← Environmental Law Center← Centro de Derecho Ambiental
Res. 24195-2021 Sala Constitucional · Sala Constitucional · 29/10/2021
OutcomeResultado
The amparo was granted solely against the Municipality of Golfito for failing to take the necessary steps to address Río Conte flooding, ordering the Mayor to act within three months; it was denied against MINAE and the CNE.El amparo se declaró con lugar únicamente contra la Municipalidad de Golfito por omitir las gestiones necesarias para solucionar las inundaciones del río Conte, ordenándosele al Alcalde actuar en un plazo de tres meses; se desestimó contra el MINAE y la CNE.
SummaryResumen
An amparo action filed by a resident of the La Amapola community (Puerto Jiménez, Golfito) over persistent flooding from the Río Conte since 2013. The petitioner alleged omissions by the Municipality of Golfito, MINAE, and the National Emergency Commission. The Constitutional Chamber granted the amparo exclusively against the Municipality of Golfito, finding it had never formally submitted the required river-channel works permit application to MINAE's Water Directorate despite having been instructed on the proper procedure. The Chamber reiterated that its environmental jurisdiction is limited to verifying whether state entities acted responsibly and promptly under Article 50, without becoming a reviewer of technical criteria. The Mayor was ordered to resolve the flooding within three months. MINAE and the CNE were exonerated, as no culpable omissions were proven against them.Recurso de amparo interpuesto por un vecino de la comunidad de La Amapola, Puerto Jiménez (Golfito), ante las continuas inundaciones causadas por el desbordamiento del río Conte desde 2013. El recurrente alegó omisiones de la Municipalidad de Golfito, del MINAE y de la CNE. La Sala Constitucional declaró con lugar el amparo únicamente contra la Municipalidad de Golfito, al comprobar que esta nunca presentó formalmente la solicitud de permiso de obra en cauce ante la Dirección de Agua del MINAE, a pesar de haber sido instruida sobre el procedimiento. La Sala reiteró que su competencia en materia ambiental se limita a verificar si las entidades estatales han actuado responsable y oportunamente conforme al artículo 50 constitucional, sin convertirse en revisora de criterios técnicos. Ordenó al Alcalde de Golfito resolver el problema en tres meses. El MINAE y la CNE fueron exonerados por no haberse acreditado omisiones lesivas a su cargo.
Key excerptExtracto clave
It must be recalled that, in this Chamber's jurisprudence, it has repeatedly been stated that constitutional competence in environmental matters cannot extend to the point of becoming a reviewer of the technical criteria set forth in regulations or by administrative authorities in environmental matters; rather, it is limited to ascertaining whether the competent state agencies have fulfilled the obligation imposed on them by Article 50 of the Constitution, to assume a responsible and timely course of action with respect to environmental protection (ruling No. 2021-020303, at 09:15 hours of September 10, 2021). This Chamber deems it pertinent to note that, pursuant to Articles 50 and 169 of the Constitution, it is the responsibility of Municipal Government to ensure respect for a healthy and ecologically balanced environment within its respective territorial jurisdiction, as well as the well-being of all inhabitants of its canton, and therefore, within the framework of its constitutional and legal powers, it must act, notify, and coordinate with the relevant authorities if it considers that a circumstance exists—such as the problem of flooding and overflow of the river in question—that could affect or threaten the life and safety of inhabitants of the area. In light of the foregoing, the Chamber finds that the respondent Municipality has omitted to carry out the necessary actions to prevent the flooding problem existing in the area where the petitioner resides, which puts his health at risk and threatens his physical integrity every time there are heavy rains. In view of the above, this Tribunal considers that the omissions attributed to the respondent municipality violate Articles 21 and 50 of the Constitution.Debe recordarse que, en la jurisprudencia de esta Sala, de forma reiterada se ha indicado que la competencia constitucional en materia ambiental no puede extenderse al punto en que se convierta en un verificador de los criterios técnicos vertidos en las normas o por las autoridades administrativas en materia ambiental, sino que se limita a constatar si las dependencias estatales competentes han cumplido la obligación que les impone el artículo 50 de la Constitución Política, de asumir una actuación responsable y oportuna respecto a la protección del ambiente (sentencia No. 2021-020303, de las 09:15 horas del 10 de setiembre de 2021). Esta Sala estima pertinente indicar que de conformidad con el artículo 50 y 169 de la Constitución Política, es responsabilidad del Gobierno Municipal, velar por el respeto a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado en su respectiva circunscripción territorial, así como por el bienestar de todos los habitantes de su respectivo cantón, y por ello, dentro del marco de sus competencias constitucionales y legales, está actuar, avisar y coordinar con las autoridades respectivas, si consideran que existe alguna circunstancia, como lo es el problema de desbordamientos e inundaciones del río en cuestión, en donde podría afectar o amenazar la vida y la seguridad de los habitantes de la zona. En mérito de lo expuesto, estima la Sala que la Municipalidad recurrida ha omitido efectuar las acciones necesarias para prevenir el problema de inundaciones existente en el área en que habita el recurrente, lo cual pone en riesgo su salud amenaza y su integridad física cada vez que existen precipitaciones fuertes. En atención a lo anterior, este Tribunal considera que las omisiones atribuidas al ayuntamiento recurrido atentan contra lo dispuesto en los artículos 21 y 50 de la Constitución Política.
Pull quotesCitas destacadas
"De lo expuesto, se desprende la responsabilidad en los hechos por parte de la Municipalidad de Golfito, no así del MINAE, como lo alega el recurrente."
"From the foregoing, the factual responsibility of the Municipality of Golfito is established, but not that of MINAE, as the petitioner alleges."
Considerando VI
"De lo expuesto, se desprende la responsabilidad en los hechos por parte de la Municipalidad de Golfito, no así del MINAE, como lo alega el recurrente."
Considerando VI
"...la demora en la atención a la situación denunciada por el tutelado, no puede ser endilgada a la autoridad recurrida del MINAE, pues se colige de los autos que ha sido la Municipalidad de Golfito la que no ha cumplido con lo prevenido."
"...the delay in addressing the situation reported by the petitioner cannot be attributed to the respondent MINAE authority, since it is clear from the record that it was the Municipality of Golfito that failed to comply with what was required of it."
Considerando VI
"...la demora en la atención a la situación denunciada por el tutelado, no puede ser endilgada a la autoridad recurrida del MINAE, pues se colige de los autos que ha sido la Municipalidad de Golfito la que no ha cumplido con lo prevenido."
Considerando VI
"tales situaciones de emergencia no constituyen un Estado de Emergencia declarado por el Poder Ejecutivo, por lo cual se sigue, con toda lógica, que en tales casos, no es procedente eximir a la administración pública, aunque sea de forma excepcional y transitoria, de su obligación de cumplir con los trámites o procedimientos diseñados para proteger el derecho a un medio ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrados, pues dicha posibilidad excepcional y extraordinaria está reservada para los Estados de Emergencia declarados por el Poder Ejecutivo conforme sus potestades legales y constitucionales"
"such emergency situations do not constitute a State of Emergency declared by the Executive Branch, from which it logically follows that in such cases it is not appropriate to exempt the public administration, even exceptionally and temporarily, from its obligation to comply with the procedures designed to protect the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, since that exceptional and extraordinary possibility is reserved for States of Emergency declared by the Executive Branch pursuant to its legal and constitutional powers"
Dictamen PGR C-162-2021 citado en informe de la Dirección de Agua del MINAE
"tales situaciones de emergencia no constituyen un Estado de Emergencia declarado por el Poder Ejecutivo, por lo cual se sigue, con toda lógica, que en tales casos, no es procedente eximir a la administración pública, aunque sea de forma excepcional y transitoria, de su obligación de cumplir con los trámites o procedimientos diseñados para proteger el derecho a un medio ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrados, pues dicha posibilidad excepcional y extraordinaria está reservada para los Estados de Emergencia declarados por el Poder Ejecutivo conforme sus potestades legales y constitucionales"
Dictamen PGR C-162-2021 citado en informe de la Dirección de Agua del MINAE
"Se ordena a Freiner William Lara Blanco, en su condición de Nombre02 de Golfito o a quien ocupe ese cargo, que gire las órdenes pertinentes y lleve a cabo todas las actuaciones que estén dentro del ámbito de sus competencias, para que, dentro del plazo de tres meses, contado a partir de la notificación de esta sentencia, se solucione el problema de inundaciones que causa el río Conte en la comunidad de La Amapola, sita en Puerto Jiménez, según lo denunciado por el recurrente."
"The Mayor of Golfito or whoever holds that office is ordered to issue the pertinent instructions and carry out all actions within the scope of their powers so that, within three months from notification of this ruling, the flooding problem caused by the Río Conte in the community of La Amapola, located in Puerto Jiménez, as reported by the petitioner, is resolved."
Por tanto
"Se ordena a Freiner William Lara Blanco, en su condición de Nombre02 de Golfito o a quien ocupe ese cargo, que gire las órdenes pertinentes y lleve a cabo todas las actuaciones que estén dentro del ámbito de sus competencias, para que, dentro del plazo de tres meses, contado a partir de la notificación de esta sentencia, se solucione el problema de inundaciones que causa el río Conte en la comunidad de La Amapola, sita en Puerto Jiménez, según lo denunciado por el recurrente."
Por tanto
Full documentDocumento completo
*210161010007CO* SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, at nine hours and twenty minutes on the twenty-ninth of October of two thousand twenty-one.
Writ of amparo (recurso de amparo) filed by [Nombre01 001], of legal age, married, identity card [Valor CED01], against the Mayor, the President of the Municipal Council (Concejo), and the Officer in Charge of the Local Emergency Committee, all of the Municipalidad de Golfito; the Director of Water and the Coordinator of the Térraba-Pacífico Sur Hydrological Unit, both of the Dirección de Agua of the Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía; and the President of the Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias.
Statement of Facts:
"The dismissal (desestimación) for insufficient evidence is ordered in the following case:
| Case File | Offense | Defendant | Type of Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Valor 002] | Invasion of a protected area. Unlawful occupation of public domain property. Unlawful exploitation of forest products in a protected area. | Municipalidad de Guatuso – Ilse María Gutiérrez Sánchez. | Dismissal pursuant to Art. 299 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Dismissal pursuant to Art. 299 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. |
"CONCLUSION OF THE PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS.
Art. 299 – Conclusive Acts. When the Public Prosecutor's Office (Ministerio Público) or the private complainant (querellante) considers that the evidence is insufficient to support the indictment, they may request dismissal or a definitive or provisional stay of proceedings (sobreseimiento definitivo o provisional).
They may also request conditional suspension of proceedings (suspensión del proceso a prueba), the application of prosecutorial discretion criteria (criterios de oportunidad), the abbreviated procedure (procedimiento abreviado), the application of the restorative justice (justicia restaurativa) procedure, or that conciliation (conciliación) be promoted. Together with the charging document (requerimiento), they shall forward to the judge the case files, the evidence, and any other material means of proof in their possession. (As amended by Article 47 of the Ley de justicia restaurativa, N° 9582 of July 2, 2018)." The evidentiary elements that the Public Prosecutor's Office (Fiscalía) found lacking—and which the Court (Juzgado) accepted—consist, as stated in the aforementioned ruling, of "the failure to carry out the procedures under the exception regime (régimen de excepción) to assess whether or not the planned works are warranted, as well as the mitigation measures (medidas de mitigación) that must be adopted for the protection of the environment." The judicial ruling concludes: "For the foregoing reasons and pursuant to Article 140 of the Código Procesal Penal, the MUNICIPALIDAD DE GUATUSO, in the person of its Mayor (Alcaldesa), IS HEREBY ORDERED to 'refrain from carrying out dredging (dragado) works on the Samén, El Sol, Frío, Aguas Negras, and Buena Vista rivers, as well as from conducting timber harvesting (aprovechamiento forestal).'" "With respect to the purview of the Dirección de Agua, it is ordered, jointly with the Dirección de Geología y MINAS, SINAC ARENAL HUETAR NORTE Upala-Guatuso, and SETENA, to carry out an analysis of the dredging works (…) The underlining is not in the original. • To issue a scientific analysis determining whether or not authorization of the works is appropriate…
The Court states that the Order shall NOT cease until the scientific studies required by the exception regime are available, for which purpose the documentation certifying compliance with the order must be submitted to said Criminal Court. It is requested that the evidence be placed once again at the disposal of the prosecutorial body so that it may proceed accordingly." The foregoing was brought to the attention of the Comisión Nacional de Emergencia through official communication DA-1839-2020 of December 16, 2020. On this basis, meetings were held with various entities, including the River Works Division (Obras Fluviales) of MOPT, the Comisión Nacional de Emergencia itself, and the corresponding legal advisors, where the need to revisit this issue and find a legal framework has been presented, so that, in the near foreseeable future, risk-response interventions may be carried out in a timely manner and without the institutional risk of facing legal situations such as the one resolved by the aforementioned Court.
On the other hand, the Executive Directorate of the Sistema Nacional de Áreas de Conservación of MINAE (SINAC) submitted queries to the Procuraduría General de la República on this matter, which gave rise to legal opinions (pronunciamientos) C-45-2021, of February 18, 2021, and C-162-2021, of June 9, 2021.
The first of these concluded: "Based on the foregoing, it is concluded that during a declared State of Emergency (Estado de Emergencia), and throughout its three progressive phases—response and initial impact, rehabilitation, and reconstruction—it could be understood that the public administration should be exempt from compliance with regulations aimed at protecting the right to a healthy environment; however, this possibility is considered valid only insofar as such an exemption is strictly necessary to protect the common good and only to the extent that it is indispensable for addressing the emergency situation alone and exclusively." It should be noted that this refers to and analyzes a declared State of Emergency.
The second concluded: "Under these circumstances, legal opinion C-45-2021 is supplemented in the sense that, although the powers conferred upon the Comisión Nacional de Emergencias in the final paragraph of Article 15 are intended to address local and minor emergency situations—which occur with high frequency and with a particular impact on local communities—such emergency situations do not constitute a State of Emergency declared by the Executive Branch; it therefore follows, with full logic, that in such cases it is not appropriate to exempt the public administration, even in an exceptional and transitory manner, from its obligation to comply with the administrative procedures (trámites o procedimientos) designed to protect the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, since this exceptional and extraordinary possibility is reserved for States of Emergency declared by the Executive Branch pursuant to its legal and constitutional powers." It is therefore clear that the Dirección de Agua and its Unidad Hidrológica Terraba-Pacífico Sur, as well as other units (dependencias) of MINAE, have acted in accordance with the applicable rules.
