By Inés M. Pousadela
MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, May 21 2024 – Regional experts called it Panama’s most important election since the 1989 US invasion that deposed de facto president General Manuel Noriega. Panamanians went to the polls amid high inflation and unemployment, with a stagnating economy. Endemic corruption was also high on their long list of concerns, along with access to water, education and a collapsing social security system.

The winner, conservative lawyer José Raúl Mulino, was a stand-in for former president Ricardo Martinelli, disqualified from running due to a money laundering conviction. Martinelli remains popular regardless and managed to transfer his popularity to his less charismatic substitute. For those who backed Mulino, nostalgia for the economic stability and growth that marked Martinelli’s pro-business administration seemed to outweigh his proven record of corruption.

On the face of it, the election results seemed to demonstrate the primacy of economic considerations in voters’ minds, with hopes for growth trumping corruption fatigue. But that’s not the whole story.

Free, fair and uncertain

On 5 May, Panamanians went to the polls to elect a president and vice-president, 71 National Assembly members, 20 Central American Parliament deputies and local representatives.

The elections were undoubtedly clean and transparent, with integrity guaranteed by the participation of civil society in the National Scrutiny Board. Results were announced quickly and all losing candidates accepted them. But the pre-voting context was far less straightforward. Until the very last minute the now president-elect wasn’t sure he’d be allowed to run.

Mulino served as security minister in Martinelli’s government between 2009 and 2014. Ten years later, largely unknown to the electorate, he entered the race as Martinelli’s running mate for Achieving Goals (Realizando Metas, RM), a party Martinelli founded in 2021.

In July 2023, Martinelli was convicted of money laundering and sentenced to 10 years in prison, making him ineligible to run. He appealed, but the Electoral Tribunal didn’t make a final decision on his disqualification until March. To avoid jail, he sought asylum in the Nicaraguan embassy in Panama City. Mulino took his place, but his presidential candidacy was also challenged. For two months, he became the centre of attention as the Electoral Tribunal and Supreme Court debated whether he could ran. The positive court ruling came on 3 May, just two days before voting. Mulino also received a lot of help from Martinelli, who campaigned for him online while holed up in the Nicaraguan embassy.

A fragmented vote

Eight candidates contested the presidency, a five-year position with no possibility of a second consecutive term. With no runoff, a fragmented vote was likely to produce a winner with far less than half the vote. Mulino’s winning total of 34.2 per cent wasn’t unusual: two previous presidents received similarly low shares, including the outgoing centre-left president, Laurentino Cortizo of the Democratic Revolutionary Party (Partido Revolucionario Democrático, PRD).

Mulino’s closest competitor, on 24.6 per cent, was Ricardo Lombana, a centre-right anti-corruption outsider. In third place was Martin Torrijos, another former president and Martinelli’s immediate predecessor, now distanced from his original party, the PRD, and running on the ticket of the Christian democratic People’s Party (Partido Popular, PP). Fourth was Rómulo Roux, of the centre-right Democratic Change (Cambio Democrático, CD), the party Martinelli founded and used as a vehicle for the presidency, but which he abandoned in 2020 amid leadership disputes.

The parties that once dominated the political landscape fared badly. The Panameñista Party didn’t even have a presidential candidate; instead, its leader joined Roux as his running mate. The PRD, which led three of the last six governments, fell below six per cent.

Independents on the rise

In 1998, Martinelli’s CD was the first to challenge the dominance of traditional parties. Later changes to the electoral law allowed independent candidates to stand. Their growing prominence reflects widespread dissatisfaction with traditional parties and the political class.

In the 5 May congressional elections, independent candidates won more seats than any political party – 20, up from just five. Mulino’s new RM party took 14 seats. The PRD lost a whopping 22, retaining only 13. The new composition of the National Assembly speaks of a thirst for renewal that doesn’t match the choice for corruption and impunity the presidential results might suggest.

Spotlight on the economy

For the three decades before the pandemic, the Panamanian economy grew by around six per cent a year, helped by income from the Panama Canal and construction and mining booms. But then challenges started piling up. The economy slowed down. Jobs disappeared. Inflation rose.

Activity in the Panama Canal has been severely affected by the impacts of climate change, with a drop in water levels. Drought has also reduced access to drinking water in some regions. Meanwhile an unprecedented rise in the numbers of migrants travelling through the Darién Gap, the treacherous stretch of jungle at the border with Colombia, has stretched the resources of the humanitarian assistance system.

