Dismissal of abandonment motion due to difficulties of elderly foreigner proving identityImprocedencia de deserción ante dificultades de adulto mayor extranjero para acreditar identidad

**IV.-** The procedural mechanism known as dismissal for want of prosecution (deserción) applies in agrarian matters in those cases where, due to the inertia or disinterest of the plaintiff, over a minimum period of three months, the proceeding cannot continue its course in the proper manner (articles 212 to 217 of the Civil Procedure Code, applied supplementarily in agrarian matters). This is because, despite the fact that the principle of ex officio procedural impulse governs in this venue, there are some scenarios where it cannot continue if the plaintiff does not fulfill the essential requirements for it (articles 6 of the Agrarian Jurisdiction Law and 5 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch). The acts to be performed by the plaintiff to avoid this procedural sanction are all those that allow the effective continuation of the process. Actions that do not have this purpose will not be useful for this (for example, an authorization to make photocopies), or those to which no effect can be granted, such as the submission of briefs by fax, without the original being provided within the time granted by law.

**V.-** To resolve what has been alleged, it is necessary to summarize what happened in this proceeding regarding the warning (prevención) issued to the plaintiff about his identification. Because an objection for lack of procedural capacity was filed, the Court, in ruling 92-2012 of November 7, 2012, ordered the plaintiff, within one month, to provide a suitable document accrediting his personal details of origin in his country (folio 559). The plaintiff provided an original birth certificate issued by the Nicaraguan Supreme Electoral Council, which contains his birth details and his parents' names (folio 564 back). The court deemed the warning complied with, and in a ruling of January 15, 2013, scheduled a date for the oral hearing (folio 566). One of the defendants filed a motion to set aside (recurso de revocatoria) against this ruling regarding the plaintiff's identity, arguing that said document had not been duly legalized to have validity abroad. The motion was rejected in a ruling of March 4, 2013 (folio 550), but ex officio, the provisions of the previous January 15 were partially annulled and the plaintiff was again warned to demonstrate, by means of an original document or suitable certification, his passport number, identity card or identification from his country of origin, or his temporary or permanent residency number in Costa Rica. The plaintiff appealed against said ruling, but his challenges were rejected (folios 585 to 602). In a brief dated June 7, 2013, the plaintiff submits his birth certificate with an Apostille according to the Convention on the Apostille and notarially certified (folios 605 to 608). The Court considered, in a ruling of June 28, 2013 (folio 609), that this had already been resolved in the ruling of March 4, without noticing what was alleged regarding the Apostille. The plaintiff did not object to this nor to the ruling of August 23, 2013 (folio 616), which reminds that the warning in the ruling of March 4 has not yet been deemed complied with. Subsequently, [Name1] filed the motion for dismissal for want of prosecution (folio 622), which was not answered by the plaintiff.

**VI.-** Having reviewed the case file and what was alleged in the appeal, the appellant is partially correct in asserting that the declaration of dismissal for want of prosecution is erroneous, as it implies a violation of due process (debido proceso), given what happened in the specific case. The foregoing because, although there were opportunities for the plaintiff to claim that he had already complied with the warning or to request more time to do so, it cannot be overlooked that there are 3 special situations that must be assessed in this matter: First: The plaintiff is an older adult (persona adulta mayor), to whom the legal system grants differentiated protection in relevant aspects, and even preferential treatment in some cases, based on the difficulties generated by age or health, to guarantee not only the right to real equality, but the effective protection of the exercise of other constitutional rights, and especially, to respect human dignity. For example, the Comprehensive Law for the Older Adult, No. 7935, of October 25, 1999, was enacted to guarantee this population equality of opportunities and a dignified life in all areas. In addition to the benefits and guarantees contained in said regulation, there are other provisions that reflect the need to take into account the special situation of older persons, such as section 290-e of the Electoral Code guarantees effective access to voting centers for older adults; 32-c of the General Telecommunications Law No. 8642 promotes providing quality telecommunications services to institutions and persons with special social needs, such as older adult shelters; section 59 of the Law of the National Financial System for Housing regulates the family housing voucher (bono familiar) for older adults who require it; article 31 of the Law of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund contemplates matters related to the Non-Contributory Pension Regime for all older adults in poverty; norm 33 of the Law Regulating Remunerated Transport of Persons in Motor Vehicles, No. 3503, provides for gratuity proportional to distance in public transport for older adults; the Law to Strengthen the National Council for the Older Adult (CONAPAM) No. 9188 will also come into effect in May 2014; article 11 of the Law of the Ombudsman's Office of the Republic, No. 7319 requires ensuring preferential treatment for older adults in public institutions, etc. Regarding the Judicial System, it is undeniable that age can affect a person's functional capacities, which hinders access to or the fulfillment of requirements for the processing of cases. To combat this situation, the Costa Rican Judicial Branch has a "Policy to guarantee adequate access to justice for the older adult population" (circular 61-08, published in Judicial Bulletin 98 of May 22, 2008) and has issued several circulars for the mandatory compliance with provisions relating to preferential attention for older adults (33-2011, 119-2010, 37-2009, 5-2009, 1-2009, 149-2008 of the Superior Council).

