o del sistema que permite, sin estándar probatorio, el secuestro de bienes? El problema es el sistema de justicia tan frágil que permite esos abusos. ¿Su opinión de que le hayan negado la fianza a La Prensa? El criterio se apega a la literalidad de la norma, dilatando que el medio recupere su capacidad de operación, a pesar de tener la discrecionalidad de no infligir al demandado gastos innecesarios. Y, ¿el secuestro a Kenia Porcell? Otro hostigamiento judicial. Martinelli anunció en Twitter lo que poco después pasó con Pérez Balladares. ¿Pacto entre expresidentes o filtro de información judicial a Martinelli? No sé, pero ambos serían de terror. La Prensa tiene abogados. Pero, ¿quién protege al que no tiene abogados? Nadie. A un individuo, un hostigamiento así lo quiebra, y al que lo ve desde afuera, lo amedrenta. ¿Cómo interpreta los silencios del PRD, de Roux, del gobierno y de los diputados independientes? Quien de verdad tiene vocación democrática no puede callar frente a los abusos. Es triste que no sepan cuáles son los pilares que sostienen la democracia. ¿Cómo sería una sociedad sin medios? Autoritarismo puro y duro. Prohibición judicial de reproducir la imagen de una figura pública. ¿Tiene alguna justificación? No. Nuevamente, un sistema judicial frágil por jueces sin formación en libertades fundamentales. ¿Qué le falta al gobierno responder del caso de los hijos de Martinelli? ¿Dónde está la coherencia? ¿Cómo un ente oficial le entrega documentos para que representen al país a personas requeridas por la ley? ¿Cómo pudieron consignar fianzas en casos donde no habían sido imputados? ¿Cómo y por qué quitaron la alerta internacional que los requería? ¿Quién autorizó la entrada del vuelo humanitario? Da la impresión de tráfico de influencias al más alto nivel. Abogados: ¿se parecen a sus clientes? En Panamá, la profesión tiene un serio problema de ética, pero además el sistema no castiga al abogado que abusa de él. En otros lados son sancionados y pueden perder hasta su licencia. ¿De qué le sirve el Parlacen a Panamá? Salvo para generar una cuota más de botín político a los partidos, de nada. ¿Cómo nos deja que otras justicias hagan lo que la nuestra no hace? La corrupción, como crimen organizado, traspasa fronteras, y los brazos que la persiguen también deben traspasarlas. Ya sabemos que aquí no vienen a enfrentar nada, si pudieron pagar por delante una fianza sin haber sido imputados. Venían en avión privado. Ni iban a tener que presentarse a un juzgado... Su valoración de Eduardo Ulloa. Bien por el reinicio de los casos de alto perfil. Pero plantea una gran duda el nombramiento de un fiscal con claros conflictos de interés con un partido. ¿Por qué en otros países sí ha habido justicia con Odebrecht y aquí no? Generalmente son países en los que se ha despolitizado el brazo de la justicia... En Panamá, ¿todo tiene precio? Hay ciudadanos que no tienen tarifa y que quieren lo mejor para el país. El 29 de abril, José Gabriel Carrizo dijo que colgarían todas las compras y harían una rendición de cuentas semanal. ¿Usted ha visto algo de eso? No, y tienen toda la capacidad para hacerlo. Esa es la verdadera transparencia a la que deberían apegarse. Hospital modular. Lo más grave. Todo es grave ahí. Desde el criterio de selección hasta la entrega y aseguramiento de la obra. Todo huele a irregularidades. Y al no transparentar, incrementan aún más la desconfianza. ¿Se justifica, por pandemia, abrir una obra sin refrendo? No, eso es total falta de legalidad. Y ya el procurador de la Administración lo dijo. Van dos casos en los que presentan una propuesta a nombre de una empresa que niega haberlo hecho… Es grave, administrativa y penalmente. Y lo peor es cómo perdemos confianza. Hemos visto protestas, pero para lo que hemos visto, ¿nos hemos indignado lo suficiente? Estamos oscilando entre el miedo y la indignación, pero como la vida está de por medio, parece que el miedo gana. Y ellos lo saben y se aprovechan. Lo que hizo el presidente el 1 de julio, ¿fue una rendición de cuentas real? No. Más que una lista de intenciones, la rendición de cuentas real implica transparencia y documentación. Cortizo anunció como un logro la ley de contrataciones públicas, pero las empresas corruptas pueden seguir licitando... ¿Oportunidad perdida? Tiene uno o dos avances, pero deja muchas deudas. Cortizo prometió presentar leyes anticorrupción en su primer año. No lo hizo. ¿La pandemia lo excusa? No. Tuvo ocho meses sin pandemia. No solo no las presentaron, sino que no acuerparon las que otros presentaron. Su valoración del contralor. Ha tenido aciertos, pero dado que él representa el único control que tenemos, debe ser más exigente en cómo y qué las entidades están contratando directamente. ¿A qué se arriesga el país con el estado de excepción en las compras? Captura del Estado por grupos económicos cercanos al poder, que compren con precios inflados y que reciban productos sin calidad o no los reciban. Por los tres ya pasamos. ¿Qué opina de que el Ejecutivo haya declarado el estado de ‘emergencia’ que establece el Código Sanitario y no el de ‘urgencia’ que dicta la Constitución? Fue una maniobra legal que afecta profundamente el Estado de derecho. Y, ¿la Corte? Siguen sin explicar por qué la Sala Tercera ha estado cerrada, generando que el Ejecutivo no tenga ningún control de la legalidad de sus acciones. ¿Un acuerdo? Deme alguna señal de esperanza. El control social de la ciudadanía, gremios, organizaciones y medios. Creían que tenían la cancha para ellos solos. Se equivocaron. Hay gente mirando. Y entre más miremos, más podremos cambiar. Reducción de salarios, que se anunció cuatro meses tarde y siguen sin implementar. ¿Qué mensaje da? No se les puede creer... piden austeridad pero siguen alimentando al monstruo de la burocracia estatal. Pagar planilla con deuda. ¿Se vale? Inaudito. Preocupa profundamente. Bono de $80 y ahora de $100. ¿Hasta ahí arropa esa manta? Es más que insuficiente, y con lo que conocemos del gasto estatal, indignante. Por eso es que la gente sale a exponerse: porque no tiene con qué comer. Su opinión del despido de Rosario Turner. Terrible en forma, dudoso en fondo. Amiguismo. ¿Igual, más o menos que en gobiernos anteriores? Llevado al máximo, porque eliminaron de un plumazo la carrera administrativa e inclusive trataron de equiparar la experiencia al perfil universitario. Militarización, ¿real o fantasmas? El autoritarismo de las fuerzas de seguridad genera intranquilidad a todos los que recordamos la dictadura. Licencias con sueldo en el sector público. ¿Tiene alguna justificación? Ninguna. Y en este momento, menos. El poder más opaco. La Asamblea. ¿Qué tan cercanos son el juega vivo y la corrupción? Muy. El juega vivo es corrupción. Cotizo se reúne con los líderes de los partidos. ¿Quién representa al 49% que no está inscrito en partidos? Nadie. Y al presidente le corresponde poder comunicarse con todos. No todo son los partidos, que solo parecen pensar en ellos y en cómo repartirse el país. Moderator comment: Below is an unedited automated translation of the above news article. Quote ‘We are ethically so sick ...’ Mizrachi Angel Flower Jul 12, 2020 - 12:00 AM <<Olga de Obaldia. File.jpg>> Olga de Obaldia. Archive Olga de Obaldía, executive director of the Panamanian chapter of Transparency International, gives a review of the latest news, as surreal as they are worrisome. Can you make a difference, beyond style, between Ricardo Martinelli and Juan Carlos Varela, both accused of alleged money laundering? No. Both must respond equally before the law. Here we are ethically so sick, that when it is small we think that it is not so serious. The difference, in corruption, between the Martinelli and Varela governments is ... In the Martinelli government we saw the institutionalization of great corruption. With Varela, the pact of incoming and outgoing presidents was broken for the first time, but there were many setbacks. There are those who, for not losing their faith, cling to the possibility that Laurentino Cortizo is not just another corrupt person, but a prisoner of corrupt people. What do you think? You must put your speech into action to make your leadership feel real. The key is how you handle people and possible acts of corruption. Evading, putting on makeup and thinking that with public relations it is fixed, it does not work. Until now… There is a lack of leadership, plans and direction. What do you think of the economic recovery plan that the government published after four months? It lacks structure, goals, budget and courses of action. It seemed more like an aspirational letter. Hopefully at least it exists. There are 7 investigations in the Public Ministry and 2 in the Administration Office. Do you see future? I want to think yes. But I don't know how there will be independent investigation with the people involved in the positions. How did you see the president throw a life jacket at the two ministers in question? The real life preserver he had to throw was to make everything transparent, which they still don't do. Not by way of political replay. What is behind Ernesto Pérez Balladares' move: impulse of arrogance or premeditated act to silence a medium? Judicial harassment, which always has the objective of preventing the company or the person from carrying out its work. If you don't close it, it distracts you so much that it deflects you from your work. It is premeditated. What is the danger of what Pérez Balladares did for the citizens? The first of the freedoms is that of expression and the right to information. Without them we cannot defend any other freedom. And in the face of the state of emergency, where there are suspended freedoms, there are others that take on an even more important role. The Judicial did not work until a week ago, the Executive does not have control of the Legislative ... Therefore, freedom of expression has never been more important. Is that a problem of a person or of the system that allows, without evidentiary standard, the seizure of property? The problem is the justice system so fragile that it allows such abuses. Your opinion that La Prensa has been denied bail? The criterion adheres to the literal nature of the rule, delaying that the medium recovers its operating capacity, despite having the discretion not to inflict unnecessary costs on the defendant. And, the kidnapping of Kenya Porcell? Another judicial harassment. Martinelli announced on Twitter what happened shortly after with Pérez Balladares. Agreement between former presidents or filter of judicial information to Martinelli? I don't know, but both would be terrifying. The Press has lawyers. But who protects the one without lawyers? No one. Such harassment breaks an individual, and the one who sees it from the outside, frightens it. How do you interpret the silences of the PRD, Roux, the government and the independent deputies? Who truly has a democratic vocation cannot remain silent in the face of abuse. It is sad that they do not know what are the pillars that support democracy. What would a society without means be like? Pure and hard authoritarianism. Judicial prohibition to reproduce the image of a public figure. Do you have any justification? No. Again, a fragile judicial system by judges without training in fundamental freedoms. What is the government lacking in responding to the case of Martinelli's children? Where is the coherence? How does an official entity deliver documents to represent the country to people required by law? How could they post bonds in cases where they had not been charged? How and why did they remove the international alert that required them? Who authorized the entry of the humanitarian flight? It gives the impression of influence peddling at the highest level. Lawyers: are they like your clients? In Panama, the profession has a serious ethical problem, but also the system does not punish the lawyer who abuses him. Elsewhere they are sanctioned and may lose even their license. What use is Parlacen to Panama? Except to generate a further share of political loot to the parties, you're welcome. How do you let other justices do what ours doesn't? Corruption, like organized crime, crosses borders, and the arms that persecute it must also cross them. We already know that here they do not come to face anything, if they could pay a deposit in advance without having been charged. They came by private plane. Nor were they going to have to appear in court ... Her assessment of Eduardo Ulloa. Good for restarting high profile cases. But the appointment of a prosecutor with clear conflicts of interest with a party raises a great doubt. Why in other countries has there been justice with Odebrecht and not here? They are generally countries where the arm of justice has been depoliticized ... In Panama, does everything have a price? There are citizens who have no fee and who want the best for the country. On April 29, José Gabriel Carrizo said they would hang all the purchases and do a weekly accountability. Have you seen any of that? No, and they have all the capacity to do it. That is the true transparency to which they should adhere. Modular hospital. The most serious. Everything is serious there. From the selection criteria to the delivery and insurance of the work. Everything smells of irregularities. And by not being transparent, they further increase mistrust. Is it justified, by pandemic, to open a work without endorsement? No, that is a complete lack of legality. And the Administration's attorney already said so. There are two cases in which they present a proposal on behalf of a company that denies having done so ... It is serious, administratively and criminally. And the worst thing is how we lose confidence. We've seen protests, but for what we've seen, have we been outraged enough? We are oscillating between fear and outrage, but since life is in the way, it seems that fear wins. And they know it and take advantage of it. What the President did on July 1, was it a real accountability? No. More than a list of intentions, real accountability involves transparency and documentation. Cortizo announced the public procurement law as an achievement, but corrupt companies can continue to tender ... Missed opportunity? You have one or two advances, but you leave many debts. Cortizo promised to introduce anti-corruption laws in his first year. It did not. Does the pandemic excuse it? No. He had eight months without a pandemic. Not only did they not present them, but they did not comply with those that others presented. Your assessment of the controller. He has had successes, but since he represents the only control we have, he must be more demanding on how and what entities are hiring directly. What does the country risk with the state of exception in purchases? Capture of the State by economic groups close to power, who buy with inflated prices and who receive products without quality or do not receive them. We already passed by the three of us. What do you think that the Executive has declared the state of ‘emergency’ established by the Sanitary Code and not the ‘urgency’ that the Constitution dictates? It was a legal maneuver that profoundly affects the rule of law. And, the Court? They still do not explain why the Third Chamber has been closed, causing the Executive to have no control over the legality of its actions. An agreement? Give me some sign of hope. Social control of citizens, unions, organizations and the media. They believed they had the court to themselves. They were wrong. There are people watching. And the more we look, the more we can change. Reduction of wages, which was announced four months late and are still not implemented. What message does it give? You can't believe them ... they ask for austerity but they continue to feed the monster of the state bureaucracy. Pay payroll with debt. Is it fair? Unheard. Deeply concerned. $ 80 bonus and now $ 100. How far does that blanket wrap? It is more than insufficient, and with what we know of state spending, outrageous. That is why people go out to expose themselves: because they have nothing to eat with. Your opinion of the dismissal of Rosario Turner. Terrible in shape, doubtful at heart. Cronyism Equal, more or less than in previous governments? Taken to the maximum, because they eliminated the administrative career in one fell swoop and even tried to equate the experience with the university profile. Militarization, real or ghost? The authoritarianism of the security forces causes unease to all of us who remember the dictatorship. Licenses with pay in the public sector. Do you have any justification? None. And right now, less. The most opaque power. The assembly. How close are live gambling and corruption? Very. Playing live is corruption. Cotizo meets with party leaders. Who represents the 49% who are not registered in parties? No one. And it is up to the president to be able to communicate with everyone. It is not all the parties, which only seem to think about them and how to divide the country. https://www.prensa.com/impresa/panorama/estamos-eticamente-tan-enfermos/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 13, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 13, 2020 Quote Panama “ethically sick – Transparency International Olga de Obaldía, Posted 12/07/2020 Olga de Obaldía , executive director of the Panamanian chapter of Transparency International provided a primer on corruption in Panama on July 12 in the weekly Knockout interview in which she described Panama as “ethically sick.” Asked if she could see a difference beyond style between Ricardo Martinelli and Juan Carlos Varela, both accused of Money Laundering she said: “No. Both must respond equally before the law. Here we are ethically so sick, that when the amount is small we think that it is not so serious. “In the Martinelli government, we saw the institutionalization of great corruption. With Varela, the pact of incoming and outgoing presidents was broken for the first time, but there were many setbacks.” Responding to the suggestion that there are those who, who, cling to the possibility that President Cortizo is not just another corrupt person, but a prisoner of corrupt people. She said: “You must put your speech into action to make your leadership feel real. The key is how you handle people and possible acts of corruption. Evading, applying makeup and thinking that with public relations it is fixed, does not work.” Recovery Plan The government’s recovery plan lacks structure, goals, budget and courses of action. It seemed more like an aspirational letter said de Obaldía. She sees the move of former president Ernesto Pérez to seize assets of La Prensa in an 8-years-old case that has not yet been decided as: “ Judicial harassment, which always has the objective of preventing the company or the person from carrying out its work. If you don't close it, it distracts you …It is premeditated and an attack on freedom of expression and the right to information. Without them, we cannot defend any other freedom. And in the face of the state of emergency, where there are suspended freedoms, there are others that take on an even more important role… freedom of expression has never been more important.” The justice system is so fragile that it allows abuses like the seizure of property without evidentiary standard. The seizure of property of former Attorney General Kenia Porcell was another judicial harassment which breaks an individual, and a person who sees it from the outside becomes afraid Martinelli sons Referring to the arrest of the Martinelli Brothers in Guatemala de Obaldía said “Where is the coherence? How does an official entity deliver documents to represent the country to people required by law? How could they post bonds in cases where they had not been charged? How and why did they remove the international alert that required them? Who authorized the entry of the humanitarian flight? It gives the impression of influence peddling at the highest level. “Corruption, like organized crime, crosses borders, and the arms that persecute it must also cross them. We already know that here they do not come to face anything if they could pay a deposit in advance without having been charged. They came by private plane. Nor were they going to have to appear in court. Lawyers “In Panama, the profession has a serious ethical problem, and the system does not punish the lawyer who abuses it. Elsewhere they are sanctioned and may even lose their license. https://www.newsroompanama.com/business/panama-ethically-sick-transparency-international Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 13, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 13, 2020 Quote Claves para entender el secuestro contra los bienes de Corprensa La acción de secuestro preventivo de bienes contra un periódico, como la interpuesta por el expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares, no tiene precedentes en Panamá. Rita Vásquez 13 jul 2020 - 12:18 AM Corprensa enfrenta un secuestro de sus activos por un millón 131 mil dólares. Archivo La demanda civil por daños y perjuicios fue presentada por el expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares (1994-1999) el 22 de marzo de 2012 contra Corporación La Prensa, S.A., (Corprensa) por una publicación hecha un año antes. A continuación, brindamos un resumen de los orígenes, hechos y acontecimientos más relevantes que precedieron el secuestro preventivo presentado por el exmandatario la semana pasada. ¿Cuándo y cómo se inicia esta disputa? En agosto de 2009, La Prensa llevó a cabo una serie de investigaciones que ligaban al círculo cercano y a familiares del expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares con pagos millonarios efectuados por una empresa que explotaba salas de juegos y de azar. ¿Cuál empresa? Se trataba de Lucky Games, una sociedad que recibió durante la administración de Pérez Balladares una concesión directa, sin acto público, para la explotación de 9 salas de juegos por 20 años. El 16 de junio de 1999, el Consejo de Gabinete autorizó el contrato de concesión. El Estado no recibió un solo centavo por la concesión, a pesar de que la concesionaria facturó en su primer año de operaciones 18 millones de dólares. ¿Se entregaron más concesiones para juegos? El gobierno de Pérez Balladares otorgó, de manera de directa, otras dos concesiones: Comput-Bingo, S.A., y Competiciones Deportivas, S.A., que operaban Bingo 90, en Obarrio. Ambas tenían como accionista a Mario Pérez Balladares, hermano del expresidente. Ernesto Pérez Balladares, a la salida del edificio Avesa, luego de rendir indagatoria por primera vez. Archivo ¿No estaba prohibido a los particulares abrir casinos en Panamá? En efecto, la Constitución establece que la “explotación de juegos de suerte y azar, y de actividades que originen apuestas, sólo podrán efectuarse por el Estado”. Sin embargo, Pérez Balladares, mediante un decreto-ley, expedido por su Gabinete en 1998, utilizó la figura de la “concesión” para permitir la entrada de operadores privados en una actividad hasta entonces reservada exclusivamente al Estado. ¿Qué arrojaron las primeras investigaciones de ‘La Prensa’? Este medio encontró que múltiples pagos salían de Lucky Games y eran depositados en la cuenta bancaria de una sociedad denominada Shelf Holding, Inc. También se descubrió que Roosevelt Thayer (íntimo amigo y ministro de Vivienda de Pérez Balladares), así como Enrique Pretelt (yerno del expresidente) habían terminado ocupando cargos directivos dentro de Lucky Games: uno era el vicepresidente y el otro el secretario de la junta directiva. La investigación descubrió, además, que otros directivos, tanto de Lucky Games como de Shelf Holding, eran personas muy cercanas a Pérez Balladares. Ese fue el caso de Samuel Camarena, presidente de la sociedad, que era el conductor de Enrique Pretelt; y de Ricardo Caputo, un cercano colaborador del expresidente que, incluso, estuvo a cargo de manejar las partidas discrecionales cuando ocupaba el Palacio de las Garzas. ¿Y la versión del expresidente y su entorno? Antes de cada publicación, La Prensa contactó al expresidente para incluir su versión. Pérez Balladares prefirió no hacer comentarios sobre el contenido de la investigación de La Prensa, pero, a través de su vocera, Catia Rojas, aclaró que “todo el proceso de privatización, que incluyen las adjudicaciones y concesiones administrativas, se realizaron con apego a la ley”, así se publicó el 4 de agosto de 2009. Roosevelt Thayer recibió personalmente al periodista de este diario y le admitió que, en efecto, él era director de Lucky Games, pero negó tener vínculo accionario alguno con la sociedad. Enrique Pretelt, sin embargo, no contestó los requerimientos. ¿Quiénes son los accionistas? La Junta de Control de Juegos exigió a la empresa Cirsa, operador efectivo de distintos casinos y salas de juego en Panamá, revelar