I need to be honest, it would not be accurate to state that I fully understood the whole debate. Some of the terms, theories and ideas discussed where not familiar to me, however it was one of the most interesting debates I have ever witnessed.

     It started with a quick introduction of the expositor and the guests by our Rector Dr. Langoni followed by the Dr. Ginarreas’ exposition on the future of Panamanian constitution. The information provided through this section was about what is a constitution, its purpose, who makes a constitution and who upholds it. I understood most of the information provided however I lost the significance of some terms and political theories used by the main speaker to get his points across.

     After the main speaker came the comments session by our two guests who did not hesitate to express their points of view on Dr. Ginarreas’ position toward what is a constitution, what it stands for and who upholds it. The guests did not agree with him nor even with each other, a factor which gave a lot of spice to their arguments. It was a heated debate which I like to compare with a duel in which the weapons of choice were words. The participants showed expert knowledge on the subject and exceptional debating skills. Of course, I was having a hard time following through this part of the debate because I’m not very familiar with either politics or laws.

     The range of subjects when from the different points of view form the participants on the purpose of a constitution, who makes and upholds it, the role of constitutions in Latin American nations, a bit of history and even the nature of politicians as human beings.

     Through the debate I looked at the faces of the individuals and noticed that some were as lost as I was with respect to these subjects. Then I thought to myself: ‘Where are all the International Affairs students who have a better understanding about the matters discussed?’ Afterwards I found out that most of the International Affairs students where at an exam at that precise moment. Even when the event was widely advertised there was no real option for these students but to miss the debate and take their exam.

     This was a huge opportunity that students missed and the reason is the lack of coordination between administration and students in FSU-Panama. In this particular case I feel that the debate would had be a success if it had been scheduled taking into consideration the sections of the student body which would profit the most from it –International Affairs majors in this case- and special arrangements could be negotiated with teachers so that entire classes would attend the debate and profit from it. Therefore I feel that lack of student participations this time lies on the event organizers.

     On the other hand as a student I had noticed poor student participation haunting most if not all of FSU-Panama activities if there is not a bonus to it. Students won’t attend special academic events if there are not extra credits involve. Student need to realize that these type of events are an effort to complement their education and formation as individuals and future professionals who will enter a highly competitive arena and need all the help they can get.


Comment on this article / Read comments about this article