Rude questions and name calling

The televised mayoral debate didn’t let facts get in the way of innuendo and verbal mud slinging

ERIC JACKSON
thepanamanews@gmail.com

February 27 was an auspicious day in the Panama City mayoral race. On that day the attempt to impugn Miguel Antonio Bernal's nomination by the Union Patriotica came to naught, and that night, after a series of proposed debates that the PRD's Bobby Velásquez and the Panameñistas' Bosco Vallarino avoided, the candidates faced off in a televised debate.

The most attention went to two exchanges: one in which Velásquez denigrated Bernal for the University of Panama controversies in which he has been a central character and Bernal responded by upholding both his academic performance and his not always popular opposition to university corruption; and the more noticed one in which Vallarino raised the subject of jailed Colombian David Murcia Guzmán's allegations that people from Bobby's campaign (as well as Balbina's) came “knocking on the door” looking for support.

Vallarino took allegations that Murcia is a front man for drug traffickers at face value, took Murcia's statements without a grain of salt, stretched those charges even farther, and called Velásquez the drug traffickers' candidate. In response, Velásquez exploded. The PRD candidate said that not only had he been smeared, but his family had been attacked as well. He denied that his campaign had taken money from Murcia and said that his campaign finance reports would reflect this. He said that he'd sue Vallarino for slander.

Well, what about Murcia's charges? First of all, they were vague. He didn't say that he had given money to campaigns, and didn't make any allegations of personal contact with Bobby Velásquez or Balbina Herrera --- he said that these candidates' people had come “knocking on the door.” That raises serious questions, but it's hardly the sort of testimony upon which a prosecutor could base a case. Plus, the PRD administration arrested and summarily deported Murcia, so he would have revenge as a motive to lie.

On the other hand, a paper trail already links Murcia to the PRD. He “bought” the tax exemptions of two PRD members of the Central American Parliament to avoid duty on two hideously expensive cars. Moreover, reports in Colombia allege that Murcia had this modus operandi of paying off politicians there.

We should also respect the principle of “innocent until proven guilty” here. Rude questions are in order, but critical facts have yet to be established. That Vallarino doesn't get this distinction says most of what people need to know about his mental faculties.

And Bobby's response?

First, his denial didn't match the allegation. Murcia said that Bobby's people had come knocking on his door, and Bobby said that he hadn't received money.

Second, should people accept any reference to campaign finance reports that are not due until two months after the election and whose contents will not be available to the public?

Finally, shouldn't people be tired of politicians invoking their families, either as proof of qualifications or as a shield to deflect questions about their conduct? Whether they are from aristocratic lineages that have been lording it over Panama since the days of Pedrarias the Cruel, or are heirs of the generation that became rich during the dictatorship, the election is about the candidates, not their families.

Publicidad