Criminal Jurisdictional Incompetence for Ministerial Rank without PortfolioIncompetencia penal por rango ministerial sin cartera creada

II.After undertaking a detailed examination of the proceedings, this Chamber finds that it lacks the requisite jurisdiction (competencia) to issue a substantive ruling on the petition filed by the Fiscalía General de la República. By way of preamble, it must be noted that Title V of the Código Procesal Penal enshrines a special procedure for trying members of the supreme branches of government. Within this procedure, as interpreted from Article 394 of the procedural code (Código adjetivo), the legislature assigned an important role to the Sala Tercera de la Corte Suprema de Justicia. The provision under discussion prescribes: “When the Ministerio Público receives notice or a complaint is filed for an alleged crime, attributed to a person subject to preliminary impeachment proceedings (antejuicio), the Fiscal General shall conduct the initial investigation aimed at gathering the indispensable data to file the accusation or request dismissal (desestimación) before the Corte Suprema de Justicia, as applicable.” As a complement to this provision, Article 56, subsection 2) of the Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, stipulates: “The Sala Tercera shall hear (…) The criminal cases against the members of the Supreme Branches of Government and other equivalent officials.” As can be inferred from the foregoing, the Sala Tercera de la Corte Suprema de Justicia is legally empowered to resolve a request for dismissal (desestimación) filed by the Fiscalía General de la República when a subjective jurisdictional requirement is present, namely, that the accused holds the status of a member of a supreme branch of government. The Executive being one of the branches that, under the republican framework, possesses such status, it must be pointed out that, based on Article 130 of the Constitución Política, government ministers are part of it. The provision states: "The Poder Ejecutivo is exercised, in the name of the people, by the President of the Republic and the Government Ministers in their capacity as obligated collaborators." For its part, Article 141 of the same legal text further develops: "For the dispatch of business pertaining to the Poder Ejecutivo, there shall be such Government Ministers as determined by law. Two or more Portfolios (Carteras) may be assigned to a single Minister." That is, the determination of the bodies that assume the character of "ministries" is a matter the framers assigned to the legislature. In the case at hand, the critical point that calls for a detailed analysis concerns whether the accused, Patricia Mora Castellanos, in her capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres (INAMU) must be considered a minister for the purposes of Articles 130 and 141 of the Constitution. This arises from the granting of the rank of "Minister of Women's Status" (Ministra de la Condición de la Mujer), according to Article 1 of Executive Agreement No. 05-P of the President of the Republic, Carlos Alvarado Quesada, issued in San José on May 8 of this year. To address this question, it is necessary to clarify that Article 14 of Law No. 7801 of April 30, 1998 (Ley del Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres) establishes: “The Executive President shall be appointed and freely removed by the Government Council. He or she shall serve in office for a period of four years. In the event of a temporary absence, he or she shall be replaced by whoever serves as Vice President of the Board of Directors. In the event of a definitive absence, the Council shall appoint a substitute, who shall hold the office for the remainder of the period, according to the computation established by this law. If an official with ministerial rank is appointed for the women’s sector, this person may assume, as an additional duty (recargo), the Executive Presidency of the Institute.” (The emphasis is not from the original). As can be observed, the provision transcribed above authorizes the designation of an official "with ministerial rank for the women’s sector," in which case that person may assume, as an additional duty (recargo), the Executive Presidency of the Institute. However, Law No. 7801 does not grant the Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres the rank of ministry. In accordance with the above, the Ley General de la Administración Pública is of great importance, a regulatory body whose Article 23 stipulates: “1. The ministerial portfolios (carteras ministeriales) shall be: a) Presidency; b) Foreign Affairs and Worship; c) Interior and Police; ch) Ministry of Justice and Peace; (Its name thus modified by Article 2 of Law No. 8771 of September 14, 2009) d) Public Security; e) Finance; f) Agriculture and Livestock; g) Economy, Industry and Commerce; (This subsection thus amended by Article 15 of the Organic Law of the Ministry of Environment and Energy No. 7152 of June 5, 1990) h) Environment and Energy. (The preceding subsection thus amended by Article 6 of Law "Transfer of the Telecommunications Sector from the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications to the Ministry of Science and Technology" No. 9046 of June 25, 2012. Article 11 of the affecting law also modifies the name of the Ministry as indicated) i) Public Works and Transport; j) Public Education; k) Health; l) Labor and Social