State must protect life against floods caused by poor urban planningEstado debe tutelar la vida frente a inundaciones por mala planificación urbana

I.- Purpose of the appeal. The appellants allege that since last year their community has had serious flooding problems caused by inadequate or nonexistent channeling of waters, as well as by a perimeter wall built at the Ciudad Blanca residential complex. They point out that despite their repeated efforts, the respondent authorities have not been able to provide a solution to the problem.

III.- On the State's objective obligation to safeguard human life. Regarding this point, this Constitutional Court, in judgment No. 2003-011519 of 10:30 a.m. on October 10, 2003, recognized the following:

“(…) It has been usual for the right to life, frequently analyzed together with the right to physical integrity, to have been understood as a right of negative content, that is, its object was limited to the claim against the State that it (sic) refrain from carrying out actions aimed at eliminating the physical existence of persons, for example torture or the death penalty, or that it punish persons, public and private, who threaten the life and integrity of others, through the penal system; however, the current trend is to impose various positive duties on the State, in the sense that (sic) beyond not disturbing the physical existence of persons, it must act to safeguard their protection against the multiple dangers that threaten it, whether they come from actions of the State itself or from other persons, and even from nature itself. Hence, for example, environmental issues have become, at least in our country, a matter of constitutional importance, since the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment was elevated to the rank of a fundamental right. Now, it is necessary to clarify that the objective existence of a State obligation regarding the protection of the right to life does not inevitably entail a subjective right of individuals to demand, through judicial bodies, that a specific measure be taken, but it does entail the right to have suitable measures taken to safeguard that right, in the face of openly negligent conduct by public authorities. Thus, it is that (sic) the State acquires the obligation to regulate those areas of social life from which dangers may arise for the physical existence of the inhabitants of its territory, whether through law, regulations, agreements, or other measures related to administrative organization and procedures, and the subjective right of individuals to have this done diligently. Consequently, the possibility of judicially demanding, through the amparo appeal, a specific type of state service activity in fulfillment of its duty to protect the life and physical integrity of its inhabitants, is limited to the clear verification of an imminent danger against those rights of individuals, such that if, for example, a certain community considered it necessary to have a hospital for the care of its residents (or any other public work), it is not through the amparo appeal that this should be demanded but rather through previously established mechanisms and before the competent bodies and entities, which must attend to the petition and decide on its technical appropriateness, which does not necessarily imply a positive response. From which it follows that the intervention of the constitutional jurisdiction is only viable in the face of proven inaction by the State, through its competent bodies, in attending to the demands that the country's inhabitants make in exercise of their rights (…)”.

II.- On the actions of the Ministry of Health. On repeated occasions, this Chamber has indicated that it is the responsibility of the Ministry of Health to oversee and supervise the proper collection, treatment, and final disposal of stormwater, being the authority responsible for ordering those measures and provisions, ordinary and extraordinary, that are technically appropriate for the protection, conservation, and improvement of people's health and their right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, under the provisions of articles 21 and 50 of the Political Constitution in relation to article 2 of the Organic Law of the Ministry of Health and article 340 of the General Health Law. Therefore, the authorities of the Ministry of Health have the obligation to ensure the application and control of compliance with existing regulatory provisions on the matter and, for this purpose, they also have the police power granted to that Ministry to supervise the proper functioning of sewer systems, in order to avoid risks or damages to people's health or their right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment (see in this regard, judgments numbers 2008-009350 of eleven hours twenty-five minutes on June four, two thousand eight, 2008-010669 of sixteen hours fifty-five minutes on June twenty-six, two thousand eight, and 2009-000908 of thirteen hours thirty-four minutes on January twenty-three, two thousand nine, among others). Now, in the case under study, based on the report submitted to the Chamber by the Minister of Health and the evidence provided to the case file, the appellants' claim is considered accredited. Effectively, it is evident from the case file that, in response to complaints filed by residents of the area where the Ciudad Blanca Horizontal Condominium is located in Liberia, which highlighted serious flooding problems, officials from the Liberia Health Governing Area have conducted several on-site inspections and have been able to verify that in that sector of the city of Liberia, due to the flat topography of the land and the lack of a stormwater disposal system, during medium or high intensity rainfall events, the wall of that condominium acts as a dam, leading to water stagnation, recommending the construction of an adequate stormwater disposal system on public roads, as well as the channeling of waters reaching the wall towards the proposed system. Based on what the Ministry of Health officials observed during an inspection conducted in July two thousand nine, on the following July twenty-second, they proceeded to issue two health orders addressed to the Municipal Council President and the Mayor, both of the Municipality of Liberia, ordering them to submit a plan that included the construction of the recommended system, as well as the channeling of waters reaching the wall, because that Municipality granted authorization and a building permit for the aforementioned wall. The case file reveals various technical reports, including one issued by a Geologist from the Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, indicating that the wall surrounding the aforementioned condominium acts as a barrier to water movement, thereby worsening the flooding problem that already existed in the area due to that construction; therefore, the construction of an adequate stormwater disposal system on public roads is recommended, as well as the channeling of waters reaching the wall towards the proposed system, and the creation of more water evacuation outlets in the wall. It is recorded in the case file that, due to the climatological phenomena that occurred during two thousand ten, on April thirtieth and August tenth, new complaints were received by the Liberia Health Governing Area, in which residents complained of serious flooding, which were verified by Ministry of Health officials when conducting on-site inspections and verifying flooding of homes up to a height of forty-five centimeters one day and up to one meter on August tenth, as well as the tearing away of a portion of the wall in several sectors by the force of the water. Due to these recent events, the authorities of the Ministry of Health issued a health order to the owners of the Ciudad Blanca Horizontal Condominium residential complex, ordering them to halt the reconstruction of the wall until it can be guaranteed that this structure will not worsen flooding in the area. In accordance with what has been noted, the Chamber considers that although the actions of the Ministry of Health officials have been aimed at seeking solutions to the problem that has arisen in the area referred to by the appellants, the truth of the matter is that these actions have not been as forceful as required to ensure that the problem is definitively solved. It must be remembered that the Ministry of Health has a series of mechanisms granted by the legal system itself, which are not observed to have been used in this specific case, since if they had been, perhaps a definitive solution would have already been found. For these reasons, it is essential to declare the appeal with merit regarding the Ministry of Health, so that, in coordination with the competent institutions, it adopts the necessary measures to, within the scope of its powers, achieve a definitive solution to the problem denounced in this amparo.