el nombre de los accionistas, tanto de Lucky Games como de otra concesionaria llamada Gaming & Services. Cirsa contestó que aparecían como titulares del 29% de las acciones de ambas Enrique Pretelt y Roosevelt Thayer. Y que el 71% restante pertenecía a Cirsa. En ese momento se supo que el total de salas que conjuntamente operaban ascendía a 23. Por último, el Ministerio de Economía reveló que desde el otorgamiento de las concesiones hasta el año 2008, las concesionarias habían obtenido ingresos por 266 millones de dólares. Respuesta del abogado del expresidente, Luis Carlos Cabezas, publicada en este medio. Infografía ¿Qué más se encontró sobre de Shelf Holding Inc.? En el curso de la investigación periodística se reveló que Shelf Holding había sido incorporada por el bufete de un muy cercano abogado del expresidente y que desde su constitución, por su cuenta bancaria habían pasado ocho millones de dólares. A pesar de no aparecer como directivo de Shelf Holding, Inc., los documentos de apertura de la cuenta bancaria estaban firmados por el expresidente Pérez Balladares. Adicionalmente, se encontró que Pérez Balladares, y su secretaria personal, Eyda Achon, era los firmantes de la cuenta bancaria de Shelf Holding, Inc. La chequera era manejada por el exmandatario y los cheques que giraba eran de su puño y letra. ¿Y los cheques “al Portador” girados por Shelf Holding, Inc.? Pérez Balladares giró de su puño y letra cheques de la cuenta de Shelf Holding “Al Portador”, los cuales fueron endosados y depositados inmediatamente en su propia cuenta corriente. ¿Se beneficiaron otras sociedades? Mister Bull Corporation, sociedad dueña del yate del expresidente, y Blue Cascade Inc., propietaria de su avión, también recibieron transferencias de Lucky Games. ¿Qué respondió Pérez Balladares? A mediados de 2009, Pérez Balladares concurrió voluntariamente al Ministerio Público. Afirmó ante los periodistas y le entregó a la fiscalía una declaración afirmando: “no tengo ni he tenido ninguna participación accionaria ni de ninguna otra índole con la empresa Lucky Games, S.A., ni en ninguna otra empresa del sector de juegos de suerte y azar”. Aceptó, eso sí, la participación de sus allegados. “No he recibido ningún beneficio económico o de ninguna otra naturaleza de la referida actividad”, añadió. Por esos días, el exmandatario también envió un correo a sus amistades y conocidos. En la misiva, reconoció que su administración otorgó a la empresa vinculada a Thayer y Pretelt una licencia para operar salas de máquinas tragamonedas. “El decir que esas personas son allegadas no es mentira, la mentira es insinuar que se le hizo un favor especial al margen de la ley”. Sus declaraciones fueron reproducidas por La Prensa. “Los golpes se dan, no se anuncian” Por esos días, el expresidente advirtió en un correo enviado a una periodista de La Prensa que en “algún momento cobraré la cuenta”. La amenaza la reiteró en una entrevista que por esos días brindó al diario Panama América: PA - ¿A qué se refiere con saldar la cuenta? EPB - Me refiero a que hayan armado dos semanas de infundios en primera plana partiendo de suposiciones y, sobre todo, que hayan involucrado y mencionado a miembros de mi familia, yo soy el político, mi familia, no. Eso se abre a ser castigado, yo tomaré el tiempo que tome, pero créanmelo, no para demandar a un periodista o a un periódico, no, no, esa parte de los errores son pasado, eso va por otro lado. PA - ¿Por qué lado? EPB - No, eso no te lo puedo decir. Ella [la periodista] me dijo que tenía que ponerlo en conocimiento de la Dirección del diario, y si eran amenazas, le dijo, no, yo no amenazo a nadie. Le dije tú puedes hacer lo que tú quieras, esta no es información secreta. PA - ¿Esa posibilidad cabría contra otra gente que no sea periodista? EPB - Yo no actúo sobre sospechas, yo actúo para saldar las cuentas de la gente que me ha hecho un mal comprobado. En un encuentro de dirigentes del Partido Revolucionario Democrático (PRD) en esas fechas, el expresidente reiteró públicamente: “Los golpes se dan, no se anuncian… a su debido tiempo lo sabrán”. ¿Entonces, a quién pertenecía Shelf Holding Inc.? En una entrevista en el programa Debate Abierto, Pérez Balladares aseguró no ser dueño de Shelf Holding. “Los motivos por los cuales esta sociedad recibió o dejó de recibir dinero son estrictamente familiares, los cuales no tengo por qué divulgar, a menos que sean fondos mal habidos”. “No tengo que estar debatiendo para el bienestar de La Prensa o de nadie lo que sucede en el seno de mi familia”. Además, el exmandatario dijo que le había prestado dinero a todos sus yernos para ayudarlos a hacer sus operaciones, pero aclaró que esto no tiene que estarlo divulgando ni mucho menos explicar cómo ellos le pagan. Sus declaraciones fueron reproducidas por este diario. Medios locales, como por ejemplo ‘La Estrella de Panamá’ y el‘ Panamá América’; e internacionales, como ‘The Nassau Guardian’, de Bahamas, cubrieron la noticia. Infografía ¿Se abrió algún proceso judicial? El 14 de septiembre de 2009, la Fiscalía Especializada contra la Delincuencia Organizada anunció la apertura de una investigación. José Ayú Prado, quien entonces fungía como fiscal encargado, anunciaría posteriormente que se investigaba la posible comisión del delito de lavado de dinero. El 27 de diciembre de 2009, el Ministerio Público giró una orden de conducción al exmandatario para que rindiera declaración indagatoria por presunto blanqueo de capitales y corrupción de funcionarios. Luego de aproximadamente 36 horas de una búsqueda que fue transmitida por los canales de televisión, y que incluyó la llegada de agentes a su residencia, su casa de playa, yate y otros lugares, el expresidente se presentó al edificio Avesa, a las 8:45 de la noche. Primer expresidente detenido El 14 de enero de 2010, Ernesto Pérez Balladares se convirtió en el primer y único expresidente, hasta ese entonces, a quien se le había decretado arresto domiciliario. Durante los siguientes días, la defensa del exmandatario presentó un total de 19 recursos, incluyendo amparos, habeas corpus, recusaciones, apelaciones y solicitudes de fianza. Su abogada, Guillermina McDonalds, incluso anunció que su cliente demandaría al Estado ante la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos por haber quedado en un estado de indefensión. A su equipo legal se incorporó el abogado Carlos Carrillo. ¿Se le concedió fianza? El juez noveno penal, Diego Fernández, a quien le correspondió el caso, negó la solicitud de fianza al expresidente, advirtiendo: “Se visualiza el ingreso de grandes sumas de dinero, así como el uso de intermediarios financieros, puesto que quienes manejan los fondos de las cuentas no son los dignatarios de las sociedades anónimas propietarias de las cuentas”. Luego de casi tres meses de arresto domiciliario, el Segundo Tribunal Superior concedió al expresidente una fianza para no ser detenido que había solicitado su equipo. Quedó con impedimento de salida y obligación de notificarse dos veces al mes. Quote José María Castillo, abogado del expresidente demandado A partir de las primeras publicaciones, y por el período que duraron las investigaciones, ‘La Prensa’, de manera constante y sistemática, se dedicó a crear una atmósfera de turbiedad sobre la figura de Ernesto Pérez Balladares, desprestigiando su condición de ciudadano honorable y respetable”. Galindo, Arias &López, abogados de La Prensa Las noticias que ‘La Prensa’ publicó, en ejercicio de la libertad de información y expresión reconocidas en la ‘Constitución’, se limitaron a reflejar coetánea y fielmente los cargos que en ese momento específico el Ministerio Público formulara en contra de un personaje público”. ¿Hubo llamamiento a juicio? El 8 de octubre de 2010, el Ministerio Público pidió el llamamiento a juicio del expresidente Pérez Balladares, bajo los cargos de lavado de dinero por fondos provenientes de actividades relacionados con juegos de suerte y azar. “Pérez Balladares: Esta es una persecución judicial” “Nunca he cometido ninguna ilegalidad ni mucho menos ningún delito de blanqueo de capitales”, fue el categórico comentario hecho por el expresidente, según se publicó en la portada de La Prensa el día 24 de marzo de 2010. En todas las etapas de la investigación, detención, llamamiento a juicio y cuando se conoció la sentencia, La Prensa consultó y publicó la posición del expresidente, quien negó vehemente los cargos en todo momento. La Prensa, incluso, publicó los resultados de una encuesta en la que el 45.5% consideraba que se trataba de un proceso justo, frente a un 41% que consideraba que era un caso de persecución política, y el 13% no sabía o no quería opinar. ¿Recibió apoyo del PRD? Tras el anuncio de que se le llamaría a juicio, el expresidente recibió el apoyo de su partido. Al concluir una reunión en Penonomé, “figuras del PRD, como Balbina Herrera, Anel Flores, Omar José Torrijos y Laurentino Cortizo ofrecieron su respaldo a Pérez Balladares y aseguraron que lo acompañarían a la audiencia”, se reportó el 11 de abril de 2011 en este diario. ¿Por qué las autoridades involucraron a la ex primera dama? Una vez recibido el llamamiento a juicio, el juez noveno ordenó ampliar las investigaciones para conocer la situación de Dora de Pérez Balladares, pues aparecía como firmante de una cantidad de cheques bajo investigación. La firma de la ex primera dama volvería a aparecer en los cheques de una fundación de nombre “Seaside”. La noticia que provocó la discordia El 21 de marzo de 2011, La Prensa publicó la siguiente noticia: “El ex presidente de la República Ernesto Pérez Balladares podría ser objeto de una segunda investigación penal, también relacionada con el delito de blanqueo de capitales”, vinculada con “supuestas irregularidades detectadas en una cuenta bancaria en Bahamas”. La Prensa reportó: “La anterior información consta en la ampliación de la vista fiscal del caso actual en el que se procesa al exmandatario por blanqueo de capitales, remitida el pasado 28 de febrero por el fiscal especializado contra la Delincuencia Organizada, Marcelino Aguilar, al Juzgado Noveno Penal. La audiencia preliminar está programada para el próximo 11 de abril.” ¿Una segunda investigación? En efecto, el entonces fiscal contra la Delincuencia Organizada, Marcelino Aguilar, después de encontrar dos cheques (por 175 mil dólares y 45 mil dólares) que fueron depositados en la cuenta de Shelf Holding, Inc., ambos firmados por la ex primera dama Dora de Pérez Balladares, decidió indagar la razón de estos fondos que provenían de una cuenta en Bahamas. Esa información había sido recibida por Aguilar después de que el Juzgado Noveno Penal le ordenó cerrar la ampliación del caso contra el exgobernante. ¿Buscó ‘La Prensa’ la versión del expresidente ante el nuevo hallazgo del fiscal? Tanto en la edición del 21 de marzo 2011, como en la del día siguiente, La Prensa trató, en vano, de obtener la versión de Pérez Balladares. Aún así, incluyó las declaraciones de su abogado, Luis Carlos Cabezas, quien declaró “que no hay nada ilegal en manejar una cuenta off shore y lo que mi cliente tenga que probar, lo hará en la audiencia programada para el 11 de abril.” ¿Qué error cometió el fiscal? El Ministerio Público informó lo siguiente: “Seaside Foundation es dueña de una cuenta en el Banco del Istmo International con sede en Bahamas, de la cual fueron girados dos cheques –uno por 175 mil dólares, en 2005, y otro por 45 mil dólares, en 2006–, ambos firmados por la esposa del expresidente, Dora Boyd de Pérez Balladares, a favor de la sociedad Shelf Holding, Inc. Shelf Holding Inc. es una de las sociedades incluidas dentro de la investigación por blanqueo de capitales que se sigue contra el exmandatario”. Cuando la fiscalía solicitó la información, lo hizo por el número de cuenta que aparecía en el cheque, sin percatarse de que la de Seaside Foundation tenía una subcuenta dentro de la cuenta madre del Banco del Istmo International Bahamas. Por ello, la fiscalía informó que la cuenta de Bahamas contra la que se giraron los dos cheques “registró movimientos bancarios por más de 176 millones de dólares entre 2009 y 2010, época en que el expresidente era investigado.” ¿Fue aclarado el error? En la edición del 23 de marzo de 2011, La Prensa reprodujo la respuesta de Luis Carlos Cabezas, abogado del exgobernante, quien calificó al fiscal Aguilar como “ignorante en materia financiera” y como “un instrumento de