In both cases, the institution remained what its design allowed it to be. No more, no less. That is why the important question is not who arrives, but what they find when they arrive: the human resources, the legal and budgetary tools, and the real means to protect the fundamental rights of the population. Law 504 of December 18, 2025, which supersedes the old Law 7 of 1997, redesigned the Ombudsman's Office. Even assuming we have the best possible public servant, the problem persists if the issue is viewed the other way around. What is the use of having the most prepared person, with knowledge, ability, and willingness, if the institutional infrastructure does not allow them to perform their functions? In a democracy that aspires to be participatory, and not merely representative, it is society that must demand not only that the institution functions, but that it does so with the highest standards of excellence. Either because the institution is fragile from its foundations or because no real power is interested in it functioning properly, and therefore does not give it the necessary tools and budget to operate. But let's return to the Ombudsman. Otherwise, the Ombudsman's Office will remain on paper: another pending aspiration on the list of the State's unfulfilled obligations. For now, we have to work on our constant tendency to look for messiahs. The truth is that Panama has had ombudsmen with full training in human rights, public administration, and constitutional law, whose knowledge few could question, as well as it has had ombudsmen whose area of expertise was not precisely human rights. That is the question that dominates the public conversation. A State that depends on an individual to do their job, and moreover to do it with honesty, integrity, absolute ability, and devotional commitment, is not a State of law, but a State of wills. What is the result? And for that, something more difficult than choosing a person well is needed: it is necessary to demand that the mechanisms be activated, that the budget be real, and that autonomy not be nominal. The author is a member of the Libertad Foundation. She created a Defender's Career based on merits, with the obligation to develop position classification manuals, and among other reforms, expanded the powers to investigate, denounce, mediate, and act ex officio. Despite this, the question remains: is that financial autonomy real? We are still waiting for a name, the correct one, the brilliant one, the savior, to resolve what can only be resolved by a structure that functions independently of whoever leads it. Around the election of the new Ombudsman, social networks fill with predictions. A mature democracy does not need heroes in every office. Panama has pending that transition: to move from the culture of the institutional caudillo to that of institutional design. It established a functional, administrative, and financial autonomy that, at least in the text, prevents the institution from receiving instructions from any authority, State body, or person. I do not intend to qualify the training of the candidates nor am I in a position to opine on their “solvency” in a moral sense. It is a comfortable thought because it narrows the margin of analysis of the State: it is no longer a structural issue that requires advanced thinking and State policies, but a problem of interviews and “castings.” However, this way of managing the State is destined for fragility. If a capable person arrives, it works. If not, it fails. Will the Defender's Career operate with transparency or will it be another mechanism to disguise political appointments as meritocracy? Rarely does anyone ask: what tools will the person chosen have to do their job? This custom of focusing on the “who” and not on the “how” or the “with what” reveals a deeply rooted belief: that the quality and effectiveness of an institution depend on the person who leads it. Will the position classification manuals be developed with technical rigor or will they be filed away along with so many other good legislative intentions? A well-written law is, at best, the first step. Who will it be? And, if not, it fails.
