The situation of press freedom in Panama presents a landscape of contrasts. While no serious physical assaults against journalists have been recorded, serious challenges persist in the judicial, political, and economic spheres that place pressure on the media.
The main problem is the judicial lawsuits, both civil and criminal, against journalists and media outlets. The legislation has not been reformed to prevent the seizure of assets of the media, both print and digital, within these processes. Such seizures can be ordered at the start of a trial, even before evidence is presented, putting at risk the financial viability of the media or journalists being sued.
The newspaper La Prensa (Corprensa) faces exorbitant legal costs and multiple pending cases before the Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ). It currently has 15 civil lawsuits: seven in the first instance for USD 4.2 million; four with rulings in its favor for USD 33.5 million, which resulted in payments of USD 817,000; and four rulings against it for USD 12 million, in which it was ordered to pay USD 566,476. In addition, it faces a lawsuit from deputy Benicio Robinson, who is claiming USD 1.5 million for alleged defamation.
In cases of slander and libel, proceedings are handled as ordinary civil lawsuits, without applying the principle of “actual malice.” This leaves decisions at the discretion of the judges. For example, a court overturned on appeal a favorable ruling for Corprensa in a case filed by former president Ernesto Pérez Balladares, who demanded USD 5 million. The initial ruling had applied the principle of “actual malice” to exonerate the outlet. This case is pending before the CSJ.
La Prensa published an investigation titled “Presidencia destina $7.1 millones para restaurar y ampliar la villa diplomática” on the renovation of an abandoned state-owned mansion, which sparked a wave of criticism of the project. Later, the newspaper published another piece, based on information collected from the president’s daughters’ social media, stating that they had inspected the property some time earlier in the company of a controversial architect. President José Raúl Mulino described that publication as “morbid and in bad faith (…) That is malice, a hallmark of that outlet.” Following this, La Prensa was notified of the cancellation of several advertising contracts from state institutions. Some officials stated that the suspension of state advertising was due to the publications related to the president’s daughters and the renovation project of the diplomatic villa, adding that they would not place ads under orders from the Presidency of the Republic.
Several media outlets have denounced that state advertising is used as a pressure mechanism. The First Report on Freedom of Expression and Press, promoted by the Forum de Periodistas, revealed that most outlets receive government pressure through advertising placements. Likewise, journalist Álvaro Alvarado denounced the breach of a two-month advertising contract on his station, alleging that the government disagreed with his editorial line.
The Sindicato Único de Trabajadores de la Construcción (SUNTRACS) sued the newspaper La Estrella de Panamá and two of its journalists over the publication of a note on the closure of its bank accounts in the Caja de Ahorros, demanding USD 1 million in compensation.
The digital outlet Foco faces two criminal cases and two civil lawsuits for a total of USD 746,000. In a case filed by former president Ricardo Martinelli, a seizure of USD 4,500 remains in effect. In addition, a sanction (not executed) by the Electoral Tribunal is still in place following a complaint from Martinelli.
Despite the judicial conviction in the New Business case, regarding the purchase of Editora Panamá América, S.A. (EPASA), the newspapers Panamá América, La Crítica and Día a Día continue to operate with editorial freedom. Their former owner, Martinelli, remains in asylum in Colombia.
Journalist Félix Tijerino, of InformatPanamá, was sued for alleged crimes against honor. In contrast, journalist Ronald Acosta obtained a favorable ruling when the judicial seizure of USD 121,000 imposed as a result of a lawsuit by deputy Benicio Robinson was overturned.
Compliance with the Access to Information Law remains deficient, as some officials avoid responding to press inquiries or invoke the Data Protection Law to deny public information. In the Asamblea Nacional, no progress was recorded in transparency initiatives.
In addition, at official events, discrimination in media invitations is common, and President Mulino often reacts “angrily” to uncomfortable questions at his weekly press conferences.
Digital harassment has generally decreased, although smear campaigns against journalists persist on social media, in some cases promoted by Ricardo Martinelli, who manipulates private information of reporters.
The difficult economic situation of the sector has led to self-censorship among journalists; several have opted to work independently or abandon the profession.
Despite the pressures and limitations, the State maintains guarantees for the practice of journalism. No closures of media outlets, digital blockages, or surveillance of journalists have been reported. Nor have there been reports of serious attacks or physical assaults. However, during the protests over reforms to the Caja de Seguro Social in Bocas del Toro, several national journalists and foreign correspondents reported being harassed or attacked by members of unions and social organizations.
Finally, the government published on the official procurement portal information on spending on state advertising. As part of an austerity policy, traditional media outlets have seen their assigned budgets significantly reduced, with complaints of discrepancies in their distribution.
