By DON WINNER for Panama-Guide.com - I can't tell you how many calls and emails I got this morning about the tourist visa thing (again.) Last week Dixa Castillo de Mendez, the Chief of the Legal Office of Panama's Department of Immigration issued a memo to field offices to clarify how they should be applying the new law. I just got back from her office and to be perfectly clear there is no change to Panamanian law. They did admit to making a mistake in that they "never should have applied the 30 day limitation" to citizens from 31 countries (listed below.) Panama has separate bilateral agreements with these countries which supersede other requirements for tourist visas specified in Panamanian law. Panamanian tourists can travel to England, for example, with no need for a visa of any kind. (more)

Short Answer Up Front: Panama screwed up and tried to apply the new restrictive 30-day tourism limit to citizens of countries with bilateral agreements containing clauses covering the movement of tourists. Local law does not take precedence over the international treaty. In order to apply these restrictions, the treaties would have to be changed.

The Long Answer: This comes down to the existence of reciprocal agreements in international treaties between Panama and thirty-one other countries. There are clauses in these treaties covering the movement of citizens between the countries for reasons of tourism. Specifically, these agreements are called "visa suppression" clauses, and they are used to make it easier for people to travel for purposes of tourism as a means of fostering trade and travel. The international standard (limitation) for this kind of activity (tourism) is 90 days. Panama has signed reciprocal agreements with the following countries:ArgentinaAustriaBelgiumBrazilBoliviaChileCosta RicaCyprusEl SalvadorEnglandFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceGuatemalaHondurasHungaryItalyIsraelLatviaLithuaniaLuxembourgNetherlandsNicaraguaParaguayPolandPortugalSingaporeSpainSwitzerlandUruguay

The Latvians are Jumping for Joy: I bet. According to Lic. Enrique Jaen who works in the Legal Section of the Department of Immigration, "the change to the law never should have been applied to citizens from these countries in the first place." He said that they were caught somewhat flat-footed by the change to law which tightened up the tourist visa regulations and they applied the more restrictive requirements across the board, to tourists from all countries. When some of the citizens from countries on the list above started to complain they discovered their error. "Panamanians can visit all of the countries on this list with no need for a visa of any kind, which is not true for the United States or Canada," said Jaen. Also true. There is no reciprocal suppression of visa agreement in effect between Panama and the United States or between Panama and Canada.

Not A Change To Law: The people in the legal office at immigration wanted to make (damn) sure that I had one thing very clear - there has been no new change to Panamanian law with regards to tourist visas. Rather, this memo is simply a clarification of official policy on the application of existing law. It specifies for immigration field officers that citizens from these countries should be granted a 90-day tourist visa, thanks to the existing bilateral suppression agreements.

Spirit and Intent: Those Latvians don't work anyway, and they're always wandering around with a backpack "on holiday." Just kidding. Man, I hope I don't piss-off my Latvian audience. What I mean to say is that the nice people up there in the legal office also explained that the 90-day limit is still a limit, and under the bilateral visa suppression agreements there is no allotment or allocation for extensions. It makes it easier for people from these counties to do the border-bunny-hop routine, however. They can skip into Costa Rica and "reset" every 90 days instead of every 30 days and still be legal. They can't work while they are here, though. That would be very illegal. A tourist is a tourist is a tourist. See the "Spirit and Intent" heading under earlier articles on this subject.

So, Immigration Screwed Up, Right? Yup. They never should have (tried to) apply the new 30 day tourist limit to citizens from the list of 31 countries in the first place, new law or no new law. At the same time they begged-off, saying they were not consulted on the potential impact of the one-line change which was tossed into the law, intended to be a measure to tighten up internal security. So the attitude was kinda like "yeah, we made a mistake, and is anyone surprised considering the way this was done?" Nope, not me. I've been watching these guys trying to get their feet back on the ground since this thing started.

Three Drafts in Congress: The last time I checked there are three different drafts of bills sitting in desk drawers somewhere, waiting for a shot at the new congress. This weekend the PRD is going to have a pow-wow and emerge with the person they are backing to be the President of the National Assembly for the 2007-2008 sessions which start on 1 September 2007. Once that's over then they will finally get around to working on some legislation, and you can expect a complete rewrite of the base law governing immigration to emerge from the National Assembly sometime during this session. Now, will that be sooner or later, October or April? Who knows? And, what will the law say when it's all said and done? Another who knows. When will it actually be implemented? Three "who knows" and you're out.

Pouting Is A Bad Idea: If you intend to sit in the corner and hold your breath until you get your way, well, that's probably a bad strategy. Panama will get around to attending to this issue when they are damn good and ready to. It's apparently much more important to us than it is to them. So in the meantime you can always just get your visa under some other program and call it a day. And according to my highly scientific Panama-Guide readers poll, only 9.7% are perpetual tourists anyway, a class which is heading the way of the polar bear (declining numbers).

Further Clarification: And so I asked again, just to be clear as mud - "Were the 90 day tourist visas reinstated for selected countries?" No. Technically Immigration made a mistake when they applied the new law to the citizens on the list of countries above. Tourists from the list of 31 countries can enter Panama and stay as tourists for 90 days.

"Did Panama 'Extend' Visas Tourist Visas from 30 to 90 Days for these people?" No. Citizens from these countries enjoy the visa suppression clauses in bilateral agreements between Panama and their home countries, and therefore the 30 day visa requirements do not apply to them.

"Does This Have Any Impact on citizens from the United States or Canada?" No, none whatsoever.

