In the National Assembly of Panama, the tension among members has reached concerning levels. Debates and discussions often border on physical confrontation, raising doubts about whether this situation contributes to building agreements and decisions beneficial to the country.
The sessions are marred by constant questioning and recriminations, where participants seem more interested in defending their own positions than in working together for the well-being of the nation. It is common for other deputies to reject proposed ideas, arguing that they have priority issues, which hinders effective decision-making.
Criticism and insults are common currency in this tension-filled environment. The lack of civility in debates and the inability to listen to and respect differing opinions are generating an unwelcoming climate for dialogue and consensus, fundamental elements in any legislative body.
Amid this crisis of political coexistence, Panama finds itself in a situation familiar to other Latin American countries, where ideological and personal differences often hinder the development of proposals and measures that benefit the citizenry as a whole.
In this context, it is necessary to reflect on the importance of sanity and respect in the political sphere, remembering that democracy is strengthened by constructive debate and collaborative work for the common good. Sterile confrontation only distances citizens from their representatives and hinders progress toward effective solutions to the challenges the country faces.