To date, as has been set out with respect to this specific case, no request has been received that meets the requirements established by the applicable rules for processing and approval as warranted.
As part of a broader effort by the Dirección to encourage the State entities involved in potentially risky interventions, official communication DA-0944-2021 notified CNE and MOPT of the provisions set forth by the Procuraduría General de la República and recommended how to proceed in order to address this legal gap (vacío legal) in timely intervention, by exempting such actions from permits issued by the Dirección de Agua, as was similarly communicated to the Municipalidad de Golfito.
Now, it is important to note that, given the existence of a legal gap in the applicable rules for addressing cases where an emergency has not been formally declared but arises day to day in communities and cannot be planned for in advance, a bill was submitted for consultation at the initiative of several institutions, including the Dirección de Agua: Expediente No. 22404, "REFORMA DEL ARTICULO 32 DE LA LEY NACIONAL DE EMERGENCIAS Y PREVENCIÓN DEL RIESGO, LEY No. 8488 DEL 22 DE NOVIEMBRE DE 2005 Y SUS REFORMAS," with the aim of resolving once and for all that gap and enabling the continuation of the works that must be carried out to address such emergencies.
The Dirección de Agua immediately issued a favorable opinion on this amendment through official communication DA-1114-2021 of July 13, 2021.
It is essential to be very clear that the problem arises with undeclared emergencies that cannot be planned for or anticipated.
As explained, as of today the applicable legal rule for addressing them is lacking.
Approving such works without that rule entails obtaining a ruling like the resolution of the Juzgado de Guatuso cited above.
Based on the foregoing, it is requested that the present writ of amparo (recurso de amparo) be dismissed and the case file be closed.
Furthermore, by means of Official Letter No. CME-O-39-2021, dated September 6, 2021, Licda. Dahianna Campos Monge, in her capacity as Head of the Women's Office (Oficina de la Mujer, OFIM) of the Municipality of Golfito, proceeded to issue a technical report on the operations management reports and the corresponding permitting process (tramitología) for the machinery required at the intervention point in the La Amapola community, which is affected by the rise (crecida) of the Río Conte, the relevant part of which is set out verbatim below: "With reference to Río La Conte in the La Amapola community, Puerto Jiménez. SITUATION REPORT N°CME-G-023. Maximum rise of the Río La e, La Amapola. June 17, 2021, 08:41. SITUATION REPORT N°CME-G-037. Maximum rise of the Río La Conté, La Amapola. June 7, 2021, 14:10. SITUATION REPORT N°CME-G-083. Maximum rise of the Río La Conté, La Amapola. August 24, 2021, 09:25.
These situation reports are forwarded to operations management for proper processing, and to carry out the corresponding permitting process for the machinery required at the intervention point in the La Amapola community, which is affected by the rise of the Río La Conté (sic). It should be noted that the work carried out by the Municipal Emergency Commission (Comisión Municipal de Emergencia) was done within the time and manner prescribed by law for management; however, the MINISTERIO DE AMBIENTE Y ENERGÍA DIRECCIÓN DE AGUA has indicated to us that, in order to proceed with the requested intervention, since the works are not within the framework of a State of Emergency (Estado de Emergencia)—given that none of the documents submitted link them to that characterization—the process is governed by opinion C-162-2021 of June 9, 2021, issued by the Procuraduría General de la República, which states: 'Consequently, it should be noted that although the powers vested in the Comisión Nacional de Emergencias under the last paragraph of Article 15 are intended to address local and minor emergency situations—which occur with high frequency and with particular impact on local communities—such emergency situations do not constitute a State of Emergency declared by the Executive Branch, from which it follows, quite logically, that in such cases it is not appropriate to exempt the public administration, even exceptionally and temporarily, from its obligation to comply with the procedures designed to protect the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, since that exceptional and extraordinary possibility is reserved for States of Emergency declared by the Executive Branch in accordance with its legal and constitutional powers.' Therefore, an in-channel construction permit (permiso de obra en cauce) must first be obtained from this Directorate before proceeding with the requested intervention.
This response delayed the management required to provide an answer to the community. However, on September 1st we were notified that contracting request 0062021201600406, for the rental of heavy machinery (maquinaria pesada) to address the emergency in the canton of Golfito, Puerto Jiménez district, in Dirección01, has been approved and will soon be operating in the area." In light of the foregoing, it is established that the Municipal Administration proceeded to carry out the necessary actions to address the problem of the maximum rise of the Río La Conte in the La Amapola sector, in coordination with the Comisión Nacional de Emergencias; therefore, based on the factual and legal background, as well as the documentary evidence submitted, it is requested that the writ be denied.
I.On Risk Management in Costa Rica. Under Ley No. 8488, Article 4, risk management (gestión del riesgo) is understood as a "process by which the vulnerability (vulnerabilidad) conditions of the population, human settlements (asentamientos humanos), infrastructure, as well as lifelines (líneas vitales), productive activities of goods and services, and the environment are positively reversed. It is a sustainable and preventive model into which effective disaster prevention and mitigation criteria are incorporated within territorial, sectoral, and socioeconomic planning, as well as preparedness, response, and recovery from emergencies." In the same vein, risk management is defined as a "continuous process of analysis, decision-making planning, and execution of actions to identify, prevent, and reduce the likelihood that a potentially destructive event—a hazard (amenaza)—will cause damage or serious disruption to the lives of persons, the socioeconomic fabric (tejido socioeconómico), livelihoods (medios de subsistencia), and the ecosystems of the territories, as well as to establish the tools to respond appropriately in the event that an impact materializes regardless, with the aim of enabling efficient recovery, without rebuilding vulnerability, after a disaster." Risk management operates across different spheres of intervention: from the national, regional, and sectoral level down to the local, community, and family level.
Moreover, it requires the existence and functioning of organizational and institutional systems and structures that represent those spheres and that bring together, under established coordination modalities, their agreed differentiated roles, their collective bodies of social representation of the different actors and interests that participate in the construction of risk and in its reduction, foresight, and control—these must be adequately defined. The management of this risk is the primary foundation of the Sistema Nacional de Gestión del Riesgo [National Risk Management System], understood as the comprehensive, organized, coordinated, and harmonious articulation of the bodies, structures, functional relationships, methods, procedures, and resources of all State institutions, seeking the participation of the entire private sector and organized civil society. Its purpose is the promotion and implementation of the public policy (política pública) guidelines that enable both the Costa Rican State and the various sectors of national activity to incorporate the concept of risk management as a cross-cutting axis (eje transversal) of development planning and practices.
From the foregoing definition, the following can be inferred: 1- That risk is cross-cutting to all public and private activities. 2- That its management must be a public policy of the Costa Rican State. 3- That this policy is embodied in the Plan Nacional de Gestión de Riesgo [National Risk Management Plan]; a document prepared by the Comisión, an act that materializes that public policy and must be mandatorily consulted by the State bodies and entities responsible for planning tasks, who, when preparing their respective plans, shall take into account the guidelines set forth in that Plan. Likewise, when preparing urban development plans, programs, and projects, the risk prevention and mitigation component must be considered, all in accordance with Article 8 of Ley No. 8488. As may be gathered from the foregoing, the Comisión performs a governing function (función rectora) in risk prevention and a coordinating function when it comes to responding to emergencies, or, put another way, the Comisión, by the principle of legality (principio de legalidad), is responsible for directing, guiding, and channeling risk prevention in Costa Rica and for coordinating State institutions when emergencies arise.
II.Responsibility of the Costa Rican State in Disaster Prevention. Ley No. 8488 also conceives of risk management as "a cross-cutting axis of the work of the Costa Rican State; it articulates public instruments, programs, and resources in ordinary and extraordinary, institutional and sectoral actions, aimed at preventing the occurrence of disasters and at managing emergencies in all their phases. Every development policy of the country must incorporate both the necessary elements for an adequate diagnosis of risk and of susceptibility to the impact of disasters, as well as the management axes that allow their control" (Article 5 of Ley o. 8488). Based on the provisions of Articles 3, 8, 25, and 26 of the same law, all State institutions, including primarily the Municipalities, have an imperative mandate to prevent disasters, and in particular it is local governments that must incorporate prevention as a component of urban development projects, considering in their programs the concepts of risk and disaster, including the ordinary management measures that are proper and timely for preventing their occurrence, promoting a culture that tends to reduce them.
Likewise, all public institutions must coordinate with CNE their prevention programs and activities, considering them as a public policy process that must operate on a permanent and sustained basis, with a systemic approach and in line with the Plan Nacional de Gestión del Riesgo. Article 27 additionally provides the obligation for each public institution's budget to include the allocation of resources for disaster risk control, treating prevention as a concept aligned with the development practices that are promoted and carried out. The importance of the shared responsibility (corresponsabilidad) and local commitment of municipalities in risk management lies in the fact that emergencies and possible disasters can materialize in their territories, so that their response and, above all, prevention must be an inherent part of their daily activities. Even "large" disasters that affect the national territory are in reality the sum of hazards and vulnerabilities that occur simultaneously, in a localized and highly dynamic manner, in the municipal territory, as a result of the concatenation of physical, social, economic, and political relationships.
The State has among its missions the prevention of risks that may affect it or its population. It must carry out a preventive task aimed at preventing persons and property from suffering harm as a result of a disaster: protection is provided to avoid damage to human life, health, or personal property. Certainly, an emergency cannot be avoided, but its effects can be mitigated, which requires preventive action. Lack of foresight—that is, failure to anticipate that the situation may arise and failure to act to prevent it—entails a risk to the life, health, and safety of persons and their property. It is understood that no Public Administration can prevent a public calamity from occurring, but responsibility cannot be attributed to it for failing to foresee the consequences that such calamity may generate. This indicates that the legal order obliges every public body, but particularly the Comisión, to act before the emergency arises and not only to act, but essentially to plan and take measures to ensure that, if it does arise, it does not cause damage to persons and property (Dictamen N. C-213-2014 of July 1, 2014).
III.Powers and Responsibilities of Local Governments in Risk Prevention through Land-Use Planning (ordenamiento territorial). It is the duty of the municipal government to ensure, through planning and the exercise of police power (potestad de policía), that urban development meets criteria of safety, public health, and environmental sustainability. The foregoing, in protection of the rights of citizens. Derived directly from Article 169 of the Constitución Política, the Código Municipal, the Ley de Planificación Urbana, the Ley de Construcciones, and related regulations, it is the absolute and exclusive responsibility of municipalities to regulate land use within their jurisdiction. This inescapable duty has been elaborated upon in various opinions of the Procuraduría General de la República, among them, C-093-2007 of March 27, 2007, C-020-2009 of January 29, 2009, C-118-2009 of May 4, 2009, C-155-2009 of June 1, 2009, C-091-2010 of May 3, 2010, and several others in the same vein.
The Sala Constitucional has confirmed this responsibility in decisions such as Nos. 2153-93, 5305-93, 6706-93, 4205-96, 2000-431, 2000-06653, 2001-07485, 2002-01220, 2002-05996, 2002-07751, 2003-11397, 2004-1915, 2004-14404, 2004-01915, 2004-09439, 2005-04002, and 2005-07516, among many others. In this regard, the jurist Eduardo Ortiz Ortiz, cited in Dictamen C-032-98 of February 25, 1998, of the Procuraduría General de la República, has stated: "Municipal competence to issue urban plans derives from statute, since it covers subject matter constitutionally reserved to it, but it also has a constitutional foundation, since it is a local matter. This means that the law may only delegate such competence to the Municipality, and it would be unconstitutional—as a violation of municipal autonomy (autónoma municipal)—for a law to do the contrary and authorize, for example, the Executive Branch." Additionally, the Tribunal de lo Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda has issued decisions consistent with the position of the Procuraduría General, such as resolution N°128-2008 of 10:30 hours on March 7, 2008, N°209-2011 of 14:30 hours on June 16, 2011, and N°124-2011 of 09:50 hours on April 15, 2012, among many others, underscoring the absolute responsibility of local governments with respect to land-use planning.
Agreement N°0443 of November 30, 2011 of the Board of Directors (Junta Directiva) of the Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, adopted at Extraordinary Session No. 10-11 held on Wednesday, November 9, 2011, and published in Gaceta N°230 of November 30, 2011, entitled: "Recommends to mayors (alcaldes y alcaldesas) that they immediately proceed to evict the occupants of recognized-risk and imminent-danger zones and demolish the buildings located in them," conclusively states:
a. To recommend to all mayors of the country:
i. That, pursuant to the duties and powers imposed upon them by the Constitución Política in its Articles 50 and 169, the Código Municipal, the Ley de Planificación Urbana, the Ley de Construcciones, the Ley Orgánica del Ambiente, Article 33 of the Ley Forestal, and related regulations, the Ley General de Salud, and the extensive case law on the subject, they immediately proceed to evict the occupants of recognized-risk and imminent-danger zones, as well as to demolish the buildings located in them, and to ensure that they are not re-occupied by human settlements, applying the procedural sequence cited in Considerando IV, extracted from resolution No. 12485-2010 of the Sala Constitucional.
ii. That, given the binding character that the Sala Constitucional confers upon them, they immediately implement the recommendations that the technical staff of CNE and of academic institutions have repeatedly provided to them over many years and of which they are aware, regarding specific and timely actions to safeguard human life in recognized-risk and imminent-danger zones.
The studies and technical recommendations that have historically been issued in each case were made available to the municipalities at the CNE offices. The Internal Audit Units and the Municipal Councils shall ensure compliance with these provisions. Non-compliance shall be considered a breach of duties and must be reported by the Internal Audit Units to the attention of the appropriate authority. (…) d. Formally communicate this Agreement to all Mayors (Alcaldes and Alcaldesas) and to the Defensoría de los Habitantes. e. Publish this Agreement and the country's natural hazard summary map (available on the website, www.cne.go.cr) in the official gazette and in a nationally circulated newspaper." (Underlining not in the original.) At this point, it is necessary to recall that, by constitutional mandate, the administration of the local interests and services of the canton (cantón) is the responsibility of the Local Government, which has full legal capacity to execute all types of acts and contracts necessary to fulfill its purposes.
The Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias is the governing public institution with respect to the coordination of preventive efforts in situations of imminent risk, mitigation, and emergency response. It is a body of maximum administrative decentralization (desconcentración máxima) attached to the Office of the President of the Republic, with instrumental legal personality for the management and administration of its budget and for the investment of its resources, with its own assets and budget. Its domicile is in the capital of the Republic, where its main headquarters are located. The actions of the CNE must be guided in accordance with the principles established by Ley No. 8488 in Article 3, among them: the state of necessity and urgency, understood as a situation of danger to a legally protected interest that can only be preserved by violating another legally protected interest, with the least possible harm to the latter and subject to subsequent accounting as required by the laws governing economic, legal, and fiscal oversight; protection of life, considering that those present in the national territory must be protected in their lives, physical integrity, property, and environment against disasters or dangerous events that may occur; and finally prevention, as anticipatory action aimed at reducing vulnerability, as well as measures taken to avoid or mitigate the impacts of dangerous events or disasters — these actions or measures, by their very nature, are of public interest and mandatory compliance.
Both ordinary and extraordinary actions are fundamentally premised on the protection of life, not only of Costa Ricans but of every inhabitant or resident in the country. Indeed, Article 3 of the Law establishes the protection of life as a fundamental principle. However, the statement of this principle does not limit protection solely to the life and physical integrity of persons present in the national territory. On the contrary, protection of life encompasses protection of the environment and of the property of persons residing there, regardless of their nationality. Protection of life, physical integrity, patrimony, and security underlies other principles established for the purpose of responding to emergencies and risk situations, as is the case with the principle of solidarity.
Among its ordinary powers under Ley N°8488 is the obligation set forth in:
Article 14° — Ordinary prevention powers of the Commission. The Commission shall be the governing entity with respect to risk prevention and emergency preparedness. It shall fulfill the following powers: (…) c) Issue binding resolutions regarding situations of risk, disaster, and imminent danger, based on technical and scientific criteria, aimed at guiding regulatory and control actions for their effective prevention and management, which shall regulate or mandate effective compliance by State institutions, the private sector, and the general public. Officials of the bodies and entities competent to execute or implement such binding resolutions may not, under any circumstances, decline to apply them. Physical or legal persons, public or private, who build on or improperly use areas restricted by these binding resolutions shall be subject to the obligation to demolish or remove the work, pursuant to Article 36 of this Law.
(…) g) Promote and foster the monitoring and management of risk situations through the study or implementation of observation, monitoring, and alert measures that make it possible to anticipate, reduce, and avoid the impact and damage of possible disaster events. Furthermore, when necessary, coordinate the monitoring and management of such situations." Likewise, the Law defines its extraordinary powers in Article 15, which reads verbatim: "Upon declaration of a state of emergency as established in Article 29 of this Law, the Commission shall be responsible for planning, coordinating, directing, and controlling actions aimed at resolving urgent needs, and for executing protection, rescue, and rehabilitation programs and activities. To that end, it shall carry out, at a minimum, the following actions: a) The coordination, direction, and control of the response to emergencies declared as such by the Executive Branch shall be carried out according to the phases defined in Article 30 of this Law; for this purpose, the Commission, through the Executive Directorate, shall prepare the General Emergency Plan in accordance with the terms set forth in Chapter VI of this Law. b) It must coordinate damage assessments, for which the institutions of the Central Administration, the Decentralized Public Administration of the State, Local Governments, and state-owned enterprises shall be responsible for assessing damages and coordinating that assessment with the Commission. c) Plan, coordinate, organize, and supervise the execution of rescue operations by public and private, national and international bodies. d) Coordinate the scientific and technical investigations necessary for the Plan, as well as physical and economic recovery programs, and provide the necessary follow-up. e) Designate as executing units those public institutions whose scope of competence covers the execution of the works defined in the General Emergency Plan, and supervise their implementation. f) Hire special personnel as required for defined periods and in accordance with the emergency declaration.
Except as provided in the preceding subparagraphs, the Commission shall respond, without the need for an emergency declaration by the Executive Branch, to local and minor emergencies that, due to their high frequency and the serious impact they cause on communities, require the provision of a first-impact humanitarian service (servicio humanitario de primer impacto), consisting of the delivery of blankets, food, and sleeping mats and, where necessary, the procurement of materials to rehabilitate basic services and set up shelters, as well as the contracting of a maximum of one hundred machine-hours for the cleanup of the most affected area of the zone." (Underlining not in the original.)
It should be noted that Ley N°8488, as part of the extraordinary powers, authorizes the CNE to respond to local and minor emergencies through the mechanism of "first impacts" (Primeros Impactos), since the final paragraph of Article 15 provides: "Except as provided in the preceding subparagraphs, the Commission shall respond, without the need for an emergency declaration by the Executive Branch, to local and minor emergencies that, due to their high frequency and the serious impact they cause on communities, require the provision of a first-impact humanitarian service, consisting of the delivery of blankets, food, and sleeping mats and, where necessary, the procurement of materials to rehabilitate basic services and set up shelters, as well as the contracting of a maximum of one hundred machine-hours for the cleanup of the most affected area of the zone." (Underlining not in the original.)
Now, the final paragraph of Article 15 refers to a first-impact humanitarian service. The Law uses the term "first impact" (primer impacto) to refer to the initial phase of response to a declared emergency. Indeed, Article 30 of the Law, which divides that response into a response phase, a rehabilitation phase, and finally a reconstruction phase, establishes that the response phase is immediate to the occurrence of the event. That phase includes urgent first-impact measures aimed at safeguarding lives, the infrastructure of vital public services, property, and the environment. It also includes mitigation works aimed at protecting the population, infrastructure, and the environment. Article 4 defines response (respuesta) as the actions taken immediately following the occurrence of an emergency; they seek to control a situation in order to safeguard works and lives, prevent greater harm, and stabilize the area of the region directly impacted by the emergency.
In this regard, without the need for an emergency declaration, the Commission may respond to local and minor emergencies, for which the contracting of a maximum of 100 machine-hours for the cleanup of the affected area is permitted. Likewise, Article 30, paragraph a) of the same law establishes that in the response phase — which is an operational phase immediately following the occurrence of the event — urgent first-impact measures are included, aimed at safeguarding lives, the infrastructure of vital public services, and the production of goods and services through alert, alarm, evacuation, and relocation actions, among others.
The Procuraduría General de la República, through Opinion C-030-2016 of February 15, 2016, stated the following with respect to first impacts: "As indicated, the response to local or minor emergencies falls to the Commission. However, given that the actions in question are classified as first-impact actions, it must be noted that the Commission does not act alone. Among the coordination bodies established by Article 10 of the Law, we find the Emergency Operations Center, a body of the Commission that brings together public institutions, governmental or otherwise, 'that work in the first response and rehabilitation phase of the emergency.' It is this body that prepares and executes first-response operations in emergency situations. Taking into account the coordination bodies established by the Law, it can be affirmed that a local or minor emergency involves all bodies with competence over the resulting damages.
It should be noted that, for the response to such minor emergencies, the Law allows the Commission to transfer to regional, municipal, and community committees, for their custody and administration, supplies and equipment for 'first response,' to be used in assisting the affected population, pursuant to Article 52. Consequently, the aforementioned committees participate in the response to such minor and local emergencies, using, where applicable, the assets transferred by the CNE."
With respect to the Emergency Exception Regime (Régimen de Excepción), this arises from a Declaration of a State of Emergency, which is issued by the Executive Branch, as provided in Article 29 of Ley N°8488. The Emergency Declaration permits exceptional treatment in the face of budgetary rigidity, by virtue of Article 180 of the Political Constitution (Constitución Política), so that the Government may swiftly obtain sufficient economic, material, or other resources to attend to persons, property, and services affected or in danger (art.
31 Ley N°8488); depending on the need at the various stages of the emergency, as established in Article 30 of the aforementioned law. In order to invoke the exception regime (régimen de excepción), a causal link (nexo de causalidad) must unequivocally exist between the event giving rise to the state of necessity and urgency and the damages actually caused. In this regard, the Sala Constitucional, in voto número 1992-003410, reiterated in voto número 2001-001369, of 2:30 p.m. on February 14, 2001, states: "the existence of a causal link is required for CNE's intervention between the event that occurred and the investment being made, duly supported by an emergency decree (decreto de emergencia) issued by the Executive Branch and a General Emergency Plan (Plan General de Emergencias), understood as a definition of functions, responsibilities, and general procedures for institutional response and alerts." Once a State of Emergency has been declared, the emergency response is carried out in three phases, as established in Article 30 of the aforementioned law, consisting of: a response phase (fase de respuesta) aimed at applying urgent measures for life, vital public service infrastructure, and the production of vital goods and services; a rehabilitation phase (fase de rehabilitación), which refers to the stabilization of the affected region through actions directed at the temporary rehabilitation of vital services such as water, transportation, telecommunications, health, commerce, and electricity, among others; and finally, a reconstruction phase (fase de reconstrucción) aimed at restoring the normal functioning of affected public services, including the reconstruction and replacement of public and socially relevant infrastructure, decades, as well as the implementation of land-use (uso de suelo de la tierra) regulation measures aimed at preventing future damage.
When the Executive Branch has issued the decree declaring the state of emergency, the Commission, through its Executive Directorate and in consultation with its Chair, convened the institutions with competence in the area and any others it deems necessary due to their being within the emergency's area of impact, for the preparation of the General Emergency Plan (Plan General de la Emergencia), an instrument that allows for the rational, efficient, and systematic planning and channeling of the actions to be taken, the necessary supervision, and the allocation of required resources. For this purpose, within a maximum period of two months, the convened institutions must submit an official report of the damages suffered in their area of competence, with an estimate of the costs and needs to be covered. There must unequivocally exist a cause-and-effect relationship in this damage report. Based on the submitted reports and other documentation certified by the Commission, the General Emergency Plan will be prepared.
The General Emergency Plan is the planning instrument that establishes the causal link between the event that occurred and the actions and investments made to address the emergency. It consists of a description of the causal event, an assessment of the damages, and an estimate of the losses generated, broken down by canton and sector; it likewise includes the delineation of the actions each institution must carry out, including those of the Commission itself, as well as a detailed breakdown of the investment required at each phase of the emergency response, from the response phase through the reconstruction of the affected area. It must also indicate the immediate action measures, the human and material resource needs required to address the event, the mediate action measures, such as those relating to the rehabilitation and reconstruction of the affected areas, and the eradication and prevention of the risk situations that gave rise to the emergency.
All institutions are obligated by this Law to contribute as necessary, with information and technical support, to the preparation of the General Emergency Plan. The drafting of this Plan, as well as the responsibilities relating to its subsequent implementation, shall take priority over the ordinary duties of each individual institution, for as long as the state of emergency is in effect.
To carry out the actions, works, and contracts, the Commission shall designate public institutions with competence in the area where the actions are to be carried out as Executing Units (Unidades Ejecutoras), provided that those institutions have a sufficient structure to fulfill their commitments; both the Commission and the executing units shall be required to prepare investment plans (planes de inversión), detailing in a comprehensive and thorough manner the actions, works, and financial resources employed to address their respective assignments, and these plans must be approved by the Commission's Board of Directors (Junta Directiva). The designation of Executing Units enables the allocation of emergency resources, which entails the use and management of those resources in accordance with the applicable procedures.
In this regard, it should be noted that Article 51, second paragraph, of the Law provides that the procurement of goods and services financed with resources from the Emergency Response Fund (Fondo para la atención de emergencias) for declared emergencies shall be governed by the principles of the Ley de la Contratación Administrativa, the provisions of the institution's Reglamento Interno de la Proveeduría institucional, and the specific provisions issued for such procurement.
The Procuraduría General de la República, in Legal Opinion No. 044 – J, dated July 20, 2012, addressed the matter, stating: "Although the General Plan must contain all the actions to be taken in response to the emergency, in its various phases, the agencies that will be responsible for those actions, and the overall investment required by the emergency across its various phases, it is nevertheless true that once an agency is designated as an executing unit, it becomes obligated to prepare an investment plan describing the actions, works, and financial resources it will employ to carry out its assigned duties. That is, an action plan for its emergency obligations, as those obligations arise from the General Plan. That investment plan cannot be limited to mentioning the main lines of action, since the law not only states that it must contain a detailed description, but also specifies that it must be comprehensive and thorough; which requires that the actions be described in their various elements in order to specify how the needs arising from the emergency will be addressed. It follows from the foregoing that the investment plan is a consequence of the General Plan. Consequently, it must include the actions set forth in the General Plan and maintain the corresponding causal link between the emergency and the actions financed under that new plan" (underlining not in the original).
VII.Regarding the specific case. Having reviewed the writ of amparo (recurso de amparo) filed against MINAE and CNE by [Nombre01 001], it should be noted that CNE is processing Emergency Procurement No.2021CE-000055-0006500001, entitled "Design and construction of a single-lane vehicular bridge with an attached pedestrian walkway over Río Frío RC 2-15-208, Sector Amapola/Riviera, San Rafael, Guatuso," which is currently underway; however, given the events reported in August, the topography of the site—specifically on the banks of the río Amapola—was affected to the point that the width of the river increased considerably, meaning that the studies originally approved for the construction of the bridge are no longer viable at this time, as the river's width went from 23 meters to approximately 64 meters, which requires a technical analysis of the situation in order to consult with river hydraulics experts regarding the new course of action, given that the contractual scope would be changing considerably.
It should further be noted that a review of the technical studies that gave rise to the procurement has been requested so that the Administration may take the appropriate measures, given that the current dimension or length of the bridge, according to the terms of reference, was tendered at 23 meters, with the new measurement being approximately 64 meters; this entails an assessment not only from a technical standpoint but also from a legal standpoint, as it significantly affects the contractual scope and would increase not only the bridge's span but also the budget allocated for the project.
It is requested that the present writ of amparo be dismissed as against the Commission, given that the entity represented herein has not violated any constitutional right of the petitioner; on the contrary, work has been carried out on site to address the problem; however, due to force majeure (fuerza mayor), the procurement currently underway cannot be continued or executed, as the topographic characteristics of the river have changed considerably and it is no longer possible to construct the originally proposed structure. Therefore, it is requested that the proceedings be archived and that the entity represented herein be exonerated from constitutional liability. The foregoing, pursuant to the provisions of Article 9 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional.
