Confusion continues over land grab as Martinelli vows no compensation

Confusion continues around the Paitilla land grab scandal in Panama where a piece of prime property, was being transferred free of charge to people said to have close connections to the president.

After initially sending a message on his Blackberry that swept the story aside  as just one of thousands of similar cases, President, Ricardo Martinelli, set up a committee of high ranking government officials along with the  National Land Authority that led to the appearance  overnight of a sign saying that the land was government property.

But the scandal refused to be hidden and filled the front  and inside pages of the country's leading broadsheets, La Prensa and La Estrella.

On Wednesday, after returning from Europe, the  president went one further saying he would not "pay anyone anything" for the land, now taken over by the state.

He had been on a trip to Europe reportedly accompanied by one of the businessmen, accompanied by one of the businessmen who was identified in media reports to have been a beneficiary of the transaction involving 11,379 square meters of land sitting on the Bay of Panama with a clear view across the Bay of the presidential palace.

It was ceded  at no cost by the director of the land registry,  Anabelle Villamonte,  to Ventures Segura, SA.

 After a side trip to Italy Martinelli and his party went to Germany to take official delivery of the TBMs to be used for the construction of the Metro.

Martinelli  said that the land will go to a park, "an extension of the “Cinta Costera.”

This follows the path  outlined at the emergency meeting of the board of the National Land Authority (Anati), chaired by Carlos Duboy, Minister of Housing and Land Management (Miviot), to request the Executive "expropriation without compensation".

"Expropriation without compensation" was also a recommendation of the Minister of the Presidency, Papadimitriu Demetrius, who said that it would use the Law 57 of 1946.

But lawyers, including Ebrahim Asvat who originally blew the whistle on the deal, William Marquez Amado,  Antonio Bernal, Rogelio Cruz, and Panameñista Rep Joseph I. Blandon, and former Comptroler Alvin Weeden have warned that this route is unconstitutional. 

The 1946 rule developed by Article 46  of the Constitution in force at that time and cited by cited by Papadimitriu  was replaced in 1972. 

So confusion reigns. A far cry from the simple gift made to the city by a florist who originally had the rights to the land.