III.- On the actions of the Municipality of Liberia. The competence of the municipal entity to administer the local interests and services of the canton of Liberia is unquestionable, as determined by the Political Constitution itself in its article 169, granting it municipal autonomy for this purpose (article 170 ibid). Although it is true that article 169 does not define or provide greater elements of judgment to definitively extract what should be understood by "local interests and services," the Chamber has previously stated that this is an indeterminate legal concept, such as "public order" or "good customs," to cite some that the Constitution also uses; however, the Chamber has also admitted that:

"…the power attributed to local governments to plan urban development within the limits of their territory does integrate the constitutional concept of 'local interests and services' referred to in article 169 of the Constitution (…)" (see among others, judgment number 5757-94 of fifteen hours three minutes on October four, nineteen ninety-four).

The constitutional regulations are developed in current legislation, and specifically, article 1 of the Construction Law clearly determines that the Municipalities of the Republic are responsible for ensuring that cities and other towns meet the necessary conditions of safety, health, and beauty in their public roads and in the buildings and constructions erected on their lands, without prejudice to the powers granted by law on these matters to other administrative bodies. Likewise, article 15 of the Urban Planning Law recognizes the competence and authority of municipal governments to plan and control urban development within the limits of their jurisdictional territory, and article 13 subsection g) of the Municipal Code indicates that it is the Council's duty to dictate urban planning measures. Similarly, it cannot be overlooked that the State, in this case specifically through the municipalities, has the obligation to regulate the areas of social life from which dangers may arise for the physical existence of the inhabitants of its territory, whether through law, regulations, agreements, or other measures related to administrative organization and procedures, and the subjective right of individuals to have this done diligently. Consequently, the possibility of judicially demanding, through the amparo appeal, a specific type of state service activity, in fulfillment of its duty to protect the life and physical integrity of its inhabitants, is limited to the clear verification of an imminent danger against those rights of individuals, from which it follows that the intervention of the constitutional jurisdiction is only viable in the face of proven inaction by the State, through its competent bodies, in attending to the demands that the country's inhabitants make in exercise of their rights (see in this regard judgment number 2005-01713 of fourteen hours fifty-three minutes on February twenty-three, two thousand five). The above evidently occurs in this specific case, with the arguments made by the appellants before this Chamber and which have been considered accredited. Effectively, as can be deduced from the account of proven facts, this Court has considered it demonstrated that in the area referred to by the appellants, serious flooding problems have been occurring, which have been aggravated by the construction of a perimeter wall at the Ciudad Blanca Horizontal Condominium, which has served as a dam that allows water stagnation, reaching the extreme that, in recent events, given the intensity of the rains that fell in previous April and August, caused part of that wall to collapse. Likewise, based on the documents in the case file, this Court observes that the constructions carried out in the area referred to by the appellants were carried out without stormwater infrastructure, curb and gutter, and with poor development and urban growth planning, this being, without a doubt, one of the reasons why serious flooding problems, as denounced, are now occurring. The sector presents stormwater evacuation problems. The Municipality of Liberia granted a building permit for the Ciudad Blanca Horizontal Condominium Project, in an area that is rural and whose use is restricted to agricultural activity; the area receives stormwater from other sectors of the city of Liberia, so the volumes of water received by the sector are of considerable proportions, and there is no adequate evacuation system to prevent flooding; the lack of an adequate evacuation system and the construction of the perimeter wall of the Ciudad Blanca Horizontal Condominium project could intensify flooding of the surrounding lands and homes; and homes built within the right-of-way of public roads, which are prohibited by article 28 of the General Law of Public Roads, were observed. Given this scenario, it is evident that the Municipality of Liberia bears great responsibility for the denounced facts, its performance even being considered negligent by this Court because, despite having been aware of the situation and the technical criteria issued in this regard, it has allowed not only the construction of several buildings in that area but has also done so without foreseeing the consequences that could arise and without obligating the interested parties, in a forceful and responsible manner, to adopt preventive measures to avoid what is now occurring, which is that when heavy rains fall, those areas, which are already inherently prone to flooding, become flooded. While it is true that it has been indicated under oath that measures have recently been adopted to mitigate the problem, which has been attempted through the construction of stormwater drainage channels to drain waters from the micro-watershed, it is also true that these measures have not yielded the desired result. Effectively, the opposite has occurred, for had such channels functioned as expected, on the past August tenth, the flooding of several homes in the area would not have occurred, since the water, as reported by the authorities of the Ministry of Health, not only knocked down another part of the aforementioned wall but also reached a height greater than one meter at some points, thereby causing not only damage to the material property of the families involved but also seriously endangering their lives at that moment, and also after the event, since it is no secret to anyone that these types of natural situations produce environmental contamination and subsequently the proliferation of mosquitoes, which ultimately translates into an ideal environment for the development of the mosquito that transmits dengue; a disease that has been a serious problem in the Guanacaste area.