Security; m) Culture, Youth and Sports (*); (*) (Sinalevi Note: According to opinion C-023 of January 31, 2007, from the Procuraduría General de la República, this subsection is partially repealed tacitly by the Law Creating the Institute of Sport and Recreation (ICODER) and its Legal Regime, No. 7800 of April 30, 1998, with respect to "Sports," in this case it should be read "Culture and Youth"). n) National Planning and Economic Policy; ñ) Science and Technology and Telecommunications. (Subsection ñ thus added by Article 104 of the Law for the Promotion of Scientific and Technological Development and Creation of MICIT (Ministry of Science and Technology), No. 7169 of June 26, 1990. Subsequently, this same subsection was amended by Article 6 of the Law for the Transfer of the Telecommunications Sector from the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications to the Ministry of Science and Technology", No. 9046 of June 25, 2012. Article 11 of the affecting law also modifies the name of the Ministry as indicated) (Paragraph 1 of this article, referring to the enumeration of ministerial portfolios (carteras ministeriales), was thus amended by Article 11 of the Law for the Restructuring of the Executive Branch, No. 6812 of September 14, 1982) and any others established by law. The law shall indicate in detail the jurisdiction (competencia) and organization of each Ministry. 2. The President of the Republic may appoint Government Ministers without Portfolio, as well as assign two or more Portfolios (Carteras) as an additional duty (recargo) to a single Minister, or appoint the Vice Presidents and Ministers without Portfolio to perform them.” This precept is of vital importance because: (i) it provides a list of the existing ministerial portfolios (carteras ministeriales), thus developing the mandate contemplated in Article 141 of the Constitución Política. It also highlights that said enumeration does not include a “Ministry of Women’s Status,” (ii) it authorizes the possibility of the law establishing other ministries, and (iii) it empowers the President of the Republic to appoint ministers without portfolio, as well as the additional duty (recargo) of multiple portfolios (carteras) upon a single minister. In light of the legal system, a literal grammatical interpretation, and in any case respectful of the principle of legality (principio de legalidad), allows this Chamber to conclude that beyond the formal appointment of the accused as Minister of Women's Status (a valid administrative act under the terms of Articles 14 of the Ley del Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres and 23 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública), such action has not had the legal effect of investing her as a member of a supreme branch of government. Recently, this Court of Criminal Cassation (Sala de Casación Penal) ruled extensively on the particular situation of the person here charged in its decision (voto) No. 2018-00395, of 18:00 hours, of May 31, 2018. It stated: “…the commonly called Ministry of Women’s Status is not constituted as a Government Ministry, this because Mrs. Mora Castellanos was only attributed a ministerial rank with the additional duty (recargo) of the Executive Presidency of I.N.A.M.U. for the purposes of political direction in the current Presidential Administration. In this understanding, Article 14 of the Ley del Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres is observed, which regarding the topic establishes: “If an official with ministerial rank is appointed for the women’s sector, this person may assume, as an additional duty (recargo), the Executive Presidency of the Institute.” Therefore, the only existing legal reference on the matter concerns this last paragraph, which indicates two legal scenarios; the first of them, regarding the possibility that the President of the Republic assigns a public official with ministerial rank for the women’s sector, and the second, concerning that the same designated person may assume, as an additional duty (recargo), the Executive Presidency of I.N.A.M.U. So such a condition can be assumed simultaneously, or it may involve two different persons. For the purposes of assessing the present case, it is established that Mrs. Mora Castellanos serves in a dual capacity, both as an official with the rank of minister for the women’s sector, and also under the additional duty (recargo) of the Executive Presidency of I.N.M.U. However, from neither of the two perspectives can the creation of a Ministry be classified or visualized. In that understanding, it is not viable to grant a Constitutional attribution to a figure that has not been constituted under the imperative that empowers the legal system for the creation of the respective ministerial portfolio (cartera ministerial), this in clear consideration of the principle of legality (principio de legalidad) governing the actions of the Administration in general,(...) Therefore, from a legal perspective, the commonly called Ministry of Women’s Status, over which Mrs. Mora Castellanos shall exercise, as an additional duty (recargo), the Executive Presidency of I.N.A.M.U., has not been created with the due grant of its material powers (competencias materiales), ergo, it does not currently form part of the Government Ministries, and the special constitutional status of immunity from criminal prosecution (fuero de improcedibilidad penal), which is an