Central America

Panamanian Supreme Court assists Trump: cancels port concession to Ck Hutchison

The company's response: 'Baseless judgment'

by Rita Fatiguso

30 January 2026

Una nave cargo in uscita dal Canale di Panama.

3' min read

Translated by AI

Versione italiana

3' min read

Translated by AI

Versione italiana

A formidable assist to the White House's ambitions to regain control of the Panama Canal comes from the Central American country's Supreme Court ruling that declared unconstitutional the laws under which the Hong Kong company CK Hutchison Holdings operated two of the five ports, Balboa on the Pacific and Cristobal on the Atlantic.

One third of the world's goods traffic passes through the Canal, one fifth of it is Made In China products. A mere ten hours is enough time to transport goods and raw materials from one ocean to another, the junction is geopolitically strategic for both the Americans and Beijing, which has invested heavily in the area.

Panama Ports Company, a subsidiary of CK Hutchison Holdings has been contracted since the 1990s to operate container terminals at the Pacific and Atlantic entrances to the canal, separate from the waterway operations. Panama Ports Company operated under a licence automatically renewed five years ago for another 25 years. A situation that the Supreme Court ruled unlawful when examining an appeal brought to its attention based in part on the fact that the Hong Kong company was not paying taxes, to the detriment of Panama's treasury.

The Canal, built by the US, was returned to the local government in 1999 with Jimmy Carter's presidency, thus 25 years ago, and traffic revenues account for at least 80% of Panama City's resources. After the first French failures, the US completed the project in 1914, with the subsequent transfer of control to Panama. President Trump has stated that he wants to regain control of the infrastructure while avoiding Chinese interference.

What is CK Hutchison

CK Hutchison Holdings is one of Hong Kong's largest conglomerates including finance, retail, infrastructure, telecommunications and logistics. CK tried to sell the Panama Canal ports to a consortium led by the US fund BlackRock with Msc on board, but strong pressure came from Beijing amid press campaigns against the Hong Kong Chinese group and the entry of the national antitrust authority.

The Panama Supreme Court ruling annulling major port contracts shifts the needle of the scales, creating uncertainty about the future of operations along the Panama Canal, an 82-kilometre man-made waterway linking the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, drastically reducing maritime journey times. Owned by Panama, it handles around 14,500 ships a year, including large NeoPanamax vessels.

The preliminary agreement with BlackRock and Aponte

CK Hutchinson has reached a preliminary agreement with the American fund BlackRock, together with the Swiss-Italian shipowner Aponte, for the sale of 43 port hubs around the world, including the two Panamanian ports, for a sum of around USD 43 billion. With CK Hutchinson close to closing, the Chinese government did everything it could to block the deal, which was also strongly supported by the Americans who are eager to regain control of one of the world's most strategic maritime infrastructures. The French Cma Cgm, which many wanted in the game for control of the two ports of call, and the Chinese Cosco, already owner of Piraeus, the port of Athens, have entered the negotiations. The shipping giant had asked to enter with a majority share in the agreement for the sale of the ports of call.

If there is, in fact, one party more at stake than the others in the fight for the Canal, it is Panama whose interests the Court intended to protect.

The revocation of the licence opens the door for BlackRock to enter the business without having to overcome other obstacles. In the meantime, Panama has activated a billion-dollar auction for the construction of two more ports and a gas pipeline. In the next few days, the names should be announced from a shortlist of a dozen or so candidates with respect to the requirements decided by the Canal Authority, which has promised to be completely impartial.