IV.- For these reasons, it is evident that, in the opinion of this Court, there has been a lack of diligence on the part of the Municipality of Liberia, so the amparo must also be granted with merit regarding this entity, because its actions and omissions have fostered situations that, combined with the effects of nature, place the appellants and other residents of the area in the situation they are in. From this perspective, for the Chamber it is not acceptable that if the Municipality of Liberia has been aware of the particular conditions present in the area referred to by the appellants, it has allowed the development of populations and housing infrastructure, and even worse, that it has tolerated this without compliance with minimum requirements such as stormwater infrastructure, curb and gutter, among others, which it even admits under oath by affirming that there has been "poor development and urban growth planning," without the excuse being acceptable that this is not the direct responsibility of that Municipality, as is also argued under oath, because it is evident that, in light of the jurisprudence established by this Chamber and current regulations, this undoubtedly relates to the administration of local interests and services; a municipal competence that is unquestionable, as determined by the Political Constitution itself in its article 169, granting it municipal autonomy for this purpose (article 170 ibid). Let the municipal authorities remember that, for the execution of their functions, the legal system grants them instruments and mechanisms to provide the greatest security and tranquility to the citizens, especially considering that these types of problems, in addition to generating disruptions to the security and tranquility of people, can also become a serious public health matter regarding which it is essential to adopt concrete actions for its elimination. For these reasons, this appeal is the appropriate and necessary means to compel the respondent bodies of the Municipality of Liberia to expeditiously fulfill their obligation, which is why it must be granted with merit, and the appropriate course of action is to order the President of the Municipal Council and the Mayor to, in coordination with other institutions and within the scope of their powers, proceed immediately to adopt the necessary measures to provide a definitive solution to the problem denounced by the appellants.

V.- On the actions of the Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias. From the report submitted by the President of the Comisión Nacional de Emergencias, it is evident that regarding the alleged situation, said body – in exercise of its powers – has undertaken the task of issuing the corresponding technical reports and studies on the prevention and mitigation measures recommended in this case, which must be complied with by the parties involved. Based on the above, the Court does not find that actions or omissions by the Commission have caused any violation of the fundamental rights of the local population.

**II.- On the actions of the Ministry of Health.** On repeated occasions, this Chamber has indicated that it is the responsibility of the Ministry of Health to oversee and supervise the proper collection, treatment, and final disposal of stormwater (aguas pluviales), being the authority responsible for ordering those ordinary and extraordinary measures and provisions that are technically appropriate for the protection, conservation, and improvement of people's health and their right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, under the protection of the provisions of Articles 21 and 50 of the Political Constitution in relation to Article 2 of the Organic Law of the Ministry of Health and Article 340 of the General Health Law. Therefore, the authorities of the Ministry of Health have the obligation to ensure the application and control of compliance with the existing regulatory provisions on the matter and, for this purpose, they also have the police power with which that Ministry has been endowed, to supervise the proper functioning of sewer systems (alcantarillado), in order to avoid risks or damage to people's health or their right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment (see in this regard, rulings number 2008-009350 of eleven hours twenty-five minutes on June fourth, two thousand eight, 2008-010669 of sixteen hours fifty-five minutes on June twenty-sixth, two thousand eight, and 2009-000908 of thirteen hours thirty-four minutes on January twenty-third, two thousand nine, among others). Now then, in the case under study, based on the report rendered to the Chamber by the Minister of Health and the evidence provided in the case file (expediente), the claims of the appellants are considered accredited. Indeed, it emerges from the case file that, in response to complaints filed by residents of the area where the Ciudad Blanca Horizontal Condominium is located in Liberia, which highlighted the serious flooding problems, officials from the Liberia Health Area (Área Rectora de Salud de Liberia) have carried out several inspections at the site and have been able to verify that, in that sector of the city of Liberia, due to the flat topography of the land and the lack of a stormwater disposal system, during moderate or high-intensity rainfall events, the perimeter wall (tapia) of that condominium acts as a dam, resulting in water ponding (estancamiento de las aguas), recommending the construction of an adequate stormwater disposal system in the public roads, as well as the channeling of water reaching the wall towards the proposed system. Based on what Ministry of Health officials observed during an inspection carried out in July two thousand nine, on the following July twenty-second, they proceeded to issue two health orders (órdenes sanitarias) addressed to the President of the Municipal Council (Concejo Municipal) and the Mayor (Alcalde), both of the Municipality of Liberia, in which they ordered them to present a plan contemplating the construction of the recommended system, as well as the channeling of the water reaching the wall, this because that Municipality granted authorization and a construction permit for the said wall. The case file reveals various technical reports, among them one issued by a Geologist from the Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, which indicate that the wall surrounding the mentioned condominium acts as a barrier to water mobilization, whereby the flooding problem already present in the location is exacerbated by that construction, which is why the construction of an adequate stormwater disposal system in the public roads is recommended, as well as the channeling of water reaching the wall towards the proposed system, and the creation of more water evacuation outlets in the wall. It is on record in the case file that, due to the climatological phenomena that occurred during two thousand ten, on April thirtieth and August tenth, new complaints were received at the Liberia Health Area, in which residents complained of serious flooding, which was verified by Ministry of Health officials when conducting an inspection at the site and verifying flooding of homes up to a height of forty-five centimeters one day and up to one meter on August tenth, as well as a part of the wall having been torn off in several sectors by the force of the water. Due to these recent events, the authorities of the Ministry of Health issued a health order to the owners of the Ciudad Blanca Horizontal Condominium residential complex, in which they were ordered to halt the reconstruction of the wall until it can be guaranteed that this structure will not represent an aggravation of the flooding in the area. In accordance with what has been noted, the Chamber considers that although the actions of the Ministry of Health officials have been aimed at seeking solutions to the problem that has arisen in the area referred to by the appellants, the truth of the matter is that it has not been as forceful as is required, in order for the problem to be definitively solved. It must be remembered that the Ministry of Health has a series of mechanisms granted by the legal system itself, which are not observed to have been used in the specific case, because if they had been, perhaps a definitive solution would have already been found. For these reasons, it is essential to grant the appeal (recurso) with respect to the Ministry of Health, so that, in a coordinated manner with the competent institutions, it adopts the measures that are necessary so that, within the scope of its powers, a definitive solution can be provided to the problem denounced in this amparo (recurso de amparo).