attribute exclusively defined in the Constitución Política, does not assign to her that condition of being a Member of the Supreme Branches of Government. This circumstance, in itself, has procedural implications within the framework of criminal law, since constitutional immunities from criminal prosecution (fueros de improcedibilidad penal) can only be established by Constitutional mandate, and the legal competence (competencia legal) attributed to this Court of Criminal Cassation to act as the Sentencing Tribunal depends on this, per Articles 391 et seq., of Title V of the Código Procesal Penal, in the chapter concerning the Procedure for Trying Members of the Supreme Branches of Government (Procedimiento para Juzgar a los Miembros de los Supremos Poderes), without the possibility of making an extensive interpretation of the matter in this area.” Therefore, considering that the accused Patricia Mora Castellanos does not hold the status of a member of a supreme branch of government, based on Articles 48, 49 and 391 of the Código Procesal Penal, 56 of the Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, as well as Article 136 of the Constitución Política, the incompetence (incompetencia) of the Sala Tercera de la Corte Suprema de Justicia to hear the request for dismissal (desestimación) filed by the Fiscal General de la República must be declared. It is ordered that the case file (expediente) be remitted to the Juzgado Penal de Hacienda del Segundo Circuito Judicial de San José for whatever is legally appropriate.

The commentary rule prescribes: “When the Public Prosecutor's Office (Ministerio Público) receives notice or a complaint is filed for an alleged crime, attributed to any of the persons subject to preliminary hearing (antejuicio), the Attorney General (Fiscal General) shall conduct the initial investigation aimed at gathering the indispensable data to formulate the accusation or request dismissal (desestimación) before the Supreme Court of Justice (Corte Suprema de Justicia), as appropriate.” As a complement to this provision, Article 56, subsection 2) of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch (Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial), prescribes: “The Third Chamber (Sala Tercera) shall hear (…) Criminal cases against the members of the Supreme Powers (Supremos Poderes) and other equivalent officials.” As inferred from the foregoing, the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice is legally empowered to resolve a request for dismissal formulated by the Office of the Attorney General (Fiscalía General de la República) when a requirement of a subjective nature is present, namely, that the accused holds the status of a member of a supreme power. The Executive being one of the powers that, in the republican scheme, assume such quality, it must be noted that based on article 130 of the Political Constitution (Constitución Política), government ministers form part thereof. The rule provides: “The Executive Power (Poder Ejecutivo) is exercised, in the name of the people, by the President of the Republic and the Government Ministers as obligated collaborators.” In turn, article 141 ibid develops: “For the dispatch of business corresponding to the Executive Power there shall be the Government Ministers determined by law. Two or more Portfolios may be entrusted to a single Minister.” That is, the determination of the bodies that assume the character of “ministries” is a matter that the constitution-maker has assigned to the legislator.

In the case before us, the critical point motivating a detailed analysis concerns whether the accused, Patricia Mora Castellanos, in her capacity as Executive President of the National Institute for Women (Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres, INAMU) must be considered a minister for the purposes of constitutional articles 130 and 141. The foregoing arises from the granting of the rank of “Minister for Women's Affairs (Ministra de la Condición de la Mujer),” according to the first article of Agreement No. 05-P of the President of the Republic, Carlos Alvarado Quesada, issued in San José on the 8th day of May of the current year. In order to respond to this concern, it is necessary to specify that Article 14 of Law No. 7801 of April 30, 1998 (Law of the National Institute for Women, Ley del Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres) establishes: “The Executive President shall be appointed and freely removed by the Governing Council (Consejo de Gobierno). He or she shall hold office for a period of four years. In case of temporary absence, he or she shall be substituted by whoever exercises the vice-presidency of the Board of Directors (Junta Directiva). In the case of a definitive absence, the Council shall appoint a substitute, who shall hold the office for the remainder of the period, in accordance with the computation established by this law. If an official with the rank of minister for the women's sector is appointed, this person may assume, as an additional duty (recargo), the Executive Presidency of the Institute.” (Emphasis not in original). As can be seen, the aforementioned rule empowers the designation of an official “with the rank of minister for the women's sector,” in which case they may assume, as an additional duty, the executive presidency of the Institute. However, Law No. 7801 does not grant the National Institute for Women the rank of a ministry.

