← Environmental Law Center← Centro de Derecho Ambiental
Res. 31963-2025 Sala Constitucional · Sala Constitucional · 03/10/2025
OutcomeResultado
The Chamber ordered the Municipality of Sarchí and the Ministry of Health to coordinate compliance with outstanding health orders within three months, while denying the claims against the Traffic Police and the Public Force.La Sala ordenó a la Municipalidad de Sarchí y al Ministerio de Salud cumplir coordinadamente las órdenes sanitarias pendientes en tres meses, pero desestimó el amparo contra la Policía de Tránsito y la Fuerza Pública.
SummaryResumen
The Constitutional Chamber partially granted an amparo filed by Sarchí residents affected by excessive noise, smoke, odors, public alcohol consumption, and other disturbances associated with several commercial establishments. It found that the Municipality of Sarchí had failed to protect local interests effectively and that the Ministry of Health, although it issued health orders, conducted inspections, and temporarily closed one establishment, had neither ensured comprehensive oversight nor completed pending proceedings promptly. The Chamber emphasized that Article 50 of the Constitution imposes a positive duty on public authorities to prevent and address environmental and health impacts through coordinated, effective, and timely action. It ordered the Municipality and the Central Western Health Governing Area to act jointly within three months to secure full compliance with outstanding health orders concerning the establishments. The claims against the Traffic Police and the Public Force were denied because no failure to act within their respective legal responsibilities was established.La Sala Constitucional declaró parcialmente con lugar el amparo presentado por vecinos de Sarchí afectados por ruido excesivo, humo, malos olores, consumo de licor en espacios públicos y otras perturbaciones asociadas con varios establecimientos comerciales. Determinó que la Municipalidad de Sarchí omitió tutelar eficazmente el interés local y que el Ministerio de Salud, aunque emitió órdenes sanitarias, realizó inspecciones y clausuró temporalmente un local, no aseguró una fiscalización integral ni concluyó oportunamente los procedimientos pendientes. La Sala destacó que el artículo 50 constitucional obliga a las autoridades a prevenir y atender de manera coordinada, eficaz y oportuna las afectaciones ambientales y sanitarias. Ordenó a la Municipalidad y al Área Rectora de Salud Central Occidente ejecutar coordinadamente, dentro de tres meses, las acciones necesarias para cumplir las órdenes sanitarias pendientes relacionadas con los locales. Desestimó el recurso contra la Policía de Tránsito y la Fuerza Pública porque no acreditó omisiones dentro de sus respectivas competencias.
Key excerptExtracto clave
XI.- CONCLUSION. This Chamber recalls that Article 50 of the Political Constitution imposes on all public authorities a positive obligation to prevent and provide protection against environmental and health impacts that compromise quality of life. That duty is not fulfilled through isolated or merely formal actions, but through coordinated, effective, and timely responses, especially when the problem—as in the case at hand—requires the concurrent exercise of powers by several authorities (the municipality, the health area, the police, and traffic control authorities in the surrounding road environment). The principle of inter-administrative cooperation and coordination requires the institutions involved to share useful information, plan joint actions, conduct coordinated operations, and evaluate results, thereby avoiding duplication, enforcement gaps, or delays that deprive fundamental rights of substance. Consequently, effective protection of the residents’ rights to a healthy environment, health, privacy, and property requires interinstitutional planning with verifiable goals; sustained rather than episodic enforcement during the identified critical times and circumstances; the application and enforcement of a proportionate and progressive sanctions regime in cases of repeated violations; and accountability to the public through periodic reports permitting verification that the identified violations have been corrected. Accordingly, this amparo proceeding is upheld solely against the Municipality of Sarchí and the Central Western Health Governing Area of the Ministry of Health. The amparo is declared PARTIALLY GRANTED solely against the Municipality of Sarchí and the Central Western Health Governing Area of the Ministry of Health. Consequently, [Name 039], as Mayor, and MARIELA CASTRO PACHECO, as President of the Municipal Council, both of the Municipality of Sarchí, as well as DANILO GRANADO ALVARADO, as Director of the Central Western Health Governing Area of the Ministry of Health, or whoever holds those offices, are ordered, within THREE MONTHS of notice of this judgment, to act in an organized and coordinated manner and execute the measures necessary to achieve full compliance with the outstanding Health Orders related to the operation of the commercial establishments ([Name 040], [Name 016] [Name 016]).XI.- CONCLUSIÓN. Esta Sala recuerda que el artículo 50 de la Constitución Política impone a todas las autoridades públicas una obligación positiva de prevención y tutela frente a afectaciones ambientales y sanitarias que comprometan la calidad de vida. Ese deber no se satisface con actuaciones aisladas o meramente formales, sino mediante respuestas coordinadas, eficaces y oportunas, especialmente cuando la problemática -como en el sub lite- exige concurrencia de competencias (municipalidad, área de salud, policía y control de tránsito en el entorno vial). El principio de cooperación y coordinación interadministrativa, exige que las instituciones involucradas compartan información útil, planifiquen acciones conjuntas, ejecuten operativos coordinados y evalúen resultados, evitando duplicidades, lagunas de control o dilaciones que vacíen de contenido los derechos fundamentales. En consecuencia, la tutela efectiva del derecho a un ambiente sano, a la salud, a la intimidad y a la propiedad de los vecinos requiere, la planificación interinstitucional con metas verificables, un control sostenido y no episódico en los horarios y momentos críticos identificados, la aplicación y ejecución del régimen sancionatorio proporcional y progresivo frente a reincidencias, y, la rendición de cuentas a la ciudadanía, a través de informes periódicos que permitan verificar la corrección de los incumplimientos detectados. Consecuentemente, se estima el presente proceso de amparo, únicamente, en contra de la Municipalidad de Sarchí y el Área Rectora de Salud Central Occidente del Ministerio de Salud. Se declara PARCIALMENTE CON LUGAR el recurso, únicamente, en contra de la Municipalidad de Sarchí y el Área Rectora de Salud Central Occidente del Ministerio de Salud. Consecuentemente, se ordena a [Nombre 039], en condición de Alcalde y MARIELA CASTRO PACHECO, en condición de Presidenta del Concejo Municipal, ambos de la Municipalidad de Sarchí, así como, a DANILO GRANADO ALVARADO, en condición de Director del Área Rectora de Salud Central Occidente del Ministerio de Salud, o a quienes ocupen esos cargos que, en el plazo de TRES MESES, contado a partir de la notificación de esta sentencia, de forma organizada y coordinada ejecuten las acciones necesarias a efectos de dar cabal cumplimiento a las Órdenes Sanitarias pendientes por cumplir que se encuentren relacionadas con el funcionamiento de los locales comerciales ([Nombre 040], [Nombre 016] [Nombre 016]).
Pull quotesCitas destacadas
"La jurisprudencia de esta Sala ha establecido que el derecho al ambiente sano exige que las autoridades sanitarias actúen de manera eficaz y preventiva, de modo que la inercia o la prolongación indefinida de trámites administrativos genera una vulneración constitucional."
"This Chamber’s case law has established that the right to a healthy environment requires health authorities to act effectively and preventively, such that inertia or the indefinite prolongation of administrative proceedings constitutes a constitutional violation."
Considerando IX
"La jurisprudencia de esta Sala ha establecido que el derecho al ambiente sano exige que las autoridades sanitarias actúen de manera eficaz y preventiva, de modo que la inercia o la prolongación indefinida de trámites administrativos genera una vulneración constitucional."
Considerando IX
"En este caso, la actuación del Ministerio de Salud fue parcialmente adecuada, pero no suficiente para garantizar una protección integral frente a la afectación de la salud y el ambiente de los vecinos."
"In this case, the Ministry of Health’s actions were partially adequate but insufficient to ensure comprehensive protection against impacts on the residents’ health and environment."
Considerando IX
"En este caso, la actuación del Ministerio de Salud fue parcialmente adecuada, pero no suficiente para garantizar una protección integral frente a la afectación de la salud y el ambiente de los vecinos."
Considerando IX
"Debe recordarse que, el recurso de amparo no procede cuando la autoridad recurrida actúa dentro de los límites de su competencia legal y no se acredita vulneración alguna de derechos fundamentales atribuible a ella."
"It must be recalled that an amparo does not lie when the respondent authority acts within the limits of its legal powers and no violation of fundamental rights attributable to it is established."
Considerando X
"Debe recordarse que, el recurso de amparo no procede cuando la autoridad recurrida actúa dentro de los límites de su competencia legal y no se acredita vulneración alguna de derechos fundamentales atribuible a ella."
Considerando X
"En este caso, no se desprende omisión atribuible ni la Policía de Tránsito ni a la Fuerza Pública, ya que las denuncias referidas correspondían mayoritariamente al orden público y no al control del tránsito vehicular."
"In this case, no omission attributable to either the Traffic Police or the Public Force can be established, because the reported complaints concerned primarily public order rather than traffic control."
Considerando X
"En este caso, no se desprende omisión atribuible ni la Policía de Tránsito ni a la Fuerza Pública, ya que las denuncias referidas correspondían mayoritariamente al orden público y no al control del tránsito vehicular."
Considerando X
Full documentDocumento completo
Decision No. 2025031963 CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at nine twenty a.m. on October third, two thousand twenty-five .
Proceedings for a writ of amparo (recurso de amparo) under expediente number 24-034459-0007-CO, filed by [Nombre 001], [Valor 001], [Nombre 002], [Valor 002], [Nombre 003], [Valor 003], [Nombre 004], [Valor 004], [Nombre 005], [Valor 005], [Nombre 006], [Valor 006], [Nombre 007], [Valor 007], [Nombre 008], [Valor 008], [Nombre 009], [Valor 009], [Nombre 010], [Valor 010], and [Nombre 011], [Valor 011], against the MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION, the MINISTRY OF HEALTH, the MINISTRY OF PUBLIC SECURITY, and the MUNICIPALITY OF VALVERDE VEGA.
BACKGROUND:
Despite all the events and complaints already described, the respondent authorities have not assisted us with the issues presented, and at this time they appear to have allowed the commercial establishments in question to operate without limits, placing their private interests above the public interest. This is so despite the fact that these establishments are located significantly close to the Cruz Roja, two childcare centers, the INA, the Escuela Líder Sarchí Norte, and the Biblioteca Pública de Sarchí, which also makes this geographic location a thoroughfare used daily by minors and residents of the canton traveling to educational institutions, workplaces, and other locations, thereby exposing them to the problems extensively described in this action. See evidence labeled ten. TWELFTH: On 29 de noviembre del año 2023, the Dirección de Desarrollo y Control Urbano de Sarchí, through official letter MS-DU-OF-441-2023, provided us with land-use certificates (certificados de uso de suelo) numbers 365-2021 and 643-2021, processed for property registration 17576 in the province of Alajuela, the property where the businesses giving rise to this proceeding are located.
These land-use certificates authorize use as a SODA and a restaurant, NOT A BAR. Certificate number 643-2021 even stipulates that this service is permitted only within the restaurant’s premises, a condition that has not been respected in any way. As shown by the evidence described as twelve, consisting of official letter MS-DU-OF-441-2023 and photographs of the premises of “[Nombre 040],” “[Nombre 016],” and “ [Nombre 015],” people can be seen consuming alcoholic beverages at all hours on the public roadway and in the establishment’s parking lot, as well as vehicles parked in front of our homes. These activities are entirely unrelated to the services authorized by the business license (patente). Nevertheless, despite our efforts to report the situation through every available means, none of the respondent authorities has provided us with even minimal assistance regarding the problem. THIRTEENTH: In view of the fact that the problem has continued to worsen over the last several months, we have continued filing complaints with the respondent entities.
In this regard, evidence labeled thirteen is submitted, consisting of emails requesting information about the complaints filed. See evidence fourteen, which contains health order (orden sanitaria) number MS-CO-DARS-VV-OS-134-2023, concluding that the commercial establishment “[Nombre 040]” is conducting its activities under an expired operating permit (permiso de funcionamiento). FOURTEENTH: In recent months, we again formally filed a complaint against the businesses “[Nombre 016],” “[Nombre 015],” and “[Nombre 040]” with the Municipalidad de Sarchí because all three provide bar service and operate as bars; the noise is unbearable because they offer karaoke at all hours; they hold festive events, such as horseback parades (cabalgatas), without the required permit; and patrons consume on the public roadway alcoholic beverages purchased from these businesses. If we neighbors call the Fuerza Pública or the traffic police, we are subjected to insults and threats, to the point that many neighbors fear for our lives.
The respondent authorities do not respond, in the case of the Municipalidad de Sarchí; conduct monitoring at times when the businesses in question are not operating, in the case of the Ministerio de Salud; or merely prepare reports and records without providing us with adequate assistance, in the case of the traffic police and the Fuerza Pública. We have no institutional support in dealing with this problem. See evidence labeled 15, consisting of a complaint filed by the petitioners with the Municipalidad de Sarchí, to which no response was given. In it, we explained that the permits issued to the businesses in question were granted without taking ley 7600 into account and without providing the spaces required for restroom facilities at those establishments. This is because customers of these three establishments are constantly seen, during both the day and night, urinating, vomiting, and exposing their genitals on the sidewalks and walls of homes.
