← Environmental Law Center← Centro de Derecho Ambiental
Res. 15413-2010 Sala Constitucional · Sala Constitucional · 2010
OutcomeResultado
The amparo is granted and the Municipality of Flores is ordered to immediately begin work to resolve the lack of sidewalks and to warn property owners to comply with their obligations, with the municipality authorized to remedy any omissions and impose fines.Se estima el recurso de amparo y se ordena a la Municipalidad de Flores iniciar de inmediato los trabajos para solucionar la falta de aceras y apercibir a los propietarios para que cumplan con sus obligaciones, pudiendo la Municipalidad suplir las omisiones y aplicar multas.
SummaryResumen
The Constitutional Chamber hears an amparo filed by a blind person residing in the Villa Lico urbanization in Flores canton, who alleges that neighbors have built ramps over a meter high and that there are generally no adequate sidewalks, preventing free movement and endangering his life. The petitioner notes that he has made multiple requests to the Municipality of Flores, including through the National Board of the Blind, without success. The Chamber finds that the Municipality has a legal duty under Law 7600 (Equal Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities Act) and the Municipal Code to ensure the elimination of physical barriers on streets to guarantee free transit for persons with disabilities. Furthermore, the municipality must oversee compliance by property owners to build and maintain sidewalks, and in case of omission, step in to do the work and later recover costs. The Chamber grants the amparo and orders the Municipality of Flores to immediately begin work to resolve the lack of sidewalks and to warn property owners to fulfill their obligations, in accordance with the technical specifications of Law 7600 and its regulations, with the municipality authorized to remedy any omissions and impose corresponding fines under Articles 75 and 76 of the Municipal Code.La Sala Constitucional conoce de un recurso de amparo interpuesto por una persona no vidente que reside en la Urbanización Villa Lico, en el cantón de Flores, quien alega que los vecinos han construido rampas de más de un metro de alto y que, en general, no existen aceras adecuadas, lo que le impide transitar libremente y pone en peligro su vida. La recurrente señala que ha realizado múltiples gestiones ante la Municipalidad de Flores, incluyendo por medio del Patronato Nacional de Ciegos, sin obtener resultados. La Sala determina que la Municipalidad tiene la obligación legal, derivada de la Ley 7600 (Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad) y del Código Municipal, de garantizar la eliminación de barreras físicas en las calles para asegurar el libre tránsito de las personas con discapacidad. Asimismo, la municipalidad debe fiscalizar el cumplimiento, por parte de los propietarios, de construir y mantener las aceras, y en caso de omisión, sustituirlos para luego recuperar los costos. La Sala acoge el recurso y ordena a la Municipalidad de Flores iniciar de inmediato los trabajos para solucionar la falta de aceras y apercibir a los propietarios para que cumplan con sus obligaciones, ajustándose a las especificaciones técnicas de la Ley 7600 y su reglamento, pudiendo la Municipalidad suplir las omisiones y aplicar las multas correspondientes conforme a los artículos 75 y 76 del Código Municipal.
Key excerptExtracto clave
IV. From the reading of the preceding recital, it follows that there is a generic duty of all entities and bodies that make up the Administration, including municipalities, to guarantee the right to equality of persons with disabilities, by eliminating any type of barrier that may prevent the full inclusion of these persons in society. In the specific case of municipalities, one of the obligations that arise from the foregoing consists of eliminating any type of physical barrier on the streets of their canton that limits the transit of persons with disabilities who reside or simply travel through their jurisdiction. This duty is developed by Law 7600 in its Article 41, and by the Regulation to said law, in its Articles 103, 125 and 126, stating as relevant: VI. In the specific case, the petitioner claims that in the San Martín neighborhood of San Gabriel de Aserrí there are no sidewalks, a situation that creates a series of problems for the protected person, who is blind. In their report, the respondent authorities state that after visiting the aforementioned place, it was verified that only some sectors have sidewalks; however, they explain that they are unable to act until the protected person points out the places where the lack of a sidewalk causes a problem. In view of the foregoing, this Chamber considers that in this appeal the alleged violation of the fundamental rights of the protected person is confirmed, since from the respondents' own statement it follows that in several sectors of the San Martín neighborhood there are no sidewalks, a situation that constitutes a violation not only of the rights of the protected person, but also of the respondent Municipality's obligation to ensure that the canton's streets have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the free transit of persons with disabilities, as provided by Law 7600 and the Municipal Code. Likewise, it is appropriate to clarify to the respondents that there is no obligation of the protected person to report which sites he considers the lack of a sidewalk causes a problem, since the respondent Municipality cannot delegate to the administered parties its obligation to supervise and ensure compliance with the law on the properties that are part of its jurisdiction. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, it is appropriate to grant the appeal, as is hereby done. V. On the merits. As stipulated in the partially transcribed ruling, the construction of sidewalks is primarily the obligation of the owners of the various properties, but it is the responsibility of the municipalities to oversee that this duty is fulfilled, and eventually to substitute the owners, later recovering those amounts. Therefore, the amparo is granted, ordering the Municipality of Flores to immediately begin the work to solve the problem caused by the lack of sidewalks in the Villa Lico sector of San Joaquín de Flores and, where applicable to owners or possessors of real estate, to warn them to begin the necessary work on the sidewalk in front of their properties, adjusting the works to the specifications contained in Law 7600 and its regulation. The foregoing, without prejudice to the fact that in the event of omission by the respective owner or possessor to comply with the stated obligations, the Municipality of Flores shall carry out the work and impose the corresponding fines, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 75 and 76 of the Municipal Code.IV.