The creation of an office responsible for representing the State as a prosecutor in criminal proceedings has generated diverse opinions among Panamanian jurists, who agree on the need to strengthen institutions and ensure the correct application of the law.
Lawyer Moisés Bartlett highlighted that the country must prioritize strengthening the institutions already established by the Constitution, instead of creating parallel structures that may overlap functions.
«The country needs to strengthen the institutions recognized and regulated by the National Constitution», he emphasized.
Bartlett explained that the Public Ministry already has the necessary faculties to exercise criminal action, as established in the Criminal Procedure Code, and that each ministry or public entity has the obligation through its own lawyers to appear as a prosecutor when the State's interests are harmed.
«Each institution has its own roster of lawyers, and the minister or head of the institution is legally obliged to fulfill this duty», he pointed out.
The jurist argued that the problem does not lie in the absence of procedural figures, but in the need for investigations to be more effective, with the due evidentiary support and without media pressure.
«Up to this point, I do not see the Public Ministry trying to bury cases; what happens is that corruption investigations are complex and must be carried out with rigor to not affect rights», he warned.
Bartlett insisted that the core issue is communicational: «We need to educate the population so that they understand that investigations take time and require prudence and legality».
In turn, lawyer Nora Sia expressed reservations about the new figure, indicating that it could generate a duplication of functions with the Public Ministry and other entities already competent in control and supervision matters.
«That is a duality of functions that clashes with those of the Public Ministry, whose job is to prosecute crime».
Lawyer Luis Fuentes Montenegro warned that the new body could duplicate functions already assigned to the legal advisors of state institutions, which would imply an additional expense of public resources.
«We must ensure that it does not become an entity with political purposes or excessive support for the government. The objective cannot be to punish, but to seek justice in a balanced and transparent manner», he concluded.
Lawyer Moisés Bartlett highlighted that the country must prioritize strengthening the institutions already established by the Constitution, instead of creating parallel structures that may overlap functions.
«The country needs to strengthen the institutions recognized and regulated by the National Constitution», he emphasized.
Bartlett explained that the Public Ministry already has the necessary faculties to exercise criminal action, as established in the Criminal Procedure Code, and that each ministry or public entity has the obligation through its own lawyers to appear as a prosecutor when the State's interests are harmed.
«Each institution has its own roster of lawyers, and the minister or head of the institution is legally obliged to fulfill this duty», he pointed out.
The jurist argued that the problem does not lie in the absence of procedural figures, but in the need for investigations to be more effective, with the due evidentiary support and without media pressure.
«Up to this point, I do not see the Public Ministry trying to bury cases; what happens is that corruption investigations are complex and must be carried out with rigor to not affect rights», he warned.
Bartlett insisted that the core issue is communicational: «We need to educate the population so that they understand that investigations take time and require prudence and legality».
In turn, lawyer Nora Sia expressed reservations about the new figure, indicating that it could generate a duplication of functions with the Public Ministry and other entities already competent in control and supervision matters.
«That is a duality of functions that clashes with those of the Public Ministry, whose job is to prosecute crime».
Lawyer Luis Fuentes Montenegro called for prudence and technical analysis in the creation of the Coordinating Legal Unit, attached to the Ministry of Government, which contemplates the participation of the State as a prosecutor.
«It must be seen with a magnifying glass. Jurists give their opinions on the new figure of the State prosecutor».