2016 Situation caused by Hurricane Otto 2017 Situation caused by Tropical Storm Nate 2019 Water Deficit 2020 Hurricane Eta Regarding the events mentioned above, reports are available which he transcribes concerning Hurricane Eta, Tropical Storm Nate, and Hurricane Otto. With respect to works carried out on the Conte River, there is Emergency Procurement for Undeclared Emergency No. 102-2017, entitled: "Rental of machinery to carry out works in Puntarenas, Golfito," which consisted of channeling works (canalización) on the Conte River in the La Amapola sector, as well as the reconstruction of protective works (obras de protección). The works performed are detailed as follows: - Rental of 100 machine-hours of a John Deere Backhoe Excavator (Pala Excavadora), year 2016, license plate , model 210GLC, engine number PE6068G948146, for the performance of channeling works on the Conte River in the La Amapola sector and reconstruction of protective works, Coordinates: Start 560914.55 — 951393.30 End: 560773.44 — 952081.22.
Purchase Order No. 6210; works were carried out between October 17 and 29, 2017. For the year 2018, there is Technical Report IAR-INF-1119-2018 from the CNE's Risk Analysis Unit (Unidad de Análisis del Riesgo), corresponding to the landslide risk assessment (valoración de riesgo por deslizamiento) for Alto Conte, Golfito, prepared for the purpose of evaluating a landslide that occurred at the beginning of October 2018 and destroyed three residential homes while causing structural damage to a fourth dwelling; Technical Report IAR-INF-1179-2018 provides the same information to the Municipalidad de Golfito. Attached is Situation Report No. CME-G-083, concerning the "Maximum flood (crecida máxima) of the La Conté River, La Amapola," dated August 24, 2021, generated at 09:25 hours, in which the following situation was described: "I. Event Characteristics (…). II. Report of Population Impact and Needs (…). 2.1.
Table 1 (Affected Communities) (…). 2.2. Table 2 (Affected Persons) (…). 2.3. Table 12 (Affected Dwellings) (…). 2.4. Table 3 (Temporary Shelters) (…)." It should be noted that CNE processed Emergency Procurement No. 2021CE-000055-0006500001, entitled "Design and construction of a single-lane vehicular bridge with an attached pedestrian walkway over Río Frío RC 2-15-208, Sector Amapola/Riviera, San Rafael, Guatuso," which remains in progress; however, given the events reported in August, the topography of the site, specifically along the banks (márgenes) of the Amapola River, was affected to the point that the width of the river increased considerably, meaning that the studies originally approved for construction of the bridge are no longer viable at this time, as the river's width went from approximately 23 meters to approximately 64 meters, which entails a technical analysis of the situation in order to consult with hydraulic engineering experts regarding the new course of action, since the contractual object would be varying considerably.
It is further noted that a review of the technical studies that gave rise to the procurement has been requested so that the Administration may take the corresponding measures, since the current span or length of the bridge, pursuant to the terms of reference (términos de referencia), was tendered at 23 meters, while the new measurement is approximately 64 meters; this implies an assessment not only from a technical standpoint but also from a legal standpoint, as it substantially affects the contractual object and would increase not only the span of the bridge but also the budget allocated for such works. He requests that the supplemental report of his client be accepted as such and that the present writ of amparo be dismissed as against that Commission, given that his client has not infringed any constitutional right of the petitioner.
Drafted by Justice Garro Vargas; and,
Considering:
I.On the consequence of failing to submit the report requested by the Chamber. In accordance with the provisions of Article 45 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, if the respondent authority (autoridad recurrida) does not submit its report, the facts alleged by the petitioning party are deemed to be true. The Chamber proceeds to examine the merits of the amparo on the basis of the factual record set forth, which does not automatically mean that the writ will be granted. In the specific case at hand, although Eduardo Enrique Mora Castro, in his capacity as Head of the Legal Advisory Unit of the National Commission for Risk Prevention and Emergency Response and General Judicial Attorney-in-Fact of that institution, submitted two reports, it must be noted that in the admissibility order (auto de curso) for the present proceedings the report was requested from the President of that maximum-deconcentration body attached to the Office of the President. Accordingly, the report is deemed not to have been submitted, and this Chamber resolves the case by weighing the other reports presented, the evidence provided, and the case law of this Tribunal applicable to the specific case.
II.Subject matter of the writ. The petitioner alleges that since 2013, the community of La Amapola, located in Puerto Jiménez de Golfito, has been suffering repeated flooding caused by the Conte River. He states that he previously filed writ of amparo number 17-009261-0007-CO, which was granted; however, the situation has not been fully resolved, since the main road — the sole access route for residents living at the end of the main thoroughfare — has deteriorated, and those residents have on multiple occasions been completely isolated (incomunicados). Furthermore, as a result of the heavy rainfall (fuertes precipitaciones) that occurred on May 18, 2021, the maximum flood of the Conte River took place, causing the levee (dique) to disappear on both banks. He argues that the Municipalidad de Golfito has shown willingness to resolve the problem at issue; however, its efforts have been obstructed by MINAE, due to the impossibility of carrying out works in the main channel (cauce mayor) of the Conte River, as MINAE denies the permit citing internal regulations (reglamentaciones internas) of that ministry.
III.Proven facts. For purposes of deciding this matter, the following facts are deemed duly established, either because they have been substantiated as such or because the respondents failed to address them as required by the initial order:
The permit may be requested digitally through the SIPECO platform, accessible on the website www.da.go.cr. Please be advised that, given these are emergency situations, this Directorate will give priority attention to the processing and resolution of such permits" (reports submitted by the respondent authorities of MINAE and the Nombre02 of Golfito, and documentary evidence submitted).
IV.Unproven Fact. The following fact, which is relevant to the resolution of this amparo appeal (recurso de amparo), is considered unproven.
Sole finding. That the Municipalidad de Golfito complied with the requirement set forth in official communication No. DA-UHTPSOZ-0773-2021, dated July 23, 2021, issued by the Unidad Hidrológica Térraba-Pacífico Sur of the Dirección de Agua of MINAE.
V.Regarding the previous amparo appeal filed by the petitioner. On June 15, 2017, the petitioner in the present case filed the amparo appeal that was processed under expediente No. 17-009261-0007-CO, the subject matter of which was as follows:
"II.- Subject matter of the appeal. The petitioner states that he is the owner of the property registered under folio real (finca matrícula de folio real) No. , located in La Amapola, Río Conte, in Puerto Jiménez de Puntarenas, with an area of 317.58 square meters. Following the passage of Hurricane Otto through the Puerto Jiménez area, the community of La Amapola has been affected by massive alluvial flooding (aluvión masivo) and water erosion (erosión hídrica), as the course of the river shifted into his property and onto the main road. During the rainy season, the river overflowed its banks, causing the loss of arable surface area suitable for cultivation. It also resulted in the obstruction of the only road providing access to and egress from the area for local residents. This obstruction prevents residents from accessing healthcare services, emergency services, public utilities, educational centers, and commercial and tourism activities, a situation that affects adults, elderly persons, and minors who live in the area.
To that end, on December 20, 2016, he filed a request with the Municipalidad de Golfito for compliance with the provisions set out in technical report No. AR-INF-0044-2013, given the ongoing erosion and washing away of the land on which residents' homes are situated, as well as problems caused by the river encroaching on the road. He notes that, by letter addressed to the President of the Comisión Nacional de Emergencias, he requested an audience to present the problems affecting the community of La Amapola of Puerto Jiménez, and further indicated that technical report No. MARINF-0044-2013, submitted to the Municipalidad de Golfito, had warned of the risk of flooding and river overflow. That letter also refers to the damage suffered on his property, on the road, gates, green areas, horses, and crops. Having received no response, on February 21, 2017, he requested from the Nombre02 of the Municipalidad de Golfito information regarding the status of his pending requests and the stage they were at.
Nevertheless, the requests submitted to the respondent authorities for the mitigation and resolution of the existing problems caused by the river overflow and recurring flooding have not been addressed, in clear violation of his rights. He further states that some communities have been cut off, as the bridge spanning the river was undermined by strong currents, preventing passage through the area. He submits that the inaction of the respondent authorities in addressing the problems and basic needs of the area constitutes a violation of his fundamental rights." That matter was decided in favor of the petitioner by judgment No. 2017-014302, issued at 09:340 hours on September 8, 2017, based on the following considerations:
V.On the Merits. In the case under review, the appellant considers his rights to health, life, property, and a healthy and ecologically balanced environment to have been violated, inasmuch as for several years he has been suffering from flooding (inundaciones) caused by the Río Conte, which poses a danger to the lives of members of his community, Amapola de Puerto Jiménez. He states that erosion and landslides (deslave) from the river cause flooding and flood surges (crecidas) that have resulted in the loss of overland access, with the consequent problems for health, education, and emergency-response services that affect all residents of that community, but particularly senior citizens and minors. He likewise states that the agricultural production and management of crops and livestock of the inhabitants of that area have been affected, as demonstrated by the evidence submitted to the case file; accordingly, he has been requesting municipal intervention since 2013, without any response providing a definitive solution to the problem they face having materialized to date.
That being so, the Court finds it established that the Risk Research and Analysis Unit of CNE issued report IAR-INF-0044-2013 in 2013, prepared by geologist Ignacio Chaves Salas at the appellant's request. That technical document describes and characterizes the existing problem at the evaluated site, which consists of lateral erosion (erosión lateral) on the right bank (margen) of the Río Conte — a natural feature of the river's normal flow dynamics — as well as the potential flood threat to farms located in that sector, owing to the small difference in elevation between the river's base level and the edge of the properties; these overflows (desbordamientos) could also affect the access road to the farms and leave that settlement cut off from the outside. The technical report's recommendations identify the need to carry out dredging (dragado) or removal of material from the river to reduce the area's vulnerability to waterlogging (anegamientos) and thereby prevent damage to the road and properties from lateral erosion; it further indicates that the Municipalidad de Golfito should be notified so that it may act within its jurisdiction and evaluate the possibility of carrying out the necessary works.
Following the passage of Hurricane Otto through the Puerto Jiménez area in December 2016, the community of La Amapola was affected, and on December 20, 2016, residents of that community requested the Municipality's intervention to dredge the Río Conte and resolve the river overflow problem. On February 21, 2017, the appellant, [Nombre01 001], submitted a note addressed to the Nombre02 Municipal of Golfito, reiterating the request of December 20, 2016; however, no response or concrete solution to those efforts is on record. The Court also notes that during the present year three requests from the appellant were received by CNE, assigned consecutive numbers 0173-2017, 0320-2017, and 0368-2017, requesting inspections and technical assessments regarding the problems caused to his farm and surrounding areas by the overflow of the Río Conte during the extraordinary rainfall associated with the passage of Hurricane Otto.
In response to these requests, and taking into account the background of the technical report previously prepared in 2013, official communication IAR-OF-0135-2017 of June 27, 2017 was issued, signed by a Geologist and the Head of the Risk Research and Analysis Unit of CNE. That technical document states that, as of that date, the vulnerability conditions with respect to flooding in the community of Amapola, Puerto Jiménez de Osa, had not diminished, since no mitigation works (obras de mitigación) or protective works on the affected bank of the Río Conte had been carried out, nor had channelization works (obras de canalización) been performed on the channel (cauce) to maintain normal flow dynamics. Given the situation in the affected area, that official communication recommends carrying out protection and mitigation works in the channel of the Río Conte, as well as the establishment of a maintenance and cleaning plan for the channel by the Municipalidad de Golfito, which would allow for the periodic removal of accumulated material from the river's channel and ensure normal flow dynamics without generating problems along the banks.
In its defense, representatives of the Municipalidad de Golfito stated that, pursuant to the Emergency Plan issued in response to the situation caused by the passage of Hurricane Otto through Costa Rican territory — issued under Emergency Decree N°40027, approved by the Board of Directors of CNE through agreement N°040-03-2017 at Ordinary Session N° 04-03-17 held on March 1, 2017, Artículo IV — page 21 sets out the compendium of Technical Commitment Sheets (Fichas de Técnicas de Compromisos) for the institutions involved in its execution, in which the works or actions to be carried out were assigned. In the present case, the reconstruction of protective, cleaning, and river channelization works was assigned to the Stormwater Works Department (Departamento de Obras Pluviales) of MOPT, with an allocated amount of 2.916.848.563.33 million colones.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, subsequent to those municipal actions there is no record of any specific act having been taken to remedy the situation complained of by the petitioner (promovente), even though the problem persists, as stated in official communication IAR-OF-0135-2017 of June 27, 2017, cited above. For its part, the Director of River Works (Dirección de Obras Fluviales) of MOPT indicated that that Directorate bears no responsibility whatsoever, since the entity that initially addressed the problem was the Local Emergency Committee (Comité Local de Emergencias), presided over by the Nombre02 Municipal of Golfito. He states that, once the problem has been documented by that entity and the financial resources required for its resolution are estimated, an assessment is made of whether it can be addressed using the Municipality's own resources — through municipal machinery and personnel — or by contracting private machinery. If the Municipality determines that it lacks the financial capacity, the procedure in these particular cases involving extraordinary events, such as Hurricane Otto, is to request assistance from CNE, as occurred in this case.
Notwithstanding what has been stated above, no solution has yet materialized, nor has any information been provided regarding provisional or urgent measures aimed at preventing or mitigating the effects of the flooding caused by the Río Conte in the community of La Amapola. Taking into account the specific jurisdiction that article 169 of the Constitución Política grants to local governments, by providing that "The administration of local interests and services in each canton shall be the responsibility of the Municipal Government (…)," it is unacceptable for the Municipalidad de Golfito to limit itself to citing the compendium of Technical Commitment Sheets for the institutions involved in the execution of the Emergency Plan, without having played an active part in its execution, as required of it by article 169 of the Constitución Política. Accordingly, the alleged violation of the fundamental rights of the protected party (tutelado) is established, and it is appropriate to grant the writ of amparo (recurso de amparo), with the order to be set out in the operative section (parte dispositiva) of this judgment.
As regards the actions of CNE and the River Works Directorate of MOPT, the writ of amparo must be dismissed. This is because the former institution did provide attention to the matters raised concerning the stated problem and issued two reports recommending municipal intervention. For its part, the River Works Directorate of MOPT lacks direct jurisdiction to intervene in this situation, and any participation by that Directorate would have to be requested by the local government and by CNE.
