IAPA Midyear Meeting. April 23 - 24, 2026.
Although no serious physical attacks against journalists were reported, judicial, political, and economic pressures persist, along with recent legislative efforts aimed at restricting journalism, raising concerns about respect for this fundamental right.
One of the main challenges is the use of civil and criminal lawsuits against journalists and media outlets, within a legal framework that allows the seizure of assets at early stages of proceedings, even without the presentation of evidence. The lack of reform in this area encourages self-censorship, weakens media sustainability, and may ultimately lead to closures, directly affecting the public’s right to access information. At the same time, initiatives continue to emerge that could expand mechanisms of pressure on journalistic work.
The newspaper La Prensa (Corporación La Prensa, Corprensa) faces significant legal costs and multiple pending cases before the Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ). It currently has 13 civil lawsuits: seven in the first instance totaling USD 5.4 million; four rulings in its favor amounting to USD 33.5 million, resulting in payments of USD 817,000; and two rulings against it, with ordered payments of USD 520,000. Additionally, it faces a lawsuit from Congressman Benicio Robinson for USD 1.5 million for alleged defamation. Funds seized in proceedings brought by former President Ernesto Pérez Balladares (USD 1.2 million) remain frozen, pending a decision by the CSJ.
Following disagreements with President José Raúl Mulino over a publication linking his daughters to the restoration of a state building, official advertising remains restricted for Corprensa-owned media outlets. Likewise, several media organizations and journalist Álvaro Alvarado have denounced the use of state advertising as a mechanism of pressure to discourage critical editorial lines.
On November 6, journalist Sabrina Bacal received a protection order issued by prosecutor Isela Mela Peralta, as part of a defamation lawsuit filed by businessmen Ramón and Roberto Carretero Napolitano. The measure prohibited her from reporting on them for four months, affecting coverage of a matter of public interest, given that the complainants have been state contractors and have been sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury’s OFAC for their links to Nicolás Maduro’s regime in Venezuela. Various press freedom organizations described the measure as a serious restriction on the right to inform.
On March 6, Judge América Vergara revoked the order in a hearing due to the violation of fundamental rights. However, the case highlights the vulnerability of journalistic work to judicial mechanisms, as the restriction remained in place for months and the criminal complaint is still ongoing, setting a concerning precedent regarding the use of legal measures to limit coverage of issues of public interest.
In the case of La Estrella de Panamá, a sustained environment of pressure on journalistic work is evident. Former officials of Senniaf (National Secretariat for Children, Adolescents, and Family) have threatened lawsuits for alleged reputational harm if content mentioning them is not removed. Additionally, a more complex phenomenon has emerged: individuals linked to investigations of serious crimes, including drug trafficking, have attempted to force the removal of publications by invoking a supposed “right to be forgotten,” which does not exist in Panamanian law. In some cases, payments have been offered to remove content, revealing practices that combine pressure, legal misinformation, and possible covert censorship.
Former President Ricardo Martinelli, currently in asylum in Colombia after being convicted of money laundering, has filed multimillion-dollar lawsuits against five media outlets and digital platforms for alleged defamation. Despite his conviction in the New Business case involving the purchase of Editora Panamá América, S.A. (EPASA) with public funds, the newspapers Panamá América, La Crítica, and Día a Día continue to operate with editorial independence.
Criminal cases against journalist Félix Tijerino, of InformatPanamá, remain ongoing, alongside additional civil actions.
The approval in first debate by the National Assembly of a reform to the right of reply raises serious concerns. The proposal requires replies to be published with the same prominence and reach as the original information—including digital media—establishes stricter deadlines, and limits editorial discretion in assessing their applicability.
This initiative has direct implications for media owners and directors, who would assume greater legal responsibilities and could face sanctions, additional administrative burdens, and increased legal exposure in ensuring compliance with the mandated publication of replies. Journalism associations warn that these changes could encourage the use of the right of reply as a mechanism of pressure, affecting editorial and business autonomy, as well as the exercise of journalism on matters of public interest.
Compliance with the Law on Access to Information remains deficient, as some officials avoid responding to press inquiries or rely on Personal Data Protection laws to deny access to public information. No progress has been recorded in transparency initiatives within the National Assembly.
Digital harassment has generally decreased; however, smear campaigns persist on social media and digital platforms against journalists and traditional media, often appearing coordinated. There is also a proliferation of digital platforms of unclear origin, whose ownership and funding lack transparency, making it difficult to trace attacks and amplifying content aimed at discrediting journalistic work.
Despite these pressures and limitations, the State continues to provide guarantees for the exercise of journalism. No media closures, digital blockages, or surveillance against journalists have been reported. Nor have there been reports of attacks or serious physical assaults.