- De la lectura del considerando anterior, se desprende que existe un deber genérico de todos los entes y órganos que conforman la Administración, incluidas las municipalidades, de garantizar el derecho a la igualdad de las personas con discapacidad, mediante la eliminación de cualquier tipo de barreras, que puedan impedir el ingreso total de estas personas a la sociedad. En el caso específico de las municipalidades una de las obligaciones que se derivan de lo dicho anteriormente, consiste en eliminar cualquier tipo de barrera física en las calles de su cantón, que limite el tránsito de las personas con discapacidad que habiten o simplemente transiten por su jurisdicción. Este deber, es desarrollado por la Ley 7600 en su artículo 41, y por el Reglamento a la citada ley, en sus artículos 103, 125 y 126, al disponer en lo que interesa: VI.- En el caso concreto, el recurrente reclama que en el Barrio San Martín de San Gabriel de Aserrí no existen aceras, situación que genera una serie de problemas para el amparado, quien es una persona no vidente. En su informe, las autoridades recurridas informan que tras realizar una visita al lugar antes mencionado, se pudo constatar que sólo algunos sectores cuentan con aceras; sin embargo explican que se encuentran imposibilitados para actuar, hasta tanto el amparado no señale los lugares en los que la falta de acera le genera un problema. Con vista en lo anterior, esta Sala considera que en el presente recurso se constata la alegada violación a los derechos fundamentales del amparado, pues del propio dicho de los recurridos se deduce que en varios sectores del Barrio San Martín no existen aceras, situación que constituye una violación no sólo a los derechos del amparado, sino también a la obligación de la Municipalidad recurrida de velar porque las calles del cantón cuenten con la infraestructura necesaria para garantizar el libre tránsito de las personas con discapacidad, tal y como lo dispone la Ley 7600 y el Código Municipal. Asimismo, conviene aclarar a los recurridos que no existe una obligación del amparado de informar cuales son los sitios en los que estima que la falta de aceras le genera un problema, esto, por cuanto la Municipalidad accionada no puede delegar en los administrados su obligación de fiscalizar y velar por el cumplimiento de la ley en los terrenos que forman parte de su jurisdicción. Así en razón de lo expuesto anteriormente, lo procedente es acoger el recurso planteado, como en efecto se hace. V.- Sobre el fondo. Como se estipula en el pronunciamiento parcialmente trascrito, la construcción de las aceras es primordialmente obligación de los propietarios de los distintos inmuebles, pero corresponde a las municipalidades fiscalizar que se cumpla ese deber, y eventualmente sustituir a los dueños, para luego recuperar esos montos. Por ello, se estima el amparo, ordenando a la Municipalidad de Flores, que de forma inmediata, inicie los trabajos para solucionar el problema generado por la falta de aceras en el sector Villa Lico de San Joaquín de Flores y, en las que correspondiere a propietarios o poseedores de bienes inmuebles, los aperciba para que inicien las obras necesarias en la acera frente a sus propiedades, ajustando las obras a las especificaciones contenidas en la Ley número 7600 y su reglamento. Lo anterior, sin perjuicio de que en caso de omisión del propietario o poseedor respectivo de cumplir las obligaciones señaladas, la Municipalidad de Flores supla los trabajos y aplique las multas correspondientes, de conformidad con lo dispuesto en los artículos 75 y 76 del Código Municipal.
Pull quotesCitas destacadas
"existe un deber genérico de todos los entes y órganos que conforman la Administración, incluidas las municipalidades, de garantizar el derecho a la igualdad de las personas con discapacidad, mediante la eliminación de cualquier tipo de barreras"
"there is a generic duty of all entities and bodies that make up the Administration, including municipalities, to guarantee the right to equality of persons with disabilities, by eliminating any type of barrier"
Considerando IV
"existe un deber genérico de todos los entes y órganos que conforman la Administración, incluidas las municipalidades, de garantizar el derecho a la igualdad de las personas con discapacidad, mediante la eliminación de cualquier tipo de barreras"
Considerando IV
"la Municipalidad accionada no puede delegar en los administrados su obligación de fiscalizar y velar por el cumplimiento de la ley en los terrenos que forman parte de su jurisdicción"
"the respondent Municipality cannot delegate to the administered parties its obligation to supervise and ensure compliance with the law on the properties that are part of its jurisdiction"
Considerando VI
"la Municipalidad accionada no puede delegar en los administrados su obligación de fiscalizar y velar por el cumplimiento de la ley en los terrenos que forman parte de su jurisdicción"
Considerando VI
Full documentDocumento completo
“I.- Purpose of the appeal. The appellant considers that the fundamental rights of the protected party have been violated, particularly those contained in Article 33 of the Constitution, because he is a blind person and the neighbors of the place where he resides in the Villa Lico Urbanization have built ramps over one meter high, which is known to the respondent Municipality, and despite this it does not intervene or take any action to solve the problem, making it practically impossible for him to move freely on the sidewalks without endangering his life. He alleges that the protected party has made multiple phone and in-person efforts, as well as through the Director of the Patronato Nacional de Ciegos before the Mayoress of the Municipality of Flores, in this regard, without obtaining positive results, all of the above in violation of Ley 7600.
IV.- On the law. On previous occasions, this Chamber has addressed the problem of access to public physical space for persons with disabilities related to the ability to move from one place to another. For example, in judgment number 2008-10096 at 19:00 hours on June 17, 2008, it was stated:
“…the issue of the rights of persons with disabilities, which are protected at the constitutional level by the principle of equality developed in Article 33 of the Magna Carta, and at the legal level by a series of norms, among which Ley 7948 “Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad” and Ley 7600 “Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las personas con discapacidad” stand out. Regarding the above, it is worth highlighting what was stated in judgment number: 2005-15751 at ten hours and twenty-eight minutes on November seventeen, two thousand five, in which it was pointed out regarding the relevant part:
III.- On the merits. Firstly, it is important to note that the “Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad”, approved by the Legislative Assembly through Law No. 7948, and the “Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad”, No. 7600, as well as the “Normas Uniformes para la equiparación de Oportunidades de las personas con discapacidad” are the cornerstone of the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities.