**III.-** **On the actions of the Municipality of Liberia.** The competence of the municipal entity to administer the local interests and services of the canton of Liberia is unquestionable, as determined by the Political Constitution itself in its Article 169, granting it municipal autonomy for that purpose (Article 170 ibid). Although it is true that Article 169 does not define nor provide major elements of judgment to definitively extract what should be understood by "local interests and services", the Chamber has already stated on other occasions that it is an indeterminate legal concept, such as those of "public order" or "good customs", to cite a few that the Constitution also uses; however, the Chamber has also admitted that:

"…the power attributed to local governments to plan urban development within the limits of their territory does form part of the constitutional concept of 'local interests and services' referred to in Article 169 of the Constitution (…)" (see among others, ruling number 5757-94 of fifteen hours three minutes on October fourth, nineteen ninety-four).

The constitutional regulations are further developed in current legislation and specifically, Article 1 of the Construction Law (Ley de Construcciones) clearly determines that the Municipalities of the Republic are responsible for ensuring that cities and other towns meet the necessary conditions of safety, health (salubridad), and beauty in their public roads and in the buildings and constructions erected on their lands, without prejudice to the powers that the laws grant in these matters to other administrative bodies. Likewise, Article 15 of the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana) recognizes the competence and authority of municipal governments to plan and control urban development within the limits of their jurisdictional territory, and Article 13 subsection g) of the Municipal Code (Código Municipal) indicates that it is among the powers of the Council (Concejo) to dictate urban planning measures. Similarly, it cannot be ignored that the State, in this case specifically through the municipalities, has the obligation to regulate the areas of social life from which dangers may arise for the physical existence of the inhabitants of its territory, whether through law, regulations, agreements, or other measures related to administrative organization and procedures, and the subjective right of individuals to have this done diligently. Consequently, the possibility of judicially demanding, through the amparo appeal, a specific type of service-providing activity from the State, in compliance with its duty to protect the life and physical integrity of its inhabitants, is restricted to the clear verification of an imminent danger against those rights of individuals, from which it follows that the intervention of the constitutional jurisdiction is only viable in the face of proven inaction by the State, through its competent bodies, in addressing the demands that the country's inhabitants make in exercise of their rights (see in this regard ruling number 2005-01713 of fourteen hours fifty-three minutes on February twenty-third, two thousand five). The foregoing is evidently what is happening in the specific case, with the claims formulated by the appellants before this Chamber and which have been considered accredited. Indeed, as emerges from the account of proven facts, this Court has held it as demonstrated that in the area referred to by the appellants, serious flooding problems have been occurring, which have been aggravated by the construction of a perimeter wall (tapia perimetral) at the Ciudad Blanca Horizontal Condominium, which has served as a dam that allows water ponding, to the extreme that, in recent events, given the intensity of the rainfall in April and August of the previous year, they caused part of that wall to collapse. Likewise, from the documents in the case file, this Court observes that the constructions carried out in the area referred to by the appellants have been executed without stormwater infrastructure (infraestructura pluvial), curb and gutter (cordón y caño), with poor development and urban growth planning, this being, without a doubt, one of the reasons why the serious flooding problems being denounced are now occurring. The sector presents problems with stormwater evacuation (evacuación de aguas pluviales). The Municipality of Liberia granted a construction permit for the Ciudad Blanca Horizontal Condominium Project, in an area that is rural and whose use is restricted to agricultural activity; the area receives stormwater from other sectors of the city of Liberia, meaning the volumes of water received by the sector are of considerable proportions, and there is no adequate evacuation system to prevent flooding from occurring; the lack of an adequate evacuation system and the construction of the perimeter wall of the Ciudad Blanca Horizontal Condominium project could intensify the flooding of the surrounding lands and homes; and homes built within the public road right-of-way (derecho de vía) were observed, which are prohibited by Article 28 of the General Law of Public Roads (Ley General de Caminos Públicos). Given this panorama, it is evident that the Municipality of Liberia has great responsibility for the facts denounced, this Court even considering that its performance has been negligent because, despite having been aware of the situation and the technical criteria issued in this regard, it has allowed not only the building of several constructions in that area but has also done so without foreseeing the consequences that could arise and without compelling the interested parties, in a forceful and responsible manner, to adopt preventive measures to avoid what is now happening, which is that when heavy rains fall, those areas that, by their very nature, are already prone to flooding, become flooded. Although it is true that, under oath, it has been indicated that measures have recently been adopted to mitigate the problem, which has been attempted through the construction of stormwater drainage channels (canales de desfogue pluvial) to drain the waters of the micro-watershed (microcuenca), it is also true that these measures have not yielded the desired result. Indeed, the opposite has happened, because if such channels had functioned as expected, last August tenth, the flooding (anegamiento) of several homes in the area would not have occurred, since the water, as reported by the authorities of the Ministry of Health, not only knocked down another part of the said wall but also reached a height greater than one meter in some points, thereby causing not only damage to the material goods of the families involved but also seriously endangering their lives at that moment, but also after the event, because it is no secret to anyone that this type of natural situation produces contamination of the environment and subsequently proliferation of mosquitoes which, in the end, translates into an ideal environment for the development of the mosquito that transmits dengue; a disease that has been a serious problem in the Guanacaste area.