In accordance with the above, the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública) is of great importance, a normative body which in its article 23 stipulates: “1. The ministerial portfolios shall be: a) Presidency; b) Foreign Affairs and Worship; c) Governance and Police; ch) Ministry of Justice and Peace; (Name thus modified by Article 2 of Law No. 8771 of September 14, 2009) d) Public Security; e) Finance; f) Agriculture and Livestock; g) Economy, Industry and Commerce; (Subsection thus reformed by Article 15 of the Organic Law of the Ministry of Environment and Energy No. 7152 of June 5, 1990) h) Environment and Energy. (Preceding subsection thus reformed by Article 6 of the Law \"Transfer of the Telecommunications Sector from the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications to the Ministry of Science and Technology\" No. 9046 of June 25, 2012. Article 11 of the affecting law also modifies the denomination of the Ministry as shown) i) Public Works and Transport; j) Public Education; k) Health; l) Labor and Social Security; m) Culture, Youth and Sports (*); (*) (Note from Sinalevi: According to opinion C-023 of January 31, 2007, from the Attorney General's Office of the Republic, this subsection is partially tacitly repealed by the Law Creating the Institute of Sport and Recreation (ICODER) and its Legal Regime, No. 7800 of April 30, 1998, regarding \"Sports\", in this case it should read \"Culture and Youth\"). n) National Planning and Economic Policy; ñ) Science and Technology and Telecommunications. (Subsection ñ thus added by Article 104 of the Law for the Promotion of Scientific and Technological Development and Creation of the MICIT (Ministry of Science and Technology), No. 7169 of June 26, 1990. Subsequently, this same subsection was reformed by Article 6 of the Law of Transfer of the Telecommunications Sector from the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Telecommunications to the Ministry of Science and Technology\", No. 9046 of June 25, 2012. Article 11 of the affecting law also modifies the denomination of the Ministry as shown) (Paragraph 1 of this article, referring to the enumeration of ministerial portfolios, was thus reformed by Article 11 of the Law of Restructuring of the Executive Power, No. 6812 of September 14, 1982) and any others established by law. It shall indicate in detail the competence and organization of each Ministry. 2. The President of the Republic may designate Government Ministers without Portfolio, as well as assign two or more Portfolios as additional duties to a single Minister, or appoint the Vice-Presidents and Ministers without Portfolio to perform them.” This precept is of vital importance because: (i) it provides a list of the existing ministerial portfolios, thus developing the mandate contemplated in Article 141 of the Political Constitution. It is noteworthy, moreover, that said enumeration does not include a “Ministry for Women's Affairs”, (ii) it authorizes the possibility that the law establish other ministries, and (iii) it empowers the President of the Republic to designate ministers without portfolio, as well as the assignment of multiple portfolios as additional duties to a single minister.

In light of the legal system, a grammatical literal interpretation, and in any case respectful of the principle of legality, allows this Chamber to conclude that beyond the formal appointment of the accused as Minister for Women's Affairs (a valid administrative act under the terms of Article 14 of the Law of the National Institute for Women and Article 23 of the General Law of Public Administration), such action has not had the legal effect of investing her as a member of a supreme power. Recently, this Chamber of Criminal Cassation ruled extensively on the particular situation of the person charged herein in its ruling No. 2018-00395, at 18:00 hours, of May 31, 2018. It was stated: “…the commonly called Ministry for Women's Affairs (Ministerio de la Condición de la Mujer) is not constituted as a Government Ministry, this is because Ms. Mora Castellanos was only attributed a ministerial rank with the additional duty (recargo) of the Executive Presidency of I.N.A.M.U. for the purposes of political direction in the current Presidential Administration. In this understanding, article 14 of the Law of the National Institute for Women is observed, which regarding the topic establishes: “If an official with the rank of minister for the women's sector is appointed, this person may assume, as an additional duty, the Executive Presidency of the Institute.” Therefore, the only existing legal reference in this regard concerns this last paragraph, which indicates two legal situations; the first of them, regarding the possibility that the President of the Republic assign a public official with the rank of minister for the women's sector, and the