terceros” para afectar a Pérez Balladares (ver facsímil). En la nota, Cabezas advirtió que el Ministerio Público cometió “un grave error” en la interpretación de la información que le suministró el banco, y que sirvió de base para hacerle la petición al juzgado para abrir un nuevo expediente contra el exgobernante. Explicó, además, “que los más de 176 millones de dólares que se manejaron entre mayo de 2009 y junio de 2010 en una cuenta bancaria de Banistmo Internacional, con sede en Bahamas, no son propiedad de Pérez Balladares, y que ese monto corresponde a todos los depósitos y cheques girados por todos los cuentahabientes de ese banco durante ese período.” “Pérez Balladares, sobreseído” El 30 de abril de 2011, el expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares y otras 14 personas acusadas de blanqueo de capitales fueron sobreseídos de forma definitiva por el Juzgado Noveno Penal, en un fallo en el que se determinó que el Ministerio Público no había logrado probar ninguna de las acusaciones que le hizo a los imputados. A criterio del juez Diego Fernández, la fiscalía se equivocó al imputar a los acusados los delitos de blanqueo de capitales y, como precedente de este, contra la administración pública. En su fallo, Fernández indicó que el delito de blanqueo de capitales señala como delitos precedentes el peculado y la corrupción de servidores públicos, pero “de ninguna manera contempla genéricamente el delito contra la administración pública”. El juez sostuvo que la fiscalía violó la legislación relacionada con el delito de blanqueo de capitales al tomar declaración indagatoria a 15 imputados con base en un criterio equivocado de los delitos por los cuales los estaba acusando. Según reportó La Prensa, el fallo también señaló que la fiscalía no aportó “ninguna prueba directa o indirecta” que demostrara que los acusados incurrieron en los delitos de blanqueo de capitales o corrupción de servidores públicos. De igual forma, el juez dictó el descongelamiento de las cuentas bancarias secuestradas –desde abril de 2010– a nombre de la sociedad anónima Shelf Holding, Inc. ¿Hubo apelación? Sí, el fiscal Marcelino Aguilar apeló la decisión. El 6 de enero 2012, bajo la ponencia de Elvia Batista, el Segundo Tribunal de Justicia confirmó el sobreseimiento dado al expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares y a otras 14 personas. La Corte Suprema de Justicia, que admitió un recurso de casación contra la sentencia, lo reenvió con sus observaciones al Segundo Tribunal de Justicia. El 13 septiembre de 2017, los magistrados del Segundo Tribunal absolvieron a Ernesto Pérez Balladares. “El delito precedente que fue objeto de estudio en el presente proceso judicial, [...] fue decretado su archivo debido a que los hechos investigados en ese momento habían sido juzgados anteriormente, aunado a que había pasado tiempo en demasía para ser dirimidos, desde que se otorgaron las concesiones, no siendo viable judicialmente su escrutinio para configurar el delito de blanqueo de capitales”, indicó el fallo. ¿Por qué demandó el expresidente a Corprensa? Por los posibles daños y perjuicios que las publicaciones de los días 21 y 22 de marzo de 2011 –referentes a la cuenta de Bahamas– le hayan podido causar. El monto de la demanda fue de 5.5 millones de dólares. ¿‘La Prensa’ fue el único medio que publicó la noticia sobre la segunda investigación? No, otros medios, tanto nacionales como extranjeros, cubrieron esta noticia. ¿El expresidente demandó a los demás medios que publicaron la noticia? No, solo a Corporación La Prensa, S.A. ¿En este caso hay una sentencia condenatoria contra ‘La Prensa’? No, no existe sentencia alguna contra La Prensa. El proceso, que lleva ocho años, luego de estar inactivo durante siete, fue reactivado por el demandante hace unos meses. ¿Por qué se ha presentado el secuestro? El demandante presentó un secuestro preventivo por un millón 131 mil dólares, con el fin de asegurarse de cobrar, en el evento de que gane la demanda. Para ello, puso una fianza de 250 mil dólares. ¿Algún otro periódico ha sufrido una medida igual? La acción de secuestro preventivo de bienes contra un periódico no tiene precedentes en Panamá. Moderator comment: Below is an unedited automated translation of the above news article. Quote Keys to understand the kidnapping against the assets of Corprensa The action of preventive kidnapping of assets against a newspaper, such as the one filed by former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares, is unprecedented in Panama. Rita Vasquez Jul 13, 2020 - 12:18 AM <<ERFX4TM22RC3XLTDOOT2XDPBHE.jpg>> Corprensa faces a kidnapping of its assets for a million 131 thousand dollars. Archive The civil lawsuit for damages was filed by former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares (1994-1999) on March 22, 2012 against Corporación La Prensa, S.A., (Corprensa) by a publication made a year earlier. The following is a summary of the most relevant origins, facts and events that preceded the preventive kidnapping presented by the former president last week. When and how does this dispute start? In August 2009, La Prensa carried out a series of investigations that linked the close circle and relatives of former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares with millionaire payments made by a company that operated gaming and gambling rooms. Which company? This was Lucky Games, a company that received a direct concession, without a public act, during the administration of Pérez Balladares, for the operation of 9 game rooms for 20 years. On June 16, 1999, the Cabinet Council authorized the concession contract. The State did not receive a single penny for the concession, despite the fact that the concessionaire billed $ 18 million in its first year of operations. Were more gaming concessions awarded? The government of Pérez Balladares directly granted two other concessions: Comput-Bingo, S.A., and Competiciones Deportivas, S.A., which operated Bingo 90, in Obarrio. Both had Mario Pérez Balladares, the former president's brother, as a shareholder. <<DPIYTKAD3RGM7MOTH5Q26IIWBI.jpg>> Ernesto Pérez Balladares, at the exit of the Avesa building, after giving an inquiry for the first time. Archive Wasn't individuals prohibited from opening casinos in Panama? In effect, the Constitution establishes that the "exploitation of games of luck and chance, and of activities that generate bets, may only be carried out by the State". However, Pérez Balladares, by means of a decree-law, issued by his Cabinet in 1998, used the figure of the "concession" to allow the entry of private operators in an activity previously reserved exclusively for the State. What did the first investigations of Prensa La Prensa ’reveal? This medium found that multiple payments came from Lucky Games and were deposited in the bank account of a company called Shelf Holding, Inc. It was also discovered that Roosevelt Thayer (Pérez Balladares' close friend and Minister of Housing), as well as Enrique Pretelt (son-in-law of the former president) had ended up occupying managerial positions within Lucky Games: one was the vice president and the other the secretary of the board of directors. . The investigation also discovered that other managers, both from Lucky Games and Shelf Holding, were very close to Pérez Balladares. That was the case of Samuel Camarena, president of the society, who was the conductor of Enrique Pretelt; and Ricardo Caputo, a close collaborator of the former president who was even in charge of handling discretionary items when he occupied the Palacio de las Garzas. And the version of the former president and his environment? Before each publication, La Prensa contacted the former president to include his version. Pérez Balladares preferred not to comment on the content of the La Prensa investigation, but through his spokesperson, Catia Rojas, clarified that "the entire privatization process, which includes administrative awards and concessions, was carried out in accordance with law ”, as published on August 4, 2009. Roosevelt Thayer personally received the journalist of this newspaper and admitted that he was indeed the director of Lucky Games, but denied having any shareholding relationship with the company. Enrique Pretelt, however, did not answer the requests. Who are the shareholders? The Gaming Control Board required the company Cirsa, effective operator of different casinos and gambling halls in Panama, to reveal the name of the shareholders, both of Lucky Games and of another concessionaire called Gaming & Services. Cirsa replied that they appeared as holders of 29% of the shares of both Enrique Pretelt and Roosevelt Thayer. And that the remaining 71% belonged to Cirsa. At that time it was learned that the total number of rooms that jointly operated amounted to 23. Lastly, the Ministry of Economy revealed that since the concessions were granted until 2008, the concessionaires had obtained revenues of $ 266 million. <<JODEVMC47NEQ5FE7OXI6KDB3HA.jpg>> Response from the former president's lawyer, Luis Carlos Cabezas, published in this medium. Infographic What else was found about Shelf Holding Inc.? In the course of the journalistic investigation, it was revealed that Shelf Holding had been incorporated by the law firm of a very close lawyer for the former president and that since its incorporation, eight million dollars had passed through his bank account. Despite not appearing as a director of Shelf Holding, Inc., the bank account opening documents were signed by former President Pérez Balladares. Additionally, it was found that Pérez Balladares, and his personal secretary, Eyda Achon, were the signatories of the bank account of Shelf Holding, Inc. The checkbook was handled by the former president and the checks he wrote were in his own handwriting. What about "bearer" checks drawn on by Shelf Holding, Inc.? Pérez Balladares wrote checks from the Shelf Holding “Al Portador” account, which were immediately endorsed and deposited in his own checking account. Did other companies benefit? Mister Bull Corporation, the company that owns the former president's yacht, and Blue Cascade Inc., owner of his plane, also received transfers from Lucky Games. What did Pérez Balladares answer? In mid-2009, Pérez Balladares voluntarily attended the Public Ministry. He affirmed before the journalists and gave the prosecution a statement affirming: "I do not have or have had any shareholding or any other type of participation with the company Lucky Games, SA, or in any other company in the sector of games of luck and chance" . Yes, he accepted the participation of his relatives. "I have not received any economic benefit or of any other nature from the referred activity," he added. In those days, the exmandatario also sent an email to his friends and acquaintances. In the letter, he acknowledged that his administration granted the company related to Thayer and Pretelt a license to operate slot machine rooms. "To say that these people are close is not a lie, the lie is to insinuate that a special favor was done to them outside the law." His statements were reproduced by La Prensa. "The blows are given, not announced" During those days, the former president warned in an email sent to a La Prensa journalist that "at some point I will collect the bill." The threat was reiterated in an interview that in those days he provided to the Panama America newspaper: PA - What do you mean by settling the account? EPB - I mean that they have put together two weeks of reports on the front page based on assumptions and, above all, that they have involved and mentioned members of my family, I am the politician, my family, no. That opens up to being punished, I will take the time it takes, but believe me, not to sue a journalist or a newspaper, no, no, that part of the mistakes are past, that goes the other way. PA - Which way? EPB - No, I can't tell you that. She [the journalist] told me that she had to bring it to the attention of the newspaper's management, and if they were threats, she said, no, I did not threaten anyone. I told him you can do whatever you want, this is not secret information. PA - Would that possibility fit against other people who are not journalists? EPB - I do not act on suspicions, I act to settle the accounts of people who have proven me wrong. In a meeting of leaders of the Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD) at that time, the former president