Humberto López Tirone, today presented as President of IBEROATUR and a promoter of Ibero-American rural tourism, carries a controversial public past. His name has been linked to the Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD) during the years of Panama’s military dictatorship, to the political apparatus of the Noriega regime, and to allegations of violence against the Civic Crusade (Cruzada Civilista). His case raises an important question: can present-day institutions ignore the past of those who represent them?
Historical memory cannot be selective. Even less so when those who now present themselves as institutional, academic, tourism, or cultural leaders carry a public record connected to the darkest years of Panama’s dictatorship. This is the case of Humberto López Tirone, a prominent figure within the Ibero-American Institute for Rural Tourism (IBEROATUR), whose name continues to generate controversy due to historical accounts placing him within the political orbit of the Noriega regime and in episodes of violence against the pro-democracy Civic Crusade.
López Tirone is neither an obscure nor insignificant figure. Historical records identify him as a leader of the PRD and Director of IFARHU during Panama’s political crisis. In the book Panamá protesta, by Brittmarie Janson Pérez, he is mentioned within the context of the opposition movement against the military regime, identified as “Humberto López Tirone, PRD leader and Director of IFARHU” in a chronology of the events of 1987.
The most serious issue, however, is not merely his political affiliation or ideological proximity to the Torrijos-Noriega movement. More significantly, his name appears in historical accounts relating to the attack of July 7, 1987, against a Civic Crusade caravan—one of the principal citizen movements resisting the dictatorship. Several Panamanian historical memory publications state that a paramilitary group loyal to the Noriega regime, led by Luis Gaspar Suárez and Humberto López Tirone, attacked the caravan with baseball bats and gunfire.
This episode cannot simply be dismissed as an anecdote from the past. The Civic Crusade was subjected to persecution, repression, and intimidation at a time when Panama was under military rule and the control of pro-regime enforcement groups. If these allegations are accurate, they would point to participation in acts of political violence against citizens demanding democracy, civil liberties, and the end of the dictatorship.
These concerns are reinforced by testimony published in La Prensa in 2007, which states that Humberto López Tirone personally threatened a Civic Crusade demonstrator with a rifle from his vehicle. The article included him among a group described as “loyalists of General Noriega” who, years later, allegedly obtained public positions or appointments.
Such allusions naturally prompt a troubling inquiry: is it feasible for an Ibero-American organization to position itself as a venue facilitating cooperation, rural tourism, territorial development, and cultural exchange when its principal leader faces substantial historical accusations connected to political violence perpetrated throughout a dictatorship?
The Ibero-American Institute for Rural Tourism (IBEROATUR) may pursue legitimate objectives. Rural tourism, agritourism, and Ibero-American cooperation are valuable and worthwhile fields. However, no institution enhances its prestige by avoiding critical reflection on the past of those who represent it. Institutional credibility depends not only on speeches, conferences, and awards, but also on the ethical consistency of its leadership.
The problem doesn’t stem from someone having previously embraced certain political convictions or belonged to a political organization. Rather, the concern arises because documented evidence connects that person to the repressive machinery of the Noriega regime and to intimidation campaigns targeting civilian adversaries. This preoccupation intensifies significantly when, many years afterward, the same individual holds roles of institutional, academic, or ethical influence yet fails to offer a public account of their history, take responsibility for their actions, or unambiguously separate themselves from those occurrences.
Panamanian society has endured far too much suffering to accept the normalization of symbolic impunity. Numerous figures tied to the dictatorship subsequently transformed themselves by integrating into democratic structures, securing diplomatic positions, managing state agencies, engaging in party politics, authoring opinion pieces, garnering accolades, or positioning themselves as champions of sovereignty and progress. Nevertheless, the experiences of those who fell victim to persecution, those hunted down, and those subjected to violence in public spaces deserve far more than to be forgotten under the weight of fresh institutional designations.
When it comes to Humberto López Tirone, transparency represents the bare minimum that ought to be demanded. The public deserves a clear account of his activities throughout the dictatorship period, including responses to claims regarding the assault on the Civic Crusade, an explanation of any connections he may have maintained with the regime’s security apparatus, and an explicit position on whether he accepts or rejects the accusations leveled against him. For IBEROATUR to maintain its standing and reputation, turning a blind eye to these matters is simply not an option.
Democracy finds its defense not merely through voting mechanisms but equally through the preservation of historical memory. Such defense occurs when institutions decline to sanitize uncomfortable histories. It emerges by acknowledging that political violence functioned not as a sporadic aberration but as a calculated tool employed systematically to subjugate vulnerable populations.
For this reason, the debate surrounding Humberto López Tirone is not merely personal. It concerns public memory, institutional ethics, and historical responsibility. Any organization aspiring to represent Ibero-American values of cooperation, human development, and respect for communities cannot simply ignore the allegations surrounding its president.
The Ibero-American Institute for Rural Tourism (IBEROATUR) should ask itself whether its international reputation can truly rest upon silence. Rural tourism, culture, and international cooperation cannot serve as a veneer to conceal a past associated with political repression. Panama, which continues to bear the wounds of its dictatorship, deserves more than forgetfulness—it deserves truth, memory, and integrity.