This situation is causing foul odors; an increase in disease vectors (vectores) affecting public health, such as mosquitoes, rodents, and cockroaches; distress to pedestrians; and increased insecurity in the neighborhood. Although the Plan Regulador de Sarchí allows commercial activities because the area is classified as a mixed-use zone (zona mixta), the commercial activities reported in this case are currently incompatible with the well-being of the neighboring community because the establishments lack appropriate conditions for containing noise, meeting customers’ basic needs such as access to restrooms, and parking vehicles without obstructing private entrances. FIFTEENTH: Once again, because of the lack of an effective response from the respondent authorities, we found it necessary to attend an ordinary session on 12 de junio del año 2024 before the Consejo Cantonal de Coordinación Institucional de Sarchí, minutes 3-2024, where we petitioners explained in detail the problem described herein and the violation of our rights protected by international instruments and the Constitution due to the lack of institutional intervention.
All the commercial establishments in question operate as a clandestine bar without having the capacity measures (medidas de aforo) required for that activity; they also operate without a karaoke license, and all three establishments sell alcohol that is consumed on the public roadway at any hour of the day or night, without any restriction, disturbing public order and increasing the presence of intoxicated persons in the area. This endangers our physical safety and that of the families represented herein, who must travel through the area to go to medical appointments, work, schools, high schools, universities, and other places. Evidence number 16 is submitted in this regard, consisting of minutes 3-2024 of the Consejo Cantonal de Coordinación Institucional de Sarchí. SIXTEENTH: It is vitally important to emphasize in this action, as indicated throughout the facts presented, that many of us who live in the community are older adults who, because of our age, experience physical health problems.
This is the case for the undersigned [Nombre 005], [Nombre 017], [Nombre 004], [Nombre 001], [Nombre 002], and [Nombre 010]. In addition, other neighbors who are not older adults experience physical and emotional health problems duly diagnosed by healthcare professionals, as is the case for the undersigned [Nombre 009], [Nombre 003], and [Nombre 011]. Because of past experiences in their lives, but above all because of the insecurity in the area, noise from the commercial establishments in question adjacent to their homes, crowds, and conduct contrary to public decency such as that described above, they experience diagnosed symptoms and illnesses such as anxiety disorder, depression, and panic disorder, among others. They have had to address and treat these conditions with their respective physicians to cope with the situation. However, as the problem worsens, our health deteriorates. We no longer even want to leave our homes, and often cannot leave them because vehicles are parked across our entrances, intoxicated or drug-impaired persons are urinating on our properties, horseback parades are held without municipal authorization, foul odors and excessive noise occur at all hours, and we are subjected to disrespectful conduct.
Many of us have even been threatened that, if we continue filing complaints, there could be physical consequences for us or even consequences affecting our homes. We can no longer continue living under these conditions. We are frightened, overwhelmed, defenseless, and alone because the respondent authorities have placed the private interests of the owners of the establishments in question above the public interest, namely: “[Nombre 040],” whose business-license holder is [Nombre 027], CÉDULA [Valor 014], and who holds only a restaurant license, NOT A LIQUOR-STORE OR BAR LICENSE, even though the business operates as a bar and nightclub; “[Nombre 016],” whose license holder is [Nombre 026], CÉDULA [Valor 013], and who holds only a convenience-store license, even though the commercial establishment operates as a bar where alcohol can be purchased and any illicit substance can even be easily obtained; and “[Nombre 015],” whose license holder is [Nombre 020], CÉDULA [Valor 012], and who sells all types of substances in his bar.
Moreover, although his permit allows him to remain open to the public only until 12 midnight, this commercial establishment remains open throughout the early morning hours. Although we submit reports to the respondent authorities, the response never goes beyond a mere warning and never involves effective, meaningful sanctions aimed at addressing the problem at its source. This favors private interests over the public interest, even though the Municipalidad de Sarchí has explicitly told us that it is committed to the well-being and quality of life of all residents of the canton. This is entirely false, given that we have had to live with this problem since 2016, when the first business license was granted to [Nombre 016], which operated as a clandestine bar from the outset. Despite all the complaints filed with the respondent authorities, the Municipalidad de Sarchí went on to grant two additional business licenses.
The problem is now unbearable and is affecting us physically and psychologically. Regarding these facts, see evidence labeled seventeen, containing the undersigned parties’ discharge summaries (epicrisis) documenting the stated illnesses, as well as civil registry records showing the ages of the undersigned older adults. SEVENTEENTH: We have been documenting the calls to 911 in which we report the problem that is the subject of this proceeding. In this regard, a table of 911 reports is submitted, listing the complaints made by the petitioners to 911 to request assistance because of the problem. See evidence labeled 18. EIGHTEENTH: For the foregoing reasons, we affected neighbors have sought relief from this authority, since the entities involved have continued to delay the matter and shift responsibility among themselves without addressing the problem at its source or providing us with any effective response, even though different vulnerable populations live in the neighborhood.
We are concerned because not only are our lives at risk, but so are the lives of those who travel through the area. The insecurity is so severe that we can no longer even leave our homes comfortably. Our rights to private property, health, personal integrity, and to live in a healthy and ecologically balanced environment have been directly infringed. We therefore appear for the purpose of enforcing our rights protected by international instruments and the Constitution, because the anguish, uncertainty, and anxiety of continuing to live in this area are causing us physical and psychological harm in addition to material damage to our private property.”
Regarding the constitutional rights protection proceeding filed by [Nombre 012], [Nombre 013], [Nombre 003]. [Nombre 004], [Nombre 005], [Nombre 006], [Nombre 007], [Nombre 008], [Nombre 009], [Nombre 010] and [Nombre 011] against this Ministerio de Salud, concerning the cases identified as the complaints filed confidentially against the establishments [Nombre 040], [Nombre 016] and [Nombre 032], respectively, which are located at [...].
BACKGROUND: The constitutional rights protection proceeding, case file Nº 24-034459-0007-CO, was received by this Ministerio de Salud on 18 de diciembre del 2024.
ASSESSMENT: The respective case files and the handling of the respective complaints were reviewed, and the actions taken by this Ministerio de Salud in each cited case are detailed below.
Complaint D-W-088-2023: Filed on 09 de noviembre del 2023 against the establishment [Nombre 040] concerning health-related problems such as noise, safety conditions, hazardous products, unauthorized activities, waste, smoking, and odors.
On 19 de diciembre del 2023, report MS-CO-DARS-W-072-2023 (folio 00286) and health order (orden sanitaria) MS-CO-DARS-W-OS-134-2023 (folio 00292) were issued, requiring the owner, [Nombre 027], to cease restaurant operations because the establishment lacked a current health operating permit (Permiso Sanitario de Funcionamiento).
On 30 de enero del 2024, Permiso Sanitario de Funcionamiento Nº 11-2024 was issued, valid until 15 de noviembre del 2024, following submission of the renewal application.
As part of the follow-up, several reports, inspections, and recommendations were issued, notably identifying the need to reschedule inspections because the establishment was closed or the owner could not be reached.
On 09 de agosto 2024, a Health Order was issued and served requiring correction of health-related issues involving the improper handling and disposal of smoke, physical accessibility ( ley 7600), the condition of restroom facilities, and the absence of an emergency plan.
On 15 de noviembre del 2024, the health permit (permiso sanitario) was renewed until 15 de noviembre del 2025. Certain matters still await a comprehensive inspection.
Complaint (denuncia) D-W-089-2023: Filed on 09 de noviembre del 2023 against the establishment [Nombre 016] ([Nombre 016]) for health-related problems similar to those described above, including noncompliance with Ley 7600.
In febrero del 2024, reports and health orders (órdenes sanitarias) were issued to adapt the restroom for persons with disabilities in accordance with Ley 7600.
In agosto del 2024, an order to close the establishment was issued due to noncompliance.
In octubre del 2024, a report was issued confirming compliance with the required conditions, and the case was deemed closed.
Complaint D-W-090-2023: Filed on 09 de noviembre del 2023 against the establishment [Nombre 032] for similar health-related problems.
In enero del 2024, a health order was issued requiring the correction of deficiencies such as walls that did not meet appropriate standards, the absence of documented hygiene and disinfection programs, and restrooms that had not been adapted for persons with disabilities.
Sound-level measurements (mediciones sónicas) were conducted in response to noise complaints, with results showing that the levels at some residences exceeded the limits permitted for mixed-use areas (commercial-residential).
In octubre del 2024, the closure (clausura) of the establishment was ordered due to persistent noncompliance. Follow-up measures remain ongoing to verify compliance with the health orders.
CONCLUSION: This Ministry of Health has provided timely attention and follow-up in all respects to the cases identified by complaints D-VV-088-2023, D-VV-089-2023, and D-VV-090-2023, within the bounds of existing law. It will likewise continue providing timely follow-up until the complaints filed have been fully resolved (See report MS DRRSCO-DARS- MS-CO-DARS-W-2021-2024 in its entirety).
Honorable Justices, in response to the allegations made by the petitioners in the amparo proceeding (recurso de amparo) filed, in which the Ministry of Health, through its Health Governing Areas (Áreas Rectoras de Salud), is accused of failing to address adequately and comprehensively the matters reported in the cases identified as complaints D-VV-088-2023, D-VV-089-2023, and D-VV-090-2023, it must be emphasized that those assertions are unfounded and premature, given that the corresponding administrative proceedings (procedimientos administrativos) remain active and ongoing.
It is important to emphasize that the administrative proceeding related to these complaints has not concluded. It is at an active stage, during which multiple actions, inspections, and technical analyses have been conducted. The General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública), in Article 261, establishes a non-mandatory procedural deadline (plazo ordenatorio no perentorio) of two months for deciding administrative proceedings, which may be extended according to the complexity of the case. In addition, Article 340, concerning the expiration of the proceeding (caducidad del procedimiento), sets a six-month limit before the proceeding may be deemed to have stalled due to administrative inaction.
In this context, it would be improper and unjustified to find noncompliance or a failure to act on the part of the Ministry of Health, since the proceedings are ongoing and have been managed in accordance with the legal and technical requirements of each case.
Regarding the Complexity of the Cases. The amparo proceeding in question encompasses complaints involving three different commercial establishments, each with its own specific problems and circumstances.
[Nombre 040] (D-VV-088-2023): The complaints concern noise, inadequate safety conditions, improper waste management, and activities conducted without a health permit.
Health orders and permit renewals have been issued, and recurring inspections have been conducted to assess compliance with applicable regulations. The complexity of the deficiencies detected has required detailed verification and prolonged follow-up.
[Nombre 016] (D-VV-089-2023): The complaints concern noncompliance with Ley 7600, noise, odors, and inadequate sanitary conditions.
The Ministry issued orders requiring the facilities to be brought into compliance with accessibility regulations, in addition to temporarily closing the establishment for serious noncompliance. It was ultimately verified that the conditions had been remedied, and the case was closed.
[Nombre 032] (D-W-090-2023): Infrastructure, noise, hygiene, and waste-management problems were reported.
Sound-level measurements and structural inspections were conducted, and orders were issued requiring the correction of deficiencies. The technical nature of the analyses has required additional time for their proper resolution.
Each of these complaints requires different technical assessments, such as acoustic measurements, verification of health permits, and structural analyses. This fully justifies the extended processing time, since each complaint is being addressed comprehensively and with the necessary thoroughness.
Allegations of Inaction. Contrary to the petitioners’ assertions, the Ministry of Health has been actively involved in handling these complaints. Numerous actions have been undertaken, including scheduled inspections, the issuance of health orders, and follow-up measures to ensure regulatory compliance. This is not an omission or negligence, but rather the continuation of a complex and detailed administrative proceeding.
It is relevant to note that some delays are attributable to factors beyond the Ministry’s control, such as the refusal or inability to obtain access to certain establishments to conduct inspections, which was duly documented in the corresponding reports.
Principle of Reasonableness. The Ministry of Health’s actions have complied with the principle of reasonableness (principio de razonabilidad), taking into account the technical nature of the complaints and the need to ensure a well-founded and fair resolution. Every aspect of the complaints has been addressed with the required depth, ensuring that no part of the process is neglected.
Accordingly, the petitioners’ requests for additional verifications are being processed within the framework of the ongoing administrative proceeding. The results of these measures will be essential to the final decision-making process, underscoring the inappropriate prematurity of this proceeding.”
