Shielding judges of the Court is questioned

Once again, the judges of the Electoral Tribunal (TE) are in the eye of the storm, this time, to push a proposal that shields the time of investigation.

The project, which has already been approved on third reading by the National Assembly and only awaits the approval of the Executive, states that to implement precautionary measures and convicted of certain crimes to the judges of the TE will require two-thirds full of Supreme Court (CSJ).

The existing rule says: "The main and alternate judges when they are enabled, will not be removed, suspended in the exercise of their duties, except in the cases and with the formalities provided by law (...) Similarly.

They may not be detained or arrested, except by written order of the competent authority to judge. " This, according to experts in political and constitutional terms, represents a shield that already enjoyed by other high-profile public servants.

"It is creating a special court. Increasingly, officials want to raise their level of armor and this in turn generates impunity," said Juan Jované. Political analyst Mario Rognoni, it is a practice that officials have been making other state bodies.

"The Electoral Court is following the current of the other bodies that have been slowly shielding for protection." Rognoni said it is absurd to require the vote of two thirds of the Court to investigate and that civil society has demonstrated inability to fight what it called arbitrary.

And the decision has not gone down well among respondents, as though they admit that these public servants have this option through laws, they do not understand for what reasons seek safety.

In fact, Roberto Troncoso, voice of civil society, said he has tried to look at "national history" the existence of any case where someone has filed a complaint against such officials, however, said not having found therefore he wonders why the judges take this action if you think someone is not able to file a complaint based on lies.

"I do not understand either deputies or magistrates who want to protect themselves such laws do not let nobody can sue or take to the Supreme Court, that it seems absurd and I think we have to be more consistent with the times," he added.

Who would also seem a shocking measure is Enrique Montenegro, Anti-Corruption Front of Panama, who called it "the straw that broke the camel" because the Constitution of the Republic provides that all rules are the same for all citizens Except, therefore, in his view, they are evading a point which provides it with "extreme audacity." "What remains to other citizens is to continue participating and denouncing the irregular actions of public officials," said Montenegro.

Se oponen a ser fiscalizados por miembros de la sociedad civil

Recientemente, los magistrados del Tribunal Electoral (TE) rechazaron una propuesta de la sociedad civil que busca conocer las actuaciones administrativas así como la asignación y manejo de fondos públicos en esa institución.

La iniciativa, que consiste en una veeduría, fue leída durante la última sesión de la Comisión Nacional de Reformas Electorales, pero rechazada de plano por los tres altos funcionarios del TE.

Y eso que el grupo de veedores, según sus proponentes, no serían sectores políticos, sino que se designarían por parte de organizaciones de la sociedad civil, con reuniones cada cuatro meses.

El Tribunal Electoral ha estado en el ojo de la tormenta por reiteradas denuncias de nepotismo y supuestas irregularidades en el uso de fondos de la institución, desviados -entre otras actividades- para fiestas familiares, principalmente por parte del magistrado presidente, Erasmo Pinilla.