Page 112 - Anatomy-of-a-Fraud

We know of other statements denouncing the fraud issued, for instance, by the
professors of the José Dolores Moscote Institute; the professors of the Bolívar Institute;
the professors of José Daniel Crespo High School in Chitré; the Association of Medical
Students of Panama; the Center of Law School Students of the National University of
Panama; the Association of Agronomists, Chiriquí chapter; the Panamanian Human
Rights Committee; and the National Council of the Panamanian Odontological Society.
The dentist group, although not referring directly to the fraud, did voice its “concern
over the deterioration of trust in the validity of our incipient democratic efforts”.
Finally, the “Letters to the Editor” in both La Prensa and Ya published many letters
from citizens from all walks of life and political affiliations, decrying the shameful
spectacle, the farce and fraud of the 1984 Panamanian elections.

As regards political parties was not only those belonging to the Opposition
Alliance that –naturally– condemned the fraud. The Popular Action Party (PAPO) and
the Workers’ Socialist Party (PST) did likewise in release published in La Prensa,
pages 10A and 8C, on May 28 and 31, respectively. During and after the campaign,
both parties, which ran their own presidential slates, maintained an independent line,
equally critical of both major groups, the UNADE and ADO. It is safe to say, therefore,
that their condemnation of the fraud had nothing to do with any preference for either
block.

Lastly, the presidential candidates who came in third and fourth (according to
official figures), General Rubén Darío Paredes, Ret., of the Popular Nationalist Party
(PNP); and Dr. Carlos Iván Zúñiga, of the Popular Action Party (PAPO), admitted the
ADO victory on May 9 and 31, respectively.

The considerable number of statements and manifests denouncing the fraud,
their sheer diversity, cogency, and clarity are further proof of the fact that a fraud was
indeed committed. They also lay to rest the facile excuse that ADO’s charges were but
a case of sour grapes. The clergy and some of Panama’s most representative labor,
executive and student organizations termed the 1984 presidential elections a fraud.
Society at large denounced it and that denunciation is one of the most convincing proofs
of its existence.

It so happens, moreover, that the fraud was acknowledged not only by wide
sectors of Panamanian society but also by influential American and European
newspaper, by prestigious international observers such as Robert F. Drinan, S.A., by
German members of parliament and by the House of Representatives of Venezuela, to
mention a few. The last section of this book is devoted to these and other instances of
international reaction to the fraud in question.