On 14 de agosto de 2018, by means of official letter SMVV368-2018, signed by Ms. Daniela Muñoz Chaves, Municipal Secretary, and addressed to Mr. [Nombre 021], Head of Business Licenses, Article VI, agreement N°3, of Ordinary Session N°118, held by the Municipal Council on 06 de agosto of the current year, was forwarded concerning approval of a license for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages (licencia para el expendido de bebidas con contenido alcohólico) in the name of Mr. [Nombre 026], holder of identity card number [Valor 013], for [Nombre 016], based on official letter MVV-PT-OF-075-2018. 22. On 07 de setiembre de 2018, pursuant to Business License Resolution Number 101- 2018, signed by [Nombre 021] of the Municipal Business License Department and approved by [Nombre 022] of the Municipal Treasury Department, an administrative decision of the Business License Department was issued concerning form #13170, surrender of a business license (renuncia de patente), in the name of Ms. [Nombre 020], holder of identity card number [Valor 012], who holds a license for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages; according to the inspection conducted on 06 de setiembre de 2018, the premises were not operating, and therefore the surrender of the business license described above was accepted. 23.
On 25 de marzo de 2019, by means of official letter MVV-PT-OF-037-2019, signed by Mr. [Nombre 021], Head of Business Licenses, and addressed to Mr. ([Nombre 026]), at [Nombre 016], Sarchí Norte district, it was stated that police reports had been received, including report 0031676- 19, specifying that during the patrol conducted on 19 de marzo at 12:10, his business was open and people were present; this indicated a possible violation of the business’s operating hours, and therefore the Municipality hereby FORMALLY ORDERS him to comply with the hours established for his business, for a class B1 license, from 8:00am to 12:00 midnight, as well as with the prohibitions and penalties relating to the use of the license, pursuant to law N°9047. 24. On 26 de setiembre de 2019, by means of official letter MS-PT-OF-118-2019, signed by Mr. [Nombre 021], Head of Business Licenses, and addressed to Mr.
([Nombre 026]), [Nombre 016], Sarchí Norte, he was informed that, according to a conversation held on 05 de junio, during which he stated that he would monitor his parking area more closely to the extent possible, another police report had been received concerning a person consuming alcohol in the parking area; therefore, the Municipalidad de Sarchí hereby FORMALLY ORDERS him to take the necessary measures to prevent this situation at his business, and he was also informed of the penalties relating to the use of the license pursuant to law N°9047. 25. On 17 de marzo de 2023, through filing number 20831 with the Service Platform of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, a change in the authorized business activity (cambio de actividad de la patente comercial) was requested for the business license registered in the name of Mr. [Nombre 027], holder of identity card number [Valor 014], in order to operate a restaurant. 26.
On 22 de marzo de 2023, by means of official letter MS-PA-OF-024-2023, signed by [Nombre 021], Head of Business Licenses, with the approval of [Nombre 022], Treasury Director, and addressed to [Nombre 039], Municipal Mayor, the application file for a license for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages in the name of Mr. [Nombre 027], holder of identity card number [Valor 014], for the premises known as [Nombre 040], was submitted. 27. On 27 de marzo de 2023, by means of official letter MS-AL-OF-0148-2023, signed by Mr. [Nombre 039], Mayor of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, and addressed to the Municipal Council of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, the application for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages in the name of Mr. [Nombre 027], holder of identity card number [Valor 014], for the premises known as [Nombre 040], was forwarded for review and approval. 28. On 05 de abril de 2023, by means of official letter MS-SCM-AC-0166-2023, signed by Mr.
Jean Carlo Barquero Castro, Acting Secretary of the Municipal Council, and addressed to [Nombre 039], Mayor of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, notice was given of Article IV, agreement N°1, of Ordinary Session N°153, held by the Concejo Municipal de Sarchí on 03 de abril de 2023, concerning approval of a license for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages for “[Nombre 040].” 29. On 13 de abril de 2023, pursuant to Business License Resolution Number 03-01-2023, signed by [Nombre 021] of the Municipal Business License Department and approved by [Nombre 022] of the Municipal Treasury Department, an administrative decision of the Business License Department was issued concerning the liquor retail license form for [Nombre 040], in the name of Mr. [Nombre 027], holder of identity card number [Valor 014]. 30. On 28 de abril de 2023, by means of official letter MS-AL-OF-0238-2023, signed by Mr. [Nombre 039], Mayor of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, and addressed to the Municipal Council, review and approval were requested for the license for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages sought by Ms. [Nombre 020], holder of identity card number [Valor 012], for the premises known as “La Farmacia”; official letter MS-PA-OF-035-2024, signed by [Nombre 021] and [Nombre 043], was attached. 31.
On 10 de mayo de 2023, by means of official letter MS-SCM-AC-0228-2023, signed by Mr. Jean Carlo Barquero Castro, Acting Secretary of the Municipal Council, and addressed to the Municipal Government and Administration Committee, with reference to Article IV, agreement N°1, of Ordinary Session N°158, held by the Concejo Municipal de Sarchí on 08 de mayo de 2023, official letter MS-AL-OF-0238-2023 concerning the application for a license for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages for “La Farmacia” was forwarded. 32. On 19 de mayo de 2023, by means of official letter MS-SCM-AC-0259-2023, signed by Mr. Jean Carlo Barquero Castro, Acting Secretary of the Municipal Council, and addressed to Mr. [Nombre 039], Mayor of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, with reference to Article II, agreement N°2, of Extraordinary Session N°080, held by the Concejo Municipal de Sarchí on 18 de mayo de 2023, the license for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages in a bar for the establishment known as “[Nombre 032]” was approved. 33.
On 19 de mayo de 2023, by means of official letter MS-SCM-AC-0260-2023, signed by Mr. Jean Carlo Barquero Castro, Acting Secretary of the Municipal Council, and addressed to Mr. [Nombre 039], Mayor of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, with reference to Article II, agreement N°3, of Extraordinary Session N°080, held by the Concejo Municipal de Sarchí on 18 de mayo de 2023, reassessment of the business license issued to Ms. [Nombre 020] was recommended. 34. On 24 de mayo de 2023, pursuant to Business License Resolution Number 06-01-2023, signed by [Nombre 021] of the Business License Department and approved by [Nombre 022], Treasury Director, an administrative decision of the Business License Department was issued concerning filing N°20973, relating to the license for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages in the name of [Nombre 020], to be exercised at the commercial premises known as [Nombre 015]. 35.
On 18 de julio de 2023, by means of official letter MS-PA-OF-197-2023, signed by Mr. [Nombre 021], Head of Business Licenses, and addressed to Ms. [Nombre 020], owner of [Nombre 015], she was formally ordered to comply with the provisions of the decision granting her liquor license, with particular emphasis on point 3, which states that alcoholic beverages may be sold and consumed only inside her establishment. 36. On 08 de setiembre de 2023, by means of official letter MS-AL-OF-0376-2023, signed by Mr. [Nombre 039], Mayor of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, and addressed to [Nombre 021] of the Business License Department and [Nombre 022] of the Municipal Treasury Department, with the subject line “urgent request for information,” information was requested concerning the business licenses associated with [Nombre 040], ([Nombre 016]), [Nombre 015], and Muncheese. 37. On 21 de setiembre de 2023, by means of official letter MS-PA-OF-245-2023, signed by [Nombre 021] of the Business License Department and addressed to [Nombre 039], Mayor of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, the request for information concerning the businesses [Nombre 040], ([Nombre 016]), [Nombre 015], and Muncheese was addressed. 38.
On 21 de febrero de 2024, by means of official letter MS-SCM-AC-0092-2024, signed by Mr. Jean Carlo Barquero Castro, Secretary of the Municipal Council, and addressed to Mr. [Nombre 039], Mayor of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, with reference to Article IV, agreement N°3, of Ordinary Session N°199, held by the Concejo Municipal de Sarchí on 19 de febrero de 2024, official letter MSP-DM-DVURFP-DGFP- DRSA-SDRSAOC-DPSARCHI-UO-0017-2024 was forwarded to the municipal administration for appropriate action concerning the report of liquor consumption on a public thoroughfare (consumo de licor en vía pública) in the vicinity of Licorera Sabor. 39. On 15 de marzo de 2024, by email sent by Lic. Lineth Arce Valverde of the Legal Services Department of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, addressed to [Nombre 038] and [Nombre 021], with a copy to Mr. [Nombre 039], a complaint filed by residents of Sarchí Norte concerning alleged irregularities in the economic activities known as “[Nombre 016],” “[Nombre 015],” and “[Nombre 040]” was forwarded. 40.
On 02 de abril de 2024, by means of official letter MS-DH-OF-0010-2024, signed by Mr. [Nombre 038], Treasury Director, and addressed to [Nombre 027], license holder for [Nombre 040],” notice was served of the report arising from the inspections conducted on 15 de marzo de 2024; the license holder was informed of the results thereof and was also advised that, according to information provided by Fuerza Pública, there were several police reports concerning liquor consumption on a public thoroughfare in the vicinity of the commercial premises, excessive noise, and incidents involving basic bodily needs, all of which must be prevented. The inspection record signed by Alexander Jiménez, Pablo Zamora, Kenneth González, César Torres, and Elian Chavez was attached. 41. On 03 de abril de 2024, by means of official letter MS-DH-OF-0011-2024, signed by Mr. [Nombre 038], Treasury Director, and addressed to [Nombre 020], license holder for Bar “La Farmacia,” notice was served of the report arising from the inspections conducted on 15 de marzo de 2024; the license holder was informed of the results thereof and was also advised that, according to information provided by Fuerza Pública, there were several police reports concerning liquor consumption on a public thoroughfare in the vicinity of the commercial premises, excessive noise, and incidents involving basic bodily needs, all of which must be prevented due to the possibility of violating Ley N°9047 and its implementing regulations. The inspection record signed by Alexander Jiménez, Pablo Zamora, Yuliana Oporta, and César Torres was attached. 42.
On 03 April 2024, through official letter MS-DH-OF-0009-2024, signed by Mr. [Nombre 038], Director de Hacienda, and addressed to [Nombre 026], business license holder (patentado) of the Minisúper “([Nombre 016]),” notice was given of the report resulting from the inspections carried out on 15 March 2024 together with Fuerza Pública. The license holder was informed of the results, which showed a person consuming an alcoholic beverage inside the establishment, constituting a violation of article 3 of the Reglamento General para la regulación y la comercialización de bebidas con contenido alcohólico de las Municipalidades de Atenas, Grecia, Naranjo, Poás, Valverde Vega (ahora Sarchí), Zarcero y San Mateo, of Ley N°9047. The license holder was also advised that, according to information provided by Fuerza Pública, several police reports had been issued for consumption of liquor on public roads near the commercial establishment, excessive noise, and incidents involving the performance of basic bodily functions, all of which must be prevented due to the possibility that Ley N°9047 and its regulations were being violated.
An inspection report signed by Alexander Jiménez, Pablo Zamora, Mauricio Gamboa, and César Torres was attached. 43. On 09 April 2024, through official letter MS-SCM-AC-0188-2024, signed by Mr. Jean Carlo Barquero Castro, Secretario del Concejo Municipal, and addressed to Mr. [Nombre 038], Director de Hacienda de la Municipalidad de Sarchí, with reference to article IV, resolution N°5, of Ordinary Session N°206 held by the Concejo Municipal de Sarchí on 08 April 2024, official letter MSP-DM-DVURFP-DGFP- DRSA-SDRSAOC-DPSARCHI-UO-0038-2024 was forwarded to the departamento de hacienda municipal for appropriate action concerning the report of liquor consumption on public roads near Licorera Sabor. 44. On 17 April 2024, through official letter MS-AL-OF-0135-2024, signed by [Nombre 039], Alcalde, de la Municipalidad de Sarchí, and addressed to the Grupo vecinal de Sarchí Norte, information was provided concerning the dissatisfaction regarding irregularities at the commercial establishments “[Nombre 016],” “[Nombre 015],” and “[Nombre 040],” the actions taken by the Municipalidad de Sarchí to address the concerns of residents of the area in question, and the requirements for the respective business licenses. 45.
On 12 June 2024, through minutes number 3-2024, signed by municipal officials Verónica Castro Benavides, Presidenta a.i., and Dave Alonso Araya Vega, Secretario de Actas, of the Consejo Cantonal de Coordinación Institucional de Sarchí (CCCIS), at which residents [Nombre 050], [Nombre 051], [Nombre 004], [Nombre 044], [Nombre 045], and [Nombre 010] were heard, the following resolutions were adopted: - The Ministerio de Salud shall issue a report to the CCCI concerning the progress made in addressing the observations issued regarding the condition of the exhaust systems at the commercial establishments [Nombre 040] and [Nombre 015]. - The Municipalidad de Sarchí shall issue a report to the CCCI concerning the inspections conducted at the commercial establishments [Nombre 016], [Nombre 040], and [Nombre 015]. - The Municipalidad de Sarchí shall notify the property owner and the business license holders of [Nombre 016], [Nombre 040], and [Nombre 015] regarding the placement of chains at the entrances to the parking areas in front of the establishments and their use once the establishments are closed. 46.