VI.Conclusion. Accordingly, this Court concludes that, while the municipal authorities are aware of the problems reported by the appellant that affect all residents of the locality due to the aforementioned flooding, no actions have been taken to provide an effective solution to that problem. In conclusion, the writ of amparo is admissible given the lack of effective action on the part of the respondent Municipality; that omission has caused the appellant and the residents of the area to continue enduring flooding, thereby placing the lives and physical integrity of the inhabitants at risk. Accordingly, the respondent Municipality must take the necessary and appropriate actions to provide a comprehensive and definitive solution to the flooding problem reported."
Arising therefrom, in the aforementioned judgment No. 2017-014302, the Court ruled as follows:
"Por tanto: The writ is granted. Elberth Barrantes Arrieta, in his capacity as Nombre02 Municipal, Alberto Díaz Chavarría, in his capacity as President of the Concejo Municipal, and Jimmy Roy Vindas Aguilar, in his capacity as Head of the Local Emergency Committee, all of the Municipalidad de Golfito, or whoever holds those positions, are ordered to immediately upon notification of this judgment adopt all measures necessary within the exercise of their respective jurisdictions to provide a comprehensive and definitive solution to the flooding problem reported by the appellant. They are likewise ordered to adopt the measures necessary to guarantee overland access for the community of Amapola, in Puerto Jiménez, Golfito, as well as access to health, education, and emergency services for all its inhabitants. The foregoing must be carried out within a period of eighteen months from notification of this ruling.
The respondents are hereby warned that failure to comply with this order will constitute the criminal offense of disobedience and that, pursuant to article 71 of the law governing this jurisdiction, a sentence of imprisonment of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, shall be imposed on anyone who receives an order issued in a writ of amparo proceeding that must be complied with or enforced and who fails to comply with or enforce it, provided the offense is not more severely penalized under another provision. The Municipalidad de Golfito is ordered to pay all costs, damages, and losses caused by the acts underlying this declaration, to be assessed in contentious-administrative enforcement proceedings. As regards CNE and the River Works Directorate of MOPT, the writ is dismissed. This ruling shall be personally notified to the respondents or to whoever holds their positions. Justice Jinesta Lobo, Justice Hernández López, and Justice Salazar Alvarado each file separate concurring notes."
VI.On the Specific Case. On August 3, 2021, the appellant [Nombre01 001] came forward again, alleging the same claims raised in the aforementioned writ of amparo No. 17-009261-0007-CO — namely, the ongoing flooding that the community of La Amapola, located in Puerto Jiménez de Golfito, suffers as a result of the Río Conte. Although on this occasion he notes that the Municipalidad de Golfito has shown willingness to resolve the problem in question, its work has been obstructed by MINAE due to the impossibility of carrying out works in the main channel (cauce mayor) of the Río Conte, as MINAE has denied the required permit, citing that ministry's internal regulations.
With respect to the foregoing, from the reports submitted by the respondent authorities (autoridades recurridas) under oath, with timely warning of the consequences set forth in article 44 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional and the documentary evidence presented, it is clearly established that the flooding problem caused by the overflow of the Río Conte due to climatological events has once again arisen. It was established that in 2017, the Municipalidad de Golfito was able to carry out a machinery intervention in the river with the approval of a hydraulic excavator by the Comisión Nacional de Emergencia under the primeros impactos (first impacts) modality. However, since that first intervention, and following various climatological events such as Tropical Storm Eta, among many others, no further machinery intervention has been carried out. As a result, the river again departed from its original channel (cauce), breaching the protective levee (dique) constructed in 2017, once again leaving the residents of the community of La Amapola stranded and at risk, Regarding the actions taken by the respondent authorities to address this situation, the following has been established:
On 18 May 2021, 17 June 2021, and 24 August 2021, the Municipalidad de Golfito submitted to the Comisión Nacional de Emergencia requests for machinery under the primeros impactos modality for the proper approval and procurement of equipment. However, the Engineer from the Reconstruction Process Management Department of the Comisión Nacional de Emergencia informed that municipal government (ayuntamiento) that the request would remain pending until the dispute with MINAE was resolved regarding the advisory opinion of the Procuraduría General de la República concerning interventions in the channels of rivers and streams (quebradas) under non-declared emergencies (emergencia no declarada). It is nonetheless reported that on 01 September 2021, the Municipalidad de Golfito was notified that procurement request 0062021201600406 for the rental of heavy machinery to address the emergency at Dirección01 had been approved, and that work in the area would commence shortly.
With respect to MINAE's Dirección de Agua, it is noted that on 20 July 2021, official memorandum AM-MG-O-0309-2021, bearing that Directorate's internal control number ID 4230-2021, was received, in which Freiner William Lara Blanco, Nombre02 of Golfito, requested authorization for the intervention in the Río Conte, based on situation report official memorandum No. CME-G-023-2021. In response to that request, by official memorandum No. DA-UHTPSOZ-0773-2021 dated 23 July 2021, Francisco de Jesús Vargas Salazar, in his capacity as Coordinator of the Térraba-Pacífico Sur Hydrological Unit of MINAE's Dirección de Agua, informed the Nombre02 of Golfito that:
"Having reviewed the information corresponding to situation report CME-023, entitled 'Maximum Flood of the Río La Conté, La Amapola,' in order to proceed with the requested intervention, given that the works do not fall within the framework of a State of Emergency (Estado de Emergencia), since none of the documents submitted link them to such a characterization, we proceed in accordance with advisory opinion C-162-2021 of 9 June 2021 issued by the Procuraduría General de la República, which states: 'Accordingly, it must be noted that although the powers granted to the Comisión Nacional de Emergencias under the final paragraph of article 15 are intended to address local and minor emergency situations — which occur with high frequency and particularly affect local communities — such emergency situations do not constitute a State of Emergency declared by the Poder Ejecutivo (Executive Branch); it follows logically, therefore, that in such cases, it is not appropriate to exempt the public administration, even on an exceptional and temporary basis, from its obligation to comply with the procedures designed to protect the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, since that exceptional and extraordinary possibility is reserved for States of Emergency declared by the Poder Ejecutivo in accordance with its legal and constitutional powers.' Therefore, an in-channel construction permit (permiso de obra en cauce) must be obtained from this Directorate prior to the requested intervention.
The permit may be requested digitally on the SIPECO platform, accessible at Dirección02. Please be advised that, given that these are emergency situations, this Directorate will prioritize the processing and resolution of such permits." Furthermore, it is reported that, upon reviewing the Registro Nacional de Concesiones y Cauce (National Registry of Concessions and Channels), the Municipalidad de Golfito had, as of the date of review, not submitted a permit application for the intervention in the river in question, as required by the aforementioned official memorandum.
With respect to the Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, it is first noted that the report was submitted by Eduardo Enrique Mora Castro, in his capacity as Head of the Legal Advisory Unit and General Judicial Representative of that institution, rather than by the President of that public institution, without any justification being provided for this course of action. In addition, in the first report, the aforementioned official mistakenly included data pertaining to emergency impacts on the Río Amapola in the Guatuso area of the province of Alajuela, rather than those concerning the community of La Amapola and the impacts of the Río Conte in Golfito, as acknowledged in the second report. Furthermore, that latter document refers to the channeling (canalización) and reconstruction of protective works on the Río Conte in the La Amapola sector, which were carried out in 2017.
It also refers to Emergency Procurement No. 2021CE-000055-0006500001, entitled "Design and construction of a single-lane vehicular bridge with an attached pedestrian walkway over Río Frío RC 2-15-208, Sector Amapola/Riviera, San Rafael, Guatuso," which is currently being processed and requires review, given that as a result of the events reported in August, the topography of the site, specifically along the banks of the Río Amapola, was affected to the point of significantly increasing the river's width — meaning that the studies originally approved for the bridge's construction are no longer viable at this time, as the river's width has grown from approximately 23 meters to approximately 64 meters.
From the foregoing, the responsibility of the Municipalidad de Golfito for the facts at issue is apparent, though the same cannot be said of MINAE, as alleged by the petitioner (recurrente). While it may be inferred that, since the flooding problem described by the protected party (tutelado) corresponds to a non-declared emergency, the Térraba-Pacífico Sur Hydrological Unit of MINAE's Dirección de Agua informed the Nombre02 of Golfito that an in-channel construction permit must be obtained prior to authorizing the intervention in the Río Conte, there is no record of compliance with that procedure, nor has any explanation been provided as to why it has not been followed, beyond expressing dissatisfaction with that requirement in the submitted report. It is not for this Constitutional Chamber (Sala) to determine whether that requirement must be observed, as it constitutes a matter of ordinary legality.
It must be recalled that the consistent case law of this Constitutional Chamber holds that constitutional jurisdiction in environmental matters cannot extend so far as to become a reviewer of the technical criteria set forth in regulations or by administrative authorities on environmental matters; rather, it is limited to verifying whether the competent state agencies have fulfilled the obligation imposed upon them by article 50 of the Constitución Política to act responsibly and promptly in protecting the environment (sentencia No. 2021-020303, of 09:15 hours on 10 September 2021). It is further noted that, although it is alleged that due to the divergence of views between MINAE and the Comisión Nacional de Emergencia regarding interventions in the channels of rivers and streams, it had not been possible to procure machinery for the reconstruction of the levee, the channeling, and the rectification of the channel of the Río Conte to resolve the problem, it is also reported that on 01 September 2021 the Municipalidad de Golfito was notified that procurement request 0062021201600406 for the rental of heavy machinery to address the emergency at Dirección01 had been approved, and that work in the area would begin shortly, which demonstrates that it is indeed possible to seek a solution to the reported problem.
This Constitutional Chamber deems it appropriate to note that, in accordance with article 50 and article 169 of the Constitución Política, it is the responsibility of the Municipal Government to ensure respect for a healthy and ecologically balanced environment within its territorial jurisdiction, as well as to safeguard the well-being of all inhabitants of its respective canton; therefore, within the framework of its constitutional and legal competencies, it must act, give notice, and coordinate with the relevant authorities if it determines that a circumstance exists — such as the overflow and flooding of the river in question — that could affect or threaten the life and safety of the residents of the area. In light of the foregoing, the Constitutional Chamber finds that the respondent municipality has failed to take the necessary steps to prevent the flooding problem in the area where the petitioner resides, thereby placing his health at risk and threatening his physical integrity every time there are heavy rains.
In view of the foregoing, this Tribunal finds that the omissions attributed to the respondent municipal government are contrary to the provisions of articles 21 and 50 of the Constitución Política. A different situation obtains with respect to the other respondent authorities. As for the Comisión Nacional de Emergencia, despite the fact that its head official (jerarca) failed to submit the required report, no omission or negligence has been established that would have violated the fundamental rights invoked by the petitioner. Finally, it is found that the delay in addressing the situation reported by the protected party cannot be attributed to the respondent authority at MINAE, since it is apparent from the case file (autos) that it is the Municipalidad de Golfito that has failed to comply with what was required. Nor is there any evidence that it challenged that requirement at the administrative level.
VII.Conclusion. Accordingly, the appeal must be upheld solely against the Municipalidad de Golfito, and the respondent Nombre02 is ordered to carry out the legal actions within its respective competencies with the aim of ensuring that the corresponding technical works are performed in the channel of the Río Conté, within the time period set forth in the operative part (parte dispositiva) of this ruling, bearing in mind that, as reported, the machinery needed to carry out the relevant works is already available. Furthermore, although in the petitioner's most recent filing it is noted that some works were indeed carried out while the amparo petition (amparo) was pending, it is the municipality's responsibility to determine whether such works are sufficient to resolve the problem that continues to affect the community of La Amapola. With respect to MINAE's Dirección de Agua and the Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, the amparo is dismissed.
As a general principle, I hold that cases related to the activity or inactivity of the Public Administration in the repair, construction, modification, or demolition of any infrastructure work should be dismissed, because such omission constitutes a matter of legality whose discussion belongs to the ordinary jurisdiction (jurisdicción ordinaria), before which the interested party may argue their grievances more fully. However, when such administrative conduct—whether by omission or otherwise—gives rise to a violation of other fundamental rights protected within this constitutional jurisdiction, or when groups considered vulnerable are affected, I do take up the merits of the matter, as this situation constitutes an exception to my position on this subject. This is precisely what occurs in the present case, in which the petitioning party (parte recurrente) alleges that the main road and sole access route for residents living at the end of the main thoroughfare, in the community of La Amapola, in Golfito, has deteriorated, and those residents have on multiple occasions been left completely cut off.
Furthermore, due to the heavy rainfall that occurred in May 2021, the río Conte reached its peak flood level (crecida máxima), causing the embankment (dique) to disappear on both banks, and although the Municipalidad de Golfito has been willing to resolve the problem in question, its efforts have been obstructed by the Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía.
IX.Documentation Submitted to the Case File. The parties are hereby notified that, should they have submitted any document in paper form, as well as objects or evidence contained in any additional device of an electronic, computing, magnetic, optical, telematic, or new-technology nature, these must be retrieved from the office within a maximum period of thirty business days counted from the notification of this judgment (sentencia). Otherwise, all material not retrieved within this period will be destroyed, pursuant to the provisions of the "Reglamento sobre Expediente Electrónico ante el Poder Judicial," approved by the Corte Plena in Session No. 27-11 of August 22, 2011, Article XXVI, and published in the Boletín Judicial No. 19 of January 26, 2012, as well as pursuant to the resolution approved by the Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial in Session No. 43-12 held on May 3, 2012, Article LXXXI.
Por tanto:
The writ of amparo (recurso) is granted, solely with respect to the Municipalidad de Golfito. Freiner William Lara Blanco, in his capacity as Nombre02 of Golfito, or whoever may hold that office, is hereby ordered to issue the relevant directives and carry out all actions within the scope of his competencies, so that, within a period of three months counted from the notification of this judgment, the flooding problem caused by the río Conte in the community of La Amapola, located in Puerto Jiménez, is resolved, as reported by the petitioner (recurrente) [Nombre01 001]. The foregoing is without prejudice to any provisional works that may eventually prove necessary to prevent damage from rainfall to the protected party (tutelado). The respondent (recurrido) is hereby warned that, pursuant to Article 71 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, a prison sentence of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, shall be imposed on any person who receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in a writ of amparo, and fails to comply with it or fails to enforce it, provided that the offense is not more severely penalized under other provisions.
The Municipalidad de Golfito is ordered to pay court costs (costas), damages, and losses occasioned by the facts giving rise to this declaration, which shall be assessed in enforcement proceedings before the administrative contentious jurisdiction. As to the Dirección de Agua of the Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía and the Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias (CNE), the writ is denied. Justice Salazar Alvarado files a note. Notify.