**VII.-** Second: The plaintiff is also a foreign person, who may have difficulties presenting identity documents either issued in his country of origin or those corresponding within the country. When this situation constitutes an obstacle to access to Justice, a right protected in constitutional section 41, or an infringement of the right to equality (33 constitutional), the judicial body must take the pertinent measures to resolve it. For example, it can process the requested action while the referenced document is being provided, grant ample time limits to comply with providing proof of identity, or order ex officio the respective reports from official national or foreign entities, through the pertinent channels, so as not to delay the proceedings. In that sense, in session 35 of 2013 of April 10, 2013, of the Superior Council, article XL, directives were issued to guarantee migrant and foreign persons access to Justice, even when they do not have an identity document or it is expired, and guidelines to verify their identity. Among these is not obstructing access to Justice due to lack of an identity document or accepting other means of proof for this purpose.

**VIII.-** Third: This Court agrees that the requirement for identification of the parties is necessary and fundamental for due process, and even more so, for the enforcement of judicial orders. But how it must be fulfilled and what type of document is considered valid and sufficient to prove identity must be assessed based on the specific situation of the parties in the case, as set forth in the Directives to guarantee migrant and foreign persons access to Justice cited above. In this case, it is evident that the plaintiff submitted a certified and apostilled copy of his birth certificate before the motion for dismissal for want of prosecution was filed, which was not duly assessed by the lower court (a quo), which, without examining the content of what was alleged in the brief of June 7, 2013, referred the plaintiff back to the ruling of March 4. In this regard, it is important to highlight that in addition to what was indicated in the preceding recital (considerando) regarding proof of identity of a migrant or foreign party, as concerns the formal validity of the birth certificate under analysis, timely submitted by the plaintiff to comply with the Court's warning, it was duly apostilled and, therefore, the lower court should have taken into consideration that it was a valid official document. Regarding this, the Convention for the Elimination of the Legalisation Requirement for Foreign Public Documents (Apostille Convention), ratified in Law 8923 of February 22, 2011, provides in its section 2: "Each Contracting State shall exempt from legalisation the documents to which this Convention applies and which must be displayed in its territory. For the purposes of this Convention, legalisation means only the formality by which the diplomatic or consular agents of the country in which the document must be displayed certify the authenticity of the signature, the capacity in which the person signing the document has acted and, where appropriate, the identity of the seal or stamp it bears". Likewise, together with the appeal brief, the plaintiff provides documentary evidence, whose content all parties must be deemed aware of, given that it is on record before the appeal was admitted. This refers to a certified copy of the plaintiff's provisional passport, which contains his photograph, a copy of his identity card, and proof of immigration processing before the Directorate General of Migration and Foreigners (Dirección General de Migración y Extranjería) (folios 647 to 650).

**IX.-** In accordance with the foregoing, the plaintiff's claim that he complied with what was ordered in a timely manner must certainly be accepted, as it is on record that he submitted the apostilled birth certificate and subsequently other documents with a photograph, which ratify the content of what is indicated in said official document. His complaint that the time limit granted to present the identity documents was insufficient is not admissible, as the lower court granted one month. If for special reasons the party does not have the identity documents and must process them, they must inform the Court of this situation and request a duly justified longer time limit, as well as demonstrate that the pertinent steps are being taken. But he is correct in pointing out that this time limit must be granted taking into account the special situations of the person who must comply with the warning, which in this case, is being an older adult and a foreigner. It should also be noted that the party reported not having his identity document when filing the claim (folio 217), but attempted to comply with the warning by providing an official document, which is his birth certificate. Taking into account that he is an older adult and a foreigner, it is logical that he could have faced difficulties in locating or obtaining official documents to identify himself. Consequently, and because aspects related to access to Justice and due process are at stake, without it being necessary to annul any ruling, the appropriate course is to revoke the decision, deeming the plaintiff duly identified.