The American Convention on Human Rights and the Political Constitution of Costa Rica enshrine the principle of equality of the individual and the prohibition of making distinctions contrary to their dignity - Articles 24 and 33 respectively-. Additionally, the Convention defines in its Article 1 Discrimination as follows:
“The term discrimination against persons with disabilities means any distinction, exclusion, or restriction based on a disability, record of a disability, consequence of a current or past disability, that has the effect or purpose of preventing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise by persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms.” Likewise, it establishes the obligation of the States that signed it to adopt:
“measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and promote integration by governmental authorities and/or private entities in the provision or supply of goods, services, facilities, programs, and activities, such as employment, transportation, communications, housing, recreation, education, sports, access to justice and police services, and political and administrative activities.” IV.- From the reading of the preceding whereas clause, it follows that there is a generic duty on all entities and bodies that make up the Administration, including municipalities, to guarantee the right to equality of persons with disabilities, through the elimination of any type of barriers that may prevent the full entry of these persons into society. In the specific case of municipalities, one of the obligations derived from the above is to eliminate any type of physical barrier in the streets of their canton that limits the transit of persons with disabilities who live or simply pass through their jurisdiction. This duty is developed by Ley 7600 in its Article 41, and by the Regulation to said law, in its Articles 103, 125, and 126, when providing, as relevant:
Article 41.- Regulatory technical specifications New constructions, expansions, or remodeling of buildings, parks, sidewalks, gardens, plazas, roads, sanitary services, and other publicly owned spaces must be carried out in accordance with the regulatory technical specifications of the public and private bodies in charge of the matter.
Private buildings that involve public attendance and provide service to the public must have the same characteristics established in the preceding paragraph.
The same aforementioned obligations shall apply to housing projects of any nature, financed totally or partially with public funds. In this type of projects, housing assigned to persons with disabilities or families in which one of the members is a person with a disability must be located in a site that guarantees their easy access.
Article 103.- Oversight The Ministry of Public Works and Transport, the Ministry of Housing and Human Settlements, the Ministry of Public Health, the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism, the Municipalities, and other competent entities for reviewing plans and granting construction and remodeling permits or any other similar authorization, must control and oversee that the pertinent provisions contained in this regulation are fully complied with.
Article 125.- Characteristics of sidewalks Sidewalks must have a minimum width of 1.20 m., an anti-slip finish, and be without steps; in the event of a grade difference, it must be overcome with a ramp.
Cross-sectional cuts or ramps made along the property line shall not be larger than 1.20 m., must comply with the requirements of gradient (gradiente), surface, and free water passage. These may be made in these cases without the need for municipal approval.
In the event that the cuts are larger or the separation distance is less than said, their maximum distance on the building line (línea de construcción) shall be that of the existing entrance or parking area. These areas must comply with the requirements indicated by the regulation in this regard, and the approval of the municipality of the location must be obtained for its execution.
Sidewalks must have a height (gradient (gradiente)) of between 15 and 25 cm. measured from the curb of the gutter (caño). In the event that the height of the property line is less than indicated, it shall be overcome by a gradient (gradiente) that must comply with what is established below.
The gradient (gradiente) in the transverse direction must have a maximum of 3%.
Article 126.- Ramps on sidewalks. On sidewalks, at all corners there must be a ramp with a maximum gradient (gradiente) of 10% to overcome the existing grade difference between the sidewalk and the street. This ramp must have a minimum width of 1.20 m. and be constructed with an anti-slip surface.
V.- Furthermore, it is also worth mentioning that the aforementioned duty is not only based on the provisions of the regulations that specifically protect the rights of persons with disabilities, as is the case with Ley 7600, but also on the obligation of municipalities to ensure that the streets in their jurisdiction have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the safety of the inhabitants of the canton, such as sidewalks, curbs (cordones), gutters (caños) and ditches (cunetas), and that there are no obstacles on them that may hinder the transit of persons, especially those with some type of disability. This duty is developed by Articles 75 subsections d) and g) and 76 of the Código Municipal, which in turn grant the Municipality a series of powers in order to guarantee compliance with their provisions, when stipulating, as relevant:
“Article 75.
In accordance with the Municipal Regulatory Plan, natural or legal persons, owners or possessors, by any title, of real estate, must comply with the following obligations: (… )
(....)
(... )
Except as ordered in the General Health Law, when residents fail to comply with the foregoing obligations, the municipality is empowered to remedy the omission of these duties by directly carrying out the works or providing the corresponding services. For the works executed, the municipality shall charge the owner or possessor of the property the effective cost of the service or the work. The resident must reimburse the effective cost within a maximum period of eight business days; otherwise, they must pay as a fine fifty percent (50%) of the value of the work or service, without prejudice to the collection of default interest.
Based on a prior technical study, the Municipal Council shall set the prices by agreement issued within its body, which must be published in “La Gaceta” to come into force. Municipalities shall review and update these prices annually, and they shall be published by regulation.
In the case of the omissions included in the paragraph preceding the previous one of this article, and when the municipality has learned of the dangerous situation by any means, the municipality is obligated to remedy the inaction of the owner, after prior warning to the resident in accordance with due process and without prejudice to charging the price indicated in the previous paragraph. If the municipality does not remedy it and due to the omission damage is caused to the health, physical integrity, or property of third parties, the negligent municipal official shall be jointly and severally liable, with the owner or possessor of the property, for the damages caused.