On 21 June 2024, through official letter MS-DH-OF-035-2024, signed by Mr. [Nombre 038], Director de Hacienda, de la Municipalidad de Sarchí, and addressed to Dr. Danilo Granados Alvarado, Director Área Rectora de Salud de Sarchí, del Ministerio de Salud, information was provided regarding the inspections conducted at various businesses in the canton by engineer Marco Tulio Arias Morera on 05 June, concerning [Nombre 015], [Nombre 016], Restaurante y ([Nombre 040]), Bar El Puente, and Bar El Rinconcito. This was submitted so that the matters falling within the authority of the Ministerio de Salud could be analyzed and assessed. 47. On 21 June 2024, through official letter MS-DH-OF-036-2024, signed by Mr. [Nombre 038], Director de Hacienda, de la Municipalidad de Sarchí, and addressed to Mr. [Nombre 026], business license holder of [Nombre 016], a report was forwarded concerning the inspection conducted at his business by engineer Marco Tulio Arias Morera on 05 June, and the following conclusions were to be considered: - Based on the occupancy of the premises and the risk classification of their contents, the Unidad de Ingeniería del Cuerpo de Bomberos determined noncompliance with 14 preventive provisions which, until corrected, adversely affect life safety and fire risk. - Using the classification system, it was determined that the 14 observations were classified as follows: • 8 observations were classified as noncritical. • 6 observations were classified as critical. - The provisions set forth in this report must be implemented to improve the building’s life-safety and fire-protection conditions. 48.
On 21 June 2024, through official letter MS-DH-OF-037-2024, signed by Mr. [Nombre 038], Director de Hacienda, de la Municipalidad de Sarchí, and addressed to Ms. [Nombre 020], business license holder of [Nombre 015], a report was forwarded concerning the inspection conducted at her business by engineer Marco Tulio Arias Morera on 05 June. The report informed the license holder that the maximum total expected occupancy load (carga máxima total esperada de aforo) permitted in the establishment at any one time was 42 persons. The following conclusions were to be considered: - Based on the occupancy of the premises and the risk classification of their contents, the Unidad de Ingeniería del Cuerpo de Bomberos determined noncompliance with 11 preventive provisions which, until corrected, adversely affect life safety and fire risk. - Using the classification system, it was determined that the 11 observations were classified as follows: • 8 observations were classified as noncritical. • 3 observations were classified as critical. - The provisions set forth in this report must be implemented to improve the building’s life-safety and fire-protection conditions. 49.
On 21 June 2024, through official letter MS-DH-OF-038-2024, signed by Mr. [Nombre 038], Director de Hacienda, de la Municipalidad de Sarchí, and addressed to Mr. [Nombre 027], business license holder of ([Nombre 040]), a report was forwarded concerning the inspection conducted at his business by engineer Marco Tulio Arias Morera on 05 June. The report informed the license holder that the maximum total expected occupancy load permitted in the establishment at any one time was 41 persons, of which they must remain mindful. The report stated the following conclusions: - The LP gas storage, installation, and distribution conditions, as well as the life-safety and fire-risk aspects assessed, presented inconsistencies and therefore failed to comply with the minimum conditions required under the regulations in force. - The observations stated in this document must be addressed within the time established according to the risk-level classification for each item. 50.
On 10 July 2024, through a record of receipt of a telephone complaint, in accordance with the “Lineamiento Institucional para la Atención de Denuncias planteadas ante la Municipalidad de Sarchí,” an anonymous telephone complaint was received and documented by [Nombre 038], Director de Hacienda Municipal, de la Municipalidad de Sarchí. It reported that several persons were conducting a musical event at the commercial establishment ([Nombre 040]), thereby disturbing the peace of the neighborhood. The complainant was informed that coordination with Fuerza Pública would be undertaken to conduct the appropriate inspection. 51. On 12 July 2024, through official letter MS-DH-OF-043-2024, signed by Mr. [Nombre 038], Director de Hacienda, de la Municipalidad de Sarchí, and addressed to [Nombre 027], business license holder of [Nombre 040], the following was stated: “Considering that last Wednesday, 10 July of the current year, the undersigned was able to verify that, at approximately 16:45 hours, a musical event was being held at [Nombre 040], you are hereby formally WARNED to refrain from holding this type of event without the proper authorization, since otherwise we would be compelled to initiate the procedures authorized by the legal system.” 52.
On 22 July 2024, through a document without an official letter number, signed by Mr. [Nombre 027] and addressed to [Nombre 038], Director de Hacienda, de la Municipalidad de Sarchí, reference was made to official letter MS-DH-OF-043-2024, and the formal warning was rejected because it did not fall within the provisions established in subsection k of article 3 of the Reglamento General a la Ley N°9047; the withdrawal of the warning was also requested. 53. On 24 July 2024, through official letter MS-DH-OF-046-2024, signed by Mr. [Nombre 038], Director de Hacienda Municipal, and addressed to [Nombre 027], business license holder of [Nombre 040],” the formal warning stated in official letter MS-DH-OF-043- 2024 was reiterated, as its purpose was to ensure compliance with the guidelines established under the business license and the liquor sales license. 54. On 31 July 2024, through a document without an official letter number, signed by Mr. [Nombre 027] and addressed to [Nombre 039], Alcalde, de la Municipalidad de Sarchí, an appeal (recurso de apelación) was filed against the warning issued by Mr. [Nombre 038], Director de Hacienda Municipal, through official letter MS-DH-OF-043-2024, pursuant to article 171 of the Código Municipal. 55.
On 08 August 2024, through official letter MS-AL-OF-0388-2024, signed by Mr. [Nombre 039], Alcalde, de la Municipalidad de Sarchí, and addressed to [Nombre 027], holder of identity card [Valor 015] and business license holder of [Nombre 040], in response to the appeal against official letter MS-DH-OF-043-2024, the appeal filed against official letter MS-DH-OF-043-2024 was declared inadmissible because the opportunity to challenge that act before the Alcaldía had already lapsed (precluida) by the date on which the appeal was filed. 56. On 19 August 2024, through a document without an official letter number received on 23 August 2024, signed by [Nombre 020] and ([Nombre 026]) and addressed to the Concejo Municipal, information was requested regarding the complaints filed against their commercial establishments, along with a request that impartiality be maintained in the performance of official duties. 57.
On 27 August 2024, an anonymous email was sent to the plataforma de servicios de la Municipalidad de Sarchí concerning a complaint regarding the consumption of liquor inside [Nombre 016] Licorera Donde Sabor, in the district of Sarchí Norte. 58. On 28 August 2024, through official letter MS-PA-OF-062-2024, signed by [Nombre 021], of the Departamento de Patentes, and addressed to [Nombre 026], holder of identity card number [Valor 016], [Nombre 016], he was notified that an anonymous complaint, including a photograph, had been received alleging that liquor had been sold at his business for consumption inside the establishment. He was hereby WARNED to enforce the prohibition against consuming alcoholic beverages within and around the establishment; the type of license, prohibition, and penalty under Ley N°9047 were also stated. 59.
On 29 August 2024, by email signed by David Villalobos Sancho, of 911 Operations, addressed to [Nombre 038], Director of Municipal Finance, regarding the results of incidents handled by the Ministry of Public Security during 2024 in which the address identified was ([Nombre 040]), [Nombre 015], and [Nombre 016], from which a list of cases involving public disorder, disturbances, and other matters was derived. 60. On 05 September 2024, by official letter MS-SCM-AC-0581-2024, signed by Mr. Jean Carlo Barquero Castro, Secretary of the Municipal Council, addressed to [Nombre 039], Mayor of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, through Article IV, resolution N°10, of Ordinary Session N°018, held by the Concejo Municipal de Sarchí on 02 September 2024, the document bearing no official-letter number, dated 23 August 2024 and submitted by [Nombre 020] and [Nombre 026], was forwarded to the Municipal Administration. 61.
On 03 October 2024, by official letter MS-AL-OF-0493-2024, signed by Mr. [Nombre 039], Mayor of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, addressed to the Concejo Municipal of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, regarding the response to the letter from Mr. ([Nombre 026]) and [Nombre 020] and the handling of official letter MS-SCM-AC-0581-2024. Attached is official letter MS-DH-OF- 064-2024, signed by [Nombre 038], Director of Tax Revenue, through which the request received was addressed. REGARDING THE AMPARO ACTION (RECURSO DE AMPARO) With respect to the arguments set forth in the relief sought by the petitioners in the amparo action filing, the following must be stated and clarified as regards the Municipalidad de Sarchí: First: With respect to the matters addressed in the First point of the filing instituting this amparo action, the municipal entity has conducted a rigorous process in managing applications and procedures related to municipal business licenses (patentes municipales), in compliance with the respective requirements for each commercial activity conducted, including those identified for this particular proceeding.
Likewise, each of the cases submitted by the petitioners has received timely attention; in this context, the registered commercial establishments have on various occasions been subject to inspections, preventive measures, and temporary closures, all based on the regulations in force and intended to ensure compliance with the legal provisions governing this matter. These actions reflect the commitment to good practices and transparency that govern public service, always directed toward the well-being of the community as a whole. It is important to emphasize that follow-up on the respective proceedings requiring attention concerning licensed commercial establishments continues daily, in adherence to due process (debido proceso), thereby ensuring the proper performance of the functions carried out by the Municipalidad. Second: With respect to the matters addressed in the Second point of the filing instituting this amparo action, it is true that Business License Resolution Number 129-2015, corresponding to form N°8515, concerning an application for a liquor-sales license for a convenience store (Minisúper), pertains to the Minisúper establishment, license type D1, in the name of Ms. [Nombre 020], valid from 10 December 2015 until its expiration on 10 December 2020, and that it is linked to the commercial business license for the Minisúper line of business, in the name of Ms. [Nombre 020], valid from 07 December 2015 until its expiration on 07 December 2020, with land use (uso de suelo) requested for a mini-supermarket in a commercial and service zone where that use is permitted as conforming.
Regarding the allegation that it “has operated as a clandestine bar,” this municipal entity has no record of such activity, since inspections and visits have repeatedly been conducted in the area and have not substantiated the petitioners’ allegation. Third: With respect to the matters addressed in the Third point of the filing instituting this amparo action, it is true that a document dated 12 August 2016, signed by various private individuals, was submitted to the Business License Department of the Municipalidad; however, it was addressed on 25 August 2016 through official letter MVV-PT-OF-091-2016, which states that the licensees were served with a formal notice (prevención) based on document MVV-PT- OF-078-2016, signed by [Nombre 021] of the Business License Department, stating: “The Municipalidad hereby FORMALLY DIRECTS YOU to PROCEED TO COMPLY WITH THE HOURS ESTABLISHED FOR YOUR BUSINESS AND WITH THE RULES REGARDING THE CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES WITHIN AND AROUND THE ESTABLISHMENT.” See folios 32, 33, 34, 35 and 36 of the attached certified case file.
Fourth: With respect to the matters addressed in the Fourth point of the filing instituting this amparo action, it is true that a document was received by the Municipalidad de Sarchí on 22 February 2017, and the matter was addressed by Ms. Norma Zeledón Pérez, Deputy Mayor of the Municipalidad, who requested a report from the Business License Department concerning [Nombre 016], which was issued through official letter MVV-PT-OF-039-2017. See folios 49 and 50 of the attached certified case file. Fifth: With respect to the matters addressed in the Seventh point of the filing instituting this amparo action, Business License Resolution Number 069-2017, corresponding to [Nombre 016], is attached as evidence of the actions taken by the Municipalidad de Sarchí. Its Por tanto concerns the temporary suspension of the commercial license from eleven o’clock on the nineteenth day of July until eleven o’clock on the twenty-fourth day of July 2017; the establishment was closed and administratively sanctioned through a preventive and temporary closure.
On 26 September 2019, through official letter MS-PT-OF-118-2019, signed by [Nombre 021] of the Business License Department and addressed to ([Nombre 026]), owner of [Nombre 016], it was stated that the Municipalidad hereby FORMALLY DIRECTS YOU to PROCEED TO take the necessary measures to prevent this situation at your BUSINESS. On 18 July 2023, through official letter MS-PA-OF-197-2023, signed by [Nombre 021] of the Business License Department and addressed to [Nombre 020], owner of [Nombre 015], it was stated, with particular emphasis, that the Municipalidad de Sarchí hereby FORMALLY DIRECTS YOU to COMPLY WITH THE TERMS SET FORTH IN THE RESOLUTION GRANTING YOUR LIQUOR LICENSE. On 12 July 2024, through official letter MS-DH-OF-043-2024, signed by [Nombre 038], Director of Finance, and addressed to [Nombre 027], owner of [Nombre 040] La Granja, it was stated that YOU ARE HEREBY FORMALLY DIRECTED to refrain from holding events without the proper authorization, since otherwise the corresponding proceedings must be initiated.