Fernando Castillo V.
President Nancy Hernández L.
Luis Fdo. Salazar A.
Jorge Araya G.
Anamari Garro V.
Marta Eugenia Esquivel R.
Ronald Salazar Murillo *FHALFBO43NPQ61* Telephones: Telf01/ ALA-4TA (800-7252-482). Fax: Telf02 / Telf03. Website: www.poder-judicial.go.cr/salaconstitucional. Address: (Dirección03, Dirección04, 100 m south of the Iglesia del Perpetuo Socorro). Reception of matters involving vulnerable groups: Dirección05, San José, Dirección06, Dirección07, streets 19 and 21, Dirección08
*210161010007CO* SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, a las nueve horas veinte minutos del veintinueve de octubre de dos mil veintiuno .
Recurso de amparo interpuesto por [Nombre01 001], mayor, casado, cédula de identidad [Valor CED01], contra el Alcalde, el Presidente del Concejo y el Encargado del Comité Local de Emergencias, todos de la Municipalidad de Golfito, el Director de Agua y el Coordinador de la Unidad Hidrológica Térraba-Pacífico Sur, ambos de la Dirección de Agua del Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía y el Presidente de la Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias.
Resultando:
“ Se ordena la desestimación por insuficiencia probatoria en la siguiente causa:
Delito Imputado Tipo de resolución [Valor 002] Invasión a un área de protección. Usurpación de un bien de dominio público. Aprovechamiento ilegal de productos forestales en área de protección.
Municipalidad de Guatuso- Ilse María Gutiérrez Sánchez.
Desestimación de conformidad con el artículo 299 Código Procesal Desestimación de conformidad con el artículo 299 Código Procesal Penal.
“CONCLUSION DEL PROCEDIMIENTO PREPARATORIO.
Artículo 299- Actos conclusivos. Cuando el Ministerio Público o el querellante estimen que los elementos de prueba son insuficientes para fundar la acusación, podrán requerir la desestimación o el sobreseimiento definitivo o provisional.
También, podrán solicitar la suspensión del proceso a prueba, la aplicación de criterios de oportunidad, el procedimiento abreviado, la aplicación del procedimiento de justicia restaurativa o que se promueva la conciliación. Junto con el requerimiento remitirán al juez las actuaciones, las evidencias y los demás medios de prueba materiales que tengan en su poder. (Así reformado por el artículo 47 de la Ley de justicia restaurativa, N° 9582 del 2 de julio del 2018)”. Los elementos de prueba que echa en falta la Fiscalía y acoge el Juzgado consisten, según se indica en la citada resolución, en “la no realización de los procedimientos bajo el régimen de excepción para valorar la procedencia o no de los trabajos a realizar, así como las medidas de mitigación que se deben adoptar para la protección del ambiente.” Concluye la resolución judicial: “Por lo anterior y con base en el artículo 140 del Código Procesal Penal, SE ORDENA a la MUNICIPALIDAD DE GUATUSO, en la persona de su Alcaldesa, “abstenerse a realizar trabajos de dragado en los ríos Samén, El Sol, Frío, Aguas Negras y Buena Vista, así como aprovechamiento forestal” “En lo que compete a la Dirección de Agua se ordena junto con la Dirección de Geología y MINAS, SINAC ARENAL HUETAR NORTE Upala-Guatuso y SETENA, realizar un análisis de las labores de dragado (…) El subrayado no es del original.• Emitir un análisis científico donde determinen si corresponde autorizar las labores o no…Señala el Juzgado que la Orden NO cesará hasta el tanto no se cuente con los estudios científicos que exige el régimen de excepción, para lo cual se deberá presentar la documentación donde se acredite lo ordenado a Dicho Juzgado Penal.
Se solicita poner nuevamente las evidencias a la orden del órgano fiscal para que proceda conforme.” Lo anterior se hizo del conocimiento de la Comisión Nacional de Emergencia mediante el oficio DA-1839-2020 del 16 de diciembre de 2020. Con base en ello, se llevaron a cabo reuniones con diferentes entidades entre ellas, Obras Fluviales del MOPT, la misma Comisión Nacional de Emergencia y con los correspondientes asesores legales, donde se les ha expuesto la necesidad de retomar este tema y buscar darle marco legal para un futuro cercano previsto, las intervenciones de atención de riesgos puede ejecutarse de forma oportuna y sin el riesgo a la institucionalidad en verse ante situaciones legal como la resuelta por el Juzgado señalado. Por otra parte, la Dirección Ejecutiva del Sistema Nacional de Áreas de Conservación del MINAE (SINAC), realizaron consultas a la Procuraduría General de la República, sobre el tema, lo que generó los pronunciamientos C-45-2021, del 18 de febrero de 2021 y C-162-2021, del 9 de junio de 2021.
El primero de ellos concluyó: “Con fundamento en lo expuesto se concluye que durante un Estado de Emergencia declarado, y durante sus tres fases progresivas: respuesta y primer impacto, rehabilitación y reconstrucción , podría entenderse que la administración pública deba eximirse del cumplimiento de la normativa dirigida a proteger el derecho al medio ambiente, pero esta posibilidad se entiende válida solo en cuanto dicha excepcionalidad sea estrictamente necesaria para proteger el bien común y solamente en la medida en que sea indispensable para atender única y exclusivamente a la situación de emergencia”. Notemos que se está refiriendo y analizando sobre un Estado de Emergencia declarado. El segundo de ellos concluyó: “Así las cosas, se adiciona el dictamen C-45-2021 en el sentido de que aunque las potestades previstas a favor de la Comisión Nacional de Emergencias en el último párrafo del artículo 15 tienen por objeto atender situaciones de emergencias locales y menores – las cuales ocurren con alta frecuencia y con especial afectación de las comunidades locales – tales situaciones de emergencia no constituyen un Estado de Emergencia declarado por el Poder Ejecutivo, por lo cual se sigue, con toda lógica, que en tales casos, no es procedente eximir a la administración pública, aunque sea de forma excepcional y transitoria, de su obligación de cumplir con los trámites o procedimientos diseñados para proteger el derecho a un medio ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrados, pues dicha posibilidad excepcional y extraordinaria está reservada para los Estados de Emergencia declarados por el Poder Ejecutivo conforme sus potestades legales y constitucionales”.
Es claro entonces, que la Dirección de Agua y su Unidad Hidrológica Terraba-Pacífico Sur, tanto por parte otras dependencias del MINAE, han actuado apegados a la norma. A la fecha, como se expuesto para el caso concreto, no se ha recibido ninguna solicitud con los requerimientos que la norma señala para darle trámite y aprobación como corresponde. Como parte de un esfuerzo más de la Dirección de motivar en los entes del Estado involucrados con las intervenciones de estado de potencial riesgo, mediante oficio DA- 0944-2021 se ha comunicado los dispuesto por la PGR a la CNE y el MOPT, y recomendado el cómo proceder para atender este vacío legal de intervención oportuna, eximiendo de permisos de la Dirección de Agua, siendo así igualmente como se le indicara a la Municipalidad de Golfito. Ahora, importante señalar que en vista de que existe un vacío legal en la norma, para atender casos donde la emergencia no ha sido declarada, pero que se presenta día a día en las comunidades, la que no puede planificarse su atención, se presentó en consulta a instancia de varias instituciones, incluida la Dirección de Agua, un proyecto de ley, Expediente No. 22404, “REFORMA DEL ARTICULO 32 DE LA LEY NACIONAL DE EMERGENCIAS Y PREVENCIÓN DEL RIESGO, LEY No. 8488 DEL 22 DE NOVIEMBRE DE 2005 Y SUS REFORMAS”, con la finalidad de resolver de una vez, ese vacío y poder continuar con las obras que deben hacerse para atender esas emergencias.
Modificación, sobre la que Dirección de Agua de inmediato se pronunció favorablemente según oficio DA-1114-2021, del 13 de julio de 2021. Es necesario tener muy claro que el problema se presenta con emergencias no declaradas y que no pueden ser planificadas o previstas. Hoy día, como se explicó, para atenderlas falta la norma legal respectiva. Aprobarlas sin ella, implica obtener una sentencia como la resolución del Juzgado de Guatuso, citada supra. Con fundamento en lo expuesto, se solicita se declare sin lugar el presente recurso de amparo y se archive el expediente.
2016 Situación provocada por el huracán Otto 2017 Situación provocada por tormenta Nate 2019 Déficit Hídrico 2020 Huracán Eta Y sobre los eventos antes mencionados, se tienen los reportes que trascribe del huracán Eta, la tormenta tropical Nate y el huracán Otto. Respecto de trabajos realizados en el río Conte, se tiene la Contratación por Emergencia No Declarada No. 102-2017, denominada: "Alquiler de maquinaria para realizar trabajos en Puntarenas, Golfito", que consistió en trabajos de canalización del río Conte, en el sector de La Amapola, así como reconstrucción de obras de protección. A continuación, se detallan los trabajos realizados: - Alquiler de 100 horas máquina de Pala Excavadora John Deere, año 2016, placa , modelo 210GLC, no motor PE6068G948146, para el desarrollo de trabajo de Canalización del río Conte en el sector de La Amapola y reconstrucción de obras de protección, Coordenadas: Inicio 560914.55 — 951393.30 Final: 560773.44 — 952081.22.
Orden de compra No. 6210, los trabajos se realizaron entre el 17 al 29 de octubre de 2017. Para el año 2018, se cuenta con Informe Técnico IAR-INF-1119-2018, de la Unidad de Análisis del Riesgo de la CNE, correspondiente a la valoración de riesgo por deslizamiento, Alto Conte, Golfito, lo anterior con el fin de evaluar un deslizamiento ocurrido a inicios del mes de octubre de 2018, el cual destruyó tres casas de habitación y causó daños estructurales en una cuarta vivienda y con Informe Técnico IAR-INF-1179-2018 se brinda la misma información a la Municipalidad de Golfito. Se adjunta informe de situación N°CME-G-083, respecto de la “Crecida máxima del río La Conté, La Amapola”, de fecha 24 de agosto de 2021, generado a las 09:25 horas, en el que se describió la siguiente situación: “ I. Características del Evento (…). II. Reporte de Afectación en Población y Necesidades (…). 2.1. Cuadro 1 (Poblados Afectados) (…). 2.2.
Cuadro 2 (Personas Afectadas) (…). 2.3. Cuadro 12 (Viviendas Afectadas) (…).2.4. Cuadro 3 (Albergues Temporales) (…)”. Cabe mencionar que la CNE tramitó la Contratación por Emergencia No. 2021CE-000055-0006500001, denominada “Diseño y construcción de puente vehicular a un carril con paso peatonal adosado sobre Río Frío RC 2-15-208 Sector Amapola/Riviera, San Rafael, Guatuso”, mismo que se encuentra en trámite; sin embargo, dados los eventos reportados en el mes de agosto, la topografía del lugar, propiamente en las márgenes del río Amapola, se vio afectada al punto de aumentar considerablemente el ancho del río, lo que implica que los estudios originalmente aprobados para la construcción del puente no resultan viables en este momento, pasando el ancho del río de 23 metros a 64 metros aproximadamente, lo que conlleva a un análisis técnico de la situación para valorar con expertos en hidráulica de ríos sobre el nuevo proceder, ya que el objeto contractual estaría variando considerablemente.
No se omite manifestar que se ha solicitado la revisión de los estudios técnicos que dieron origen a la contratación para que la Administración pueda tomar las medidas correspondientes, ya que, la dimensión o largo actual del puente, según los términos de referencia, se licitó por 23 metros, siendo la nueva medida de 64 metros aproximadamente, esto implica una valoración no solo desde el punto de vista técnico, sino también del punto de vista legal, ya que incide en gran proporción en el objeto contractual y aumenta no solo la cabida del puente, sino también aumentaría el presupuesto que se cuenta para tal obra. Solicita se tenga por ampliado el informe de su representada y que se declare el presente recurso de amparo sin lugar en cuanto a esa Comisión, siendo que su representada no ha lesionado ningún derecho constitucional del recurrente.
Redacta la Magistrada Garro Vargas; y,
Considerando:
I.Sobre la consecuencia de no rendir el informe solicitado por la Sala. De conformidad con lo dispuesto en el artículo 45 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, si la autoridad recurrida no rinde su informe, se tienen por ciertos los hechos alegados por la parte recurrente. La Sala entra a estudiar la procedencia del amparo, con la base fáctica expuesta, lo que no implica que automáticamente se acoja el recurso. En el caso concreto, a pesar de que Eduardo Enrique Mora Castro, en su condición de Jefe de la Unidad de Asesoría Legal de la Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias y Apoderado General Judicial de dicha institución, rindió dos informes, debe advertirse que en el auto de curso del presente proceso el informe le fue solicitado al Presidente de ese órgano de desconcentración máxima adscrito a la Presidencia de la República. Por lo anterior, se tiene por no rendido el informe y esta Sala resuelve el caso valorando los otros informes presentados, la prueba aportada y la jurisprudencia de este Tribunal aplicable al caso concreto.
II.Objeto del recurso. El recurrente alega que desde el año 2013, la comunidad de La Amapola, sita en Puerto Jiménez de Golfito, ha venido sufriendo continuas inundaciones por causa del río Conte. Dice que anteriormente interpuso el recurso de amparo número 17-009261-0007-CO, el cual fue declarado con lugar; sin embargo, la situación no se ha podido solucionar en su totalidad, toda vez que existe un deterioro en el camino principal y único acceso para los vecinos que habitan al final de la vía principal, quienes en múltiples ocasiones han quedado completamente incomunicados. Además, debido a las fuertes precipitaciones que se presentaron el 18 de mayo de 2021, se dio la crecida máxima del río Conte, lo que ocasionó la desaparición del dique en ambos márgenes. Aduce que la Municipalidad de Golfito se ha mostrado anuente a solucionar la problemática en cuestión; empero, su labor se ha visto obstaculizada por el MINAE, debido a la imposibilidad de realizar obras en el cauce mayor del río Conte, pues deniega el permiso argumentando reglamentaciones internas de dicho ministerio.
III.Hechos probados. De importancia para la decisión de este asunto, se estiman como debidamente demostrados los siguientes hechos, sea porque así han sido acreditados o bien porque los recurridos hayan omitido referirse a ellos según lo prevenido en el auto inicial:
El permiso podrá ser solicitado de manera digital en la plataforma de SIPECO ubicable en la página web www.da.go.cr. Se le informa que, al ser situaciones de emergencia, esta Dirección dará una prioridad en la atención y resolución de estos permisos” (informes rendidos por las autoridades recurridas del MINAE y el Nombre02 de Golfito y prueba documental aportada).