Article 76.- When the obligations set forth in the previous article are breached, the municipality shall charge quarterly as a fine:
VI.- In the specific case, the appellant claims that in Barrio San Martín of San Gabriel de Aserrí there are no sidewalks, a situation that generates a series of problems for the protected party, who is a blind person. In their report, the respondent authorities report that after visiting the aforementioned place, it was verified that only some sectors have sidewalks; however, they explain that they are unable to act until the protected party indicates the places where the lack of sidewalks creates a problem for him. In view of the foregoing, this Chamber considers that in this appeal the alleged violation of the fundamental rights of the protected party is confirmed, since from the respondents’ own statements it follows that in several sectors of Barrio San Martín there are no sidewalks, a situation that constitutes a violation not only of the protected party's rights, but also of the obligation of the respondent Municipality to ensure that the streets of the canton have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the free transit of persons with disabilities, as provided by Ley 7600 and the Código Municipal. Likewise, it is appropriate to clarify to the respondents that there is no obligation on the part of the protected party to report which sites he deems the lack of sidewalks creates a problem for him, because the respondent Municipality cannot delegate to the administered parties its obligation to oversee and ensure compliance with the law on the lands that are part of its jurisdiction. Thus, by reason of the foregoing, it is appropriate to grant the appeal filed, as is hereby done.” A decision in which it is insisted that the possibility of moving in public spaces without obstacles is part of the right to equality of persons with disabilities.
V.- On the merits. As stipulated in the partially transcribed ruling, the construction of sidewalks is primarily the obligation of the owners of the various properties, but it is the responsibility of the municipalities to oversee compliance with that duty, and eventually to substitute for the owners, in order to subsequently recover those amounts. Therefore, the amparo appeal is granted, ordering the Municipality of Flores to immediately begin the work to solve the problem generated by the lack of sidewalks in the Villa Lico sector of San Joaquín de Flores and, for those corresponding to owners or possessors of real estate, to warn them to begin the necessary works on the sidewalk in front of their properties, adjusting the works to the specifications contained in Law number 7600 and its regulation. The foregoing, without prejudice that in the event of omission by the respective owner or possessor to fulfill the indicated obligations, the Municipality of Flores shall remedy the works and apply the corresponding fines, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 75 and 76 of the Código Municipal.” Additionally, the Convention defines "Discrimination" in its article 1 as follows:
"The term discrimination against persons with disabilities means any distinction, exclusion or restriction based on a disability, record of disability, consequence of present or past disability, which has the effect or purpose of preventing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms " Likewise, it enshrines the obligation of the States that signed it to adopt:
"the measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and promote integration by governmental authorities and/or private entities in the provision or supply of goods, services, facilities, programs, activities, such as employment, transportation, communications, housing, recreation, education, sports, access to justice and police services, and political and administrative activities" IV.- From the reading of the preceding considerando, it follows that there is a generic duty of all entities and bodies that make up the Administration, including the municipalities, to guarantee the right to equality of persons with disabilities, through the elimination of any type of barriers that may prevent the full entry of these persons into society. In the specific case of municipalities, one of the obligations arising from the foregoing consists of eliminating any type of physical barrier on the streets of their canton that limits the transit of persons with disabilities who reside or simply transit through their jurisdiction. This duty is developed by Ley 7600 in its article 41, and by the Regulation to the cited law, in its articles 103, 125, and 126, by providing as relevant:
Article 41.- Regulatory technical specifications New constructions, expansions, or remodeling of buildings, parks, sidewalks (aceras), gardens, plazas, roads, sanitary services, and other public-owned spaces must be carried out in accordance with the regulatory technical specifications of the public and private bodies in charge of the matter.
Private buildings that involve public attendance and provide public service must have the same characteristics established in the preceding paragraph.
The same mentioned obligations shall apply to housing projects of any nature, totally or partially financed with public funds. In this type of project, housing assigned to persons with disabilities or families of persons where one of its members is a person with a disability must be located in a site that guarantees their easy access.
Article 103.- Oversight (Fiscalización) The Ministry of Public Works and Transport, the Ministry of Housing and Human Settlements, the Ministry of Public Health, the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism, the Municipalities, and other entities competent to review plans and grant construction and remodeling permits or any other similar authorization, must control and oversee that the pertinent provisions contained in this regulation are complied with in all their extremes.
Article 125.- Characteristics of sidewalks (aceras) Sidewalks (aceras) must have a minimum width of 1.20 mts., a non-slip finish, and without presenting steps; in case of unevenness, it shall be overcome with a ramp.
Transversal cuts or ramps made along the property line shall not be larger than 1.20 mts., and must comply with gradient, surface, and free flow of water requirements. These may be made in these cases without the need for municipal approval.
In case the cuts are larger or the separation distance is less than stated, their maximum distance on the building line shall be that which exists for the entrance or parking area. These areas must comply with the requirements indicated by the respective regulation and, in this case, must have the approval of the municipality of the place for their execution.
Sidewalks (aceras) must have a height (gradient) of between 15 and 25 cms., measured from the gutter curb. In the event the property line height is less than indicated, it shall be overcome by a gradient that must comply with the provisions set forth below.
The cross-sectional gradient shall have a maximum of 3%.
Article 126.- Ramps on sidewalks (aceras). On sidewalks (aceras), at all corners, there must be a ramp with a maximum gradient of 10% to overcome the unevenness existing between the sidewalk (acera) and the street. This ramp must have a minimum width of 1.20 mts. and be built with a non-slip finish.
V.- On the other hand, it is also convenient to mention that the aforementioned duty not only has a basis in the provisions of the regulations that specifically protect the rights of persons with disabilities, such as the case of Ley 7600, but also in the obligation of the municipalities to ensure that the streets of their jurisdiction have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the safety of the inhabitants of the canton, such as sidewalks (acercas), curbs, gutters, and ditches (cunetas), and that there are also no obstacles on them that may hinder the transit of persons, especially those who suffer from some type of disability. This duty is developed by articles 75 subsections d) and g) and 76 of the Código Municipal, which in turn grant the Municipality a series of powers to guarantee compliance with the provisions therein, by providing as relevant:
"Article 75.
In accordance with the Municipal Regulatory Plan, natural or legal persons, owners or possessors, by any title, of real estate, must comply with the following obligations: (... )
(....)