"Can the 90 day tourist visa be extended?" No. For all tourists, regardless of country of origin, 90 days is the limit."

And Hopefully, That's That: Clear enough? Whatever. The only constant is change.

Copyright 2007 by Don Winner for Panama-Guide.com. Go ahead and use whatever you like as long as you credit the source. Salud.
Discuss   Add this link to...  Bury
Add to:      

Short Answer Up Front: Panama screwed up and tried to apply the new restrictive 30-day tourism limit to citizens of countries with bilateral agreements containing clauses covering the movement of tourists. Local law does not take precedence over the international treaty. In order to apply these restrictions, the treaties would have to be changed.

The Long Answer: This comes down to the existence of reciprocal agreements in international treaties between Panama and thirty-one other countries. There are clauses in these treaties covering the movement of citizens between the countries for reasons of tourism. Specifically, these agreements are called "visa suppression" clauses, and they are used to make it easier for people to travel for purposes of tourism as a means of fostering trade and travel. The international standard (limitation) for this kind of activity (tourism) is 90 days. Panama has signed reciprocal agreements with the following countries:ArgentinaAustriaBelgiumBrazilBoliviaChileCosta RicaCyprusEl SalvadorEnglandFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceGuatemalaHondurasHungaryItalyIsraelLatviaLithuaniaLuxembourgNetherlandsNicaraguaParaguayPolandPortugalSingaporeSpainSwitzerlandUruguay

The Latvians are Jumping for Joy: I bet. According to Lic. Enrique Jaen who works in the Legal Section of the Department of Immigration, "the change to the law never should have been applied to citizens from these countries in the first place." He said that they were caught somewhat flat-footed by the change to law which tightened up the tourist visa regulations and they applied the more restrictive requirements across the board, to tourists from all countries. When some of the citizens from countries on the list above started to complain they discovered their error. "Panamanians can visit all of the countries on this list with no need for a visa of any kind, which is not true for the United States or Canada," said Jaen. Also true. There is no reciprocal suppression of visa agreement in effect between Panama and the United States or between Panama and Canada.

Not A Change To Law: The people in the legal office at immigration wanted to make (damn) sure that I had one thing very clear - there has been no new change to Panamanian law with regards to tourist visas. Rather, this memo is simply a clarification of official policy on the application of existing law. It specifies for immigration field officers that citizens from these countries should be granted a 90-day tourist visa, thanks to the existing bilateral suppression agreements.

Spirit and Intent: Those Latvians don't work anyway, and they're always wandering around with a backpack "on holiday." Just kidding. Man, I hope I don't piss-off my Latvian audience. What I mean to say is that the nice people up there in the legal office also explained that the 90-day limit is still a limit, and under the bilateral visa suppression agreements there is no allotment or allocation for extensions. It makes it easier for people from these counties to do the border-bunny-hop routine, however. They can skip into Costa Rica and "reset" every 90 days instead of every 30 days and still be legal. They can't work while they are here, though. That would be very illegal. A tourist is a tourist is a tourist. See the "Spirit and Intent" heading under earlier articles on this subject.

So, Immigration Screwed Up, Right? Yup. They never should have (tried to) apply the new 30 day tourist limit to citizens from the list of 31 countries in the first place, new law or no new law. At the same time they begged-off, saying they were not consulted on the potential impact of the one-line change which was tossed into the law, intended to be a measure to tighten up internal security. So the attitude was kinda like "yeah, we made a mistake, and is anyone surprised considering the way this was done?" Nope, not me. I've been watching these guys trying to get their feet back on the ground since this thing started.

Three Drafts in Congress: The last time I checked there are three different drafts of bills sitting in desk drawers somewhere, waiting for a shot at the new congress. This weekend the PRD is going to have a pow-wow and emerge with the person they are backing to be the President of the National Assembly for the 2007-2008 sessions which start on 1 September 2007. Once that's over then they will finally get around to working on some legislation, and you can expect a complete rewrite of the base law governing immigration to emerge from the National Assembly sometime during this session. Now, will that be sooner or later, October or April? Who knows? And, what will the law say when it's all said and done? Another who knows. When will it actually be implemented? Three "who knows" and you're out.

Pouting Is A Bad Idea: If you intend to sit in the corner and hold your breath until you get your way, well, that's probably a bad strategy. Panama will get around to attending to this issue when they are damn good and ready to. It's apparently much more important to us than it is to them. So in the meantime you can always just get your visa under some other program and call it a day. And according to my highly scientific Panama-Guide readers poll, only 9.7% are perpetual tourists anyway, a class which is heading the way of the polar bear (declining numbers).

Further Clarification: And so I asked again, just to be clear as mud - "Were the 90 day tourist visas reinstated for selected countries?" No. Technically Immigration made a mistake when they applied the new law to the citizens on the list of countries above. Tourists from the list of 31 countries can enter Panama and stay as tourists for 90 days.

"Did Panama 'Extend' Visas Tourist Visas from 30 to 90 Days for these people?" No. Citizens from these countries enjoy the visa suppression clauses in bilateral agreements between Panama and their home countries, and therefore the 30 day visa requirements do not apply to them.

"Does This Have Any Impact on citizens from the United States or Canada?" No, none whatsoever.

"Can the 90 day tourist visa be extended?" No. For all tourists, regardless of country of origin, 90 days is the limit."

And Hopefully, That's That: Clear enough? Whatever. The only constant is change.

Copyright 2007 by Don Winner for Panama-Guide.com. Go ahead and use whatever you like as long as you credit the source. Salud.">            |   Bookmarks