711F.1914/407
The Panamanian Acting Minister for Foreign Afairs ( Goytía ) to the American Ambassador in Panama ( Wilson )2
Mr. Ambassador: I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of Your Excellency’s letter dated October 28, 1941, addressed to Dr. Octavio Fábrega, [then]3 in charge of the office, transmitting the changes made by Your Excellency’s Government in the counterproposal4 of the agreement on the leasing of lands for defensive bases.
The preamble and the body of the agreement are based on articles 2 and 10 of the General Treaty of 1936.5 Concerning this point, I renew to Your Excellency the opinion already expressed by the Panamanian Chancellery and I add, in addition, that the fundamental article of the agreement is article 10 exclusively, inasmuch as article 2 does not govern the matter. Its purpose is to declare the fact that the Republic of Panama has loyally and satisfactorily complied with its contractual obligations with respect to the granting of lands necessary and convenient for the construction, maintenance, operation, sanitation and protection of the Canal and the formal renunciation by the United States of the occupation of new lands for the purposes indicated. Article 2 of the General Treaty indicates only that in the event of any contingency, action will be taken in accordance with articles 1 and 10. Thus it is that the real basis of the agreement is contained in article 10 and not in article 2, the basic content of which involves the negation of what has been asked.
The Government of the Republic views article 4 with concern as regards the faculty which the Government of the United States [Page 578] intends—to reserve to itself to “arrest, judge and punish all persons who in such regions may maliciously commit any crime against the security of the military installations located there. …”7
One can accept as an extension of the legal fiction of extraterritoriality, arrest, judgment and punishment for crimes against the security of the military installations within the defense areas; but it is not desirable nor is it absolutely necessary for the purposes of the agreement that Panamanian citizens, within their own territory, unaffected by restrictive clauses stipulated in a Public Treaty, be subjected to this jurisdiction of another country; wherefore it is considered that the said Article might be modified so as to exclude Panamanian citizens from the penal jurisdiction of the United States entirely, except for those cases in which Panamanian citizenship was acquired for the purpose of committing hostile acts against the Canal or the Republic of Panama.
Article 9 establishes that “upon completion of these roads (those named in the clause cited) the Republic of Panama will assume responsibility for their maintenance, with the exception of repairs for any damage caused during the existence of this Agreement by transit of armed forces of the United States.”
The paragraph transcribed does not fit in with the idea of Clause 9, in as much as the upkeep of said roads will be the responsibility of both parties, in the proportion in which damage is caused by wear and tear or by accident. It is suggested that it be eliminated.
It would be more convenient for both parties to substitute periodic estimates of the damage caused by transit of military vehicles of the United States, by quotas calculated on a basis of depreciation and accidental damage caused by said vehicles.
In the last paragraph of the same clause it is fitting to specify that the “United States will take at all times the precautions necessary to avoid, if possible, interruptions of transit in the Republic of Panama.”
At the end of Clause 10 will have to be added the following expression: “without prejudice to the free access of the inhabitants established within the restricted areas to their respective properties.”8
Article XII could be completed with the following paragraph: “Whenever it is possible and at reasonable prices, the provisioning and equipment of the bases and their personnel will be done with products, articles and foodstuffs coming from the Republic of Panama.”
The provisions of Clause XIII ought to be concrete and uniform, for which [reason]9 the following change is suggested: “The annual [Page 579] rental which the Government of the United States will pay to the Republic of Panama in accordance with this contract shall be one hundred balboas or dollars annually, of the weight and fineness of the present balboa or dollar per hectare.
“In case that within the sites chosen for bases there exist buildings, industries, cultivations, installations or improvements, the United States will pay beforehand the indemnities which experts designated by both governments may fix. If the said experts do not reach an agreement in their evaluation, a referee shall be chosen, whose decision shall be final.”
I am confident that Your Excellency will receive the viewpoints shown above with consideration and an exact comprehension of the reasons which motivate them.
I avail myself [etc.]
- Copy transmitted to the Department by the Ambassador in Panama in his despatch No. 527, January 17; received January 19.↩
- Brackets appear in the file translation. Dr. Fbrega later became Minister for Foreign Affairs.↩
- Draft not printed.↩
- Signed March 2, 1936; for text, see Department of State Treaty Series No. 945, or 53 Stat. (pt. 3) 1807.↩
- Omission indicated in the file translation.↩
- This was intended as a limitation on the United States military authorities to prohibit public travel on access roads.↩
- Brackets appear in the file translation.↩