On 28 August 2024, through official letter MS-PA-OF-062-2024, signed by [Nombre 021] of the Business License Department and addressed to [Nombre 026], owner of [Nombre 016], it was stated that YOU ARE HEREBY FORMALLY DIRECTED to proceed to COMPLY WITH THE PROHIBITION ON THE CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES WITHIN AND AROUND THE ESTABLISHMENT. See folios 67, 68, 98, 167, 311, 312, 339 and 340 of the attached certified case file. Sixth: With respect to the matters addressed in the Tenth point of the filing instituting this amparo action, official letter MS-AL-OF-0376-2024, signed by Mr. [Nombre 039], Mayor, and addressed to [Nombre 021] of the Business License Department and [Nombre 022] of Municipal Finance, is attached as evidence of the actions taken by the Municipalidad de Sarchí. That letter urgently requests information concerning the licensees under review, and the request was addressed through official letter MS-PA-OF-245-2023, which provides details for the commercial establishments under review regarding land use, health permits, application dates for commercial activities and liquor licenses, license classes, amounts paid for the commercial business license and liquor license, operating hours, restrictions, and tax status.
See folios 168, 169, 170, 171 and 172 of the attached certified case file. Seventh: With respect to the matters addressed in the Twelfth point of the filing instituting this amparo action, official letter MS-PA-OF-245-2023 is attached as evidence of the actions taken by the Municipalidad de Sarchí; it provides information concerning the licensees that demonstrates compliance with the regulations governing the conduct of the specified commercial activities. See folios 170, 171 and 172 of the attached certified case file. Eighth: With respect to the matters addressed in the Fourteenth point of the filing instituting this amparo action, official letters MS-DH-OF-0010-2024, MS-DH-OF-0011-2024 and MS-DH-OF-0009- 2024, together with the respective reports documenting the inspections conducted by municipal officials, licensees, and Fuerza Pública at the establishments under review, are submitted as supporting evidence of the inspections conducted by the local government in response to the requests made by residents of the area.
Likewise, the residents of Sarchí Norte received a response through official letter MS-AL-OF-0135-2024, signed by [Nombre 039], Mayor, addressing their dissatisfaction regarding the alleged irregularities at the commercial establishments “[Nombre 016], [Nombre 015] and ([Nombre 040]),” and describing the actions undertaken in pursuit of solutions to the problems reported by residents of the area. See folios 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 214, 215, 216, and 217 of the attached certified case file. Ninth: With respect to the matters addressed in the Fifteenth point of the filing instituting this amparo action, an ordinary session of the Consejo Cantonal de Coordinación Institucional de Sarchí was held in the session hall of the Municipalidad de Sarchí on 12 June 2024, attended by the various authorities and institutions of the canton, as well as by several residents of the Sarchí Norte sector, at which the following resolutions were adopted: “1.
Prior communication among institutions when road improvements are carried out, so that such work does not generate debris that obstructs roadway drainage systems. 2. The Ministerio de Salud shall issue a report to the CCCI concerning the progress made in addressing the observations issued regarding the condition of the exhaust systems at the commercial establishments [Nombre 040] and [Nombre 015]. 3. The Municipalidad de Sarchí shall issue a report to the CCCI concerning the inspections conducted at the commercial establishments Mini Super El Sabor, [Nombre 040] and [Nombre 015]. 4. The Municipalidad de Sarchí shall notify the property owner and the licensees of Mini Super El Sabor, [Nombre 040] and [Nombre 015] regarding the installation of chains at the entrances to the parking areas in front of the establishments and their use once the establishments are closed. 5. The Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía is requested to provide a report identifying the area covered by a possible spring (naciente) located near the property of Mr.
Gilbert Alpízar, where the commercial establishments Mini Súper El Sabor, [Nombre 040] and [Nombre 015] are located.” Accordingly, the commitment to the residents of the area remains in effect, with a view to strengthening public safety within the available legal authority. Likewise, through official letter MS-DH-OF-035-2024, Danilo Granados Alvarado, Director of the Área Rectora de Salud de Sarchí, was informed of the reports prepared by engineer Marco Tulio Arias Morera of the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos de Costa Rica concerning several commercial establishments in the canton, including those under review herein.
Likewise, through official letters MS-DH-OF-036-2024, MS-DH-OF-037-2024, and MS-DH-OF- 038-2024, the professional’s reports were forwarded to the business license holders for appropriate action regarding their findings. See folios 218 to 309 of the attached certified case file. Tenth: With respect to the matters set forth in the Sixteenth point of the filing initiating this amparo appeal (recurso de amparo), the information submitted by the appellants concerning their medical diagnoses is acknowledged as received. However, it is important to note that municipalities do not have the authority to prevent commercial activities when the established requirements for conducting them have been met, since acting otherwise would constitute a discriminatory practice and a violation of rights. For this reason, the corresponding municipal procedures have been carried out on repeated occasions to address the situation presented, in accordance with due process (debido proceso), with the aim of safeguarding the well-being of the canton’s residents in an equitable and healthful manner.
Having stated the foregoing, the following clarification is provided: The commercial activities at issue in the appeal involve three establishments, which have the following information and requirements: • [Nombre 016] o Taxpayer name: [Nombre 026] o Compliant land-use designation (uso de suelo): 3020-2015 [ZUCR Zona Urbana Comercial Residencial] o Commercial activity and license type: Class D 1, mini-supermarket type. o Liquor license application date: 18 de julio 2018 o Liquor license response date: 23 de agosto 2018 o Hours for the sale of liquor: 08:am to 12:00 midnight. See folios 88 and 90 of the attached certified case file. • [Nombre 040] o Taxpayer name: [Nombre 027] o Compliant land-use designation: 643-2021 [ZUCR Zona Urbana Comercial Residencial] o Commercial activity and license type: Class C, restaurant type o Liquor license application date: 17 de marzo 2023 o Liquor license response date: 13 de abril 2023 o Hours for the sale of liquor: from 11:am to 2:30 am.
See folios 136, 136, and 138 of the attached certified case file. • [Nombre 015] o Taxpayer name: [Nombre 020] o Compliant land-use designation: 643-2021 [ZUCR Zona Urbana Comercial Residencial] o Commercial activity and license type: Class B1, bar type. o Liquor license application date: 20 de abril 2023 o Liquor license response date: 24 de mayo 2023 o Hours for the sale of liquor: 11:am to 12:00 midnight. See folios 164, 165, and 166 of the attached certified case file. REQUEST Based on all the foregoing, the following is requested: • That this amparo appeal be dismissed with respect to the undersigned and the entity we represent, because the appellants’ constitutional rights have not been violated. On the contrary, the Municipalidad has taken actions intended to provide assistance and cooperation to the canton’s residents, while at all times respecting the rights of merchants and residents and acting within the framework of due process and legality, principles that underpin and guide public service. • That this amparo appeal be dismissed, considering that the undersigned and the entity we represent have undertaken the necessary administrative measures to seek a solution for the appellants, in addition to the fact that both the Alcaldía and the Concejo Municipal have addressed the matter and, as the Municipalidad, have taken action within the scope of their authority. • That any claim for an award of costs, damages, or losses arising from this appeal be denied.”
Justice Cruz Castro writes the opinion; and,
Considering:
Before analyzing the merits of the case—concerning the alleged violation of the right to prompt and proper proceedings—it must be clarified that, since judgment No. 2008-02545 at 8:55 hours on 22 de febrero de 2008, this Chamber has referred to the contentious-administrative jurisdiction (jurisdicción contencioso administrativa)—with some exceptions—those matters in which it is disputed whether the public administration has complied with the deadlines established by the Ley General de la Administración Pública (Articles 261 and 325) or by sector-specific laws governing special administrative proceedings (procedimientos administrativos especiales), both for issuing a final administrative act (acto final) in an administrative proceeding instituted ex officio or at the request of a party, and for deciding the applicable administrative appeals (recursos administrativos). This case specifically presents an exception, since it concerns several complaints filed with the Municipalidad de Sarchí, the Área Rectora de Salud de Sarchí, and the Delegación de Tránsito regarding problems associated with the activities of three commercial establishments ([Nombre 040], [Nombre 016]) that may affect health and the environment. Having clarified this point, the Chamber proceeds to decide the specific situation raised in this amparo proceeding (amparo).
Pursuant to Article 45 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, if the respondent authority (autoridad recurrida) fails to submit its report, the facts alleged by the petitioning party (parte recurrente) are deemed true. The Chamber proceeds to examine whether the amparo is warranted on the basis of the facts presented, which does not mean that the petition is automatically granted. In this specific case, the head of the Delegación Policial de la Fuerza Pública de Sarchí did not submit the requested report. Accordingly, the report is deemed not to have been submitted, and this Chamber decides the case by assessing the other reports provided, the reported facts, the evidence attached to the filing initiating the amparo, and the case law of this Court applicable to the specific case.
The petitioning party files an amparo petition and states that, from 2015 to the present, they have repeatedly but unsuccessfully reported the unlawful operation of several businesses—particularly “[Nombre 016]”—which, although they hold only business licenses (patentes) for a convenience store, small restaurant, or restaurant, actually operate as clandestine bars. These establishments sell liquor without restrictions on operating hours and organize parties, horseback-riding events, and activities with loud music, causing noise pollution (contaminación sónica), trash in the streets, fights, drug and alcohol use on public streets, and insecurity in the neighborhood. The petitioners state that, despite the repeated complaints filed since 2016 with the Municipalidad de Sarchí, Área Rectora de Salud de Valverde Vega, Fuerza Pública, and Policía de Tránsito, the authorities have taken no effective measures.
They allege that there may even be a conflict of interest at the Municipalidad, given the family relationship between license holders and the officials responsible for granting business licenses. They complain that official responses have been limited to formal communications or inspections conducted at times when the businesses are not operating, rendering those actions ineffective. They recount that the situation has worsened over time: liquor and drug use in the street; urine and vomit on the walls and sidewalks of homes; foul odors from neighboring restaurants due to improperly placed exhaust systems; increased pests; improper parking in front of homes; threats and insults against those who report the problems; and an atmosphere of insecurity directly affecting older adults, children, and persons with physical and psychological illnesses. They assert that numerous calls to 911 have been documented, as has the submission of medical evidence confirming harm to the physical and emotional health of neighborhood residents.
The residents complain that although the land-use certificates (certificados de uso de suelo) authorize only convenience-store or restaurant activities, the establishments operate as bars and nightclubs, offering karaoke, live music, and liquor sales throughout the early morning hours, without occupancy controls or adequate sanitary conditions. They contend that the respondent institutions have allowed this situation, placing private interests above the public interest despite the proximity of these businesses to schools, daycare centers, the Cruz Roja, and the public library. They allege that institutional inaction has violated their fundamental rights to health, life, privacy, private property, and a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. They therefore request that the Court protect their rights and order the respondent authorities to adopt effective measures to end the reported problems.