Mulino campaigned on promises to improve the economy by attracting investment, developing infrastructure and creating jobs. He pledged to improve access to safe water and promised to ‘shut down’ the Darién Gap.

Mulino’s voters may have accepted the bargain he appeared to offer – prosperity in exchange for impunity – but many more people voted against him than for. He was able to win because the vote against was so fragmented. The number of independents who entered Congress is just one of many indicators of widespread dissatisfaction with politicians like him.

Mulino will have to deliver on his promises to attract investment and create jobs. He’ll need to reduce inequalities and deal with growing insecurity, the situation in the Darién Gap and a pensions system on the brink of insolvency. Last but not least, he’ll need to strengthen institutions and tackle corruption – which begs the question of what he’ll do about Martinelli.

The challenges are many and great, and Mulino won’t have anything close to a legislative majority. The National Assembly is so fragmented that a high-level deal with one or two parties won’t be enough. Mulino seemed to recognise this on election night when he called for national unity and said he was open to dialogue and consensus. This was a first step in the direction he should keep following.

Inés M. Pousadela is CIVICUS Senior Research Specialist, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, May 21 2024 – The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) decision to seek warrants on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Defense Minister Yoav Gallant has triggered a strong backlash both from the Biden administration and a group of pro-Israeli Senators in the US Congress.

The names in the ICC arrest warrants also include Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri (Deif) and Ismail Haniyeh—all leaders of Hamas.

As expected, US President Joe Biden, an unflinching supporter of Israel, who continues providing billions of dollars in American weapons used in the devastation of Gaza, described the ICC charges as “outrageous” and rejected the comparison of Israel with Hamas on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

“Let me be clear: whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence — none — between Israel and Hamas,” he said in a statement. “We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security.”

Sarah Leah Whitson, executive director, Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), told IPS the Prosecutor’s application for arrest warrants for Israeli and Hamas officials is a milestone in accountability in the face of decades of impunity for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Palestine.

“The U.S. Congress’ promise to attack the Prosecutor and the ICC will be an attack on international justice and the rule of law; don’t expect other countries to submit to ICC warrants if the US does not.”

“While the Prosecutor has sought these initial arrest warrants for war crimes related to the ongoing war in Gaza, the warrants that come next should indict Israeli officials for their ongoing settlement enterprise, which are also war crimes under the Rome Statute,” said Whitson.

“Any effort to ‘balance’ warrants against Israeli officials with an equal number of warrants against Palestinian officials would be an embarrassing concession to political calculations.”

In a letter to ICC Prosecutor Karim A. Khan last week, and in anticipation of the charges against Israel, a group of 12 US Senators said: “We write regarding reports that the International Criminal Court may be considering issuing international arrest warrants against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials. Such actions are illegitimate and lack legal basis, and if carried out will result in severe sanctions against you and your institution”.

“By issuing warrants, you would be calling into question the legitimacy of Israel’s laws, legal system, and democratic form of government. Issuing arrest warrants for the leaders of Israel would not only be unjustified, it would expose your organization’s hypocrisy and double standards”.

“Finally, neither Israel nor the United States are members of the ICC and are therefore outside of your organization’s supposed jurisdiction. If you issue a warrant for the arrest of the Israeli leadership, we will interpret this not only as a threat to Israel’s sovereignty but to the sovereignty of the United States”, the letter warned.

While the request must be approved by the I.C.C.’s judges, the “announcement is a blow to Netanyahu and will likely fuel international criticism of Israel’s war strategy in Gaza”, the New York Times said May 20.

Nihad Awad, National Executive Director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said: “Just as President Biden recognized that the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrant against Vladimir Putin due to war crimes in Ukraine was ‘justified,’ the president should do the same now regarding the arrest warrant applications sought by the ICC prosecutor against Benjamin Netanyahu due to war crimes in Gaza.

“War crimes are war crimes, regardless of whether they are committed by so-called American allies,” he said.

“Biden should not interfere with the clear and credible arrest warrant applications that the ICC prosecutor is seeking against Israeli leaders responsible for genocidal war crimes in Gaza, nor should our nation continue to fund those war crimes.”

“Benjamin Netanyahu is a racist mass murderer who has no intention of stopping his campaign of starvation and slaughter in Rafah and the rest of Gaza unless President Biden forces him to stop.
That time has come,” said Awad.

Michael Omer-Man, DAWN’s Israel-Palestine research director, told IPS while the Prosecutor has sought these initial arrest warrants for war crimes related to the ongoing war in Gaza, the warrants that come next should indict Israeli officials for their ongoing settlement enterprise, which are also war crimes under the Rome Statute.