publicly reiterated: "The blows are given, not announced ... in due course they will know." So who did Shelf Holding Inc. belong to? In an interview on the Open Debate program, Pérez Balladares claimed not to be the owner of Shelf Holding. "The reasons why this society received or stopped receiving money are strictly familiar, which I do not have to disclose, unless they are ill-gotten funds." "I do not have to be debating for the well-being of La Prensa or anyone else what is happening within my family." In addition, the exmandatario said that he had loaned money to all his sons-in-law to help them carry out their operations, but clarified that this does not have to be disclosed, much less explain how they pay him. Their statements were reproduced by this newspaper. <<3QKRBU6XSBCWZDLAV7LEJCVJJ4.jpg>> Local media, such as ‘La Estrella de Panamá’ and ‘Panamá América’; and internationals, such as ‘The Nassau Guardian’ from the Bahamas, covered the news. Infographic Was any judicial process opened? On September 14, 2009, the Office of the Special Prosecutor against Organized Crime announced the opening of an investigation. José Ayú Prado, who then served as the prosecutor in charge, would later announce that the possible commission of the crime of money laundering was being investigated. On December 27, 2009, the Public Ministry issued a driving order to the former president to make an investigative statement for alleged money laundering and corruption of officials. After approximately 36 hours of a search that was broadcast on television channels, and that included the arrival of agents at his residence, his beach house, yacht and other places, the former president appeared at the Avesa building at 8: 45 at night. First ex-president arrested On January 14, 2010, Ernesto Pérez Balladares became the first and only former president, until then, to whom house arrest had been decreed. During the following days, the ex-president's defense presented a total of 19 appeals, including amparos, habeas corpus, challenges, appeals and requests for bail. His lawyer, Guillermina McDonalds, even announced that his client would sue the State before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights for having been left in a state of defenselessness. Lawyer Carlos Carrillo joined his legal team. Was bail granted? The ninth criminal judge, Diego Fernández, who was responsible for the case, denied the request for bail to the former president, warning: “The entrance of large sums of money is visualized, as well as the use of financial intermediaries, since those who manage the funds of the accounts are not the dignitaries of the corporations that own the accounts. ” After almost three months of house arrest, the Second Superior Court granted the former president a bail not to be detained that his team had requested. He was prevented from leaving and required to notify himself twice a month. Quote José María Castillo, lawyer for the former defendant From the first publications, and for the period that the investigations lasted, 'La Prensa', in a constant and systematic way, was dedicated to creating an atmosphere of turbidity over the figure of Ernesto Pérez Balladares, discrediting his status as an honorable citizen and respectable". Galindo, Arias & López, attorneys for La Prensa The news that 'La Prensa' published, in exercise of the freedom of information and expression recognized in the 'Constitution', was limited to reflecting contemporaneously and faithfully the charges that at that specific moment the Public Ministry formulated against a public figure ” . Was there an appeal to trial? On October 8, 2010, the Public Ministry requested the appeal of former President Pérez Balladares, on charges of money laundering for funds from activities related to games of luck and chance. "Pérez Balladares: This is a judicial persecution" "I have never committed any illegality, much less any crime of money laundering," was the categorical comment made by the former president, as published on the cover of La Prensa on March 24, 2010. At all stages of the investigation, arrest, appeal to trial and when the sentence was known, La Prensa consulted and published the position of the former president, who vehemently denied the charges at all times. La Prensa even published the results of a survey in which 45.5% considered that it was a fair process, compared to 41% who considered it to be a case of political persecution, and 13% did not know or did not want to. opine. Did you receive support from the PRD? Following the announcement that he would be called to trial, the former president received the support of his party. At the conclusion of a meeting in Penonomé, "figures from the PRD, such as Balbina Herrera, Anel Flores, Omar José Torrijos and Laurentino Cortizo offered their support to Pérez Balladares and assured that they would accompany him to the audience," was reported on April 11, 2011 in this diary. Why did the authorities involve the former first lady? Once the summons to trial was received, the ninth judge ordered that the investigations be expanded to find out the situation of Dora de Pérez Balladares, since she appeared as a signatory to a number of checks under investigation. The former first lady's signature would reappear on checks from a foundation named "Seaside." The news that caused the discord On March 21, 2011, La Prensa published the following news: "The former President of the Republic, Ernesto Pérez Balladares, could be the subject of a second criminal investigation, also related to the crime of money laundering", linked to "alleged irregularities detected in a bank account in the Bahamas. " La Prensa reported: “The above information is included in the extension of the tax hearing of the current case in which the ex-president is being prosecuted for money laundering, forwarded last February 28 by the specialized prosecutor against Organized Crime, Marcelino Aguilar, to the Ninth Criminal Court. The preliminary hearing is scheduled for April 11. ” A second investigation? In effect, the then prosecutor against Organized Crime, Marcelino Aguilar, after finding two checks (for $ 175,000 and $ 45,000) that were deposited in the account of Shelf Holding, Inc., both signed by former first lady Dora de Pérez Balladares, decided to investigate the reason for these funds that came from an account in the Bahamas. That information had been received by Aguilar after the Ninth Criminal Court ordered him to close the expansion of the case against the former governor. Did ‘La Prensa’ look for the former president's version of the prosecutor's new finding? In both the March 21, 2011, and the following day's edition, La Prensa tried, in vain, to obtain the version by Pérez Balladares. Still, he included the statements of his lawyer, Luis Carlos Cabezas, who declared "that there is nothing illegal in managing an off shore account and what my client has to prove, he will do at the hearing scheduled for April 11." What mistake did the prosecutor make? The Public Ministry reported the following: “The Seaside Foundation owns an account at the Bahamas-based Banco del Istmo International, from which two checks were written - one for $ 175,000 in 2005 and another for $ 45,000, in 2006–, both signed by the wife of the ex-president, Dora Boyd de Pérez Balladares, in favor of the company Shelf Holding, Inc. Shelf Holding Inc. is one of the companies included in the investigation for money laundering that continues against the exmandatario ”. When the prosecution requested the information, it was done by the account number that appeared on the check, not realizing that the Seaside Foundation's had a subaccount within the mother account of the Bank of the Isthmus International Bahamas. Therefore, the prosecution reported that the Bahamas account against which the two checks were drawn "recorded bank movements of more than $ 176 million between 2009 and 2010, at which time the former president was being investigated." Was the error cleared? In the March 23, 2011 edition, La Prensa reproduced the response of Luis Carlos Cabezas, the former governor's lawyer, who described the prosecutor Aguilar as "ignorant in financial matters" and as "an instrument of third parties" to affect Pérez Balladares ( see facsimile). In the note, Cabezas warned that the Public Ministry committed "a serious error" in the interpretation of the information provided by the bank, and that it served as the basis for making the petition to the court to open a new file against the former governor. He further explained that “the more than 176 million dollars that were handled between May 2009 and June 2010 in a bank account of Banistmo International, based in the Bahamas, are not owned by Pérez Balladares, and that this amount corresponds to all deposits and checks drawn on all account holders of that bank during that period. ” "Pérez Balladares, dismissed" On April 30, 2011, former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares and 14 other people accused of money laundering were definitively dismissed by the Ninth Criminal Court, in a ruling in which it was determined that the Public Ministry had failed to prove any of the accusations he made to the accused. In the opinion of Judge Diego Fernández, the prosecution was wrong to charge the defendants with the crimes of money laundering and, as a precedent for this, against the public administration. In his ruling, Fernández indicated that the crime of money laundering indicates the embezzlement and corruption of public servants as precedent crimes, but "in no way does it generically contemplate the crime against the public administration." The judge maintained that the prosecution violated the legislation related to the crime of money laundering by taking an investigative statement from 15 defendants based on the wrong criteria of the crimes for which they were being accused. As reported by La Prensa, the ruling also indicated that the prosecution did not provide "any direct or indirect evidence" to demonstrate that the defendants committed the crimes of money laundering or corruption of public servants. Similarly, the judge ordered the unfreezing of the hijacked bank accounts - since April 2010 - on behalf of the Shelf Holding, Inc. Was there an appeal? Yes, the prosecutor Marcelino Aguilar appealed the decision. On January 6, 2012, under the presentation of Elvia Batista, the Second Court of Justice confirmed the dismissal given to former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares and 14 other people. The Supreme Court of Justice, which admitted an appeal in cassation against the sentence, forwarded it with its observations to the Second Court of Justice. On September 13, 2017, the magistrates of the Second Court acquitted Ernesto Pérez Balladares. "The preceding crime that was the subject of study in this judicial process, [...] was ordered to be closed due to the fact that the facts investigated at that time had been previously tried, in addition to the fact that it had spent too much time to be settled, since the concessions were granted, their scrutiny to configure the crime of money laundering is not judicially viable, ”indicated the ruling. Why did the former president sue Corprensa? For the possible damages that the publications of March 21 and 22, 2011 - regarding the Bahamas account - could have caused. The amount of the lawsuit was 5.5 million dollars. Was 'The Press' the only medium that published the news about the second investigation? No, other media, both national and foreign, covered this news. Did the former president sue the other media that published the news? No, only to Corporación La Prensa, S.A. In this case, is there a conviction against ‘La Prensa’? No, there is no sentence against La Prensa. The eight-year process, after being inactive for seven, was reactivated by the plaintiff a few months ago. Why has the kidnapping been filed? The plaintiff filed a preventive kidnapping for a million 131 thousand dollars, in order to make sure to collect, in the event that the lawsuit wins. For this, he put a bond of 250 thousand dollars. Has any other newspaper suffered the same measure? The preventive kidnapping of assets against a newspaper is unprecedented in Panama. https://www.prensa.com/impresa/panorama/claves-para-entender-el-secuestro-contra-los-bienes-de-corprensa/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 14, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 