The following facts are deemed duly established and relevant to deciding this matter, either because they have been substantiated or because the respondent authority failed to address them, as directed in the initial order:
Facts related to the Policía de Tránsito del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes:
On 12 de octubre de 2023, incident 2023-10-12-03090 was reported to the Sistema de Emergencias 911 and forwarded solely to the Ministerio de Seguridad Pública, without participation by the Policía de Tránsito (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 13 de octubre de 2023, incident 2023-10-13-03366 was recorded and handled exclusively by the Ministerio de Seguridad Pública, without assignment to the Policía de Tránsito (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 24 de marzo de 2024, incident 2024-03-24-03145 occurred and was forwarded solely to the Ministerio de Seguridad Pública, without the Policía de Tránsito being notified (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 18 de abril de 2024, incident 2024-04-18-00115 was generated, reported to 911, and assigned only to the Ministerio de Seguridad Pública, without participation by the Policía de Tránsito (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 25 de julio de 2024, incident 2024-25-07-01831 was reported without intervention by the Policía de Tránsito, as it was assigned solely to the Ministerio de Seguridad Pública (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 14 de agosto de 2024, incident 2024-14-08-03174 was recorded without the Policía de Tránsito being notified or responding, as it was assigned only to the Ministerio de Seguridad Pública (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 24 de agosto de 2024, incidents 2024-08-24-02891, 2024-08-24-02293 and 2024-08-24-02404 were reported, all of which were handled solely by the Ministerio de Seguridad Pública, without the Policía de Tránsito being assigned as a responder (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 16 de diciembre de 2024, the Deputy Chief of the Central de Comunicaciones de la DGPT, licenciado Óscar Calvo Quirós, sent by email 16 reports from the Sistema de Emergencias 911 concerning incidents that occurred between 2015 and 2024. Of these, nine concerned public-order disturbances (sent to the Ministerio de Seguridad Pública as first responder and to the Policía de Tránsito as second responder), and seven concerned traffic incidents, improperly parked vehicles, or service requests, which were processed by the respective unit, with no failure to respond being evident (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 18 de diciembre de 2024, the head of the Delegación de Occidente, licenciado Osman Murillo Rodríguez, responded through official communication number DVT-DGPT-OPT-RHN-UD-N-2024-139, stating that since assuming leadership in enero de 2021, he had received no direct complaints at the delegation concerning the case; that incidents referred by 911 had been handled in accordance with police protocol, without confirming the reported events; that most incidents involved disturbances of the public order, which fall within the jurisdiction of the Ministerio de Seguridad Pública and Ministerio de Salud; and that strategic checkpoints had been conducted at the entrances to and exits from Sarchí, without any traffic citations (boletas de citación) being issued (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
Facts related to the Área Rectora de Salud Central Occidente del Ministerio de Salud:
On 09 de noviembre de 2023, complaints D-VV-088-2023 (against [Nombre 040]), D-VV-089-2023 (against [Nombre 016] D’ Sabor) and D-VV-090-2023 (against [Nombre 032]) were filed regarding noise, deficient sanitary conditions, unauthorized activities, improper waste management, smoking, and odors, among other matters (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 19 de diciembre de 2023, with respect to La Granja, report MS-CO-DARS-VV-072-2023 and sanitary order (orden sanitaria) MS-CO-DARS-VV-OS-134-2023 were issued, ordering the activity to cease because it lacked a current sanitary operating permit (permiso sanitario de funcionamiento) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 30 de enero de 2024, commercial establishment La Granja was granted Permiso Sanitario de Funcionamiento N.º 11-2024, valid until 15 de noviembre de 2024 (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
In enero de 2024, a sanitary order was issued concerning commercial establishment La Farmacia to correct noncompliant conditions (walls in unsuitable condition, absence of documented hygiene/disinfection programs, and restroom facilities that had not been adapted) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
In febrero de 2024, reports and sanitary orders were issued concerning commercial establishment D’ Sabor to bring its restroom facilities into compliance with Ley 7600 (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
With respect to commercial establishment La Farmacia, sound-level measurements (mediciones sónicas) were conducted following noise complaints, and levels exceeding the limits permitted for mixed-use zones were recorded at some residences (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 09 de agosto de 2024, commercial establishment La Granja was served with a sanitary order requiring it to correct smoke handling and disposal, accessibility (Ley 7600), the condition of restroom facilities, and the absence of an emergency plan (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
In agosto de 2024, the closure (clausura) of D’ Sabor was ordered due to noncompliance (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
In octubre de 2024, compliance with the conditions imposed on D’ Sabor was verified, and the case was closed (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 15 de noviembre de 2024, La Granja’s sanitary operating permit was renewed through 15 de noviembre de 2025, with certain matters remaining pending for a comprehensive inspection (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
Regarding the facts related to the Municipalidad de Sarchí:
On 7 de diciembre de 2015, Resolución de Patentes N.° 126-2015 was issued, approving a convenience-store business license for the establishment “Minisúper D’ Sabor,” in the name of [Nombre 020] (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 7 de diciembre de 2015, official communication MVV-PT-OF-127-2015 was forwarded to the Concejo Municipal with the application for a license to sell alcoholic beverages (class D1) for “Minisúper D’ Sabor” (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 8 de diciembre de 2015, the Concejo Municipal approved the liquor license for [Nombre 020] (minutes transcribed on 9 de diciembre de 2015, official communication SMVV0708-2015) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 10 de diciembre de 2015, Patent Resolution No. 129-2015 was issued, granting a liquor license (class D1) to Minisúper D’ Sabor, with operating hours from 8:00 to 24:00 (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 25 de agosto de 2016, through official letter MVV-PT-OF-091-2016, the Municipality formally ordered the establishment to comply with the operating hours and prohibitions established in Ley 9047, following a complaint dated 17 de agosto de 2016 (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 21 de setiembre de 2016, Fuerza Pública reported (official letter Sub36-048-2016) that an observation report had been prepared concerning incidents at the establishment and forwarded to the Business Licensing Department (Departamento de Patentes) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 26 de setiembre de 2016, [Nombre 020] responded to the Business Licensing Department regarding a letter from neighbors concerning [Nombre 016] D’ Sabor (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 29 de setiembre de 2016, through official letter MVV-PT-OF-105-2016, the Municipality issued a final order to comply with the prohibition against consuming alcoholic beverages inside and around the establishment, pursuant to Ley 9047 (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 28 de enero de 2017, Fuerza Pública reported that persons were consuming liquor inside [Nombre 016] Licorera D’ Sabor (official letter No. 0012185-17). (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 1 de febrero de 2017, the Business Licensing Department inspected the establishment and verified that liquor was being consumed inside, based on report 0012185-17 (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 2 de febrero de 2017, [Nombre 026] submitted a response concerning the warning issued during the inspection of 1 de febrero de 2017 (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 7 de marzo de 2017, the Business Licensing Department informed the Office of the Deputy Mayor (Vicealcaldía), through official letter MVV-PT-OF-039-2017, of the municipal actions concerning [Nombre 016] Licorera D’ Sabor (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 8 de marzo de 2017 (00:06 h), Fuerza Pública reported that the establishment was open, with persons and vehicles present (report No. 0026041-17) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 6 de abril de 2017, the person in charge of the establishment submitted a response regarding the police report of 3 de marzo de 2017; neighbors also reported incidents occurring on 27 de marzo de 2017 that culminated in a police inspection (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 3 de mayo de 2017, Fuerza Pública reported three responses (reports 0045533-17, 0045541-17 and 0050255-17) involving liquor consumption outside and inside the establishment and issued warnings to the manager (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 16 de mayo de 2017, the license holder expressed disagreement over not receiving copies of the police reports and requested that they be dismissed (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 18 de julio de 2017, through Patent Resolution 069-2017, the Municipality temporarily suspended the business license (patente comercial) of [Nombre 016] Licorera D’ Sabor from 19 al 24 de julio de 2017, ordering its preventive closure and the placement of seals (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 27 de marzo de 2018, through Resolution 043-2018, the business license of [Nombre 016] D’ Sabor was transferred from [Nombre 020] to [Nombre 026] (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 1 de agosto de 2018, the Business Licensing Department submitted to the Council the liquor-license application for [Nombre 016] D’ Sabor in the name of [Nombre 026] (official letter MVV-PT-OF-075-2018) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 6 de agosto de 2018, the Council approved the liquor license for D’ Sabor (official letter SMVV368-2018 dated 14 de agosto de 2018) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 7 de setiembre de 2018, through Resolution 101-2018, the Municipality accepted the surrender of [Nombre 020]’s business license (the establishment was not operating as of 6 de setiembre de 2018) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 25 de marzo de 2019, an application was filed to change the licensed activity to a restaurant in the name of [Nombre 027] (proceeding 20831) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 24 de mayo de 2019, the Municipality warned D’ Sabor of possible noncompliance with its operating hours (official letter MVV-PT-OF-037-2019 dated 25 de marzo and follow-up letter MS-PT-OF-118-2019 dated 26 de setiembre de 2019). (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 22 y 27 de marzo de 2023, the liquor-license application for [Nombre 040] was forwarded to the Council (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 3 de abril de 2023, the Council approved the liquor license for La Granja (official letter MS-SCM-AC-0166-2023) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 13 de abril de 2023, Patent Resolution 03-01-2023 was issued together with the liquor-license certificate for La Granja (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 28 de abril y 10/19 de mayo de 2023, the application for a bar liquor license for [Nombre 032] was processed and approved (official letters MS-AL-OF-0238-2023, MS-SCM-AC-0228-2023, MS-SCM-AC-0259-2023) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 24 de mayo de 2023, Patent Resolution 06-01-2023 was issued, granting the liquor license to [Nombre 015] (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 18 de julio de 2023, the Municipality formally ordered [Nombre 015] to ensure that alcoholic beverages were sold and consumed only inside the establishment (official letter MS-PA-OF-197-2023) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 8 y 21 de setiembre de 2023, the Mayor’s Office requested, and the Business Licensing Office (Intendencia de Patentes) provided, comprehensive information regarding the business licenses of La Granja, D’ Sabor and La Farmacia (official letters MS-AL-OF-0376-2023 and MS-PA-OF-245-2023) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 15 de marzo de 2024, the Legal Advisory Office (Asesoría Jurídica) forwarded a complaint from neighbors concerning alleged irregularities at D’ Sabor, La Farmacia and La Granja (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 2 y 3 de abril de 2024, the Treasury Department (Hacienda) notified La Granja, La Farmacia and D’ Sabor of the results of the inspections conducted on 15 de marzo de 2024 (consumption on public thoroughfares, excessive noise and other circumstances), warning them of potential violations of Ley 9047 (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 9 de abril de 2024, the Council forwarded to the Treasury Department an official letter from MSP concerning liquor consumption on public thoroughfares near Licorera Sabor. (see report submitted by the respondent authorities) On 17 de abril de 2024, the Mayor’s Office responded to the Sarchí Norte neighborhood group, detailing municipal actions and business-license information. (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 12 de junio de 2024, the Consejo Cantonal de Coordinación Institucional held a meeting (minutes 3-2024) and agreed upon the following: reports from Salud and the Municipality concerning exhaust systems and inspections; placement of chains at parking-lot entrances upon closing; and proceedings before MINAE concerning a possible spring (naciente) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 21 de junio de 2024, inspection reports (05 de junio) were sent to Salud, and the findings of Bomberos were forwarded to D’ Sabor, La Farmacia and La Granja (preventive noncompliance and maximum occupancy limits: 42 persons at La Farmacia; 41 at La Granja), together with critical safety observations (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 10 de julio de 2024, an anonymous telephone complaint was received concerning musical entertainment at La Granja; an inspection was coordinated with Fuerza Pública (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 12 de julio de 2024, La Granja was formally ordered to refrain from holding musical events without authorization (official letter MS-DH-OF-043-2024) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 22 y 24 de julio de 2024, La Granja’s license holder challenged the order, and the Municipality reaffirmed the measure (official letter MS-DH-OF-046-2024) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 31 de julio de 2024, the license holder appealed to the Mayor’s Office; on 8 de agosto de 2024, the Mayor’s Office declared the appeal inadmissible due to procedural preclusion (preclusión) (official letter MS-AL-OF-0388-2024) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 27 y 28 de agosto de 2024, an anonymous complaint was received regarding liquor consumption inside Minisúper D’ Sabor, and the Municipality formally ordered compliance with the prohibition against consumption in and around the establishment (official letter MS-PA-OF-062-2024) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 29 de agosto de 2024, 911 reported incidents involving public disorder and disturbance at La Granja, La Farmacia and D’ Sabor (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 5 de setiembre de 2024, the Council forwarded to the municipal Administration the submission filed by [Nombre 020] and [Nombre 026] concerning complaints and impartiality (official letter MS-SCM-AC-0581-2024) (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On 3 de octubre de 2024, the Mayor’s Office responded to the Council and attached official letter MS-DH-OF-064-2024 describing the response provided to the request for information concerning the businesses involved (see report submitted by the respondent authorities).
On numerous occasions, this Court has elaborated upon the content of this right, which is established in Article 50 of the Political Constitution (Constitución Política). Environmental protection is an appropriate mechanism for safeguarding and improving everyone’s quality of life, making intervention by the Public Authorities necessary with respect to factors that may disrupt its balance and prevent persons from developing and functioning in a healthy environment. The State serves as the guarantor of the protection and safeguarding of the environment and natural resources. In this regard, oversight and enforcement in environmental matters and activities constitute an essential function of the State; consequently, with respect to environmental protection, the functions of governance, oversight and enforcement in environmental matters belong to the State and are entrusted to its various administrative agencies.
As consistently reiterated in the case law (jurisprudencia) of this Chamber, constitutional jurisdiction (competencia constitucional) in environmental matters cannot be extended to the point that this Chamber becomes a reviewer of the technical criteria set forth in regulations or by administrative authorities in environmental matters; rather, it is limited to determining whether the competent state agencies have fulfilled the obligation imposed upon them by Article 50 of the Political Constitution to act responsibly and promptly with respect to environmental protection. It has also been held that an application for amparo (recurso de amparo) may proceed only if the existence of an interference with or threat to one or more of the rights or guarantees established in the Political Charter or in the international human-rights instruments signed by the country is demonstrated. This latter circumstance underscores the eminently summary nature of amparo proceedings (proceso de amparo), whose procedure is not well suited to slow and complex evidentiary measures (diligencias probatorias), or to the need first to examine—by way of declaratory relief—whether subconstitutional rights (derechos de rango infra constitucional) cited by the parties as part of the factual basis of the application for amparo or the statutory report (informe de ley), as applicable, actually exist, since it is evident that this Chamber lacks jurisdiction over that matter.
In this situation, it is inappropriate for the Chamber to issue any ruling, whether favorable or unfavorable, in such cases because, in order to determine whether fundamental rights have been violated, that dispute must first be resolved as a matter of ordinary law (plano de la legalidad).