second, referring that the same designated person may assume, as an additional duty, the Executive Presidency of I.N.A.M.U. So that such condition may be assumed simultaneously, or, there may be two different persons involved. For the purpose of the assessment of the present case, it is noted that Ms. Mora Castellanos serves in a dual condition, both as an official with the rank of minister for the women's sector, and also under the additional duty of the Executive Presidency of I.N.M.U. However, from neither of the two perspectives can the creation of a Ministry be catalogued or visualized. In this understanding, it is not viable to grant a Constitutional attribution to a figure that has not been constituted under the imperative that empowers the legal system for the creation of the respective ministerial portfolio, this in clear consideration of the principle of legality that governs the actions of the Administration in general, (…) Therefore, from a legal perspective, the commonly called Ministry for Women's Affairs, over which Ms. Mora Castellanos shall exercise with the additional duty the Executive Presidency of I.N.A.M.U., has not been created with the due granting of its material competences, ergo, it does not form part of the Government Ministries at present, and the privilege of criminal non-prosecutability (fuero de improcedibilidad penal) which is an exclusive attribution defined in the Political Constitution, does not assign her that condition of being a Member of the Supreme Powers. This circumstance, in itself, has procedural implications within the framework of criminal law, since the privileges of criminal non-prosecutability can only be established by Constitutional mandate and the legal competence attributed to this Chamber of Criminal Cassation depends on this to act as a Sentencing Court, under the terms of articles 391 et seq., of Title V of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Código Procesal Penal), in the chapter referring to the Procedure for Judging Members of the Supreme Powers, without there being a possibility of performing an extensive interpretation of the topic in this matter.” Thus, considering that the accused Patricia Mora Castellanos does not hold the status of a member of a supreme power, based on Articles 48, 49, and 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 56 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Branch, as well as Article 136 of the Political Constitution, the lack of competence of the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice must be declared to hear the request for dismissal filed by the Attorney General of the Republic (Fiscala General de la República). It is ordered to remit the case file to the Criminal Treasury Court of the Second Judicial Circuit of San José (Juzgado Penal de Hacienda del Segundo Circuito Judicial de San José) for whatever is appropriate under the law.

"II. Luego de proceder con un examen detallado de las actuaciones, esta Cámara advierte que no tiene la competencia requerida para emitir un pronunciamiento de fondo en relación con la petición incoada por la Fiscalía General de la República. A modo de preámbulo, debe señalarse que el título V del Código Procesal Penal consagra un procedimiento especial para juzgar a los miembros de los supremos poderes. En éste, según se ha interpretado a partir del numeral 394 del Código adjetivo, el legislador asignó a la Sala Tercera de la Corte Suprema de Justicia un importante rol. Prescribe la norma de comentario: “Cuando el Ministerio Público tenga noticia o se formule denuncia por un presunto delito, atribuido a alguna de las personas sujetas a antejuicio, el Fiscal General practicará la investigación inicial tendente a recabar los datos indispensables para formular la acusación o solicitar la desestimación ante la Corte Suprema de Justicia, según corresponda.” Como complemento a esta disposición, el artículo 56, inciso 2) de la Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, preceptúa: “La Sala Tercera conocerá (…) De las causas penales contra los miembros de los Supremos Poderes y otros funcionarios equiparados”. Como se colige de lo anterior, la Sala Tercera de la Corte Suprema de Justicia está legalmente habilitada para resolver una solicitud de desestimación formulada por la Fiscalía General de la República cuando se esté en presencia de un requisito de orden subjetivo, a saber, que el imputado reúna la condición de miembro de un supremo poder. Siendo el Ejecutivo uno de los poderes que, en el esquema republicano, asumen tal calidad, debe apuntarse que con base en el ordinal 130 de la Constitución Política, los ministros y ministras de gobierno forman parte de éste. Dispone la norma: “El Poder Ejecutivo lo ejercen, en nombre del pueblo, el Presidente de la República y los Ministros de Gobierno en calidad de obligados colaboradores.” Por su parte, el artículo 