(... )
Except as ordered by the General Health Law, when the citizens fail to comply with the previous obligations, the municipality is empowered to make up for the omission of those duties, directly carrying out the works or providing the corresponding services. For the works executed, the municipality shall charge the owner or possessor of the property the effective cost of the service or the work. The citizen must reimburse the effective cost within a maximum period of eight business days; otherwise, they must pay as a fine fifty percent (50%) of the value of the work or service, without prejudice to the collection of late payment interest.
Based on a prior technical study, the Municipal Council shall set the prices by agreement issued from its chamber, which must be published in "La Gaceta" to enter into force. The municipalities shall review and annually update these prices and they shall be published by regulation.
When dealing with the omissions included in the preceding paragraph of this article and the municipality has become aware by any means of the dangerous situation, the municipality is obliged to make up for the inaction of the owner, after prior warning to the citizen in accordance with due process and without prejudice to charging the price indicated in the previous paragraph. If the municipality does not make up for it and due to the omission damage is caused to the health, physical integrity, or property of third parties, the omitting municipal official shall be liable, jointly and severally with the owner or possessor of the property, for the damages caused.
Article 76.- When the obligations set forth in the previous article are breached, the municipality shall charge quarterly as a fine:
VI.- In the specific case, the appellant claims that in Barrio San Martín of San Gabriel de Aserrí there are no sidewalks (aceras), a situation that generates a series of problems for the amparado, who is a blind person. In their report, the respondent authorities report that after making a visit to the aforementioned place, it was possible to verify that only some sectors have sidewalks (aceras); however, they explain that they are unable to act until the amparado identifies the places where the lack of a sidewalk (acera) causes him a problem. In view of the foregoing, this Chamber considers that in the present recurso, the alleged violation of the fundamental rights of the amparado is verified, since from the respondents' own words it follows that in several sectors of Barrio San Martín there are no sidewalks (aceras), a situation that constitutes a violation not only of the rights of the amparado, but also of the obligation of the respondent Municipality to ensure that the streets of the canton have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the free transit of persons with disabilities, as provided by Ley 7600 and the Código Municipal. Likewise, it is convenient to clarify to the respondents that there is no obligation for the amparado to inform which sites the lack of sidewalks (aceras) causes him a problem, this, because the respondent Municipality cannot delegate to the administered parties its obligation to oversee and ensure compliance with the law on the lands that form part of its jurisdiction. Thus, for the reasons set forth above, the appropriate course is to grant the recurso filed, as is hereby done.” Decision in which it is insisted that the possibility of moving in public spaces without obstacles forms part of the right to equality of persons with disabilities.
V.- On the merits. As stipulated in the partially transcribed ruling, the construction of sidewalks (aceras) is primarily an obligation of the owners of the various properties, but it is incumbent upon the municipalities to oversee compliance with that duty, and eventually to substitute the owners, in order to later recover those amounts. Therefore, the amparo is granted, ordering the Municipality of Flores to immediately begin the works to solve the problem generated by the lack of sidewalks (aceras) in the Villa Lico sector of San Joaquín de Flores and, in those corresponding to owners or possessors of real estate, to warn them to begin the necessary works on the sidewalk (acera) in front of their properties, adjusting the works to the specifications contained in Ley number 7600 and its regulation.
The foregoing, without prejudice to the fact that in the event of omission by the respective owner or possessor to fulfill the stated obligations, the Municipality of Flores may perform the work and apply the corresponding fines, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 75 and 76 of the Código Municipal." **I.- Purpose of the appeal.** The appellant considers that the fundamental rights of the protected person have been violated, particularly those contained in Article 33 of the Constitution, by virtue of the fact that he is a blind person and that the neighbors of the place where he resides in Urbanización Villa Lico have built ramps over one meter high, which is known to the respondent Municipality, and despite this it does not intervene or do anything to solve the problem, since it is practically impossible for him to move freely on the sidewalks without endangering his life. He alleges that the ward has made multiple telephone and in-person efforts, as well as through the Director of the Patronato Nacional de Ciegos, before the Mayor of the Municipality of Flores, in that regard, without obtaining positive results, all of the foregoing in violation of Law 7600.
**IV.- On the law.** On previous occasions, this Chamber has referred to the problem of access to public physical space for persons with disabilities related to the possibility of moving from one place to another. For example, in judgment number 2008-10096 of 7:00 p.m. on June 17, 2008, it was stated:
“…the issue of the rights of persons with disabilities, which are protected at the constitutional level by the principle of equality developed by Article 33 of the Carta Magna, and at the legal level by a series of norms, among which Law 7948 "Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad", and Law 7600 "Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las personas con discapacidad" stand out. Regarding the foregoing, it is worth highlighting what was said in judgment number: 2005-15751 of ten hours and twenty-eight minutes on November seventeenth, two thousand five, in which it was stated, in relevant part:
III.- On the merits. Firstly, it is important to note that the "Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad", approved by the Asamblea Legislativa through Law No. 7948, and the "Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad", No. 7600, as well as the “Normas Uniformes para la equiparación de Oportunidades de las personas con discapacidad”, constitute the cornerstone of the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities.
The Convención Americana Sobre Derechos Humanos and the Constitución Política of Costa Rica enshrine the principle of equality of the person and the prohibition of making distinctions contrary to their dignity - Articles 24 and 33 respectively. Additionally, the Convention defines in its Article 1 Discrimination as follows:
"The term discrimination against persons with disabilities means any distinction, exclusion or restriction based on a disability, antecedent of disability, consequence of present or past disability, which has the effect or purpose of impeding or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms." Likewise, it enshrines the obligation of the States that signed it, to adopt:
"measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and promote integration by governmental authorities and/or private entities in the provision or supply of goods, services, facilities, programs, activities, such as employment, transportation, communications, housing, recreation, education, sports, access to justice and police services, and political and administrative activities." **IV.-** From the reading of the preceding recital, it follows that **there is a generic duty of all entities and bodies that make up the Administration, *including the municipalities*, to guarantee the right to equality of persons with disabilities, *through the elimination of any type of barrier*, that may prevent the full entry of these persons into society.** ***In the specific case of the municipalities* one of the obligations** that derive from the foregoing, ***consists of eliminating any type of physical barrier on the streets of their canton*, that limits the transit of persons with disabilities who reside in or simply transit through their jurisdiction.** This duty is developed by Law 7600 in its Article 41, and by the Regulation to the cited law, in its Articles 103, 125 and 126, by providing, in relevant part:
Article 41.- Regulatory technical specifications.