IV.Hecho no probado. Se considera indemostrado el siguiente hecho de relevancia para la resolución de este recurso de amparo.
Único. Que la Municipalidad de Golfito haya cumplido con lo prevenido mediante oficio No. DA-UHTPSOZ-0773-2021, del 23 de julio del 2021, por la Unidad Hidrológica Térraba-Pacífico Sur de la Dirección de Agua del MINAE.
V.Sobre el anterior recurso de amparo presentado por el recurrente. El 15 de junio de 2017, el aquí recurrente interpuso el amparo que se tramitó en el expediente No. 17-009261-0007-CO y cuyo objeto fue el siguiente:
“II.- Objeto del recurso. El recurrente manifiesta que es propietario de la finca matricula de folio real No. , ubicado en La Amapola, Río Conte, en Puerto Jiménez de Puntarenas, cuya medida es de 317,58 metros cuadrados. Luego del paso del huracán Otto la zona de Puerto Jiménez, la comunidad de La Amapola se ha visto afectada por el aluvión masivo y la erosión hídrica, debido a que el cauce del río se modificó hacia dentro de su propiedad y la carretera principal. Durante la época lluviosa, se dio el desbordamiento del río, provocando la pérdida de superficie terrestre arable y útil para la siembra. Además, generó la obstrucción de la única vía terrestre para el acceso y salida de los vecinos del lugar. Esto último impide que tengan acceso a los servicios de salud, de emergencias, servicios públicos, centros educativos, así como, al desarrollo de las actividades comerciales y turísticas, situación que afecta a los adultos, las personas adultas mayores y los menores de edad que habitan en el lugar.
Por ello, el 20 de diciembre de 2016 presentó a la Municipalidad de Golfito una solicitud para el cumplimiento de lo señalado en el informe técnico No. AR-INF-0044-2013, dada la constante erosión y lavado de los terrenos donde se ubican las casas de habitación de los vecinos, así como, los problemas por el ingreso del río a la carretera. Señala que, por nota dirigida a la Presidencia de la Comisión Nacional de Emergencias, solicitó se le otorgara una audiencia para exponer los problemas de la comunidad de La Amapola de Puerto Jiménez, además, indicó que por informe técnico N° MARINF- 0044-2013, entregado a la Municipalidad de Golfito, se advirtió sobre el riesgo de inundación y el desbordamiento del río. En esa nota, también, se hace alusión a los daños sufridos en su propiedad, en el camino, en los portones, zonas verdes, caballos y en sembradíos. Ante la falta de respuesta, el 21 de febrero de 2017, solicitó al Nombre02 de la Municipalidad de Golfito, información sobre el trámite de sus gestiones y la fase en que se encuentran.
No obstante, las solicitudes presentadas ante las autoridades recurridas para la mitigación y solución de los problemas existentes por el desbordamiento del río y las constantes inundaciones, no han sido atendidas, en clara trasgresión a sus derechos. Por otra parte, señala que algunas comunidades se encuentran incomunicadas, dado que, el puente que pasa sobre el río fue socavado por las fuertes corrientes, lo cual impide transitar por el sitio. Manifiesta que la inacción por parte de las autoridades recurridas en atender los problemas y necesidades básicas de la zona, lesiona sus derechos fundamentales”.
Ese asunto fue declarado con lugar mediante sentencia No. 2017-014302, de las 09:340 horas del 08 de setiembre de 2017, con base en las siguientes consideraciones:
“V.- Sobre el fondo. En el caso bajo estudio, el recurrente estima lesionado su derecho a la salud, vida, propiedad y un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado, toda vez que desde hace varios años viene sufriendo inundaciones producidos por el Río Conte, con peligro para la vida de las personas de su comunidad, Amapola de Puerto Jiménez. Asegura que la erosión y deslave del río provocan inundaciones y crecidas que han provocado la falta de acceso vía terrestre, con los consecuentes problemas a las diferentes instancias de salud, educación y atención de emergencias, que afectan a todos los vecinos de esa comunidad, pero en especial a personas adultas mayores, y menores de edad. De igual manera que se afectada la producción y atención de las cosechas y ganados de los habitantes de ese sector, como lo demuestra la prueba aportada al expediente, por lo que ha solicitado desde el año 2013, la intervención municipal, sin que a la fecha se haya concretado una respuesta que solucione de manera definitiva el problema que enfrentan.
Así las cosas, la Sala tiene por demostrado que la Unidad de Investigación y Análisis de Riesgo de la Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias (CNE), emitió en el año 2013, el informe IAR-INF-0044-2013, realizado por el geólogo Ignacio Chaves Salas, a solicitud del recurrente. En dicho documento técnico se describe y caracteriza la problemática existente en el sitio evaluado, que consiste en erosión lateral sobre la margen derecha del río Conte, propia de la dinámica normal del caudal, así como la amenaza potencial de inundación hacia fincas ubicadas en dicho sector debido a la poca diferencia de altura entre el nivel base del río y el borde de las propiedades, estos desbordamientos también podrían afectar el camino de acceso a las fincas y dejar incomunicada dicho poblado. El informe técnico señala en sus recomendaciones la necesidad de realizar un dragado o movimientos de material del río para disminuir la vulnerabilidad de la zona a anegamientos, y así evitar afectaciones al camino y propiedades por la erosión lateral, además, se indica que se debe dar parte a la Municipalidad de Golfito para que actúe según sea su competencia y valore la posibilidad realizar las obras necesarias.
Después del paso del huracán Otto por la zona de Puerto Jiménez en diciembre del 2016, la comunidad de La Amapola se vio afectada, por lo que el 20 de diciembre del 2016, vecinos de dicha comunidad, solicitaron la intervención de la Municipalidad para dragar el río Conte, y dar solución al problema desbordamiento de dicho río. El 21 de febrero del 2017, el recurrente, [Nombre01 001] , presentó una nota dirigida al Nombre02 Municipal de Golfito, reiterando la solicitud del 20 de diciembre del 2016; sin embargo, no se acredita respuesta ni solución concreta a dichas gestiones. Asimismo, la Sala constata que en el presente año se han recibido tres solicitudes por parte del recurrente, ante la CNE, con números de consecutivos asignados 0173-2017, 0320-2017 y 0368-2017, requiriendo inspecciones y criterio técnico por los problemas ocasionados en su finca y sitios aledaños, debido al desbordamiento del río Conte durante las crecidas asociadas a las lluvias extraordinarias del paso del huracán Otto.
En respuesta a estas solicitudes, y teniendo el antecedente del informe técnico previamente realizado en 2013, se emitió el oficio IAR-OF-0135-2017 del 27 de junio del 2017, suscrito por un Geólogo y el Jefe de la Unidad de Investigación y Análisis del Riesgo, de la Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias. En este documento técnico, se indica que a la fecha las condiciones de vulnerabilidad ante inundaciones en la comunidad de Amapola, Puerto Jiménez de Osa, no han disminuido, pues, no se han realizado obras de mitigación o protección de la margen afectada del río Conte, así como obras de canalización del cauce que mantengan una dinámica normal. Ante lo presentado en la zona afectada, se recomienda en dicho oficio, realizar obras de protección y mitigación en el cauce del río Conte, así como el establecimiento de un plan de mantenimiento y limpieza del cauce por parte de la Municipalidad de Golfito, el cual permita la remoción periódica de material acumulado cauce en el río, y que asegure la dinámica normal del caudal, sin la generación de problemas sobre las márgenes.
En su defensa, los representantes de la Municipalidad de Golfito señalaron que mediante el Plan de Emergencia ante la situación provocada por el paso del huracán Otto, por el territorio costarricense, emitido en atención al Decreto de Emergencia N°40027, aprobado por la Junta Directiva de la Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, mediante acuerdo N°040-03-2017, en la Sesión ordinaria N° 04-03-17, celebrada el 1 de marzo de 2017, Artículo IV, se establece, en su página 21, el compendio de Fichas de Técnicas de Compromisos de las instituciones involucradas en su ejecución, en el cual se asignaron las obras o acciones a realizar, relacionadas con los alegatos del recurrente, en este caso, al Departamento de Obras Pluviales del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes (MOPT), la reconstrucción de obras de protección, limpieza y canalización de ríos, al cual se le designó un monto de 2.916.848.563.33 millones de colones.
No obstante, posterior, a tales actuaciones municipales no consta que se haya realizado algún acto en concreto, para remediar la situación aquejada por el promovente, pese a que la problemática persiste, según se indica en el oficio IAR-OF-0135-2017 del 27 de junio del 2017, supra citado. Por su parte, el Director de Obras Fluviales del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes, indicó que esa Dirección no tiene responsabilidad alguna, pues la entidad que en primera instancia atendió la problemática fue el Comité Local de Emergencias, que lo preside el Nombre02 Municipal de Golfito. Señala que, una vez documentado el problema por parte de esa entidad, y se estiman los recursos económicos que se requieren para su solución, valora si lo pueden hacer con recursos propios, utilizando maquinaria y personal municipal, o contratando maquinaria privada. Si la Municipalidad determina que no tiene capacidad económica, procede en estos casos particulares de eventos extraordinarios, como lo fue el huracán Otto, solicitar ayuda a la CNE, como ocurrió en este caso.
No obstante, a pesar de lo señalado, aún no se ha llegado a concretar ninguna solución, ni siquiera se informa de medidas provisionales o urgentes dirigidas a evitar o mitigar los efectos de las inundaciones provocadas por el Río Conte en la comunidad de La Amapola. Tomando en consideración la competencia específica que el artículo 169, de la Constitución Política, otorga a los gobiernos local, al disponer que: "La administración de los intereses y servicios locales en cada cantón, estará a cargo del Gobierno Municipal (...)", resulta inaceptable que la Municipalidad de Golfito se limite a citar el compendio de Fichas de Técnicas de Compromisos de las instituciones involucradas en la ejecución del Plan de Emergencia, sin haber tenido una participación activa en su ejecución, con le exige el numeral 169 de la Carta Política. Por ello, se acredita la alegada violación a los derechos fundamentales del tutelado, siendo lo procedente declarar con lugar el recurso, con la orden que se indicará en la parte dispositiva de esta sentencia.
En cuanto a la actuación de la Comisión Nacional de Emergencias, y la Dirección de Obras Fluviales del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes, el amparo debe desestimarse. Ello debido a que la primera institución si ha dado atención a las gestiones planteadas sobre la problemática planteada, y ha emitido dos informes recomendando la intervención municipal. Por su parte, la Dirección de Obras Fluviales del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes, carece de competencia directa para intervenir en esta situación, y de requerirse su participación debe ser a instancia del gobierno local, así como de la CNE. VI.- Conclusión. De esta forma, este Tribunal concluye que, si bien las autoridades municipales son conscientes de los problemas denunciados por el recurrente y que afectan a todos los vecinos de la localidad, debido a las inundaciones mencionadas, no se han tomado acciones para brindar una solución efectiva a dicha problemática.
En conclusión, el amparo resulta procedente habida cuenta de la falta de acciones efectivas por parte de la Municipalidad recurrida, esa omisión ha ocasionado que el recurrente y los vecinos de la zona, se mantengan soportando inundaciones, y ello ha ocasionado un peligro a la vida e integridad de sus habitantes. Así las cosas, debe la Municipalidad recurrida tomar las acciones necesarias y pertinentes, para dar una solución integral y definitiva al problema de inundaciones denunciado”.
De ahí que en la citada sentencia No. 2017-014302, esta Sala dispusiera lo siguiente:
“Por tanto: Se declara con lugar el recurso. Se ordena a Elberth Barrantes Arrieta, en su condición de Nombre02 Municipal, a Alberto Díaz Chavarría, en su condición de Presidente del Concejo Municipal, y a Jimmy Roy Vindas Aguilar, en su condición de Encargado del Comité Local de Emergencias, todos de la Municipalidad de Golfito o a quienes ejerzan dichos cargos, que en forma inmediata a la notificación de esta sentencia, adopten las medidas que sean necesarias dentro del ejercicio de sus competencias, para dar una solución integral y definitiva al problema de inundaciones denunciado por el recurrente. Asimismo, deberán adoptar las medidas necesarias para garantizar el acceso a la vía terrestre de la comunidad de Amapola, en Puerto Jiménez, Golfito, así como a los servicios salud, educación y atención de emergencias, a todos sus habitantes. Lo anterior, deberá ejecutarse dentro de un plazo de dieciocho meses, a partir de la notificación de esta resolución.
Se advierte a los recurridos, que, de no acatar dicha orden, incurrirán en el delito de desobediencia y que, de conformidad con el artículo 71, de la Ley de esta jurisdicción, se le impondrá prisión de tres meses a dos años, o de veinte a sesenta días multa, a quien recibiere una orden que deba cumplir o hacer cumplir, dictada en un recurso de amparo y no la cumpliere o no la hiciere cumplir, siempre que el delito no esté más gravemente penado. Se condena a la Municipalidad de Golfito al pago de las costas, daños y perjuicios causados con los hechos que sirven de base a esta declaratoria, los que se liquidarán en ejecución de sentencia de lo contencioso administrativo. En cuanto a la Comisión Nacional de Emergencias, y la Dirección de Obras Fluviales del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes, se declara sin lugar el recurso. Notifíquese esta resolución a los recurridos o a quienes ejerzan sus cargos, en forma personal. El Magistrado Jinesta Lobo, la Magistrada Hernández López, y el Magistrado Salazar Alvarado ponen notas en forma separada”.
VI.Sobre el caso concreto. El 03 de agosto de 2021, acude nuevamente el recurrente [Nombre01 001] alegando lo mismo que reclamó en el citado recurso de amparo No. 17-009261-0007-CO, a saber: las continuas inundaciones que por causa del río Conte sufre la comunidad de La Amapola, sita en Puerto Jiménez de Golfito. Aunque en esta oportunidad refiere que la Municipalidad de Golfito se ha mostrado anuente a solucionar la problemática en cuestión; empero, su labor se ha visto obstaculizada por el MINAE, debido a la imposibilidad de realizar obras en el cauce mayor del río Conte, pues deniega el permiso argumentando reglamentaciones internas de dicho ministerio.