Public institutions must act promptly and efficiently, particularly when providing the services for which they are responsible. In the case of municipalities, the general task assigned to them of addressing local interests and services encompasses a broad range of activities. This matter was addressed in judgment No. 2011-012886, issued at 12:44 on September 23, 2011, on which occasion the Chamber stated:
“…As established by Article 169 of the Political Constitution and the Municipal Code, municipalities are responsible for administering local services and interests in order to promote the comprehensive development of the cantons in harmony with national development. Accordingly, the Municipality must establish a comprehensive urban-planning policy in accordance with the applicable law, aimed at the efficient and harmonious development of urban centers and guaranteeing, at a minimum, efficient electricity and communications services; sound drinking-water supply and wastewater-disposal systems; adequate water-supply and sewerage systems; city lighting and beautification systems; street and other public-road construction, repair, and cleaning services; and, in general, concrete and practical plans to make life comfortable and safe for the population. (…) Consequently, in this Court’s opinion, through its omission, the Municipality has endangered the ability of the applicants and residents of the community in question to travel freely, as well as their right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, as recognized in Articles 27 and 50 of the Political Constitution. Therefore, as regards this entity, this application must be granted…”.
From the factual background described above and the reports submitted by the municipal authority, it was established that the Municipalidad de Sarchí has issued business-license and liquor-license decisions, conducted inspections, addressed complaints from residents, and, in certain cases, formally notified license holders regarding compliance with operating hours, prohibitions, and operating conditions applicable to the businesses identified. Nevertheless, the numerous reports from residents, inspections by Fuerza Pública, and minutes of interinstitutional meetings (CCCI) show that the measures adopted by the local authority have been insufficient, fragmented, and delayed, and have therefore failed to effectively guarantee the residents’ fundamental right to live in a healthy and ecologically balanced environment (Article 50 of the Political Constitution). The municipality’s constitutional duty is not exhausted by issuing business licenses or formal notices; it entails actively safeguarding the community’s peace, public health, and safety by promptly exercising its powers to order closures, revoke business licenses, or impose administrative penalties when repeated conduct so warrants.
In this case, excessive noise, the sale and consumption of liquor outside the establishments, public disorder, and harm to residents’ health were established as a long-standing problem, demonstrating a municipal failure to effectively protect the local interest. Accordingly, as concerns this authority, the application must be granted, and it must be ordered to intensify inspections, apply immediate corrective measures, and coordinate with other competent institutions to ensure the cessation of conduct harmful to the applicants’ fundamental rights.
The report submitted by the health authority established that complaints D-VV-088-2023, D-VV-089-2023, and D-VV-090-2023, concerning the establishments “La Granja,” “D’ Sabor,” and “La Farmacia,” had been processed since November 2023. Health orders (órdenes sanitarias) were issued, noise measurements were taken, one establishment (D’ Sabor) was temporarily closed, and conditional health permits were renewed. Although the institution has demonstrated significant diligence, particularly by issuing health orders and conducting technical inspections, matters requiring comprehensive oversight remain outstanding, especially regarding excessive noise, emergency plans, accessible restroom facilities, and smoke-extraction systems. The case law of this Chamber has established that the right to a healthy environment requires health authorities to act effectively and preventively, such that inaction or the indefinite prolongation of administrative proceedings constitutes a constitutional violation.
In this case, the actions of the Ministerio de Salud were partially adequate but insufficient to guarantee comprehensive protection against harm to the residents’ health and environment. Accordingly, as regards this authority, the application is partially granted, and it is ordered to promptly conclude the pending administrative proceedings, conduct the outstanding comprehensive inspections, and adopt, within the scope of its authority, the corrective measures necessary to ensure compliance with health regulations.
X.REGARDING THE SPECIFIC CASE IN RELATION TO THE POLICÍA DE TRÁNSITO AND THE DELEGACIÓN POLICIAL DE LA FUERZA PÚBLICA DE SARCHÍ. The reports submitted by the Dirección General de Policía de Tránsito and the Delegación de Occidente established that most incidents reported to Sistema 911 were assigned to the Ministerio de Seguridad Pública as the first responder and that, in specific cases, the Policía de Tránsito also participated as the second responder or in relation to traffic violations. The reports reviewed disclosed no inaction by the Fuerza Pública or traffic authorities within the scope of their respective authority, nor any failure to perform their duties. It should be recalled that an application for amparo does not lie when the respondent authority acts within the limits of its statutory authority and no violation of fundamental rights attributable to it has been established. In this case, no omission attributable to either the Policía de Tránsito or the Fuerza Pública is apparent, since the complaints in question primarily concerned public order rather than vehicular-traffic control. Consequently, as regards the Policía de Tránsito and the Fuerza Pública, the application must be denied.
This Chamber recalls that Article 50 of the Political Constitution imposes on all public authorities a positive obligation to prevent and provide protection against environmental and public-health impacts that compromise quality of life. That duty is not discharged through isolated or merely formal actions, but through coordinated, effective, and timely responses, especially when the problem—as in the case at bar (sub lite)—requires the concurrent exercise of authority by multiple entities: the municipality, the health area, the police, and traffic-control authorities in the surrounding road network. The principle of inter-administrative cooperation and coordination requires the institutions involved to share useful information, plan joint actions, carry out coordinated operations, and evaluate results, thereby avoiding duplication, gaps in oversight, or delays that deprive fundamental rights of meaningful effect.
Consequently, effective protection of the residents’ rights to a healthy environment, health, privacy, and property requires interinstitutional planning with verifiable goals; sustained, rather than episodic, oversight during the identified critical hours and periods; the application and enforcement of a proportionate and progressive sanctions regime in response to repeated violations; and accountability to the public through periodic reports allowing verification that the detected instances of noncompliance have been corrected. Consequently, this amparo proceeding is granted solely against the Municipalidad de Sarchí and the Área Rectora de Salud Central Occidente del Ministerio de Salud.
I have supported this Court’s position that, when a litigant alleges a violation of the right to prompt and effective justice in administrative proceedings (sede administrativa), jurisdiction over the legal dispute lies with the Contentious-Administrative Courts (Tribunales de lo Contencioso-Administrativo), not with this Chamber. However, with the recent enactment of Ley n.° 9097, Ley de Regulación del Derecho de Petición, it has been established that this right is eligible for judicial protection through the application for amparo established by Article 32 of the Law on Constitutional Jurisdiction, in conjunction with Article 27 of the Political Constitution of the Republic of Costa Rica, in cases where the petitioner considers that the Administration’s material actions, administrative acts, or response are affecting the petitioner’s fundamental rights. In my view, the recently enacted legislation does not require this Court to modify its line of precedent, since, under Section 7 of its Law, this Court alone is responsible for defining its own jurisdiction.
Therefore, except for those legal-constitutional disputes that this Chamber itself has recognized as exceptional cases that may properly be heard in this jurisdiction through the constitutional amparo remedy, in all other cases—and for the reasons given by this Court (judgment N° 2008-02545, issued at 8:55 on February 22, 2008)—jurisdiction lies with the judges of the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. All of the foregoing is consistent with Article 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights, constitutional law (values, principles, and rules), and the applicable statutory provisions, based on a logical, systemic, and purposive interpretation of the legal system.
The parties are hereby advised that, if they have submitted any document on paper, as well as objects or evidence contained on any additional electronic, computer, magnetic, optical, or telematic device, or produced using new technologies, they must retrieve them from the court within a maximum period of 30 business days from the date notice of this judgment is served. Otherwise, any material not retrieved within that period shall be destroyed, pursuant to the "Reglamento sobre Expediente Electrónico ante el Poder Judicial", approved by the Corte Plena at session N° 27-11 of 22 de agosto del 2011, article XXVI, and published in Boletín Judicial number 19 of 26 de enero del 2012, as well as the resolution approved by the Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial at session N° 43-12 held on 3 de mayo del 2012, article LXXXI.
POR TANTO:
The appeal (recurso) is declared PARTIALLY GRANTED, solely against the Municipalidad de Sarchí and the Área Rectora de Salud Central Occidente del Ministerio de Salud. Consequently, [Nombre 039], in his capacity as Mayor, and MARIELA CASTRO PACHECO, in her capacity as President of the Concejo Municipal, both of the Municipalidad de Sarchí, as well as DANILO GRANADO ALVARADO, in his capacity as Director of the Área Rectora de Salud Central Occidente del Ministerio de Salud, or whoever holds those offices, are ordered, within a period of THREE MONTHS from the date notice of this judgment is served, to carry out, in an organized and coordinated manner, the actions necessary to fully comply with the outstanding Health Orders (Órdenes Sanitarias) relating to the operation of the commercial establishments ([Nombre 040], [Nombre 016] [Nombre 016]). The respondent authorities are warned that, pursuant to article 71 of the Law governing this jurisdiction, anyone who receives an order issued in an amparo proceeding (recurso de amparo) that they are required to comply with or enforce and fails to comply with or enforce it shall be punished by imprisonment for three months to two years, or by a fine of twenty to sixty day-fines, provided that the offense is not subject to a more severe penalty.
With respect to the Policía de Tránsito del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes and the Delegación Policial de la Fuerza Pública, the appeal is dismissed. The Municipalidad de Sarchí and the State are ordered to pay the legal costs (costas), damages, and losses caused by the facts underlying this ruling, which shall be assessed during enforcement of the judgment (ejecución de sentencia) in the administrative litigation jurisdiction (contencioso administrativo). Justice Castillo files a separate note. Let notice be served.
Fernando Castillo V.
President Fernando Cruz C.
Paul Rueda L.
Jorge Araya G.
Anamari Garro V.
Ingrid Hess H.
Jose Roberto Garita N.
Telephone numbers: 2549-1500 / 800-SALA-4TA (800-7252-482). Fax: 2220-4607 / 2220-4844. Website: www.poder-judicial.go.cr/salaconstitucional. Address: (Sabana Sur, Calle Morenos, 100 mts. South of the iglesia del Perpetuo Socorro).
SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, a las nueve horas veinte minutos del tres de octubre de dos mil veinticinco .
Recurso de amparo que se tramita en el expediente número 24-034459-0007-CO interpuesto por [Nombre 001], [Valor 001], [Nombre 002], [Valor 002], [Nombre 003], [Valor 003], [Nombre 004], [Valor 004], [Nombre 005], [Valor 005], [Nombre 006], [Valor 006], [Nombre 007], [Valor 007], [Nombre 008], [Valor 008], [Nombre 009], [Valor 009], [Nombre 010], [Valor 010] y [Nombre 011], [Valor 011], contra el MINISTERIO DE OBRAS PÚBLICAS Y TRANSPORTES, el MINISTERIO DE SALUD, el MINISTERIO DE SEGURIDAD PÚBLICA y la MUNICIPALIDAD DE VALVERDE VEGA.
RESULTANDO:
En atención al recurso de amparo interpuesto por [Nombre 012], [Nombre 013], [Nombre 003]. [Nombre 004], [Nombre 005], [Nombre 006], [Nombre 007], [Nombre 008], [Nombre 009], [Nombre 010] y [Nombre 011], en contra de este Ministerio de Salud, referente a los casos Identificados como las denuncias interpuestas de forma confidencial respectivamente los establecimientos [Nombre 040], [Nombre 016] y [Nombre 032], estos ubicados en [...].
ANTECEDENTES: El recurso de amparo, expediente Nº 24-034459-0007-CO, es recibido por este Ministerio de Salud en fecha 18 de diciembre del 2024.
DESARROLLO: Se hace un análisis de los respectivos expedientes y de la atención de las denuncias respectivas, y a continuación se detalla lo ejecutado por este Ministerio de Salud para cada caso citado.
Denuncia D-W-088-2023: Interpuesta el 09 de noviembre del 2023 contra el establecimiento [Nombre 040] por problemas sanitarios como ruido, condiciones de seguridad, productos peligrosos, actividades sin permiso, residuos, fumado y olores.
En fecha 19 de diciembre del 2023 se emite informe MS-CO-DARS-W-072-2023 (folio 00286) y orden sanitaria MS-CO-DARS-W-OS-134-2023 (folio 00292). donde se solicita al propietario [Nombre 027] paralizar la actividad del restaurante por no poseer permiso sanitario vigente.
El 30 de enero del 2024 se emite Permiso Sanitario de Funcionamiento Nº 11-2024 con vigencia hasta el 15 de noviembre del 2024 al presentar la solicitud de renovación.
En seguimiento, se emiten varios informes, inspecciones y recomendaciones, destacándose la necesidad de reprogramar inspecciones debido al cierre del establecimiento o falta de acceso al propietario.
En fecha 09 de agosto 2024, se emite y notifica Orden Sanitaria para corregir aspectos sanitarios relacionados a inadecuado manejo y disposición de humo, accesibilidad física ( ley 7600), estado de servicios sanitarios y ausencia de plan de emergencias.
El 15 de noviembre del 2024 se renueva el permiso sanitario hasta el 15 de noviembre del 2025. Aún existen aspectos pendientes de inspección integral Denuncia D-W-089-2023: Interpuesta el 09 de noviembre del 2023 contra el establecimiento [Nombre 016] ([Nombre 016]) por problemas sanitarios similares a los anteriores, incluyendo incumplimientos de la Ley 7600.
En febrero del 2024 se emiten informes y órdenes sanitarias para acondicionar el servicio sanitario para personas con discapacidad según la Ley 7600.
En agosto del 2024 se emite una orden de clausura del establecimiento por incumplimientos.