New constructions, expansions or remodeling of buildings, parks, sidewalks (aceras), gardens, plazas, roads, sanitary services and other publicly owned spaces must be carried out in accordance with the regulatory technical specifications of the public and private entities in charge of the matter.
Private buildings that involve public attendance and provide service to the public must have the same characteristics established in the preceding paragraph.
The same obligations mentioned shall govern housing projects of any nature, totally or partially financed with public funds. In this type of projects, housing assigned to persons with disabilities or families in which one of its members is a person with a disability must be located in a site that guarantees easy access.
Article 103.- Oversight.
The Ministry of Public Works and Transport, the Ministry of Housing and Human Settlements, the Ministry of Public Health, the National Institute of Housing and Urbanism, **the Municipalities** and other entities competent to review plans and grant construction and remodeling permits or any other similar authorization, ***must control and oversee*** that the pertinent provisions contained in this regulation are complied with in all their extremes.
**Article 125.- Characteristics of sidewalks (aceras).** Sidewalks (aceras) must have a minimum width of 1.20 mts., a non-slip finish and present no steps; in the event of a difference in level, this shall be overcome with a ramp.
Transverse cuts or ramps made along the property line shall not be larger than 1.20 mts., and must comply with the requirements of gradient, surface and free flow of water. They may be made in these cases without the need for municipal approval.
In the event that the cuts are larger or the separation distance is less as stated, their maximum distance on the building line shall be that which exists for the entrance or parking area. These areas must comply with the requirements indicated by the respective regulation and must have, in this case, the approval of the municipality of the place for their execution.
Sidewalks (aceras) must have a height (gradient) of between 15 and 25 cms. measured from the curb. In the event that the height of the property line is less than that indicated, it shall be overcome by a gradient that must comply with what is established below.
The transverse gradient shall have a maximum of 3%.
**Article 126.- Ramps on sidewalks (aceras).** On the sidewalk (acera), at all corners there must be a ramp with a maximum gradient of 10% to overcome the existing difference in level between the sidewalk (acera) and the street. This ramp must have a minimum width of 1.20 mts. and be built with a non-slip finish.
**V.-** On the other hand, it is also worth mentioning that the aforementioned duty not only has a basis in the provisions of the regulations that specifically protect the rights of persons with disabilities, as is the case of Law 7600, but also in the obligation of the municipalities to ensure that the streets of their jurisdiction have the necessary infrastructure to guarantee the safety of the inhabitants of the canton, such as sidewalks (aceras), curbs, gutters and ditches, and that there are no obstacles on them that could hinder the transit of persons, especially those who suffer from some type of disability. This duty is developed by Articles 75, subsections d) and g), and 76 of the Código Municipal, which in turn grant the Municipality a series of powers in order to guarantee compliance with the provisions thereof, by providing, in relevant part:
"Article 75.- In accordance with the Municipal Master Plan (Plan Regulador Municipal), natural or legal persons, owners or possessors, by any title, of real estate, must fulfill the following obligations: (...)
(....)
(... )
Except as ordered by the General Health Law (Ley General de Salud), **when residents breach the foregoing obligations, the municipality is empowered to remedy the omission of those duties, by directly performing the works or providing the corresponding services**. For the works performed, the municipality shall charge the owner or possessor of the property the effective cost of the service or the work. The resident must reimburse the effective cost within a maximum period of eight business days; otherwise, they must pay, as a fine, fifty percent (50%) of the value of the work or the service, without prejudice to the collection of default interest.
Based on a prior technical study, the Municipal Council shall set the prices by resolution adopted within its body, which must be published in "La Gaceta" to enter into force. Municipalities shall annually review and update these prices, and they shall be published by regulation.
When it involves the omissions included in the preceding paragraph of this article and the municipality has learned by any means of the dangerous situation, the municipality is obligated to remedy the owner’s inaction, after prior warning to the resident in accordance with due process and without prejudice to charging the price indicated in the preceding paragraph. If the municipality does not remedy it and the omission causes damage to the health, physical integrity, or property of third parties, the negligent municipal official shall be jointly and severally liable with the owner or possessor of the property for the damages and losses caused.
Article 76.- When the obligations set forth in the preceding article are breached, the municipality shall charge quarterly, as a fine:
V.- On the merits. As stipulated in the partially transcribed pronouncement, the construction of sidewalks is primarily an obligation of the owners of the different properties, but it is the responsibility of the municipalities to supervise compliance with that duty, and eventually to substitute for the owners, in order to later recover those amounts. Therefore, the appeal is granted, ordering the Municipality of Flores to immediately begin the works to resolve the problem generated by the lack of sidewalks in the Villa Lico sector of San Joaquín de Flores, and, for those that correspond to owners or possessors of real property, to warn them so that they begin the necessary works on the sidewalk in front of their properties, adjusting the works to the specifications contained in Law 7600 and its regulations. The foregoing, without prejudice to the fact that in the event of omission by the respective owner or possessor to fulfill the indicated obligations, the Municipality of Flores shall remedy the works and apply the corresponding fines, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 75 and 76 of the Municipal Code (Código Municipal)."