**IV.-** Regarding what was appealed, the appealed ruling is revoked. Instead, the motion for dismissal for want of prosecution is declared without merit and the proceedings are ordered to continue, with the plaintiff deemed duly identified." This refers to a certified copy of the plaintiff's provisional passport, which includes his photograph, a copy of his identity card, and proof of immigration proceedings before the Dirección General de Migración y Extranjería (folios 647 to 650).

**IX.-** Based on the foregoing, the plaintiff's argument that he timely complied with the order must certainly be accepted, as it is on record that he presented the apostilled birth certificate and subsequently other documents with a photograph, which ratify the content of what is indicated in said official document. His claim that the deadline granted to present the identity documents was insufficient is not admissible, since the lower court (a quo) granted one month. If for special reasons the party does not have the identity documents and must process them, he must inform the Court of this situation and request a duly justified longer period, as well as demonstrate that the pertinent steps are being taken. However, he is correct in pointing out that this deadline must be granted taking into account the special situations of the person who must comply with the order, as in this case, being an elderly person (persona adulta mayor) and a foreigner. It must also be highlighted that the party reported not having his identity document when filing the lawsuit (folio 217), but he attempted to comply with the order by providing an official document, namely his birth certificate. Considering that he is an elderly person and a foreigner, it is logical that he could have faced difficulties in finding or obtaining official documents to identify himself. Consequently, and because aspects related to access to Justice and due process (debido proceso) are at stake, without it being necessary to annul any resolution, the appropriate course is to revoke the ruling, and the plaintiff shall be deemed duly identified.

**IV.-** In the appealed decision, the contested resolution is revoked. In its place, the claim of abandonment (incidente de deserción) is declared without merit, and the proceedings are ordered to continue, with the plaintiff being deemed duly identified." Among these is not obstructing access to Justice due to lack of an identity document or accepting other evidentiary means for this purpose.

VIII.- Third: This Court agrees that the requirement of party identification is necessary and fundamental for due process, and even more so, for the enforcement of judicial orders. But how it must be fulfilled and what type of document is considered valid and sufficient to prove identity must be assessed based on the situation presented by the parties in the specific case, as set forth in the aforementioned Guidelines to guarantee migrant and foreign persons access to Justice. In this case, it is on record that the plaintiff presented a certified and apostilled copy of his birth certificate, before the incident of abandonment (incidente de deserción) was filed, which was not duly assessed by the lower court (a quo), which, without studying the content of what was alleged in the brief of June 7, 2013, referred the plaintiff to what was resolved in the decision of March 4 prior. In this regard, it is important to highlight that in addition to what was indicated in the previous recital (considerando) regarding proof of identity for a migrant or foreign party, as concerns the formal validity of the birth certificate under analysis, timely presented by the plaintiff to comply with the Court's directive, it was duly apostilled and therefore the lower court should have taken into consideration that it was a valid official document. In this regard, the Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents (APOSTILLE Convention), ratified in Law 8923 of February 22, 2011, provides in its article 2: "Each Contracting State shall exempt from legalisation documents to which this Convention applies and which must be presented in its territory. For the purposes of this Convention, legalisation means only the formality by which the diplomatic or consular agents of the country in which the document must be presented certify the authenticity of the signature, the capacity in which the person signing the document has acted and, where appropriate, the identity of the seal or stamp which it bears." Likewise, together with the appeal brief, the plaintiff provides documentary evidence whose content all parties must be considered informed of, given that it was on record before the appeal was admitted. This refers to a certified copy of the plaintiff's provisional passport, in which his photograph appears, a copy of his own identity card, and proof of immigration proceedings before the Dirección General de Migración y Extranjería (folios 647 to 650).

