Panama parliament changes internal rules, sparking backlash

Panama's National Assembly has approved a controversial overhaul of its internal regulations, sparking significant opposition from some lawmakers and legal experts. The legislative body ratified Project of Law 594, which amends and adds articles to the 1984 Law 49, establishing the Organic Regulation of the Internal Regime (RORI).

The vote, which took place on Tuesday after nearly a month of discussion, saw 38 deputies in favor, 21 against, and one abstention. The Assembly's press office stated that 21 articles were reformed and five new ones were added, asserting that the approved changes "strengthen a more open parliament." They also claimed the reforms "fill regulatory gaps," reinforce "institutional discipline," and "bring the work of the House of the People closer to citizen oversight."

However, the reforms have drawn sharp criticism. Deputy Eduardo Cedeño has declared the changes "incompatible" with the Constitution and plans to challenge their constitutionality before the Supreme Court. He argued that the reforms "denature" the legislative work. Another group of parliamentarians expressed that reforming the RORI "does not influence 100% in their primary needs," suggesting it does not address fundamental issues.

Among the approved changes are provisions related to the election of dignitaries, the swearing-in of substitute deputies, dress code during plenary sessions, staff structure, classification of employees, and the structuring of parliamentary bodies concerning competencies. Notably, the reforms eliminate reservation in the Budget Commission and introduce alternative procedures for electing Permanent Commissions. They also address session broadcasts, the precedence of matters, the right to speak, courtesy of the floor, and stipulate that staff attached to deputies cannot opt for Legislative Career service.

The RORI governs the Assembly's role in approving the national budget, the Panama Canal budget, ratifying key state appointments, managing legislation, and maintaining the balance of powers. Supporters of the reforms argue they modernize and optimize the Assembly's functioning to meet current democratic demands, while opponents fear they undermine constitutional principles and legislative integrity.