Draft bill 293.

Summary.

The draft bill amends Law 63 of August 28, 2008. It gives the Criminal Chamber (Sala Penal) jurisdiction over proceedings against specified senior officials, cassation and review appeals, jurisdictional disputes, habeas corpus appeals, and objections to extradition decisions by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores). It assigns the Higher Courts of Appeal (Tribunales Superiores de Apelaciones) habeas corpus applications, various appeals against criminal decisions, disputes between traditional Indigenous authorities and comarca judges, and applications by the Public Prosecutor’s Office (Ministerio Público) and the defense in extradition matters, except those objections. The officials listed include the Ombudsman (Defensor del Pueblo) and the leadership of the National Police (Policía Nacional).

A criminal complaint would be filed in writing through legal counsel and would identify the parties, describe the events, state the basis and provisional amount of the civil claim, and specify the evidence offered. A copy would accompany it for each person complained against. Prosecutors and courts would exclude civil compensation if they receive evidence that the victim pursued the claim in another jurisdiction. The bill regulates provisional seizure of property linked to the listed offenses, its placement under the Ministry of Economy and Finance (Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas), and registration of the measure with the Public Registry (Registro Público) or municipality when appropriate. It allows owners who are uninvolved third parties to hold property provisionally and confines seizure of a business with multiple owners to the interest directly linked to the offense.

From the filing of the complaint with the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the complainant could request property-related protective measures under the Civil Procedure Code (Código Procesal Civil) from the guarantees judge, including measures against a person alleged to be civilly liable as a third party, to secure compensation. At the hearing to formulate charges, the prosecutor would present the facts, supporting evidence, and their relationship to the alleged offense; the defense would receive equal time to argue. After assessing the submissions, the judge would admit or reject the charges, with the effect of an appeal depending on the decision. Evidence taken at that hearing would be governed by the Political Constitution of Panama (Constitución Política de Panamá) and international instruments ratified by Panama (Panamá).

At the prosecution hearing, the judge would decide preliminary objections and permit corrections to accusations without adding evidence. A complainant’s failure to appear would amount to withdrawal of that person’s criminal action. The defense could examine and challenge evidence and seek its exclusion; if it offers evidence for trial, it would give the Public Prosecutor’s Office a copy within three days when no copy was given before or during the hearing. The judge would determine whether probable cause supports sending the case to the Trial Court (Tribunal de Juicio) or whether to reject the accusation. Five-day and ten-day periods govern specified steps and appeals. The order opening oral trial would identify, among other matters, the accusation, evidence, and persons summoned. A conviction would be confined to the alleged facts and the criminal provision invoked in the accusation. An acquittal would order release and termination of protective measures, with a specific provision for foreign tourists or persons without residence in the Republic of Panama (República de Panamá); a conviction would set penalties and decide property and civil liability matters.

A person detained under an extradition request could seek bail upon proving ties to the national territory, including after the request is decided if surrender has been postponed; an appeal would lie to the Second Criminal Chamber (Sala Segunda de lo Penal). To obtain designation of a complex case, the Public Prosecutor’s Office would have to establish diligence, outstanding evidence, the time required, an applicable ground, and the impossibility of separating proceedings. The judge could limit the designation to particular accused persons, review it, and revoke it. The designation would extend preventive detention by the additional period granted and the ordinary investigation period to two years; only two extensions would be available, with the designation counting as the first.

The draft bill also amends Article 407 of Law 402 of October 9, 2023: it includes prescription among preliminary exceptions requiring a separate ruling and governs their filing, a five-day period for the claimant’s response, determination at a hearing, and appeal. It provides for commencement upon promulgation. Its provisions concern the named judicial bodies, the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Economy and Finance, the National Police, and the Public Registry, and may be of interest to litigants, victims, persons under investigation, property owners, and participants in civil and criminal proceedings.