Panama Port Fight Pits 2 Wealthy Americans

PANAMA · PORTS

A Panama port fight between two wealthy Americans over the proposed US$260 million Puerto Barú terminal now rests with the Supreme Court, according to a Bloomberg feature published on Thursday 22 October 2026. The court is weighing the environmental approval of a 124-hectare port south of the city of David in Chiriquí Province, a ruling that will shape a major private investment in western Panama.

For US readers the stakes are practical, because both men are American, developer John McKeown says he raised money for the port from American backers he did not name, and the terminal is meant to link Chiriquí’s coffee, papaya and shrimp growers to North American and Asian markets. The case also tests how far a rich investor can go with civil and criminal suits against local conservation groups, which matters to US funders and companies in Latin America.

We have followed Panama’s push to draw investment into its western provinces in our look at the money waiting in Chiriquí. This article covers a separate event, the court fight over one port.

How the Panama Port Fight Began

Ocean Pacific Investments, the company McKeown leads, calls Puerto Barú the first green port in Panama and says it would ease pressure on the capital’s trade hubs while opening routes to North America and Asia. La Prensa adds that the company presents it as the first port outside the canal area to handle coastal shipping, known as cabotage, between western Panama and the capital.

The terminal would sit on 124 hectares (306 acres) south of David, and the company calls it the largest private investment in the history of Chiriquí. Destino Panamá gives the cost as US$260 million, while La Prensa has used US$250 million.

Louis Bacon, a hedge fund investor who built his fortune at Moore Capital Management, opposes the port and owns the Islas Secas resort about 50 kilometres (31 miles) southwest of the site, where nightly rates start at US$3,500. He says he is not fighting the project to protect his hotel and that dredging and habitat damage would spread beyond the site.

McKeown, who lives part of the year in Panama, says he would never have backed the port if he thought it would do significant harm to a country he calls home. He adds that Ocean Pacific is not a port operator and plans to bring one in as a partner.

Where the Court Case Stands

Six Panamanian environmental groups filed a nullity suit in September 2024 against the Environment Ministry resolution that approved the port’s impact study, which the ministry issued on 16 January 2024, La Prensa reported. The court refused to suspend the approval while the case runs, so the project was able to continue.

Experts gave evidence in March and April 2026, and in May the Procuraduría de la Administración, the state body that gives the court a legal opinion in such cases, recommended declaring the approval not illegal. That opinion is not binding, and the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court, which handles administrative disputes, takes the final decision.

Business groups have pressed for a quick ruling. The Panama Maritime Chamber said in early August that a definitive decision would give investors legal certainty, according to La Prensa, and the chamber is a trade body that speaks for the maritime industry.

The feature quotes Environment Minister Juan Carlos Navarro as saying the ministry is bound by the approval granted under the previous administration and will follow the court’s final ruling. He added that the suits against the civic groups worry officials.

Cases Against Two Environmental Groups

The project’s side filed criminal complaints in August 2025 against two of the groups, the Centro de Incidencia Ambiental (CIAM) and Adopta Bosque, over alleged slander and insult, Infobae reported, and the feature adds alleged defamation and offences against the economy, with Ocean Pacific named as the filer. A civil court, the Fifth Liquidating Civil Court, later ordered a precautionary seizure of their bank accounts and assets in a damages case brought by the project’s backers.

The groups say the seizure is a precaution and not a verdict, and that it has frozen salaries and field work. Project lawyer José María Castillo says the actions seek accountability for public statements he describes as lacking scientific support, and he denies any aim of silencing critics.

Joana Abrego, a lawyer working with CIAM, compares the cases with strategic lawsuits meant to intimidate critics, known as SLAPPs, the feature reports. Infobae said civil groups would ask the Ombudsman’s Office to back a bill protecting environmental defenders.

Mangroves, Coiba and the UNESCO Question

Six groups argue that the port and its ship traffic would cause irreversible damage through pollution, churned water and blocked sunlight. Ocean Pacific rejects that, saying the impacts were studied over four years in a review that included a public hearing.

The report says the site lies among channels that hold about a quarter of Panama’s mangroves, and Infobae notes that the David mangroves have had local protection since 2007. Bacon paid for an alternative plan that would move the port about 80 kilometres (50 miles) west to Puerto Armuelles, and his foundation funded an analysis that put the environmental cost of the Barú site at about US$30 million over 20 years.

UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee has also asked Panama to re-examine the project’s scope over possible effects on Coiba National Park, a World Heritage site since 2005, and an updated report is due by 1 December 2026, La Prensa reported. Ocean Pacific says the ministry told UNESCO in May 2024 that the port has no direct or indirect impact on the park, and its environmental lawyer puts the distance to the park’s buffer zone at about 92 kilometres.

CIAM says that ministry note, dated 23 May 2024, was signed by the then minister Milcíades Concepción days before the previous government left, the same official who approved the study. The ministry began a technical evaluation in April 2026 and asked UNESCO for an advisory mission it planned for mid-2026, La Estrella de Panamá reported.

What the Panama Port Fight Means for Chiriquí

Chiriquí has about 500,000 people and is a main farming region of Panama, and a 2021 study the company commissioned estimated the project could generate more than 1,100 jobs. McKeown says Puerto Armuelles is too far from the region’s farms to work as a substitute.

What It Means for You

US investors in ports, logistics or farm exports should watch a ruling that will show how Panama weighs a signed environmental approval against a suit that has run for more than two years. A ruling for the company would give legal certainty to a US$260 million project, while a ruling for the groups would annul the 2024 approval.

Nothing changes today for travellers or residents in Chiriquí, because no ruling has been issued, and the feature says the company has kept working on the project while the court reviews it. Our guides Panama Explained and Panama Geopolitics Explained 2026 set out the wider economy and politics, and our Panama City guide covers daily life in the capital.

Anyone who funds conservation groups in Latin America can read the case as a test of how suits are used against critics. Our Panama news page and our explainer Panama and Its Neighbours in Central America follow what comes next.

What Is Not Known

No source we reviewed gives a date for the Supreme Court’s ruling, and the court has not said when it will decide. Nor do the sources say which way the court is leaning.

The cost is US$260 million in the Spanish edition of the feature and in Destino Panamá, and US$250 million in La Prensa. None of them explains the gap.

We found no report that the UNESCO advisory mission has taken place. McKeown has not named the American investors he says funded the project, and no port operator has been named.

We could not open the court file or the ministry resolution itself, so the case details rest on La Prensa, Infobae and La Estrella reporting and on the feature as carried in Spanish by La República. The motives each side attributes to the other, including Ocean Pacific’s suggestion that the campaign may serve personal interests, are positions of the parties and are not established.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Puerto Barú?

It is a proposed 124-hectare commercial port south of David in Chiriquí Province, promoted by Ocean Pacific Investments. Its cost is given as about US$260 million.

Who are the two Americans in the dispute?

They are developer John McKeown, who leads the company behind the port, and Louis Bacon, a hedge fund investor who opposes it and owns the Islas Secas resort. Both say they are acting in Panama’s best interest.

What is the Supreme Court deciding?

It is deciding whether the Environment Ministry’s approval of the port’s impact study, issued on 16 January 2024, was legal. A state adviser has recommended declaring it not illegal, but that opinion is not binding.

Why did UNESCO get involved?

UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee asked Panama to re-examine the project’s scope over possible effects on Coiba National Park. Panama must deliver an updated report by 1 December 2026, and the company says the port has no impact on the park.

What happened to the bank accounts of the environmental groups?

A civil court ordered a precautionary seizure of the accounts and assets of CIAM and Adopta Bosque in a damages case brought by the project’s backers. The groups say it is not a verdict, and the project’s lawyer says the actions seek accountability for public statements.

What does the Panama port fight mean for US readers?

It involves two wealthy Americans, a US$260 million project and a ruling that will show how Panama treats approved investments. It changes nothing for travellers today.

Sources: La República, 22 October 2026 (Spanish edition of the Bloomberg feature); Destino Panamá, 22 October 2026; La Prensa, 8 May 2026; La Prensa, 7 April 2026; La Prensa, 3 August 2026; La Prensa, 9 April 2026; Infobae, 6 February 2026; La Estrella de Panamá, 6 April 2026.

Editorial responsibility: Matthias Camenzind, Editor-in-Chief · Editorial standards · Report an error

The Rio Times · Power Map

See who really holds power in Latin America

Click to open the Power Map →