**IV.-** For these reasons, it is evident that, in the opinion of this Court, there has been a lack of diligence on the part of the Municipality of Liberia, for which reason the amparo must also be granted with respect to this entity, because with its actions and omissions, situations have been fostered that, coupled with the effects of nature, place the appellants and other residents of the area in the situation in which they find themselves. Under this perspective, it is not acceptable to the Chamber that if the Municipality of Liberia has been aware of the particular conditions presented by the area referred to by the appellants, it allowed the development of populations and housing infrastructure, and even worse, that it tolerated it without the fulfillment of minimum requirements such as stormwater infrastructure, curb and gutters, among others, which it even accepts under oath by affirming that there has been "poor development and urban growth planning", without it being an excuse that this is not the direct responsibility of that Municipality, as is also argued under oath, because it is evident that, in light of the jurisprudence established by this Chamber and the current regulations, this undoubtedly refers to the administration of local interests and services; a municipal competence that is unquestionable, as determined by the Political Constitution itself in its Article 169, granting it municipal autonomy for that purpose (Article 170 ibid). The municipal authorities should remember that, for the execution of their functions, the legal system grants them instruments and mechanisms in order to provide the greatest security and tranquility to the citizens (municipes), especially if one takes into account that this type of problem, in addition to generating disruptions to people's security and tranquility, can also become a serious public health matter with respect to which it is essential to adopt concrete actions for its elimination. For these reasons, this appeal is the appropriate and necessary means to compel the respondents from the Municipality of Liberia to comply with their obligation promptly, which is why it must be granted, the appropriate course being to order the President of the Municipal Council and the Mayor, in a coordinated manner with other institutions and within the scope of their powers, to immediately proceed to adopt the measures that are necessary to provide a definitive solution to the problem denounced by the appellants.

**V.-** **On the actions of the Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias.** From the report rendered by the President of the Comisión Nacional de Emergencias, it emerges that regarding the alleged situation, said body – in exercise of its powers – has undertaken the task of issuing the corresponding technical reports and studies on the prevention and mitigation measures recommended in this case, which must be complied with by the involved parties.

Based on the foregoing, the Tribunal does not find that actions or omissions by the Commission have produced any breach of the fundamental rights of the local population." </span><o:p></o:p></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=ES-CR style='mso-ansi-language:ES-CR'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p> </div> </body> </html> While it is true that, under oath, it has been indicated that measures have recently been adopted to mitigate the problem, which has been attempted through the construction of stormwater drainage channels (canales de desfogue pluvial) to drain the waters of the micro-watershed (microcuenca), it is also true that these measures have not yielded the desired result. Indeed, the opposite has occurred, for had such channels functioned as expected, this past August tenth would not have seen the flooding (anegamiento) of several homes in the area, given that the water, as reported by the authorities of the Ministry of Health, not only knocked down another part of the aforementioned wall (tapia) but also reached a height exceeding one meter at some points, thereby causing not only damage to the material property of the involved families but also placing their lives in serious danger at that moment, and also after the event, since it is no secret that these types of natural situations produce environmental contamination and subsequently a proliferation of mosquitoes which, ultimately, translates into an ideal environment for the development of the mosquito that transmits dengue; a disease that has been a serious problem in the Guanacaste zone.

**IV.-** For these reasons, it is evident that, in this Court's opinion, there has been a lack of diligence on the part of the Municipality of Liberia, for which the amparo action must be granted also with respect to this entity, as its actions and omissions have fostered situations that, combined with the effects of nature, place the petitioners and other neighbors of the zone in the situation in which they find themselves. From this perspective, it is not acceptable to this Chamber that if the Municipality of Liberia has been aware of the particular conditions presented by the zone to which the petitioners refer, it has permitted the development of populations and housing infrastructure, and even worse, that it would have tolerated it without compliance with minimum requirements such as stormwater infrastructure (infraestructura pluvial), curbs and gutters (cordón y caños), among others, which it even admits under oath by affirming that there has been "poor development and urban growth planning," without the excuse that this is not the direct responsibility of that Municipality, as is also argued under oath, because it is evident that, in light of the jurisprudence established by this Chamber and the current regulations, this is without a doubt related to the administration of local interests and services; a municipal competence that is unquestionable, as determined by the Political Constitution itself in its Article 169, granting it for that purpose municipal autonomy (Article 170 ibid). Let the municipal authorities remember that, for the execution of their functions, the legal system grants them instruments and mechanisms for the sake of providing the greatest security and tranquility to the residents (munícipes), especially considering that these types of problems, in addition to generating disturbances for the security and tranquility of individuals, can also become a serious public health matter with respect to which it is essential to adopt concrete actions for its elimination. For these reasons, this remedy (recurso) is the appropriate and necessary means to compel the respondent authorities of the Municipality of Liberia to promptly fulfill their obligation, which is why it must be granted, and the proper course is to order the President of the Municipal Council and the Mayor to, in coordination with other institutions and within the scope of their competencies, proceed immediately to adopt such measures as may be necessary to provide a definitive solution to the problem denounced by the petitioners.

**V.-** **Regarding the actions of the National Commission for Risk Prevention and Emergency Response (Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias).** From the report issued by the President of the National Emergency Commission (Comisión Nacional de Emergencias), it follows that regarding the alleged situation, said body –in exercise of its competencies– has undertaken the task of issuing the corresponding reports and technical studies on the prevention and mitigation measures recommended in this case, which must be complied with by the involved parties. Based on the foregoing, the Court does not find that any actions or omissions of the Commission have caused any violation of the fundamental rights of the population of that place.

“ I.- Objeto del recurso. Alegan los recurrentes que desde el año anterior su comunidad tiene serios problemas de inundaciones causadas por la inadecuada o inexistente canalización de las aguas, así como por una tapia perimetral construida en el residencial Ciudad Blanca. Señalan que pese a sus reiteradas gestiones, las autoridades recurridas no han sido capaces de dar una solución al problema.