14, 2020 Quote Wall Street Journal highlights Panama’s “fragile democracy” Balladares and Matrinelli Posted 13/07/2020 The seizure of $ 1.13 million in assets of Corporación La Prensa, SA (Corprensa) and the arrest in Guatemala of two sons of former President Ricardo Martinelli that "highlight the fragility of democracy in Panama," warns Mary O'Grady Wall Street Journal (WSJ) , columnist and specialist in Latin American issues. A week ago, on Monday, July 6, Corprensa posted a bond to lift the kidnapping that the civil judge Lina Castro De León ordered in favor of former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares (1994-1999), amid a lawsuit filed eight years ago, in which he claims $5.5 million from the corporation, ror moral damage. That same day, in Guatemala, Ricardo Alberto and Luis Enrique Martinelli Linares were detained at the request of the United States Department of Justice, which wants hem for alleged conspiracy to launder Odebrecht money. “The two events highlight the fragility of the aid young Panamanian democracy, something that is more forceful when it comes to corruption," said O'Grady If the Martinelli Linares brothers had arrived in Panama from Guatemala - as was their intention - it is unlikely that they would face the accusations in the United States, since the Panamanian Constitution prohibits the extradition of their nationals. " Their fate would be in the hands of the same courts that are now helping to silence L a Prensa, "she added. She stressed that the action against Corprensa is seen as "an unprecedented attack against press freedom in that nation." The kidnapping measure is still in force, since Judge Castro De León denied the bail presented by Corprensa, which publishes the newspapers La Prensa and Mi Diario. "The threats to the democratic institutions of this small tropical country, with just 4.2 million inhabitants, would go unnoticed", were it not for the tremendous importance that the interoceanic route has for world maritime traffic and the impact that politics has on its feasibility,” writes the columnist. ‘As for the Martinelli, the anti-corruption prosecutors in the Odebrecht case have summoned the former president for questioning twice; Instead of coming, he excused himself using a medical certificate issued by a cardiologist. In addition, he insists on not appearing in other proceedings against him, protected under the terms of his 2018 extradition from the United States, which he alleges protect him from being prosecuted for cases other than the one for which he was handed over to Panama: that of illegal wiretapping. His children are also wanted in the process, but they have never appeared. Since 2015, they have been living in Florida, where they were captured in November 2018, by immigration agents. Then it was said that, although they had legally entered the country, they no longer had a visa to stay in the United States. They were detained for 14 days in a migratory shelter, where a judge granted bail of $1 million each. Since then - according to O'Grady - they have been collaborating with the US authorities in the Odebrecht investigation, until the end of last month, when they left that country. https://www.newsroompanama.com/business/wall-street-journal-highlights-panamas-fragile-democracy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 14, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 14, 2020 Quote Las acciones de dos expresidentes ponen a prueba ‘la fragilidad de la democracia panameña', destaca columnista del WSJ Redacción de La Prensa 13 jul 2020 - 09:07 AM Corprensa edita los periódicos La Prensa y Mi Diario. El secuestro por $1.13 millones en activos de Corporación La Prensa, S.A. (Corprensa) y la detención en Guatemala de dos hijos del expresidente Ricardo Martinelli Berrocal (2009-2014), son eventos que “destacan la fragilidad de la democracia en Panamá”, advirtió Mary O’Grady, columnista del diario Wall Street Journal (WSJ), especialista en temas latinoamericanos. Hace una semana, el lunes 6 de julio, Corprensa presentó una fianza para levantar el secuestro que la juez civil Lina Castro De León ordenó a favor del expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares (1994-1999), en medio de una demanda que éste presentó hace ocho años, en la que reclama $5.5 millones a la corporación, por supuesto daño moral. Ese mismo día, en Guatemala, Ricardo Alberto y Luis Enrique Martinelli Linares fueron detenidos a solicitud del Departamento de Justicia de Estados Unidos, que los reclama por presunta conspiración para lavar dinero de Odebrecht. “Los dos acontecimientos destacan la fragilidad de la joven democracia panameña, algo que es más contundente cuando se trata de corrupción”, indicó O’Grady en su columna. Si los hermanos Martinelli Linares hubiesen llegado a Panamá desde Guatemala -como era su intención-, es poco probable que enfrentaran las acusaciones en Estados Unidos, ya que la Constitución panameña prohíbe la extradición de sus nacionales. “Su destino estaría en las manos de los mismos tribunales que ahora están ayudando a silenciar a La Prensa”, agregó. Resaltó que la acción contra Corprensa es vista como “un atentado sin precedentes contra la libertad de prensa en esa nación”. La medida de secuestro está vigente todavía, puesto que la juez Castro De León negó la fianza que presentó Corprensa, que edita los periódicos La Prensa y Mi Diario. “Las amenazas a las instituciones democráticas de este pequeño país tropical, de apenas 4.2 millones de habitantes, pasarían desapercibidas”, si no fuera por la tremenda importancia que para el tráfico marítimo mundial tiene la ruta interoceánica y el impacto que la política tiene sobre su viabilidad, sostiene la columnista. En cuanto a los Martinelli, las fiscales anticorrupción del caso Odebrecht han citado a indagatoria al expresidente en dos oportunidades; en vez de acudir, se excusó utilizando un certificado médico expedido por un cardiólogo. En adición, insiste en no comparecer a otros procesos en su contra, amparado en los términos de su extradición de Estados Unidos de 2018, que alega lo protegen de ser procesado por casos distintos a aquel por el que fue entregado a Panamá: el de los pinchazos. Sus hijos también están llamados por este proceso, pero nunca han comparecido. Desde el año 2015, han estado viviendo en Florida, donde fueron capturados en noviembre de 2018, por agentes migratorios. Entonces se dijo que, aunque habían ingresado legalmente al país, ya no tenían visa para permanecer en Estados Unidos. Estuvieron 14 días detenidos en un albergue migratorio, donde un juez les concedió fianza de $1 millón a cada uno. Desde entonces -según O’Grady- estarían colaborando con las autoridades estadounidenses en la investigación de Odebrecht, hasta a finales del mes pasado, se fueron de ese país. Lea aquí la columna de Mary O'Grady, del diario WSJ El Departamento de Estado estadounidense contradijo a Martinelli Berrocal por escrito, en una nota a la Procuraduría General de la Nación, en la que señaló que Panamá no necesita su aval para procesar al exmandatario por otros casos. “El expresidente, que pretende correr nuevamente en las elecciones de 2024, ha sostenido que las acusaciones son ataques políticos en su contra”, señala O’Grady. Martinelli, que cuenta ya innumerables demandas contra La Prensa por sus investigaciones sobre actos de corrupción, amenazó mediante un tuit el 30 de junio que él podría demandar al diario y congelar sus activos. Cinco días después, Perez Balladares, cuyo proceso por difamación contra La Prensa “había dormido en la pila de expedientes del juzgado por ocho años, logró que un juez le otorgara precisamente eso”. “Esto, dudosamente, es una coincidencia”, remarcó O’Grady. Moderator comment: Below is an unedited automated translation of the above news article. Quote The actions of two former presidents test ‘the fragility of Panamanian democracy ', highlights WSJ columnist Press Writing Jul 13, 2020 - 09:07 AM <<OAAYQIBA2VEX7GXLS4FHGMPPRQ.jpg>> Corprensa publishes the newspapers La Prensa and Mi Diario. The kidnapping for $ 1.13 million in assets of Corporación La Prensa, S.A. (Corprensa) and the arrest in Guatemala of two sons of former President Ricardo Martinelli Berrocal (2009-2014), are events that “highlight the fragility of democracy in Panama,” warned Mary O'Grady, columnist for the Wall Street Journal (WSJ ), specialist in Latin American issues. A week ago, on Monday, July 6, Corprensa posted a bond to lift the kidnapping that the civil judge Lina Castro De León ordered in favor of former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares (1994-1999), in the middle of a lawsuit that he filed eight years ago. years, in which he claims $ 5.5 million from the corporation, of course moral damage. That same day, in Guatemala, Ricardo Alberto and Luis Enrique Martinelli Linares were detained at the request of the United States Department of Justice, which claims them for alleged conspiracy to launder Odebrecht money. "Both events highlight the fragility of the young Panamanian democracy, something that is more forceful when it comes to corruption," O'Grady said in her column. If the Martinelli Linares brothers had arrived in Panama from Guatemala - as was their intention - it is unlikely that they would face the accusations in the United States, since the Panamanian Constitution prohibits the extradition of their nationals. "His fate would be in the hands of the same courts that are now helping to silence La Prensa," he added. She stressed that the action against Corprensa is seen as "an unprecedented attack against press freedom in that nation." The kidnapping measure is still in force, since Judge Castro De León denied the bail presented by Corprensa, which publishes the newspapers La Prensa and Mi Diario. "The threats to the democratic institutions of this small tropical country, with just 4.2 million inhabitants, would go unnoticed", were it not for the tremendous importance that the interoceanic route has for world maritime traffic and the impact that politics has on its feasibility, maintains the columnist. As for the Martinelli family, anti-corruption prosecutors in the Odebrecht case have summoned the former president for questioning twice; Instead of coming, he excused himself using a medical certificate issued by a cardiologist. In addition, he insists on not appearing in other proceedings against him, protected by the terms of his 2018 extradition from the United States, which he alleges protect him from being prosecuted for cases other than the one for which he was handed over to Panama: that of the punctures His children are also called through this process, but they have never appeared. Since 2015, they have been living in Florida, where they were captured in November 2018, by immigration agents. Then it was said that, although they had legally entered the country, they no longer had a visa to stay in the United States. They were detained for 14 days in a migratory shelter, where a judge granted bail of $ 1 million each. Since then - according to O'Grady - they have been collaborating with the US authorities in the Odebrecht investigation, until the end of last month, they left that country. Read Mary O'Grady's column from the WSJ here The US State Department contradicted Martinelli Berrocal in writing, in a note to the Office of the Attorney General of the Nation, in which she indicated that Panama does not need her endorsement to prosecute the ex-president for other cases. "The former president, who intends to run again in the 2024 elections, has maintained that the accusations are political attacks against him," says O'Grady. Martinelli, who already counts countless lawsuits against La Prensa for his investigations into acts of corruption, threatened in a tweet on June 30 that he could sue the newspaper and freeze its assets. Five days later, Perez Balladares, whose defamation case against La Prensa "had slept in the court's pile of files for eight years, managed to get a judge to grant him just that." "This, doubtfully, is a coincidence," O'Grady said. https://www.prensa.com/politica/las-acciones-de-dos-expresidentes-ponen-a-prueba-la-fragilidad-de-la-democracia-panamena-destaca-columnista-del-wsj/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 16, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 16, 2020 Quote Tribunal falla a favor de Corprensa en demanda de TCT