141 ibíd desarrolla: “Para el despacho de los negocios que corresponden al Poder Ejecutivo habrá los Ministros de Gobierno que determine la ley. Se podrán encargar a un solo Ministro dos o más Carteras.” Es decir, la determinación de los órganos que asumen el carácter de “ministerios” es materia que el constituyente ha asignado al legislador. En el caso que nos ocupa, el punto álgido y que motiva un abordaje detallado atañe a si la imputada, Patricia Mora Castellanos, en su condición de presidenta ejecutiva del Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres (INAMU) debe reputarse como ministra para los efectos de los numerales 130 y 141 constitucionales. Lo anterior, a raíz del otorgamiento del rango de “Ministra de la Condición de la Mujer”, según el artículo primero del acuerdo N° 05-P del Presidente de la República, Carlos Alvarado Quesada, emitido en San José el día 08 de mayo del año en curso. Con el fin de responder a tal inquietud, es necesario precisar que el artículo 14 de la ley N° 7801 del 30 de abril de 1998 (Ley del Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres) establece: “El Presidente Ejecutivo será de nombramiento y libre remoción del Consejo de Gobierno. Durará en su cargo un período de cuatro años. En caso de ausencia temporal, será sustituido por quien ejerza la vicepresidencia de la Junta Directiva. Si se tratare de una ausencia definitiva, el Consejo nombrará a un sustituto, quien ejercerá el cargo por lo que resta del período, de acuerdo con el cómputo establecido por la presente ley. De nombrarse un funcionario con rango de ministro para el sector de la mujer, esta persona podrá asumir como recargo la Presidencia Ejecutiva del Instituto.” (El destacado no corresponde al original). Como se aprecia, la norma antes transcrita faculta la designación de un funcionario “con rango de ministro para el sector de la mujer”, en cuyo caso puede asumir, como recargo, la presidencia ejecutiva del Instituto. Sin embargo, la ley N° 7801 no otorga al Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres el rango de ministerio. En consonancia con lo anterior, de gran importancia resulta la Ley General de la Administración Pública, cuerpo normativo que en su ordinal 23 estatuye: “1. Las carteras ministeriales serán: a) Presidencia; b) Relaciones Exteriores y Culto; c) Gobernación y Policía; ch) Ministerio de Justicia y Paz; (Así modificada su denominación por el artículo 2° de la ley N° 8771 del 14 de setiembre de 2009) d) Seguridad Pública; e) Hacienda; f) Agricultura y Ganadería; g) Economía, Industria y Comercio; (Así reformado este inciso por el artículo 15 de la Ley Orgánica del Ministerio del Ambiente y Energía N° 7152 de 5 de junio de 1990) h) Ambiente y Energía. (Así reformado el inciso anterior por el artículo 6° de la Ley "Traslado del Sector Telecomunicaciones del Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones al Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología" N° 9046 del 25 de junio de 2012. El artículo 11 de la ley afectante modifica además la denominación del Ministerio en la forma vista) i) Obras Públicas y Transportes; j) Educación Pública; k) Salud; l) Trabajo y Seguridad Social; m) Cultura, Juventud y Deportes (*); (*) (Nota de Sinalevi: Según el dictamen C-023 de 31 de enero 2007, de la Procuraduría General de la República, este inciso se encuentra derogado parcialmente en forma tácita por la Ley Crea Instituto del Deporte y Recreación (ICODER) y su Régimen Jurídico, No. 7800 de 30 de abril de 1998, en lo que respecta a "Deportes", en este caso debe leerse "Cultura y Juventud"). n) Planificación Nacional y Política Económica; ñ) Ciencia y Tecnología y Telecomunicaciones. (Así adicionado el inciso ñ por el artículo 104 de la Ley de Promoción del Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico y Creación del MICIT (Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología), Nº 7169 del 26 de junio de 1990. Posteriormente, este mismo inciso fue reformado por el artículo 6° de la Ley de Traslado del Sector Telecomunicaciones del Ministerio de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones al Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología", N° 9046 del 25 de junio de 2012. El artículo 11 de la ley afectante modifica además la denominación del Ministerio en la forma vista) (El párrafo 1 de este artículo, referente a la enumeración de las carteras ministeriales, fue así reformado por el artículo 11 de la Ley de Reestructuración del Poder Ejecutivo, Nº 6812 de 14 de setiembre de 1982) y las demás que establezca la ley. Esta indicará en detalle la competencia y organización de cada Ministerio. 