III.- Sobre la obligación objetiva del estado de tutelar la vida humana. En cuanto a este extremo, este Tribunal Constitucional, en la sentencia No. 2003-011519 de las 10:30 hrs. del 10 de octubre de 2003, reconoció lo siguiente:

“(…)Ha sido usual que el derecho a la vida, frecuentemente analizado conjuntamente con el derecho a la integridad física, haya sido entendido como un derecho de contenido negativo, es decir, su objeto se limitaba a la pretensión contra el Estado de que (sic) se abstuviera de realizar acciones dirigidas a eliminar la existencia física de las personas, por ejemplo la tortura o la pena de muerte, o bien que castigara a las personas, públicas y privadas, que atentaran contra la vida e integridad de los otros, a través del sistema penal; sin embargo, la tendencia actual es imponer al Estado diversas conductas positivas, en el sentido de que (sic) más allá de que (sic) no debe perturbar la existencia física de las personas debe actuar en tutela de su protección, ante los múltiples peligros que la acechan, bien sea que ellos provengan de acciones del Estado mismo o de otras personas, e inclusive, de la misma naturaleza. De ahí que, por ejemplo, los temas ambientales han pasado a ser, al menos en nuestro país, un asunto de índole constitucional, puesto que el derecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado fue elevado a rango de derecho fundamental. Ahora bien, es menester aclarar que la existencia objetiva de una obligación del Estado en lo referente a la protección del derecho a la vida no apareja, ineludiblemente, un derecho subjetivo de las personas a exigir, a través de los organismos judiciales, que se tome una medida determinada, pero sí a que se tomen las medidas idóneas en tutela de ese derecho, ante actitudes abiertamente negligentes de las autoridades públicas. Se trata así de que (sic) el Estado adquiere la obligación de regular las áreas de la vida social de las cuales puedan surgir peligros para la existencia física de los habitantes de su territorio, ya sea través de la ley, de reglamentos, de acuerdos o de otras medidas relacionadas con la organización y los procedimientos administrativos, y del derecho subjetivo de las personas a que así se proceda, en forma diligente. En consecuencia, la posibilidad de exigir judicialmente, a través del recurso de amparo, un tipo específico de actividad prestacional por parte del Estado en cumplimiento de su deber de protección a la vida e integridad física de sus habitantes, es restringida a la clara verificación de un peligro inminente contra esos derechos de las personas, de forma tal que si por ejemplo, una determinada comunidad estimara necesario contar con un hospital para la atención de sus pobladores (o de cualquier otra obra pública), no es por la vía del amparo que se debe exigir sino a través de los mecanismos previamente establecidos y ante los órganos y entes competentes, quienes deberán atender la petición y resolver su procedencia técnica, que no implica necesariamente una respuesta positiva. De lo que se desprende que la injerencia de la jurisdicción constitucional solamente es viable ante la inercia comprobada del Estado, a través de sus órganos competentes, en atender las demandas que en ejercicio de sus derechos realicen los habitantes del país (…)”.

II.- Sobre la actuación del Ministerio de Salud. En reiteradas ocasiones esta Sala ha señalado que le corresponde al Ministerio de Salud velar y fiscalizar por la debida recolección, tratamiento y disposición final de las aguas pluviales, siendo la autoridad responsable de ordenar aquéllas medidas y disposiciones, ordinarias y extraordinarias, que técnicamente procedan en protección, conservación y mejoramiento de la salud de las personas y de su derecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado, al amparo de lo dispuesto en los artículos 21 y 50 de la Constitución Política en relación con el artículo 2 de la Ley Orgánica del Ministerio de Salud y el artículo 340 de la Ley General de Salud. Tienen entonces, las autoridades del Ministerio de Salud, la obligación de velar por la aplicación y el control del cumplimiento de las disposiciones normativas existentes en la materia y para ello además cuentan con el poder de policía, de que se ha dotado a ese Ministerio, para fiscalizar el debido funcionamiento de los sistemas de alcantarillado, en aras de evitar riesgos o daños a la salud de las personas o a su derecho a disfrutar de un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado (ver en ese sentido, sentencias números 2008-009350 de las once horas veinticinco minutos del cuatro de junio del dos mil ocho, 2008-010669 de las dieciséis horas cincuenta y cinco minutos del veintiséis de junio del dos mil ocho y 2009-000908 de las trece horas treinta y cuatro minutos del veintitrés de enero del dos mil nueve, entre otras). Ahora bien, en el caso bajo estudio, a partir del informe rendido a la Sala por la Ministra de Salud y de las pruebas aportadas al expediente, se tiene por acreditado el dicho de los recurrentes. Efectivamente, de autos se desprende que ante denuncias presentadas por vecinos de la zona donde se ubica el Condominio Horizontal Ciudad Blanca en Liberia, en las que se ponía en evidencia los serios problemas de inundaciones, los funcionarios del Área Rectora de Salud de Liberia, han realizado varias inspecciones en el sitio y han podido comprobar que en ese sector de la ciudad de Liberia, debido a la topografía plana de los terrenos y a la inexistencia de un sistema de disposición de aguas pluviales, ante eventos lluviosos de mediana o alta intensidad, la tapia de ese condominio actúa como una represa que redunda en un estancamiento de las aguas, recomendándose la construcción de un sistema adecuado de disposición de aguas pluviales en las vías públicas, así como el encauzamiento de las aguas que llegan a la tapia, hacia el sistema propuesto. A partir de lo que observaron los funcionarios del Ministerio de Salud, en inspección que realizaron en julio del dos mil nueve, procedieron el veintidós de julio siguiente, a emitir dos órdenes sanitarias dirigidas al Presidente del Concejo Municipal y al Alcalde, ambos de la Municipalidad de Liberia, en las cuales les ordenaban la presentación de un plan que contemple la construcción del sistema recomendado, así como el encauzamiento de la aguas que llegan a la tapia, ello por cuanto, esa Municipalidad otorgó autorización y permiso de construcción para la citada tapia. Del expediente se desprenden sendos informes técnicos, entre ellos el emitido por una Geóloga de la Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, que indican que la tapia que rodea al citado condominio, actúa como una barrera para la movilización de las aguas, con lo cual el problema de inundaciones que ya se presentaba en el lugar, se acrecienta con esa construcción por lo que se recomienda, la construcción de un sistema adecuado de disposición de aguas pluviales en las vías públicas, así como el encauzamiento de las aguas que llegan a la tapia, hacia el sistema propuesto, y la realización de más salidas de evacuación de aguas en la tapia. Consta en autos, que debido a los fenómenos climatológicos que se han presentado durante el dos mil diez, el treinta de abril y el diez de agosto, se recibieron nuevas denuncias en el Área Rectora de Liberia, en las cuales los vecinos se quejaban de serias inundaciones, las cuales fueron constatadas por funcionarios del Ministerio de Salud, al realizar inspección en el sitio y verificar inundación de viviendas hasta una altura de cuarenta y cinco centímetros un día y hasta un metro el diez de agosto, así como el haberse arrancado una parte de la tapia en varios sectores por la fuerza del agua. Debido a estos recientes acontecimientos, las autoridades del Ministerio de Salud, giraron orden sanitaria a los propietarios del residencial Condominio Horizontal Ciudad Blanca, en la cual se ordenó que paralicen la reconstrucción de la tapia, hasta que se logre garantizar que esa estructura no va a representar un agravamiento en las inundaciones en la zona. De acuerdo con lo apuntado, considera la Sala que si bien la actuación de los funcionarios del Ministerio de Salud ha estado dirigida a buscar soluciones a la problemática que se ha presentado en la zona a la que se refieren los recurrentes, lo cierto del caso es que no ha sido todo lo contundente que se requiere, en aras de que el problema sea solucionado de manera definitiva. Recuérdese que el Ministerio de Salud, cuenta con una serie de mecanismos que le otorga el propio ordenamiento jurídico, los cuales no se observa que hayan sido utilizados en el caso concreto, pues de haberlo hecho, talvez ya se habría logrado encontrar una solución definitiva. Por tales razones, se hace indispensable declarar con lugar el recurso respecto del Ministerio de Salud, en aras de que, de manera coordinada con las instituciones que sean competentes, adopte las medidas que sean necesarias para que, dentro del ámbito de sus competencias, se logre dar una solución definitiva a la problemática denunciada en este amparo.