IX.- In accordance with the foregoing, the plaintiff's argument that he complied with what was ordered in a timely manner must certainly be accepted, since it is on record that he presented the apostilled birth certificate and subsequently other documents with a photograph, which ratify the content of what was indicated in said official document. His claim that the deadline granted to present the identity documents was insufficient is not appropriate, since the lower court granted one month. If for special reasons the party does not have the identity documents, and must process them, they must inform the Court of that situation and request a longer, duly justified deadline, as well as demonstrate that the pertinent steps are being taken. But he is correct in pointing out that this deadline must be granted taking into account the special situations of the person who must comply with the directive, as is the case here, being an elderly person and a foreigner. It must also be highlighted that the party reported not having his identity document when filing the lawsuit (folio 217), but attempted to comply with the directive by providing an official document, such as his birth certificate. Taking into account that he is an elderly person and a foreigner, it is logical that he may have faced difficulties in finding or obtaining official documents to identify himself. Consequently, and because aspects related to access to Justice and due process are at stake, without it being necessary to annul any decision, the appropriate course is to revoke what was resolved, considering the plaintiff duly identified.

IV.- In the matter under appeal, the appealed decision is revoked. In its place, the incident of abandonment (incidente de deserción) is declared without merit, and it is ordered to continue the proceedings, considering the plaintiff duly identified."

“IV.- El instituto procesal conocido como deserción, se aplica en materia agraria, en aquellos casos en los cuales, por la inercia o desinterés de la parte actora, en un lapso mínimo de tres meses, el proceso no puede continuar su trámite, en la forma debida (artículos 212 a 217 del Código Procesal Civil, aplicados supletoriamente en materia agraria). Esto por cuanto, pese a que en esta sede rige el principio de impulso procesal de oficio, existen algunos supuestos donde éste no puede continuar si la parte actora no cumple con los requisitos indispensables para ello (artículos 6 de la Ley de Jurisdicción Agraria y 5 de la Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial). Los actos a realizar por la parte accionante, para evitar esta sanción procesal, son todos aquellos que permitan la continuación efectiva del proceso. No serán útiles para ello las actuaciones que no tienen ese fin (por ejemplo, una autorización para sacar fotocopias), o bien a las que no se les puede conceder efecto alguno, como por ejemplo la presentación de memoriales por fax, sin que se aporte el original en tiempo concedido por la ley.

V.- Para resolver lo alegado, resulta necesario resumir lo acontecido en este proceso respecto de la prevención hecha al actor sobre su identificación. Por haberse interpuesto la excepción de falta de capacidad procesal, el Juzgado, en resolución 92-2012 del 7 de noviembre del 2012, ordenó al actor, en un mes, aportar documento idóneo que acreditase sus calidades de origen en su país (folio 559). El actor aportó un certificado de nacimiento original emitido por el Consejo Supremo Electoral nicaraguense, en el cual se leen sus datos de nacimiento y nombre de sus padres (folio 564 vuelto). El juzgado tuvo por cumplido lo prevenido, y en resolución del 15 de enero del 2013, señaló fecha para el juicio verbal (folio 566). Una de las demandadas presentó recurso de revocatoria contra tal por lo relacionado con la identidad del actor, alegando que dicho documento no había sido debidamente legalizado para tener valor en el extranjero. El recurso fue rechazado en resolución del 4 de marzo del 2013 (folio 550), pero de oficio se anuló parcialmente lo dispuesto el 15 de enero anterior y de nuevo se previno al actor demostrar, mediante documento original o certificación idónea, el número de pasaporte, cédula o identificación de su país de origen o número de residencia temporal o permanente en Costa Rica. El actor recurrió contra dicha resolución, pero se rechazaron sus impugnaciones (folios 585 a 602). En memorial del 7 de junio del 2013, el actor presenta su certificado de nacimiento apostillado según la Convención sobre la Apostilla y certificado notarialmente (folios 605 a 608). El Juzgado consideró, en resolución del 28 de junio del 2013 (folio 609), que ya eso había sido resuelto en resolución del 4 de marzo anterior, sin percatarse de lo alegado sobre el apostillado. La parte actora no objetó nada al respecto ni tampoco contra la resolución del 23 de agosto del 2013 (folio 616), que recuerda aún no se tiene por cumplido lo prevenido en resolución del 4 de marzo. Posterior a ello, [Nombre1] presenta el incidente de deserción (folio 622), sin que se contestara por el actor.

