New judges-opportunity or deja vu?

As Panama’s National Assembly readies itself to discuss the appointment of the two new Supreme Court judges designated by the Cabinet Council on Friday evening, December 15, two opposition parties have rushed to the barricades with denunciations, calling on caucus members to unite in rejecting the nominations.

The main complaint, with some justification, is the lack of consultation and input from civil society, promised by President Varela during his election campaign and largely overlooked with his previous appointments and with the new candidates. The earlier couple within hours of entering their new offices rushed to shore up the bid for re-election of controversial chief magistrate Ayu Prado, a man who electioneering Varela had suggested should resign.

This time around while the two nominees are generally seen as highly qualified for the posts the method of selection has turned them into political footballs.

Both the PRD and CD cry about lack of input in the process, and of party affiliations. With one of the two  candidates clearly seen on social networks playing a role in Varela’s election campaign  there  is at least call for further probing, but the complaining parties have in the past  dutifully followed the  tradition of packing the court with those of at least similar inclinations, and Martinelli appointments were all  close to the famed zero circle.

The CD, on the other hand, has also denounced  Zulekya Moore for her role as anti-corruption prosecutor, confining in preventive detention, those accused of multi-million dollar crimes,  with the potential of skipping the country.

One CD leader, herself facing criminal charges, was quick to suggest that as a Judge Moore would continue “political persecution” which broadly appears to mean going after thieves and money launderers.

Meanwhile, the Independent Movement (Movin)  has said that both Ana Lucrecia Tovar de Zarak and Zuleyka Moore have the academic and professional profile to be magistrates, but also considered that “there are reasonable concerns about their designations”.

The “concerns   – in the case of  Tovar de Zarak are for her political and family affinity While  Moore “is part of the most important corruption investigation in Latin America”  (Odebrecht) and would force her to declare herself impeded in this and other cases of corruption.

“These issues have to be discussed objectively, taking into account the responsible opinion of the citizens … the National Assembly must fill this role with responsibility and transparency, ” said the group …  and put aside the football and maybe begin the process of removing corruption from the justice system, starting with the  “hands-off” pact between the Assembly and the Judges.