III.- Sobre la actuación de la Municipalidad de Liberia. Es incuestionable la competencia del ente municipal para administrar los intereses y servicios locales del cantón de Liberia, tal y como lo determina la misma Constitución Política en su artículo 169, otorgándole para tal efecto autonomía municipal (artículo 170 ibíd). Si bien es cierto el artículo 169 no define ni da mayores elementos de juicio como para extraer, en forma definitiva, lo que debe entenderse por "intereses y servicios locales", ya la Sala en otras oportunidades ha dicho, que se trata de un concepto jurídico indeterminado como lo son el de "orden público" o el de "buenas costumbres", por citar algunos que también la Constitución utiliza; sin embargo, la Sala además ha admitido que:

"…la potestad atribuida a los gobiernos locales para planificar el desarrollo urbano dentro de los límites de su territorio sí integra el concepto constitucional de "intereses y servicios locales" a que hace referencia el artículo 169 de la Constitución (…)" (ver entre otras, sentencia número 5757-94 de las quince horas tres minutos del cuatro de octubre de mil novecientos noventa y cuatro).

La normativa constitucional encuentra desarrollo en la legislación vigente y específicamente, el artículo 1 de la Ley de Construcciones claramente determina que son las Municipalidades de la República, las encargadas de que las ciudades y demás poblaciones, reúnan las condiciones necesarias de seguridad, salubridad y belleza en sus vías públicas y en los edificios y construcciones que en terrenos de las mismas se levanten, sin perjuicio de las facultades que las leyes conceden en estas materias a otros órganos administrativos. Asimismo, el artículo 15 de la Ley de Planificación Urbana reconoce la competencia y autoridad de los gobiernos municipales para planificar y controlar el desarrollo urbano, dentro de los límites de su territorio jurisdiccional, y el artículo 13 inciso g) del Código Municipal señala que son atribuciones del Concejo, dictar las medidas de ordenamiento urbano. De igual manera, no puede dejarse de lado que el Estado, en este caso específicamente a través de las municipalidades, tiene la obligación de regular las áreas de la vida social de las cuales puedan surgir peligros para la existencia física de los habitantes de su territorio, ya sea a través de la ley, de reglamentos, de acuerdos o de otras medidas relacionadas con la organización y los procedimientos administrativos, y del derecho subjetivo de las personas a que así se proceda, en forma diligente. En consecuencia, la posibilidad de exigir, judicialmente, a través del recurso de amparo, un tipo específico de actividad prestacional por parte del Estado, en cumplimiento de su deber de protección a la vida e integridad física de sus habitantes, es restringida a la clara verificación de un peligro inminente contra esos derechos de las personas, de lo que se desprende que la injerencia de la jurisdicción constitucional solamente es viable ante la inercia comprobada del Estado, a través de sus órganos competentes, en atender las demandas que en ejercicio de sus derechos realicen los habitantes del país (ver en ese sentido sentencia número 2005-01713 de las catorce horas cincuenta y tres minutos del veintitrés de febrero del dos mil cinco). Lo anterior, es evidente que ocurre en el caso concreto, con los planteamientos que formulan los recurrentes ante esta Sala y que se han tenido por acreditados. Efectivamente, como se desprende de la relación de hechos probados, este Tribunal ha tenido por demostrado que en la zona a la que se refieren los recurrentes, se han venido presentando serios problemas de inundaciones que se han agravado con la construcción que se hizo de una tapia perimetral en el Condominio Horizontal Ciudad Blanca, la cual ha servido como represa que permite el estancamiento de aguas, llegándose al extremo de que, en recientes acontecimientos, dada la intensidad de las lluvias caídas en abril y agosto anteriores, provocaron que parte de esa tapia colapsara. De igual manera, a partir de los documentos que constan en el a la que se refieren los recurrentes, se han realizado sin infraestructura pluvial, cordón y caño, con mala planificación de desarrollo y crecimiento urbano, siendo ello, sin duda alguna, una de las razones por las cuales ahora, se están presentando los serios problemas de inundaciones que se denuncian. El sector presenta problemas de evacuación de aguas pluviales. La Municipalidad de Liberia otorgó permiso de construcción al Proyecto Condominio Horizontal Ciudad Blanca, en una zona que es rural y su uso se restringe a la actividad agropecuaria; que la zona recibe las aguas pluviales provenientes de otros sectores de la ciudad de Liberia, por lo que los volúmenes de agua que recibe el sector, es de proporciones considerables y no existe un sistema de evacuación adecuado que impida que se generen inundaciones; que la falta de un sistema de evacuación adecuado y la construcción de la tapia perimetral del proyecto Condominio Horizontal Ciudad Blanca, podría intensificar las inundaciones de los terrenos y viviendas aledañas; y que se observaron viviendas construidas en el derecho de vía de los caminos públicos y que se