Panama is dangerously close to being classified as a non democratic regime, a leading transparency watchdog warned this week. The country’s stagnant corruption score now places it at a fragile political frontier, highlighting severe institutional decay despite its outward appearance of democratic function.
The 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), published by Transparency International, awarded Panama just 33 points out of a possible 100. This score not only repeats last year’s result but also consolidates the nation’s worst historical performance since it joined the index in 2012. More critically, analysts say this low and stagnant score is a direct symptom of a democracy in deep distress.
“In The Economist’s index, which classifies countries as full democracies, flawed democracies, and non democratic regimes, we have been on a dangerous frontier for several years now, since 2018. We are positioned at the lowest score within the flawed democracies category.” [Translated from Spanish]
Olga de Obaldía, director of the Foundation for the Development of Citizen Freedom, Transparency International’s Panamanian chapter, issued that stark assessment during the report’s presentation. She directly linked Panama’s corruption perception to its precarious democratic standing.
The nation now sits at a tipping point. Experts warn that a drop of just one more point in its CPI score could formally push Panama into the group of countries considered non democratic regimes. This classification shift would represent a profound crisis for the Central American nation’s political system.
Institutional Cracks Beneath a Democratic Facade
The core problem, according to analysts, is not the basic mechanics of elections. Panama still holds competitive votes and sees alternation in power. The decay is happening in the foundational pillars of the rule of law that sustain a healthy democracy over the long term.
De Obaldía pointed to a severe deterioration in checks and balances between state powers, in accountability mechanisms, and in the criminal justice system. These weaknesses, she argued, are pushing the country toward greater democratic fragility every day. The political system allows for a change of faces in office but fails to curb the systemic practices that undermine public trust and effective governance.
“We have managed to have elections that allow people to go and vote and that allow for a change in who holds public office. However, we have a serious deterioration in the controls between the branches of the state, in accountability, and in criminal justice.” [Translated from Spanish]
Political analyst José Eugenio Stoute echoed this grave concern. He stated that the latest CPI portrays a country trapped in institutional stagnation. The score reflects a persistent inability of the political system to reverse practices that erode public confidence. For Stoute, the behavior of political parties is central to the crisis.
He accused these organizations of entering electoral contests with the sole purpose of fighting for a share of the national budget, which he said amounts to nearly $200 billion over five years. This dynamic of patronage and resource distribution, rather than public service, deepens institutional deterioration. It creates a cycle where political power is sought primarily for access to state funds.
A Global Pattern of Democratic Erosion
The Transparency International report underscores a global pattern. Persistently low or declining CPI scores are typically associated with democracies that have fragile checks and balances, weakened justice systems, and political processes vulnerable to undue influence. The report contrasts this with full democracies, where scores are usually higher and corruption is less systemic.
This connection is evident in regional comparisons. While Panama stagnates at 33 points, other nations in the Americas with stronger institutions score significantly higher. The report highlights that countries with deeply affected political structures often appear at the very bottom of the Corruption Perceptions Index. These include non democratic or authoritarian regimes where corruption is manifest at all levels.
Examples cited in the analysis are sobering. Venezuela scores a mere 10 points, while Azerbaijan has 30. Other nations with very low scores, like the Democratic Republic of Congo (19), Tajikistan (17), and Haiti (16), are frequently characterized by closed political systems, weakened justice, and scant democratic controls. Panama’s current trajectory, experts caution, risks aligning it more closely with these models than with healthy democracies.
The methodology behind the CPI adds weight to these warnings. It does not rely on public opinion surveys. Instead, it aggregates data from 13 high-credibility international sources, including the World Justice Project and the World Economic Forum. Panama is evaluated by the minimum seven sources required to be included, a fact that some analysts say should prompt deeper introspection about the quality of data available on its governance.
The Precarious Road Ahead
The immediate impact of this analysis is a loud alarm bell for Panama’s political class and civil society. Being on the “dangerous frontier” of the Democracy Index (The Economist) for nearly eight years indicates a chronic condition, not a temporary illness. The nation’s institutional immune system is failing to fight off the corruption that weakens democratic health.
What comes next is a pivotal question. The report from libertad ciudadana makes clear that technical fixes or superficial reforms will not be enough. Reversing the slide requires a fundamental recommitment to the separation of powers, judicial independence, and genuine accountability. It demands a political culture shift away from treating the state budget as a prize to be divided.
Failure to address these core issues carries significant risks. Beyond the grave label of a non democratic regime, continued erosion threatens economic stability, investor confidence, and social cohesion. Panama’s position as a regional hub for commerce and finance is built upon a reputation for stability and reliability. That reputation is now under direct threat from within, challenged by the very institutions meant to uphold it.
The country stands at a crossroads. One path leads toward the deeper institutional repair needed to climb back toward being a robust, albeit imperfect, democracy. The other path, marked by continued stagnation and further point declines in key indices, leads toward a different category of nation entirely. The choice, as presented by the data, could not be more stark.