VI.- Revisados los autos y lo alegado en la apelación, lleva razón parcialmente la recurrente al afirmar que la declaratoria de deserción es errónea, por implicar una violación del debido proceso, dado lo acontecido en el caso concreto. Lo anterior por cuanto, si bien existieron oportunidades para que la parte actora reclamase que ya había cumplido con lo prevenido o pidiese más tiempo para ello, no puede dejar de considerarse que existen 3 situaciones especiales que deben valorarse en este asunto: Primera: Quien demanda es una persona adulta mayor, a la cual el ordenamiento jurídico le da tutela diferenciada en los aspectos atinentes, e incluso preferencial en algunos casos, en función de las dificultades generadas por la edad o la salud, para garantizar no solo el derecho a la igualdad real, sino la efectiva tutela del ejercicio de los demás derechos constitucionales, y en especial, para respetar la dignidad del ser humano. Por ejemplo, la Ley integral para la persona adulta mayor, Nº 7935, del 25 de octubre de 1999, se emitió para garantizar a dicha población igualdad de oportunidades y vida digna en todos los ámbitos. Además de los beneficios y garantías contenidos en dicha normativa, existen otras disposiciones que reflejan la necesidad de tomar en cuenta la situación especial de las personas mayores, tales como el numeral 290-e del Código Electoral garantiza el efectivo acceso a los recintos de votación a las personas adultas mayores; 32-c de la Ley General de Telecomunicaciones Nº8642 promueve dotar de servicios de telecomunicaciones de calidad a las instituciones y personas con necesidades sociales especiales, tales como albergues de adultos mayores; el numeral 59 de la Ley del Sistema Financiero Nacional para la vivienda, regula el bono familiar para las personas adultas mayores que lo requieran; el artículo 31 de la Ley de la Caja Costarricense de Seguridad social contempla lo atinente al régimen no Contributivo de las pensiones para todos los adultos mayores en situación de pobreza; la norma 33 DE la Ley reguladora del transporte remunerado de personas en vehículos automotores, Nº 3503, dispone la gratuidad proporcional a la distancia, en el transporte público de adultos mayores; también entrará en vigencia en mayo del 2014 la Ley de Fortalecimiento del Consejo Nacional de la Persona Adulta Mayor (CONAPAM) Nº9188; el artículo 11 de la Ley de la Defensoría de los Habitantes de la República, Nº7319 le impone velar por que se de un trato preferencial de las personas adultas mayores en las instituciones públicas, etc. Tratándose del Sistema Judicial, es innegable que la edad puede afectar las capacidades funcionales de la persona, lo cual dificulta el acceso o el cumplimiento de requisitos para la tramitación de los procesos. Para combatir dicha situación, el Poder Judicial costarricense cuenta con una "Política para garantizar el adecuado acceso a la justicia de la población adulta mayor” (circular 61-08, publicada en el Boletín Judicial 98 del 22 de mayo de 2008) y ha emitido varias circulares que para el cumplimiento obligatoriamente de las disposiciones relativas a la atención privilegiada de adultos mayores (33-2011, 119-2010, 37-2009, 5-2009, 1-2009, 149-2008 del Consejo Superior).

VII.- Segunda: También es la parte actora una persona extranjera, que puede tener dificultades para presentar documentos de identidad ya sea emitidos en su país de origen o los que corresponda el el país. Cuando esa situación implica un obstáculo para el acceso a la Justicia, derecho tutelado en el numeral 41 constitucional, o bien una afectación al derecho de igualdad (33 constitucional), el órgano judicial debe tomar las medidas pertinentes para solventarla. Por ejemplo, puede dar trámite a la gestión solicitada mientras se aporta el documento referido, otorgar plazos amplios para cumplir con aportar prueba de la identidad, o bien, ordenar de oficio los informes respectivos a las entidades oficiales nacionales o extranjeras, por los canales pertinentes, con el fin de no atrasar los procedimientos. En ese sentido, en sesión 35 del 2013 del 10 de abril del 2013 del Consejo Superior, artículo XL, se emitieron directrices para garantizar a las personas migrantes y extranjeras el acceso a la Justicia, aún cuando no cuenten con documento de identidad o esté vencido, y los lineamientos para verificar su identidad. Entre tales se encuentra no obstaculizarse el acceso a la Justicia por falta del documento de identidad o aceptarse otros medios probatorios para ello.