prohíben en el artículo 28 de la Ley General de Caminos Públicos. Ante este panorama, es evidente que la Municipalidad de Liberia, tiene una gran responsabilidad en los hechos denunciados, considerándose inclusive por parte de este Tribunal, que su desempeño ha sido negligente pues a pesar de que ha tenido conocimiento de la situación y de los criterios técnicos emitidos al respecto, ha permitido no solo la edificación de varias construcciones en esa zona sino también que lo ha hecho, sin prever las consecuencias que de ello se podían derivar y sin obligar a los interesados, de manera contundente y responsable, a adoptar medidas preventivas para evitar lo que ahora está ocurriendo, que cuando caen fuertes lluvias, se inunden esas zonas que, ya de por sí, por su naturaleza, son propensas a las inundaciones. Si bien es cierto, bajo juramento se ha indicado que recientemente, se han adoptado medidas para mitigar el problema, lo cual se ha intentado hacer a través de la construcción de canales de desfogue pluvial, para drenar las aguas de la microcuenca, también es lo cierto, que esas medidas no han dado el resultado deseado. Efectivamente, ha pasado lo contrario, pues de haber funcionado tales canales como se esperaba, el pasado diez de agosto, no se hubiera presentado el anegamiento de varias viviendas en la zona, ya que el agua, según lo informaron las autoridades del Ministerio de Salud, no solo tiró al suelo otra parte de la citada tapia, sino que alcanzó una altura mayor a un metro en algunos puntos, ocasionándose con ello, no sólo la afectación de bienes materiales de las familias involucradas sino también, poniéndose en serio peligro sus vidas en ese momento, pero también posterior al evento, pues para nadie es un secreto que este tipo de situaciones naturales, producen contaminación al ambiente y luego proliferación de zancudos que, al final de cuentas, se traduce en un ambiente ideal para el desarrollo del mosquito transmisor del dengue; enfermedad que ha sido un serio problema en la zona de Guanacaste.

IV.- Por tales razones, resulta evidente que, en criterio de este Tribunal, ha existido una falta de diligencia de la Municipalidad de Liberia, por lo cual el amparo debe ser estimado también respecto de este ente, pues con sus actuaciones y omisiones, se han propiciado situaciones que, aunadas a los efectos de la naturaleza, colocan a los recurrentes y demás vecinos de la zona, en la situación en la que se encuentran. Bajo esta perspectiva, para la Sala no es aceptable que si la Municipalidad de Liberia ha tenido conocimiento, de las condiciones particulares que presenta la zona a la que se refieren los recurrentes, haya permitido el desarrollo de poblaciones e infraestructura habitacional y peor aún, que lo hubiera tolerado sin el cumplimiento de requisitos mínimos como son la infraestructura pluvial, cordón y caños, entre otros, lo cual inclusive, aceptan bajo juramento al afirmar que se ha dado una “mala planificación de desarrollo y crecimiento urbano”, sin que para ello sea excusa el que ello no es responsabilidad directa de esa Municipalidad como también se argumenta bajo juramento, pues es evidente que, a la luz de la jurisprudencia sentada por esta Sala y de la normativa vigente, ello sin duda alguna está referido a la administración de los intereses y servicios locales; competencia municipal que es incuestionable, tal y como lo determina la misma Constitución Política en su artículo 169, otorgándole para tal efecto autonomía municipal (artículo 170 ibíd). Recuerden las autoridades municipales que, para la ejecución de sus funciones, el ordenamiento jurídico les otorga instrumentos y mecanismos en aras de brindar la mayor seguridad y tranquilidad a los munícipes, sobre todo si se toma en cuenta que este tipo de problemas, además de que generan trastornos para la seguridad y tranquilidad de las personas, también se pueden convertir en un asunto grave de salud pública respecto del cual es indispensable adoptar acciones concretas para su eliminación. Por tales razones, este recurso es el medio adecuado y necesario para obligar a los recurridos de la Municipalidad de Liberia, a cumplir con celeridad su obligación, motivo por el cual debe ser estimado, siendo lo procedente es ordenar al Presidente del Concejo Municipal y al Alcalde, que de manera coordinada con otras instituciones y dentro del ámbito de sus competencias, procedan de manera inmediata a adoptar las medidas que sean necesarias, para brindarle una solución definitiva al problema denunciado por los recurrentes.

V.- Sobre la actuación de la Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgosy Atención de Emergencias. Del informe rendido por Presidenta de la Comisión Nacional de Emergencias, se desprende que referente a la situación alegada, dicho órgano –en ejercicio de sus competencias- se ha dado a la tarea de emitir los informes y estudios técnicos correspondientes sobre las medidas de prevención y mitigación que se recomiendan en este caso, las cuales deben ser acatadas por las partes involucradas. A partir de lo anterior, no encuentra el Tribunal que actuaciones u omisiones de la Comisión hayan producido quebranto alguno a los derechos fundamentales de la población del lugar.”