Huan Qiu Shi Bao·2026-02-01 09:53Core Viewpoint - The Panama Supreme Court ruled that the contract of Hong Kong's CK Hutchison Holdings (referred to as "CK Hutchison") for operating two ports near the Panama Canal is unconstitutional, leading to significant backlash from CK Hutchison, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Hong Kong government [1][2]. Group 1: Legal and Contractual Issues - The ruling stems from an audit initiated by Panama's Office of the Comptroller General, which indicated that the contract caused Panama to lose over $1 billion in tax revenue [1]. - CK Hutchison's subsidiary, Panama Ports Company, originally obtained approval from the Panamanian government in January 1997 for a 25-year concession to operate Balboa and Cristobal ports, which was extended for another 25 years until 2047 under an automatic renewal clause [1]. - The Panama Supreme Court's decision has been described as a significant setback for CK Hutchison, which has operated these ports for a long time [1]. Group 2: Responses and Future Actions - The Hong Kong government expressed strong dissatisfaction with the ruling, urging the Panamanian government to respect contractual agreements and ensure a fair business environment for local enterprises [2]. - CK Hutchison stated that the court's ruling contradicts the spirit of good faith and contractual obligations, reserving the right to pursue legal action [2]. - Following the court's decision, Panama's President stated that discussions are underway with Maersk to temporarily take over the operations of the two ports [3]. Group 3: Broader Implications - The Hong Kong government warned that foreign governments using coercive measures in international trade relations could severely damage the legitimate business rights of Hong Kong enterprises and investor confidence [3]. - The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs affirmed that it would take all necessary measures to protect the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises [3].