“Any effort to ‘balance’ warrants against Israeli officials with an equal number of warrants against Hamas officials would be an embarrassing concession to political calculations,” he pointed out.

Norman Solomon, executive director, Institute for Public Accuracy, told IPS the ICC itself has long been guilty of selective prosecutions confined by the leverage of global power politics. The news this week, with appropriate legal action against Israel and Hamas, gives hope that the ICC has begun to break out of its ethnocentric self-confinement.

The biggest factors in the ongoing slaughter of civilians in Gaza by Israel are that country’s extremely cruel militarism and the huge support of that militarism by the U.S. government. Rarely has any war been so widely and fervently condemned by so many people and nations around the world.

“The Gaza war is truly a crime against humanity on a massive and ongoing scale. Accountability should be demanded not only of the Israeli leaders inflicting this slaughter but also the U.S. government that continues to make it possible, said Solomon, national director, RootsAction.org and author of “War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine.”

As a practical matter, he said, a single standard of human rights is difficult to maintain in public discourse and virtually impossible to enforce on a global basis.

War crimes and crimes against humanity, as addressed in the new announcement from the ICC, were surely committed by the leaders of both Israel and Hamas ever since early October 2023. While they do, of course, deny any such charges, the human consequences of the crimes they have overseen are horrific, he pointed out.

From the vantage point of the U.S. government, he argued, the main patron of Israel, the truth of the matter is unacceptable. And so, President Biden felt compelled to immediately denounce the ICC applications for arrest warrants for Israel’s prime minister and so-called defense minister.

“What Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant have been doing for more than seven months is indefensible on any moral or legal grounds”.

Vastly larger than the repugnant crimes against humanity by Hamas — which should be unequivocally condemned — are the crimes against humanity by the Israeli government that have been heavily subsidized by the military aid and rhetorical support of the United States, said Solomon.

In his statement, the ICC Prosecutor said “on the basis of evidence collected and examined by my Office, I have reasonable grounds to believe that Yahya SINWAR (Head of the Islamic Resistance Movement (“Hamas”) in the Gaza Strip), Mohammed Diab Ibrahim AL-MASRI, more commonly known as DEIF (Commander-in-Chief of the military wing of Hamas, known as the Al-Qassam Brigades), and Ismail HANIYEH (Head of Hamas Political Bureau) bear criminal responsibility for the following war crimes and crimes against humanity” committed on the territory of Israel and the State of Palestine (in the Gaza strip) from at least 7 October 2023:

• Extermination as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(b) of the Rome Statute;
• Murder as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(a), and as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
• Taking hostages as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(iii);
• Rape and other acts of sexual violence as crimes against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(g), and also as war crimes pursuant to article 8(2)(e)(vi) in the context of captivity;
• Torture as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(f), and also as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i), in the context of captivity;
• Other inhumane acts as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(l)(k), in the context of captivity;
• Cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i), in the context of captivity; and
• Outrages upon personal dignity as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(ii), in the context of captivity.

Regarding Israel, the ICC Prosecutor said “on the basis of evidence collected and examined by my Office, I have reasonable grounds to believe that Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, and Yoav Gallant, the Minister of Defence of Israel, bear criminal responsibility for the following war crimes and crimes against humanity” committed on the territory of the State of Palestine (in the Gaza strip) from at least 8 October 2023:

• Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Statute;
• Willfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health contrary to article 8(2)(a)(iii), or cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
• Willful killing contrary to article 8(2)(a)(i), or Murder as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
• Intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population as a war crime contrary to articles 8(2)(b)(i), or 8(2)(e)(i);
• Extermination and/or murder contrary to articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(a), including in the context of deaths caused by starvation, as a crime against humanity;
• Persecution as a crime against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(h);
• Other inhumane acts as crimes against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(k).

“My Office submits that the war crimes alleged in these applications were committed in the context of an international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine, and a non-international armed conflict between Israel and Hamas (together with other Palestinian Armed Groups) running in parallel. We submit that the crimes against humanity charged were committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack against the Palestinian civilian population pursuant to State policy. These crimes, in our assessment, continue to this day”.

“My Office submits that the evidence we have collected, including interviews with survivors and eyewitnesses, authenticated video, photo and audio material, satellite imagery and statements from the alleged perpetrator group, shows that Israel has intentionally and systematically deprived the civilian population in all parts of Gaza of objects indispensable to human survival.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);