2. El Presidente de la República podrá designar Ministros de Gobierno sin Cartera, así como recargar dos o más Carteras en un solo Ministro, o nombrar para desempeñarlas a los Vicepresidentes y a Ministros sin Cartera.” Este precepto es de vital importancia por cuanto: (i) brinda una lista de las carteras ministeriales existentes, desarrollando así el mandato contemplado en el artículo 141 de la Constitución Política. Destaca, además, que en dicha enumeración no se contempla un “Ministerio de Condición de la Mujer”, (ii) autoriza la posibilidad de que la ley establezca otros ministerios y (iii) faculta al Presidente de la República la designación de ministros sin cartera, así como el recargo de múltiples carteras en un mismo ministro. A la luz del ordenamiento jurídico, una interpretación literal gramatical, y en todo caso respetuosa del principio de legalidad, permite a esta Cámara concluir que más allá del nombramiento formal de la denunciada como Ministra de Condición de la Mujer (acto administrativo válido al tenor de los artículos 14 de la Ley del Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres y 23 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública), tal actuación no ha tenido el efecto jurídico de investirla como miembro un supremo poder. Recientemente, esta Sala de Casación Penal se pronunció de manera amplia sobre la situación particular de la aquí encartada en su voto N° 2018-00395, de las 18 horas, del 31 de mayo de 2018. Se afirmó: “…el comúnmente llamado Ministerio de la Condición de la Mujer, no se encuentra constituido como Ministerio de Gobierno, esto debido a que únicamente se le atribuyó a la señora Mora Castellanos un rango ministerial con recargo de la Presidencia Ejecutiva del I.N.A.M.U. para efectos de la dirección política en la actual Administración Presidencial. En este entendido, se aprecia el numeral 14 de la Ley del Instituto Nacional de las Mujeres, que en lo relativo al tema establece: “De nombrarse un funcionario con rango de ministro para el sector de la mujer, esta persona podrá asumir con recargo la Presidencia Ejecutiva del Instituto.”. Por lo que la única referencia legal existente al respecto, versa sobre este último párrafo, mismo que indica dos supuestos jurídicos; el primero de ellos, en lo relativo a la posibilidad de que el Presidente de la República asigne a un funcionario público con rango de ministro para el sector de la mujer, y el segundo, referente a que la misma persona designada podrá asumir con recargo la Presidencia Ejecutiva del I.N.A.M.U. Por lo que tal condición puede ser asumida de forma simultánea, o bien, pueda tratarse de dos personas diferentes. Para efecto de la valoración del presente caso, se tiene que la señora Mora Castellanos funge en la doble condición, tanto como funcionaria con rango de ministra para el sector de la mujer, así como también bajo el recargo de la Presidencia Ejecutiva del I.N.M.U. Sin embargo, desde ninguna de las dos perspectivas, se puede catalogar o visualizar la creación de un Ministerio. En ese entendido, no es viable otorgarle una atribución Constitucional a una figura que no ha sido constituida bajo el imperativo que faculta el ordenamiento jurídico para la creación de la respectiva cartera ministerial, esto en clara ponderación al principio de legalidad que rigen las actuaciones de la Administración en general,(...) Por lo que desde una perspectiva jurídica, el comúnmente llamado Ministerio de la Condición de la Mujer, sobre el cual la señora Mora Castellanos ejercerá con recargo la Presidencia Ejecutiva del I.N.A.M.U., no ha sido creado con el debido otorgamiento de sus competencias materiales, ergo, no forma parte de los Ministerios de Gobierno en la actualidad, y el fuero de improcedibilidad penal que es una atribución exclusiva de definición en la Constitución Política, no le asigna esa condición de ser Miembro de los Supremos Poderes. Esta circunstancia, por sí misma, que tiene implicaciones procesales dentro del marco del derecho penal, por cuanto, los fueros de improcedibilidad penal únicamente pueden ser establecidos por mandato Constitucional y de ello depende la competencia legal atribuida a esta Sala de Casación Penal para que funja como Tribunal Sentenciador, tenor de los numerales 391 ss, del título V del Código Procesal Penal, en el capítulo referente al Procedimiento para Juzgar a los Miembros de los Supremos Poderes, sin que exista una posibilidad de realizar una interpretación extensiva del tema en esta materia.” Así las cosas, considerando que la imputada Patricia Mora Castellanos no reviste la condición de miembro de un supremo poder, con base en los artículos 48, 49 y 391 del Código Procesal Penal, 56 de la Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial, así como el artículo 136 de la Constitución Política, se debe declarar la incompetencia de la Sala Tercera de la Corte Suprema de Justicia para conocer de la solicitud de desestimación planteada por la Fiscala General de la República. Se ordena remitir el expediente al Juzgado Penal de Hacienda del Segundo Circuito Judicial de San José para lo que en derecho corresponda."