“I.- Objeto del recurso. El recurrente considera lesionados los derechos fundamentales del amparado, en particular los contenidos en el artículo 33 constitucional, en virtud de que es una persona no vidente y que los vecinos del lugar donde reside en la Urbanización Villa Lico, han construido rampas de más de un metro de alto, lo que es de conocimiento de la Municipalidad recurrida, y pese a esto no interviene ni realiza nada al efecto para solucionar el problema, ya que le resulta prácticamente imposible transitar libremente por las aceras, sin poner su vida en peligro. Alega que el tutelado ha realizado múltiples gestiones telefónicas y personales así como por intermedio de la Directora del Patronato Nacional de Ciegos ante la Alcaldesa de la Municipalidad de Flores, en ese sentido, sin obtener resultados positivos, todo lo anterior en violación de la Ley 7600.
IV.- Sobre el derecho. En anteriores oportunidades la Sala se ha referido al problema del acceso al espacio físico público para personas con discapacidades relacionadas con la posibilidad de trasladarse de un lugar a otro. Por ejemplo, por sentencia número 2008-10096 de las 19:00 horas del 17 de junio de 2008, se indicó:
“…el tema de los derechos de las personas con discapacidad, los cuales se encuentran tutelados a nivel constitucional por el principio de igualdad desarrollado por el artículo 33 de la Carta Magna, y a nivel legal por una serie de normas, entre las que destaca la Ley 7948 "Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad", y la Ley 7600 "Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las personas con discapacidad". Sobre lo anterior, conviene destacar lo dicho en la sentencia número: 2005- 15751 de las diez horas con veintiocho minutos del diecisiete de noviembre del dos mil cinco, en la que se señaló en lo que interesa:
III.- Sobre el fondo. En primer término es importante señalar que con la "Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad", aprobada por la Asamblea Legislativa por ley N° 7948 y la "Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad", N° 7600, así como las “Normas Uniformes para la equiparación de Oportunidades de las personas con discapacidad” consisten en la piedra angular de protección de los derechos de las personas con discapacidad.
La Convención Americana Sobre Derechos Humanos y la Constitución Política de Costa Rica, consagran el principio de igualdad de la persona y la prohibición de hacer distinciones contrarias a su dignidad -artículos 24 y 33 respectivamente-. Adicionalmente, La Convención define en su artículo 1 la Discriminación de la siguiente manera:
"El término discriminación contra las personas con discapacidad, significa toda distinción, exclusión o restricción basada en una discapacidad, antecedente de discapacidad, consecuencia de discapacidad presente o pasada, que tenga el efecto o el propósito de impedir o anular el reconocimiento, goce o ejercicio por parte de las personas con discapacidad, de sus derechos humanos y libertades fundamentales " Asimismo, consagra la obligación de los Estados que la suscribieron, a adoptar:
"las medidas para eliminar progresivamente la discriminación y promover la integración por parte de las autoridades gubernamentales y/o entidades privadas en la prestación o suministro de bienes, servicios, instalaciones, programas, actividades, tales como el empleo, el transporte, las comunicaciones, la vivienda, la recreación, la educación, el deporte, el acceso a la justicia y los servicios policiales y las actividades políticas y de administración" IV.- De la lectura del considerando anterior, se desprende que existe un deber genérico de todos los entes y órganos que conforman la Administración, incluidas las municipalidades, de garantizar el derecho a la igualdad de las personas con discapacidad, mediante la eliminación de cualquier tipo de barreras, que puedan impedir el ingreso total de estas personas a la sociedad. En el caso específico de las municipalidades una de las obligaciones que se derivan de lo dicho anteriormente, consiste en eliminar cualquier tipo de barrera física en las calles de su cantón, que limite el tránsito de las personas con discapacidad que habiten o simplemente transiten por su jurisdicción. Este deber, es desarrollado por la Ley 7600 en su artículo 41, y por el Reglamento a la citada ley, en sus artículos 103, 125 y 126, al disponer en lo que interesa:
Artículo 41.- Especificaciones técnicas reglamentarias Las construcciones nuevas, ampliaciones o remodelaciones de edificios, parques, aceras, jardines, plazas, vías, servicios sanitarios y otros espacios de propiedad pública, deberán efectuarse conforme a las especificaciones técnicas reglamentarias de los organismos públicos y privados encargados de la materia.
Las edificaciones privadas que impliquen concurrencia y brinden atención al público deberán contar con las mismas características establecidas en el párrafo anterior.
Las mismas obligaciones mencionadas regirán para los proyectos de vivienda de cualquier carácter, financiados total o parcialmente con fondos públicos. En este tipo de proyectos, las viviendas asignadas a personas con discapacidad o familias de personas en las que uno de sus miembros sea una persona con discapacidad deberán estar ubicadas en un sitio que garantice su fácil acceso.
Artículo 103.- Fiscalización El Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes, el Ministerio de Vivienda y Asentamientos Humanos, el Ministerio de Salud Pública, el Instituto Nacional de Vivienda y Urbanismo, las Municipalidades y demás entidades competentes de revisar planos y conceder permisos de construcción y remodelación o cualquier otra autorización similar, deberán controlar y fiscalizar que las disposiciones pertinentes contenidas en el presente reglamento se cumplan en todos sus extremos.
Artículo 125.- Características de las aceras Las aceras deberán tener un ancho mínimo de 1.20 mts., un acabado antiderrapante y sin presentar escalones; en caso de desnivel éste será salvado con rampa.
Los cortes transversales o rampas que se hagan a lo largo de la línea de propiedad, no será de un tamaño mayor a 1,20 mts., deberán cumplir con los requisitos de gradiente, superficie y libre paso de aguas. Podrán hacerse en estos casos sin necesidad de visto bueno municipal.
En caso de ser mayores los cortes o menor la distancia de separación según dicho, su distancia máxima sobre la línea de construcción será la que exista de área de entrada o de estacionamiento. Estas áreas deberán cumplir con los requisitos que indique el reglamento al respecto y deberá contarse en este caso con el visto bueno de la municipalidad del lugar para su ejecución.
Las aceras deberán tener una altura (gradiente) de entre 15 y 25 cms. medida desde el cordón del caño. En caso de que la altura de la línea de propiedad sea menor a la señalada, se salvará por gradiente que deberá cumplir con lo establecido a continuación.