Según el fallo, el derecho a la libertad de información y de prensa que le asiste a la demandada justifica la insatisfacción del derecho al honor e imagen que le asiste a los demandantes. Mónica Palm 16 jul 2020 - 12:11 AM El 3 de agosto de 2012, los camiones de TCT bloquearon el edificio de Corprensa para impedir que circularan los periódicos La Prensa y Mi Diario. ’. Archivo El Primer Tribunal Superior de Justicia revocó una sentencia de una juez civil que condenó a Corporación La Prensa, S.A. (Corprensa) a pagar $600 mil en concepto de daño moral, a los hermanos David y Daniel Ochy Diez, de la constructora Transcaribe Tranding, S.A. (TCT). Pretensión original Los Ochy Diez originalmente reclamaban $6 millones por unas publicaciones del diario La Prensa, los días 31 de julio y 1 y 2 de agosto de 2012, sobre sus contratos estatales para construir una carretera en Paso Canoa-Puerto Armuelles, por $114 millones. Al día siguiente -3 de agosto de 2012-, los camiones de TCT bloquearon el edificio de Corprensa para impedir que circularan los periódicos La Prensa y Mi Diario. Fallo a favor de Corprensa El tribunal consideró que el medio de comunicación “se comportó de manera diligente en la elaboración de los textos periodísticos... cumpliendo así con el deber de diligencia en la búsqueda de la verdad, que le impone el Código de Ética del Periodista en Panamá”, señala el fallo del 27 de febrero de 2020, que firman los magistrados Nelson Ruiz, Carlos Trujillo y Olga Rujano De León. De ese modo, el tribunal revocó un fallo de primera instancia, de la juez Decimotercera Civil, Melina Robinson, que el 25 de noviembre de 2015 condenó a Corprensa a pagar $600 mil a los Ochy en concepto de daño moral, más la cancelación de costas legales por otros $60 mil. En ese entonces la juez dijo que las publicaciones vinculadas con los contratos estatales fueron “falsas, temerarias, injuriosas y denigrantes”, pese a que estas se ajustaban de forma rigurosa a documentos oficiales y se referían a asuntos de interés público. Defensa legal Los demandantes estuvieron representados por José María Castillo, quien también representa al expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares en sus acciones judiciales contra Corprensa. Hace dos semanas, la jueza Lina Castro De León ordenó un secuestro de activos de Corprensa por $1.13 millones, a favor de Pérez Balladares, por un litigio que presentó el exmandatario hace ocho años y que está en primera instancia. Diferencias de criterio La juez Melina Robinson, en su fallo de 2015, tomó en consideración que “la propia parte [es decir, Corprensa] reconoció que realizó” las publicaciones de los días 31 de julio y 1 y 2 de agosto de 2012, pero el Primer Tribunal Superior advirtió que este reconocimiento “en modo alguno conlleva que se deba tener por probada la existencia de la obligación demandada, como erradamente lo entendió la juez primaria, toda vez que la obligación reclamada, si bien se origina por publicaciones efectuadas en los medios periodísticos antes citados de determinadas notas, no menos cierto es que se requiere, además, que las aludidas notas tengan un contenido falso, temerario, injurioso o denigrante, que infringe una lesión al derecho al honor y reputación de los demandantes”. Otros argumentos En su momento, la juez de primera instancia dijo que las publicaciones fueron “falsas, temerarias, injuriosas y denigrantes”. Pero el tribunal señala en su fallo que los informes periciales aportados no dan cuenta que Corprensa -representada en este caso por el abogado Adán Arnulfo Arjona- haya utilizado calificativos denigrantes en su contra. De interés público Según los Ochy, las publicaciones hacen referencia a TCT como “una de las grandes beneficiadas del plan de infraestructura que adelantó el gobierno de Ricardo Martinelli”. Respecto a este punto, el tribunal recordó que, entre los años 2009 y 2012, a la constructora se le adjudicaron 41 contratos de obras públicas, por $465.6 millones. Antes, entre 2005 y 2008, sus contratos con el Estado sumaban $25.8 millones. “Las informaciones (...) versaban sobre contrataciones públicas así como con el uso de fondos públicos, por tal razón, puede catalogarse como noticias de relevancia o interés público”, señaló el fallo. Libertad de información y de prensa Según la sentencia, el derecho a la libertad de información y de prensa que le asiste a la demandada justifica la insatisfacción del derecho al honor e imagen que le asiste a los demandantes. El tribunal concluye que Corprensa no faltó a su deber como medios de comunicación masivos de verificar la información que iba a ser divulgada. De esta forma, absolvió a Corporación La Prensa y le niegó las pretensiones a David Marco Ochy Diez y Daniel Miguel Ochy Diez. Moderator comment: Below is an unedited automated translation of the above news article. Quote Court rules in favor of Corprensa in TCT lawsuit According to the ruling, the right to freedom of information and of the press that assists the defendant justifies the dissatisfaction of the right to honor and image that assists the plaintiffs. Monica Palm Jul 16, 2020 - 12:11 AM <<3A3PIGG275DNTH7VH2XC5D5YCQ.jpg>> On August 3, 2012, TCT trucks blocked the Corprensa building to prevent the newspapers La Prensa and Mi Diario from circulating. ’. Archive The First Superior Court of Justice reversed a sentence of a civil judge that sentenced Corporación La Prensa, S.A. (Corprensa) to pay $ 600 thousand in moral damage, to brothers David and Daniel Ochy Diez, from the construction company Transcaribe Tranding, S.A. (TCT). Original claim The Ochy Diez originally claimed $ 6 million for publications of the newspaper La Prensa, on July 31 and August 1 and 2, 2012, about their state contracts to build a highway in Paso Canoa-Puerto Armuelles, for $ 114 million. The next day -August 3, 2012-, the TCT trucks blocked the Corprensa building to prevent the newspapers La Prensa and Mi Diario from circulating. Judgment in favor of Corprensa The court considered that the media "behaved diligently in the preparation of the journalistic texts ... thus complying with the duty of diligence in the search for truth, which is imposed by the Journalist Code of Ethics in Panama" , indicates the ruling of February 27, 2020, signed by magistrates Nelson Ruiz, Carlos Trujillo and Olga Rujano De León. In this way, the court reversed a first instance ruling, by the Thirteenth Civil judge, Melina Robinson, which on November 25, 2015 ordered Corprensa to pay $ 600 thousand to the Ochys for moral damage, plus the cancellation of costs. legal for another $ 60 thousand. At that time, the judge said that the publications related to the state contracts were "false, reckless, insulting and demeaning", despite the fact that these were rigorously adjusted to official documents and referred to matters of public interest. Legal defense The plaintiffs were represented by José María Castillo, who also represents former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares in his legal actions against Corprensa. Two weeks ago, Judge Lina Castro De León ordered a kidnapping of Corprensa's assets for $ 1.13 million, in favor of Pérez Balladares, due to a litigation that the former president filed eight years ago and that is in the first instance. Criterion differences Judge Melina Robinson, in her 2015 ruling, took into consideration that “the party itself [that is, Corprensa] acknowledged that it made” the publications of July 31 and August 1 and 2, 2012, but the First Court Superior warned that this recognition "in no way implies that the existence of the demanded obligation must be considered proven, as the primary judge wrongly understood, since the obligation claimed, although it originates from publications made in the journalistic media before Quoted from certain notes, it is no less true that the aforementioned notes are required to have a false, reckless, insulting or demeaning content, which infringes the plaintiffs' right to honor and reputation ”. Other arguments At the time, the trial judge said the posts were "false, reckless, insulting and demeaning." But the court notes in its ruling that the expert reports provided do not show that Corprensa - represented in this case by the lawyer Adán Arnulfo Arjona - has used derogatory labels against her. Of public interest According to the Ochys, the publications refer to TCT as "one of the great beneficiaries of the infrastructure plan that the Ricardo Martinelli government carried out." Regarding this point, the court recalled that, between 2009 and 2012, the construction company was awarded 41 public works contracts, for $ 465.6 million. Before, between 2005 and 2008, its contracts with the State totaled $ 25.8 million. "The information ... was about public procurement as well as the use of public funds, for this reason, it can be classified as news of relevance or public interest," the ruling stated. Freedom of information and press According to the judgment, the right to freedom of information and of the press that assists the defendant justifies the dissatisfaction of the right to honor and image that assists the plaintiffs. The court concludes that Corprensa did not fail in its duty as the mass media to verify the information that was to be disclosed. In this way, she acquitted Corporación La Prensa and denied the claims of David Marco Ochy Diez and Daniel Miguel Ochy Diez. https://www.prensa.com/impresa/panorama/tribunal-falla-a-favor-de-corprensa-en-demanda-de-tct/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 17, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 17, 2020 Quote OPINION – Legislators highlight their mediocrity The notorious illegal meeting at Jimmy's Posted 16/07/2020 In the midst of the health crisis, have the enormous political uncertainty, and the chain of judicial surprises that plague Panama, the deputies of the ruling party presented a show th In the midst of the health crisis, have the enormous political uncertainty, and the chain of judicial surprises that plague Panama, the deputies of the ruling party presented a show that lived up to their ambitions and the size of their mediocrity. It would be thought that after the memorable dinner at a legendary barbecue[ in Jimmy’s], the PRD bench would have agreed with itself, to decide the directors of the permanent committees. Such a feat of governability is very far from the appetites of the "honorable" deputies who, like a raging pack, distributed the charges, without taking into account loyalties or political pacts. An uncomfortable veteran deputy was exiled to a beloved Women's Commission, while others were figurines from an album that appeared repeatedly in the most powerful commissions. Why the last-minute dispute at? All seek the greatest influence to exercise the worst possible blackmail against the Executive Branch, of their own party, which has declined. Thus, the caste of deputies who control the PRD extort its government and kidnap the country. -LA PRENSA, Jul. 16 https://www.newsroompanama.com/opinion/opinion-legislators-highlight-their-mediocrity-1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 19, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 19, 2020 Quote OPINION: When cockroaches spray the messenger Posted 18/07/2020 When light is shone on the darkest parts of our society, the person who reveals is often attacked. Perhaps the filth has an explanation, although until now it had been ignored, perhaps for convenience, perhaps for impotence. The truth is that the exposed cockroaches do not give explanations and do not provide information that justifies their wanderings. On the contrary, offended they claim darkness and cry that there is no dirt. Every State contractor and every government entity that manages taxpayer resources is required to be accountable and demonstrate the good use of public funds. Any company or citizen, proud of the service or goods it provides, would be glad to be able to expose the quality of its facilities and its high standards in safety and hygiene processes. If the truth is on your side, Why is the medium and the journalist attacked? Having the opportunity to answer reasonable concerns for several weeks, why then the silence and now the screaming? We clarify: yes we are campaigning, but to monitor the resources of the Republic -LA PRENSA, Jul.18 https://www.newsroompanama.com/opinion/opinion-when-cockroaches-spray-the-messenger-1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 22, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 22, 2020 Quote Panama a Dying Democracy? The attacking bedfellows fom opposing parties Posted 20/07/2020 The two-pronged assault on press freedom in Panama via the country’s notoriously “susceptible” justice system has produced few reactions from Newsroom readers intent on denouncing real or imaginary infringements of mobility rights during the pandemic. But last weekend author Phil Edmonston, a former Canadian MP (Member of Parliament) and previous chair of Democrats Abroad in Panama decided enough was enough and wrote: A dying Democracy I am ashamed to be so angry on a Sunday a day I usually tuck away for positive thoughts and good works. Two of Panama’s former presidents (Ernesto “El Toro” Balladare 1944-98 and Ricardo “Loco” Martinelli 2009 -2014) are trying to shut down our free press by reactivating a multimillion dollar sequestration petition against La Prensa, attached to an 8-year-old dormant defamation lawsuit. Hopefully, this petition will lose on appeal. And as John Milton predicted, we shall see: “Truth and Falsehood grapple in a free and open encounter.” https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/milton-areopagitica-1644-jebb-ed. La Prensa has covered Panama’s political scene through the Noriega dictatorship and has supported a free press and civil rights in every way. As iconic civil rights leader and Congressman John Lewis (R.I.P,) said so eloquently before Washington’s National Press Club in 2013. https://www.c-span.org/video/?314750-1/50th-anniversary-march-washington: "If it had not been for the press, the civil rights movement would have been like a bird without wings, a choir without a song." So, let us raise our voices high. And not let democracy die. https://www.newsroompanama.com/opinion/panama-a-dying-democracy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Moderator_02 Posted July 25, 2020 Author Moderators Share Posted July 25, 2020 Quote 21 días de secuestro de cuentas de Corprensa El pasado martes, Corprensa presentó una petición de levantamiento de los bienes secuestrados en exceso. La juez Decimoquinta Civil no se ha pronunciado al respecto. Mónica Palm 25 jul 2020 - 12:00 AM A Corprensa se le han retenido cuentas bancarias y valores por $1.46 millones, lo que supera el monto del secuestro civil concedido al exgobernante. LP Tres semanas han transcurrido desde que Corporación La Prensa (Corprensa) fue notificada del Oficio de Secuestro de sus cuentas bancarias. El 21 de julio, Corprensa presentó, a través de sus apoderados, una petición de levantamiento de los bienes secuestrados en exceso a un millón 131 mil dólares. Al cierre de la jornada del viernes 24, la juez Lina Castro De León, del Juzgado Decimoquinto de lo Civil, no había emitido un pronunciamiento. Esto, a pesar de que se tenían confirmaciones bancarias desde el 13 de julio, que permitían verificar que el secuestro ya se excedía en al menos $329 mil. El secuestro, por un millón 131 mil dólares, fue aprobado por la juez, a petición del expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares, quien demandó por $5.5 millones a Corprensa por presuntos daños y perjuicios en marzo de 2012. El caso se encuentra en primera instancia, en fase de presentación de pruebas, sin un fallo a favor ni en contra. Silencio de la juez Castro, ante el secuestro de Corprensa La juez Decimoquinta Civil, Lina Castro De León, aún no se ha pronunciado frente a una nueva solicitud presentada el martes 21 de julio para liberar el excedente del monto secuestrado a Corporación La Prensa (Corprensa), dentro del pleito interpuesto hace ocho años por el expresidente Ernesto Pérez Balladares. Corprensa sostiene que se le han retenido cuentas bancarias y valores por $1.46 millones, lo que supera el monto del secuestro civil concedido al exgobernante. El pasado 22 de junio, la juez concedió el secuestro civil solicitado por Pérez Balladares, por hasta $1.13 millones, en el contexto de una demanda presentada contra Corprensa en marzo de 2012 -aún en primera instancia, en fase de pruebas-, en la que reclama $5.5 millones, por presuntos daños y perjuicios. En virtud de esa orden, BG Valores contestó el 7 de julio al juzgado que había retenido sumas del portafolio No. 1224 y de la cuenta Money Market, por la suma total de $964,828.68. A su vez, Banco General comunicó el 13 de julio el secuestro de una cuenta, por $495,728.32, lo que -sumado a la cifra anterior- arroja un monto de poco más de $1.46 millones. Banco General también informó que había retenido otras cuentas de Corprensa. Posteriormente, el 17 de julio, Scotia Bank confirmaría el secuestro de $12,956.75. Dado que era evidente que el monto a favor de Pérez Balladares ya se encontraba asegurado, Corprensa solicitó el 21 de julio, a través de la firma Galindo, Arias y López, a la juez que ordene el levantamiento del secuestro, en lo que respecta a los excedentes. Al cierre de la jornada de ayer, la juez no se había pronunciado. Anteriormente, la juez Castro ya rechazó una fianza de seguro por $1.13 millones, consignada por Corprensa a primera hora de la mañana del lunes 6 de julio. Corprensa fue notificada por uno de sus bancos del secuestro de sus cuentas bancarias en la mañana del sábado 4 de julio, por lo que se trabajó para llegar al juzgado a primera hora, adelantándose a las confirmaciones bancarias. Según la legislación procesal panameña, si el juzgado no ha recibido confirmaciones bancarias, una vez consignada la fianza de una empresa de seguros, el secuestro debe levantarse “de plano”, de acuerdo con el artículo 536 del Código de Procedimiento Civil. Esto no ocurrió, pese a que la fianza cubría el total del monto secuestrado, ya que la juez se pronunció en rechazo de la fianza y la petición del levantamiento del secuestro en la tarde del miércoles 8 de julio. La fianza que había sido consignada por el expresidente para realizar el secuestro fue por la suma de $250 mil. “La medida entorpece la operación y viabilidad de la empresa a mediano plazo”, dijo Diego Quijano, presidente de Corprensa, más ahora, en media pandemia, cuando la economía se encuentra parcialmente clausurada. “En este momento, lo que más pesa sobre nosotros es la expectativa de que ese dinero estará congelado por 5 a 10 años, mientras el caso este sigue su curso en el sistema judicial”. Especialistas en derechos humanos han manifestado el riesgo para la libertad de prensa y el derecho al acceso a la información de que el sistema judicial panameño permita estas acciones de hostigamiento judicial contra los medios de comunicación y activistas. La semana pasada, en una carta enviada a Edison Lanza, relator especial de la Libertad de Expresión de la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH), y a Paulo Abrao, secretario ejecutivo de la CIDH, 11 organizaciones panameñas solicitaron que sea acogida la petición de medidas cautelares presentada por el abogado Félix Wing, a favor de la población panameña y Corprensa. Las organizaciones sostienen que “el objetivo del hostigamiento judicial es claro: distrae tiempo, energía y recursos de la labor del demandado, y cuando se trata de un medio de comunicación, es aun más claro: silenciarlo y arrodillarlo”. Moderator comment: Below is an unedited automated translation of the above news article. Quote 21 days of hijacking of Corprensa accounts Last Tuesday, Corprensa presented a petition to lift the excess sequestered assets. The Fifteenth Civil Judge has not ruled on the matter. Monica Palm Jul 25, 2020 - 12:00 AM <<4GHINHNLDFGHPLF5L6O7IMNL6U.jpg>> Corprensa has had bank accounts and securities withheld for $ 1.46 million, which is more than the amount of the civil kidnapping granted to the former governor. LP Three weeks have passed since Corporación La Prensa (Corprensa) was notified of the Kidnapping Official of their bank accounts. On July 21, Corprensa filed, through its attorneys, a petition to lift the seized assets in excess of $ 1,131,000. At the close of business on Friday the 24th, Judge Lina Castro De León, of the Fifteenth Civil Court, had not issued a ruling. This, despite having bank confirmations since July 13, which allowed verifying that the kidnapping already exceeded at least $ 329 thousand. The kidnapping, for a million 131 thousand dollars, was approved by the judge, at the request of former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares, who sued Corprensa for $ 5.5 million for alleged damages in March 2012. The case is in first instance, in presentation phase of evidence, without a ruling in favor or against. Silence of Judge Castro, before the kidnapping of Corprensa The Fifteenth Civil Judge, Lina Castro De León, has not yet ruled on a new request presented on Tuesday, July 21 to release the surplus of the amount seized from Corporación La Prensa (Corprensa), in the lawsuit filed eight years ago by the former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares. Corprensa maintains that bank accounts and securities for $ 1.46 million have been withheld, which exceeds the amount of the civil kidnapping granted to the former governor. On June 22, the judge granted the civil kidnapping requested by Pérez Balladares, for up to $ 1.13 million, in the context of a lawsuit filed against Corprensa in March 2012 -even in the first instance, in the testing phase-, in which Claims $ 5.5 million, for alleged damages. By virtue of that order, BG Valores replied on July 7 to the court that it had withheld amounts from portfolio No. 1224 and from the Money Market account, for the total amount of $ 964,828.68. In turn, Banco General reported on July 13 the hijacking of an account, for $ 495,728.32, which - added to the previous figure - yields an amount of just over $ 1.46 million. Banco General also reported that it had withheld other Corprensa accounts. Subsequently, on July 17, Scotia Bank would confirm the hijacking of $ 12,956.75. Given that it was evident that the amount in favor of Pérez Balladares was already insured, on July 21, Corprensa requested, through the Galindo, Arias and López firm, the judge to order the lifting of the kidnapping, with regard to surplus. At the close of business yesterday, the judge had not ruled. Previously, Judge Castro already rejected an insurance bond for $ 1.13 million, entered by Corprensa first thing in the morning on Monday, July 6. Corprensa was notified by one of its banks of the seizure of its bank accounts on the morning of Saturday, July 4, so it worked to reach the courthouse early, anticipating bank confirmations. According to Panamanian procedural legislation, if the court has not received bank confirmations, once the bond of an insurance company has been posted, the kidnapping must be lifted "outright", in accordance with article 536 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This did not happen, despite the fact that the bond covered the total amount kidnapped, since the judge ruled in rejection of the bond and the request to lift the kidnapping on the afternoon of Wednesday, July 8. The bond that had been consigned by the former president to carry out the kidnapping was in the amount of $ 250 thousand. "The measure hinders the operation and viability of the company in the medium term," said Diego Quijano, president of Corprensa, more now, in a pandemic, when the economy is partially closed. "At this time, what weighs most on us is the expectation that this money will be frozen for 5 to 10 years, while the case continues in the judicial system." Human rights specialists have expressed the risk for press freedom and the right to access to information that the Panamanian judicial system allows these actions of judicial harassment against the media and activists. Last week, in a letter sent to Edison Lanza, special rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), and to Paulo Abrao, executive secretary of the IACHR, 11 Panamanian organizations requested that the petition of precautionary measures presented by the lawyer Félix Wing, in favor of the Panamanian population and Corprensa. The organizations maintain that "the objective of judicial harassment is clear: it diverts time, energy and resources from the defendant's work, and when it comes to a means of communication, it is even clearer: to silence and kneel him." https://www.prensa.com/impresa/panorama/21-dias-de-secuestro-de-cuentas-de-corprensa/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.