VIII.- Tercera: Este Tribunal concuerda con que el requisito de la identificación de las partes es necesario y fundamental para el debido proceso, y más aún, para la ejecución de las órdenes judiciales. Pero cómo debe cumplirse y qué tipo de documento se considera válido y suficiente para demostrar la identidad debe ser valorado en función de la situación que presentes las partes del caso concreto, tal y como se expone en las Directrices para garantizar a las personas migrantes y extranjeras el acceso a la Justicia antes citadas. En este caso, consta que la parte actora presentó copia certificada y apostillada de su certificado de nacimiento, antes de presentarse el incidente de deserción, lo cual no fue debidamente valorado por el a quo, quien sin estudiar el contenido de lo alegado en el memorial del 7 de junio del 2013, remitió a la parte actora a lo resuelto en resolución del 4 de marzo anterior. Al respecto, es importante resaltar que además de lo indicado en el considerando anterior sobre la prueba de la identidad de una parte migrante o extranjera, en lo que concierne a la validez formal del certificado de nacimiento en análisis, presentado oportunamente por el actor para cumplir lo prevenido por el Despacho, el mismo fue debidamente apostillado y por ende debió el a quo tomar en consideración que era un documento oficial válido. Al respecto, la Convención para la Eliminación del Requisito de Legalización para los Documentos Públicos Extranjeros (Convención de la APOSTILLA), ratificada en Ley 8923 del 22 de febrero del 2011, dispone en su numeral 2: "Cada Estado contratante eximirá de legalización los documentos a los que aplique la presente Convención y los cuales deban de ser mostrados en su territorio. Para propósitos de la presente Convención, la legalización significa solamente la formalidad por medio de la cual los agentes diplomáticos o consulares del país en el cual debe mostrarse el documento certifican la autenticidad de la firma, la calidad en la cual ha actuado la persona que firma el documento y, cuando sea apropiado, la identidad del sello o timbre que lleva". Asimismo, junto con el escrito de apelación, la parte actora aporta documental de cuyo contenido se deben tener por enteradas todas las partes, dado que consta antes de admitirse el recurso. Tal se refiere a copia certificada del pasaporte provisional del actor, en el cual consta su fotografía, copia de la cédula de identidad del mismo, y comprobante de trámite migratorio ante la Dirección General de Migración y Extranjería (folios 647 a 650).

IX.- De acuerdo con lo expuesto, ciertamente se debe aceptar el alegato del actor de que cumplió lo ordenado oportunamente, pues consta que presentó el certificado de nacimiento apostillado y posteriormente otros documentos con fotografía, que ratifican el contenido de lo indicado en dicho documento oficial. No es procedente su reclamo de que el plazo concedido para presentar los documentos de identidad fuese insuficiente, pues el a quo concedió un mes. Si por razones especiales la parte no cuenta con los documentos de identidad, y debe tramitarlos, debe informar esa situación al Juzgado y pedir un plazo mayor debidamente justificado, así como demostrar que se está tramitando lo pertinente. Pero si lleva razón en señalar que ese plazo se debe otorgar tomando en cuenta las situaciones especiales de quien debe cumplir lo prevenido, como lo es en este caso, ser una persona adulta mayor y extranjera. Debe además resaltarse que la parte informó no contaba con su documento de identidad al plantear la demanda (folio 217), pero intentó cumplir lo prevenido aportando un documento oficial, como lo es su certificado de nacimiento. Tomando en cuenta que es adulto mayor y extranjero, es lógico que pudo enfrentar dificultades para encontrar u obtener documentos oficiales para identificarse. Por consiguiente, y por estar de por medio aspectos relacionados con el acceso a la Justicia y el debido proceso, sin que resulte necesario anular ninguna resolución, lo procedente es revocar lo resuelto, teniéndose por identificado debidamente al actor.

IV.- En lo apelado, se revoca la resolución recurrida. En su lugar, se declara sin lugar el incidente de deserción y se ordena continuar los procedimientos, teniéndose por debidamente identificado al actor.”