Al respecto, de los informes rendidos por las autoridades recurridas, dados bajo juramento, con oportuno apercibimiento de las consecuencias previstas en el artículo 44 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional y la prueba documental aportada, se acredita diáfanamente que de nuevo se está presentado la problemática de inundación provocada por el desbordamiento del río Conte debido a eventos climatológicos. Quedó demostrado que, en el año 2017, la Municipalidad de Golfito logró realizar una intervención de maquinaria al río con la aprobación de una pala hidráulica de parte de la Comisión Nacional de Emergencia, según la modalidad de primeros impactos. Sin embargo, desde esa primera intervención y con el paso de distintos eventos climatológicos como la tormenta Eta, entre muchos otros, no se ha vuelto a realizar otra intervención con maquinaria. De ahí que el río volvió a perder su cauce original rompiendo el dique de protección realizado en el año 2017, provocando que nuevamente deje abnegados a los vecinos de la comunidad de La Amapola, En cuanto a las acciones por parte de las autoridades recurridas para atender esa situación, se tiene por comprobado lo siguiente:
La Municipalidad de Golfito el 18 de mayo de 2021, el 17 de junio de 2021 y el 24 de agosto de 2021, remitió a la Comisión Nacional de Emergencia solicitudes de maquinaria bajo la modalidad de primeros impactos para su debida aprobación y contratación de maquinaria. No obstante, el Ingeniero del Departamento de Gestión de Procesos de Reconstrucción de la Comisión Nacional de Emergencia informó a ese ayuntamiento que esa solicitud quedaba a la espera de que se resuelva el diferendo con el MINAE sobre el criterio de la Procuraduría General de la República en cuanto a las intervenciones por emergencia no declarada en cauces de ríos y quebradas. Empero, se informa que el 01 de setiembre de 2021, se comunicó a la Municipalidad de Golfito que la solicitud de contratación 0062021201600406 para el alquiler de maquinaria pesada a fin de atender tal emergencia en el Dirección01, ha sido aprobada, por lo cual, pronto se estará trabajando en la zona.
Respecto a la Dirección de Agua del MINAE, se constata que el 20 de julio de 2021, se recibió el oficio AM-MG-O-0309-2021 con número de control interno de esa Dirección ID 4230-2021, en el cual se solicitó por parte de Freiner William Lara Blanco, Nombre02 de Golfito, permiso para la intervención del río Conte, con fundamento en el informe de situación oficio No. CME-G-023- 2021. En atención a esa gestión, por oficio No. DA-UHTPSOZ-0773-2021, del 23 de julio de 2021, Francisco de Jesús Vargas Salazar, en su condición de Coordinador de la Unidad Hidrológica Térraba-Pacífico Sur de la Dirección de Agua del MINAE, le informó al Nombre02 de Golfito que:
“Revisada la información, correspondiente al informe de situación CME-023 nombrado “Crecida Máxima del río La Conté, La Amapola”, para el proceder con la intervención solicitada, al no estar los trabajos en un marco de Estado de Emergencia, puesto que ningún documento entregado, lo vincula a esta caracterización, se procede con lo indicado en dictamen C-162-2021 del 9 de junio del 2021 elaborado por la Procuraduría General de la República, el cual indica: “De forma consecuente, debe indicarse que aunque las potestades previstas a favor de la Comisión Nacional de Emergencias en el último párrafo del artículo 15 tienen por objeto atender situaciones de emergencias locales y menores – las cuales ocurren con alta frecuencia y con especial afectación de las comunidades locales – tales situaciones de emergencia no constituyen un Estado de Emergencia declarado por el Poder Ejecutivo, por lo cual se sigue, con toda lógica, que en tales casos, no es procedente eximir a la administración pública, aunque sea de forma excepcional y transitoria, de su obligación de cumplir con los trámites o procedimientos diseñados para proteger el derecho a un medio ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrados, pues dicha posibilidad excepcional y extraordinaria está reservada para los Estados de Emergencia declarados por el Poder Ejecutivo conforme sus potestades legales y constitucionales.” Por tanto, se deberá proceder con un permiso de obra en cauce ante esta Dirección, previo a la intervención solicitada.
El permiso podrá ser solicitado de manera digital en la plataforma de SIPECO ubicable en la página web Dirección02. Se le informa que, al ser situaciones de emergencia, esta Dirección dará una prioridad en la atención y resolución de estos permisos”.
Además, se informa que, revisado el Registro Nacional de Concesiones y Cauce, a la fecha no se ha presentado, conforme lo señalado en el oficio citado, la solicitud de permiso por parte de la Municipalidad de Golfito para la intervención del río en cuestión.
En lo que corresponde a la Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, primeramente, se destaca que ha rendido informe Eduardo Enrique Mora Castro, en su condición de Jefe de la Unidad de Asesoría Legal y Apoderado General Judicial de dicha institución, pero no el Presidente de esa institución pública, sin que se justifique ese proceder. A lo anterior se agrega que, en el primer informe, el citado funcionario incluyó por error datos atinentes a afectaciones de emergencia en el río Amapola de la zona de Guatuso en la provincia de Alajuela y no del poblado La Amapola y las afectaciones del río Conte en Golfito, como lo acepta en el segundo informe. Además, en ese último documento se refiere a los trabajos de canalización y reconstrucción de obras de protección del río Conte, en el sector de La Amapola, que se realizaron en el 2017. Así como a la Contratación por Emergencia No. 2021CE-000055-0006500001, denominada “Diseño y construcción de puente vehicular a un carril con paso peatonal adosado sobre Río Frío RC 2-15-208 Sector Amapola/Riviera, San Rafael, Guatuso”, que se encuentra en trámite y la cual requiere ser revisada, pues en razón de los eventos reportados en el mes de agosto, la topografía del lugar, propiamente en las márgenes del río Amapola, se vio afectada al punto de aumentar considerablemente el ancho del río, lo que implica que los estudios originalmente aprobados para la construcción del puente no resultan viables en este momento, pasando el ancho del río de 23 metros a 64 metros aproximadamente.
De lo expuesto, se desprende la responsabilidad en los hechos por parte de la Municipalidad de Golfito, no así del MINAE, como lo alega el recurrente. Si bien se colige que como la atención de la problemática ocasionada por las inundaciones que refiere el tutelado, corresponden a una emergencia no declarada, la Unidad Hidrológica Térraba-Pacífico Sur de la Dirección de Agua del MINAE le informó al Nombre02 de Golfito que se debe solicitar un permiso de obra en cauce, previo a autorizar la intervención del río Conte, no consta que haya cumplido con ese trámite ni se informa la razón por la cual no se ha procedido en ese sentido, más que manifestar inconformidad con ese requerimiento en el informe rendido. Sin que corresponda a esta Sala entrar a determinar si debe observarlo o no, pues constituye un extremo de legalidad ordinaria. Debe recordarse que, en la jurisprudencia de esta Sala, de forma reiterada se ha indicado que la competencia constitucional en materia ambiental no puede extenderse al punto en que se convierta en un verificador de los criterios técnicos vertidos en las normas o por las autoridades administrativas en materia ambiental, sino que se limita a constatar si las dependencias estatales competentes han cumplido la obligación que les impone el artículo 50 de la Constitución Política, de asumir una actuación responsable y oportuna respecto a la protección del ambiente (sentencia No. 2021-020303, de las 09:15 horas del 10 de setiembre de 2021).
A lo anterior se agrega que aunque se alega que debido a las diferencias de criterios entre el MINAE y la Comisión Nacional de Emergencia respecto a la intervención de los cauces en ríos y quebradas, no se ha logrado realizar la contratación de maquinaria para realizar los trabajos de reconstrucción de dique, canalización y rectificación del cauce del río Conte para solventar el problema, también se informa que el 01 de setiembre de 2021 se comunicó a la Municipalidad de Golfito que la solicitud de contratación 0062021201600406 para el alquiler de maquinaria pesada a fin de atender la emergencia en el Dirección01, ha sido aprobada, por lo cual, pronto se estará trabajando en la zona, lo que denota que sí se puede procurar solucionar la problemática denunciada. Esta Sala estima pertinente indicar que de conformidad con el artículo 50 y 169 de la Constitución Política, es responsabilidad del Gobierno Municipal, velar por el respeto a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado en su respectiva circunscripción territorial, así como por el bienestar de todos los habitantes de su respectivo cantón, y por ello, dentro del marco de sus competencias constitucionales y legales, está actuar, avisar y coordinar con las autoridades respectivas, si consideran que existe alguna circunstancia, como lo es el problema de desbordamientos e inundaciones del río en cuestión, en donde podría afectar o amenazar la vida y la seguridad de los habitantes de la zona.
En mérito de lo expuesto, estima la Sala que la Municipalidad recurrida ha omitido efectuar las acciones necesarias para prevenir el problema de inundaciones existente en el área en que habita el recurrente, lo cual pone en riesgo su salud amenaza y su integridad física cada vez que existen precipitaciones fuertes. En atención a lo anterior, este Tribunal considera que las omisiones atribuidas al ayuntamiento recurrido atentan contra lo dispuesto en los artículos 21 y 50 de la Constitución Política. Situación diferente acontece con las otras autoridades recurridas. En cuanto a la Comisión Nacional de Emergencia, a pesar de que su jerarca omitió rendir el informe requerido, no se acredita ninguna omisión, ni negligencia que hubiera lesionado los derechos fundamentales invocados por el recurrente. Finalmente, se estima que la demora en la atención a la situación denunciada por el tutelado, no puede ser endilgada a la autoridad recurrida del MINAE, pues se colige de los autos que ha sido la Municipalidad de Golfito la que no ha cumplido con lo prevenido. Aparte de que tampoco se comprueba que lo haya objetado en esa instancia administrativa.
VII.Conclusión. Por consiguiente, corresponde estimar el recurso únicamente contra la Municipalidad de Golfito y ordenarle al Nombre02 recurrido que realice las gestiones legales de sus respectivas competencias, con el objetivo de que se lleven a cabo los trabajos técnicos correspondientes en el cauce del río Conté, dentro del plazo que se indica en la parte dispositiva de esta sentencia, teniendo presente que, según lo informado, ya se cuenta con la maquinaria para realizar los trabajos que corresponden. Además, si bien en la última gestión presentada por el recurrente refiere que estando en curso el amparo sí hicieron algunos trabajos, es responsabilidad de la municipalidad determinar si tales obras son las suficientes para solventar la problemática que continúa aquejando a la comunidad de La Amapola. Respecto a la Dirección de Agua del MINAE y la Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, se desestima el amparo.
En tesis de principio, considero que los casos relacionados con la actividad o inactividad de la Administración Pública en la reparación, construcción, modificación o demolición de cualquier obra de infraestructura, deben ser desestimados, por constituir, esa omisión, un tema de legalidad, cuya discusión corresponde a la jurisdicción ordinaria, ante la cual la persona interesada puede debatir, con mayor amplitud, sus disconformidades. Sin embargo, cuando de aquella conducta administrativa (omisiva o no) se derive alguna violación a otros derechos fundamentales tutelados en esta jurisdicción constitucional, o se afecten grupos considerados vulnerables, sí entro a conocer el fondo del asunto, por constituir esta situación una excepción a mi posición en esta materia, tal y como sucede en este caso, en que la parte recurrente alega que existe un deterioro en el camino principal y único acceso para los vecinos que habitan al final de la vía principal, en la comunidad de La Amapola, en Golfito, quienes en múltiples ocasiones han quedado completamente incomunicados.
Además, debido a las fuertes precipitaciones que se presentaron en el mes de mayo de 2021, se dio la crecida máxima del río Conte, lo que ocasionó la desaparición del dique en ambos márgenes, y pese a que la Municipalidad de Golfito se ha mostrado anuente a solucionar la problemática en cuestión, su labor se ha visto obstaculizada por el Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía.
IX.Documentación aportada al expediente. Se previene a las partes que, de haber aportado algún documento en papel, así como objetos o pruebas contenidas en algún dispositivo adicional de carácter electrónico, informático, magnético, óptico, telemático o producido por nuevas tecnologías, estos deberán ser retirados del despacho en un plazo máximo de treinta días hábiles contados a partir de la notificación de esta sentencia. De lo contrario, será destruido todo aquel material que no sea retirado dentro de este plazo, según lo dispuesto en el "Reglamento sobre Expediente Electrónico ante el Poder Judicial ", aprobado por la Corte Plena en Sesión No. 27-11 del 22 de agosto del 2011, artículo XXVI y publicado en el Boletín Judicial No. 19 del 26 de enero del 2012, así como en el acuerdo aprobado por el Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial, en la Sesión No. 43-12 celebrada el 3 de mayo del 2012, artículo LXXXI.
Por tanto:
Se declara con lugar el recurso, únicamente, en lo que respecta a la Municipalidad de Golfito. Se ordena a Freiner William Lara Blanco, en su condición de Nombre02 de Golfito o a quien ocupe ese cargo, que gire las órdenes pertinentes y lleve a cabo todas las actuaciones que estén dentro del ámbito de sus competencias, para que, dentro del plazo de tres meses, contado a partir de la notificación de esta sentencia, se solucione el problema de inundaciones que causa el río Conte en la comunidad de La Amapola, sita en Puerto Jiménez, según lo denunciado por el recurrente [Nombre01 001] . Lo anterior, sin perjuicio de los trabajos provisionales que eventualmente resulten necesarios efectuar para evitar los daños que puedan causarle las lluvias al tutelado. Se advierte al recurrido que de conformidad con lo establecido en el artículo 71 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, se impondrá prisión de tres meses a dos años, o de veinte a sesenta días multa, a quien recibiere una orden que deba cumplir o hacer cumplir, dictada en un recurso de amparo y no la cumpliere o no la hiciere cumplir, siempre que el delito no esté más gravemente penado.
Se condena a la Municipalidad de Golfito al pago de las costas, daños y perjuicios ocasionados por los hechos que han dado lugar a esta declaratoria, los que se liquidarán en ejecución de sentencia de lo contencioso administrativo. En cuanto a la Dirección de Agua del Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía y la Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, se declara sin lugar el recurso. El Magistrado Salazar Alvarado pone nota. Notifíquese.
Fernando Castillo V.
Nancy Hernández L.
Luis Fdo. Salazar A.
Jorge Araya G.
Anamari Garro V.
Marta Eugenia Esquivel R.
Ronald Salazar Murillo *FHALFBO43NPQ61*
Document not found. Documento no encontrado.