La gradiente en sentido transversal, tendrá como máximo el 3%.
Artículo 126.- Rampas en las aceras. En las aceras, en todas las esquinas deberá haber una rampa con gradiente máxima de 10% para salvar el desnivel existente entre la acera y la calle. Esta rampa deberá tener un ancho mínimo de 1.20 mts. y construidas en forma antiderrapante.
V.- Por otra parte, también conviene mencionar que el deber antes mencionado, no sólo tiene asidero en lo dispuesto por la normativa que tutela específicamente los derechos de las personas con discapacidad, tal y como es el caso de la Ley 7600, sino además en la obligación de las municipalidades de velar por que las calles de su jurisdicción cuenten con la infraestructura necesaria para garantizar la seguridad de los habitantes del cantón, tales como acercas, cordones, caños y cunetas, y que además no existan sobre ellas obstáculos que puedan dificultar el tránsito de las personas, especialmente de aquellas que sufran algún tipo de discapacidad. Este deber es desarrollado por los artículos 75 incisos d) y g) y 76 del Código Municipal, los cuales a su vez otorgan a la Municipalidad una serie de potestades con el fin de garantizar el cumplimiento de lo dispuesto por ellos, al disponer en lo que interesa:
"Artículo 75.
De conformidad con el Plan Regulador Municipal, las personas físicas o jurídicas, propietarias o poseedoras, por cualquier título, de bienes inmuebles, deberán cumplir las siguientes obligaciones: (... )
(....)
(... )
Salvo lo ordenado en la Ley General de Salud, cuando los munícipes incumplan las obligaciones anteriores, la municipalidad está facultada para suplir la omisión de esos deberes, realizando en forma directa las obras o prestando los servicios correspondientes. Por los trabajos ejecutados, la municipalidad cobrará, al propietario o poseedor del inmueble, el costo efectivo del servicio o la obra. El munícipe deberá rembolsar el costo efectivo en el plazo máximo de ocho días hábiles; de lo contrario, deberá cancelar por concepto de multa un cincuenta por ciento (50%) del valor de la obra o el servicio, sin perjuicio del cobro de los intereses moratorios.
Con base en un estudio técnico previo, el Concejo Municipal fijará los precios mediante acuerdo emanado de su seno, el cual deberá publicarse en "La Gaceta" para entrar en vigencia. Las municipalidades revisarán y actualizarán anualmente estos precios y serán publicados por reglamento.
Cuando se trate de las omisiones incluidas en el párrafo transanterior de este artículo y la municipalidad haya conocido por cualquier medio la situación de peligro, la municipalidad está obligada a suplir la inacción del propietario, previa prevención al munícipe conforme al debido proceso y sin perjuicio de cobrar el precio indicado en el párrafo anterior. Si la municipalidad no la suple y por la omisión se causa daño a la salud, la integridad física o el patrimonio de terceros, el funcionario municipal omiso será responsable, solidariamente con el propietario o poseedor del inmueble, por los daños y perjuicios causados.
Artículo 76.- Cuando se incumplan las obligaciones dispuestas en el artículo anterior, la municipalidad cobrará trimestralmente con carácter de multa:
VI.- En el caso concreto, el recurrente reclama que en el Barrio San Martín de San Gabriel de Aserrí no existen aceras, situación que genera una serie de problemas para el amparado, quien es una persona no vidente. En su informe, las autoridades recurridas informan que tras realizar una visita al lugar antes mencionado, se pudo constatar que sólo algunos sectores cuentan con aceras; sin embargo explican que se encuentran imposibilitados para actuar, hasta tanto el amparado no señale los lugares en los que la falta de acera le genera un problema. Con vista en lo anterior, esta Sala considera que en el presente recurso se constata la alegada violación a los derechos fundamentales del amparado, pues del propio dicho de los recurridos se deduce que en varios sectores del Barrio San Martín no existen aceras, situación que constituye una violación no sólo a los derechos del amparado, sino también a la obligación de la Municipalidad recurrida de velar porque las calles del cantón cuenten con la infraestructura necesaria para garantizar el libre tránsito de las personas con discapacidad, tal y como lo dispone la Ley 7600 y el Código Municipal. Asimismo, conviene aclarar a los recurridos que no existe una obligación del amparado de informar cuales son los sitios en los que estima que la falta de aceras le genera un problema, esto, por cuanto la Municipalidad accionada no puede delegar en los administrados su obligación de fiscalizar y velar por el cumplimiento de la ley en los terrenos que forman parte de su jurisdicción. Así en razón de lo expuesto anteriormente, lo procedente es acoger el recurso planteado, como en efecto se hace.” Decisión en la que se insiste en que forma parte del derecho de igualdad de las personas con discapacidad la posibilidad de desplazarse en los espacios públicos sin obstáculos.
V.- Sobre el fondo. Como se estipula en el pronunciamiento parcialmente trascrito, la construcción de las aceras es primordialmente obligación de los propietarios de los distintos inmuebles, pero corresponde a las municipalidades fiscalizar que se cumpla ese deber, y eventualmente sustituir a los dueños, para luego recuperar esos montos. Por ello, se estima el amparo, ordenando a la Municipalidad de Flores, que de forma inmediata, inicie los trabajos para solucionar el problema generado por la falta de aceras en el sector Villa Lico de San Joaquín de Flores y, en las que correspondiere a propietarios o poseedores de bienes inmuebles, los aperciba para que inicien las obras necesarias en la acera frente a sus propiedades, ajustando las obras a las especificaciones contenidas en la Ley número 7600 y su reglamento. Lo anterior, sin perjuicio de que en caso de omisión del propietario o poseedor respectivo de cumplir las obligaciones señaladas, la Municipalidad de Flores supla los trabajos y aplique las multas correspondientes, de conformidad con lo dispuesto en los artículos 75 y 76 del Código Municipal.”
Document not found. Documento no encontrado.