En octubre del 2024 se emite informe confirmando el cumplimiento de las condiciones exigidas, dándose por finalizado el caso Denuncia D-W-090-2023: Interpuesta el 09 de noviembre del 2023 contra el establecimiento [Nombre 032] por problemas sanitarios similares.
En enero del 2024 se emite orden sanitaria solicitando correcciones de inconformidades como paredes sin condiciones adecuadas, ausencia de programas documentados de higiene y desinfección, y servicios sanitarios no adaptados.
Se realizan mediciones sónicas debido a denuncias de ruido. con resultados que en algunas viviendas sobrepasan los limites permitidos para zonas mixtas (comercial-residencial).
En octubre del 2024 se ordena la clausura del establecimiento por Incumplimientos persistentes. Se mantienen acciones de seguimiento para verificar el cumplimiento de las órdenes sanitarias.
CONCLUSIÓN: Este Ministerio de Salud ha dado atención y seguimiento oportuno a los casos identificados con las denuncias D-VV-088-2023, D-VV-089-2023 y D-VV-090-2023, en todos sus extremos y bajo el margen de legalidad existente. Asimismo, continuará dando seguimiento oportuno hasta el finiquito de las denuncias Interpuestas (Ver de forma integral del informe MS DRRSCO-DARS- MS-CO-DARS-W-2021-2024)
Honorables Magistrados, en defensa de lo alegado por los recurrentes en el recurso de amparo interpuesto. en el cual se acusa al Ministerio de Salud, a través de sus Áreas Rectoras de Salud, de no haber atendido de manera adecuada e integral los aspectos denunciados en tos casos identificados como denuncias D-VV-088-2023, D-VV-089-2023 y D-VV-090-2023, es necesario destacar que dichas afirmaciones son infundadas y prematuras, dado que los procedimientos administrativos correspondientes aún están activos y en curso.
Es importante subrayar que el procedimiento administrativo relacionado con estas denuncias no ha concluido. Este se encuentra en una etapa activa, en la que se han realizado múltiples diligencias, inspecciones y análisis técnicos. La Ley General de la Administración Pública, en su artículo 261, establece un plazo ordenatorio no perentorio de dos meses para la resolución de procedimientos administrativos, ampliable conforme a la complejidad del caso. Además, el articulo 340 sobre la caducidad del procedimiento fija un límite de seis meses antes de considerar que el procedimiento se ha paralizado por lnacciónde la administración.
En este contexto, resulta improcedente e injustificado declarar un Incumplimiento o falta de atención por parte del Ministerio de Salud, ya que los procedimientos están en curso y han sido gestionados conforme a las exigencias legales y técnicas de cada caso.
Sobre la Complejidad de los Casos El recurso de amparo en cuestión engloba denuncias relacionadas con tres establecimientos comerciales diferentes, cada uno con problemáticas y circunstancias específicas· [Nombre 040] (D-VV-088-2023): Las denuncias incluyen ruido, condiciones de seguridad deficientes, manejo inadecuado de residuos y actividades sin permiso sanitario Se han emitido órdenes sanitarias renovaciones de permisos y se han realizado inspecciones recurrentes para evaluar, el cumplimiento de las normativas. La complejidad de las inconformidades detectadas ha requerido verificaciones detalladas y seguimiento prolongado.
[Nombre 016] (D-VV-089-2023): Se denuncian incumplimientos de la Ley 7600, ruido, olores y condiciones sanitarias deficientes El Ministerio ha emitido órdenes para adaptar las instalaciones a las normativas de accesibilidad, además de clausurar temporalmente el establecimiento por incumplimientos graves. Finalmente, se verificó que las condiciones fueron subsanadas, dando cierre al caso.
[Nombre 032] (D-W-090-2023): Se señalan problemas de infraestructura, ruido, higiene y manejo de residuos.
Se realizaron mediciones sónicas, inspecciones estructurales y se emitieron órdenes para corregir inconformidades. La naturaleza técnica de los análisis ha demandado tiempo adicional para su adecuada resolución.
Cada una de estas denuncias requiere evaluaciones técnicas distintas, como mediciones acústicas, verificaciones de permisos sanitarios y análisis estructurales. Esto justifica plenamente la extensión del tiempo de tramitación, ya que cada denuncia es atendida de manera integral y con la exhaustividad necesaria.
Alegaciones de Inacción. Contrario a las afirmaciones de los recurrentes, el Ministerio de Salud ha estado activamente involucrado en la gestión de estas denuncias. Se han llevado a cabo numerosas diligencias, incluyendo inspecciones programadas, emisiones de órdenes sanitarias y seguimientos para garantizar el cumplimiento normativo. No se trata de omisión o negligencia. sino de la continuidad de un procedimiento administrativo complejo y detallado.
Es relevante señalar que algunos retrasos se deben a factores ajenos al control del Ministerio, como la negativa o imposibilidad de acceso a ciertos establecimientos para realizar inspecciones, lo cual fue oportunamente documentado en los informes correspondientes.
Principio de Razonabilidad. La actuación del Ministerio de Salud se ha ajustado al principio de razonabilidad, considerando la naturaleza técnica de las denuncias y la necesidad de asegurar una resolución fundamentada y justa. Cada aspecto de las denuncias ha sido tratado con la profundidad requerida. garantizando que ninguna parle del proceso sea descuidada Por lo anterior, respecto a las solicitudes de los recurrentes sobre verificaciones adicionales. estas están siendo procesadas dentro del marco del procedimiento administrativo en curso. Los resultados de estas gestiones serán fundamentales para la toma de decisiones finales, loque subraya la premura inapropiada de este recurso.”
Redacta el Magistrado Cruz Castro; y,
Considerando:
De previo a analizar el fondo del asunto –por la presunta violación del derecho a un procedimiento pronto y cumplido– debe aclararse que, a partir de la sentencia No. 2008-02545 de las 8:55 horas del 22 de febrero de 2008, esta Sala ha remitido a la jurisdicción contencioso administrativa –con algunas excepciones– aquellos asuntos en los que se discute si la administración pública ha cumplido o no los plazos, pautados por la Ley General de la Administración Pública (artículos 261 y 325) o por las leyes sectoriales relativas a los procedimientos administrativos especiales, tanto para resolver por acto final un procedimiento administrativo –instruido de oficio o a instancia de parte– como para conocer de los recursos administrativos procedentes. Precisamente, en este caso se plantea un supuesto de excepción, pues se está ante varias denuncias interpuestas ante la Municipalidad de Sarchí, el Área Rectora de Salud de Sarchí, la Delegación de Tránsito por problemas relacionados con actividades de tres locales comerciales ([Nombre 040], [Nombre 016]), que pueden afectar la salud y el ambiente. Aclarado el punto, se entra a resolver la situación concreta planteada en este amparo.
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, el jefe de la Delegación Policial de la Fuerza Pública de Sarchí no rindió el informe solicitado. Por lo anterior, se tiene por no rendido el informe y esta Sala resuelve el caso valorando los otros informes aportados los hechos denunciados, la prueba que se adjunta al escrito de interposición del amparo y la jurisprudencia de este Tribunal aplicable al caso concreto.
La parte recurrente interpone recurso de amparo y expone que, desde el año 2015 hasta la fecha han venido denunciando, sin éxito, la operación irregular de varios comercios —en particular el “[Nombre 016]”— que, aunque cuentan únicamente con patentes de minisúper, soda o restaurante, funcionan en realidad como bares clandestinos. En dichos locales se expende licor sin control de horarios, se organizan fiestas, cabalgatas y actividades con música a alto volumen, generando contaminación sónica, basura en las calles, pleitos, consumo de drogas y alcohol en la vía pública, así como inseguridad en el vecindario. Los recurrentes señalan que, pese a las constantes denuncias presentadas desde 2016 ante la Municipalidad de Sarchí, el Área Rectora de Salud de Valverde Vega, la Fuerza Pública y la Policía de Tránsito, las autoridades no han tomado medidas efectivas. Acusan que existe incluso un posible conflicto de interés en la Municipalidad, dado el vínculo familiar entre patentados y funcionarios responsables de otorgar patentes.
Reclaman que las respuestas oficiales se han limitado a oficios o inspecciones en horarios en que los negocios no operan, lo cual hace ineficaces las acciones. Relatan que la situación ha escalado con el tiempo: consumo de licor y drogas en la calle, orines y vómitos en tapias y aceras de viviendas, malos olores de los restaurantes vecinos por extractores mal ubicados, aumento de plagas, estacionamiento indebido frente a casas, amenazas e insultos contra quienes denuncian, y un ambiente de inseguridad que afecta directamente a adultos mayores, niños y personas con enfermedades físicas y psicológicas. Aducen que se han documentado múltiples llamadas al 911 y la presentación de pruebas médicas que confirman daños a la salud física y emocional de los vecinos. Los vecinos denuncian que, aunque los certificados de uso de suelo solo autorizan actividades de minisúper o restaurante, los establecimientos actúan como bares y discotecas, con karaoke, música en vivo y venta de licor toda la madrugada, sin control de aforo ni condiciones sanitarias adecuadas.
Consideran que las instituciones recurridas han permitido esta situación, privilegiando intereses privados sobre el interés público, a pesar de la cercanía de estos comercios con escuelas, guarderías, la Cruz Roja y la biblioteca pública. Alegan que la inacción institucional ha vulnerado sus derechos fundamentales a la salud, a la vida, a la intimidad, a la propiedad privada y a vivir en un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado. Por ello solicitan al Tribunal tutelar sus derechos y ordenar a las autoridades recurridas adoptar medidas efectivas que pongan fin a la problemática denunciada.
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 la autoridad recurrida haya omitido referirse a ellos, según lo prevenido en el auto inicial:
Hechos relacionados con la Policía de Tránsito del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes:
El 12 de octubre de 2023, se reportó el incidente 2023-10-12-03090 al Sistema de Emergencias 911, remitido únicamente al Ministerio de Seguridad Pública, sin participación de la Policía de Tránsito (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 13 de octubre de 2023, se registró el incidente 2023-10-13-03366, atendido exclusivamente por el Ministerio de Seguridad Pública, sin asignación a la Policía de Tránsito (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 24 de marzo de 2024, ocurrió el incidente 2024-03-24-03145, que fue remitido únicamente al Ministerio de Seguridad Pública, sin conocimiento de la Policía de Tránsito (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 18 de abril de 2024, se generó el incidente 2024-04-18-00115, reportado al 911 y asignado solo al Ministerio de Seguridad Pública, sin participación de la Policía de Tránsito (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 25 de julio de 2024, se reportó el incidente 2024-25-07-01831, sin intervención de la Policía de Tránsito, ya que fue asignado únicamente al Ministerio de Seguridad Pública (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 14 de agosto de 2024, se registró el incidente 2024-14-08-03174, sin conocimiento ni atención de la Policía de Tránsito, al estar asignado solo al Ministerio de Seguridad Pública (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 24 de agosto de 2024, se reportaron los incidentes 2024-08-24-02891, 2024-08-24-02293 y 2024-08-24-02404, todos ellos atendidos únicamente por el Ministerio de Seguridad Pública, sin que la Policía de Tránsito fuera asignada como respondedor (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 16 de diciembre de 2024, el Subjefe de la Central de Comunicaciones de la DGPT, licenciado Óscar Calvo Quirós, mediante correo electrónico, remite 16 reportes del Sistema de Emergencias 911 correspondientes a incidentes ocurridos entre 2015 y 2024. De estos, nueve fueron contra el orden (enviados como primer respondedor al Ministerio de Seguridad Pública y como segundo respondedor a la Policía de Tránsito), y siete fueron incidentes de tránsito, mal estacionados o gestiones, tramitados por la Unidad respectiva, sin que se evidenciara incumplimiento en la atención (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 18 de diciembre de 2024, el jefe de la Delegación de Occidente, licenciado Osman Murillo Rodríguez, responde mediante oficio número DVT-DGPT-OPT-RHN-UD-N-2024-139, indicando que desde que asumió la jefatura en enero de 2021 no ha recibido denuncias directas en la delegación sobre el caso; que las incidencias trasladadas por el 911 se han atendido conforme al protocolo policial, sin constatar los hechos denunciados; que la mayoría de incidencias corresponden a alteración del orden público, competencia del Ministerio de Seguridad Pública y Ministerio de Salud; y que se han realizado controles estratégicos en accesos y salidas de Sarchí, sin que se hayan confeccionado boletas de citación (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
Hechos relacionados con Área Rectora de Salud Central Occidente del Ministerio de Salud:
El 09 de noviembre de 2023, se interpusieron las denuncias D-VV-088-2023 (contra [Nombre 040]), D-VV-089-2023 (contra [Nombre 016] D’ Sabor) y D-VV-090-2023 (contra [Nombre 032]), por ruido, condiciones sanitarias deficientes, actividades sin permiso, manejo inadecuado de residuos, fumado y olores, entre otros (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 19 de diciembre de 2023, respecto de La Granja, se emite el informe MS-CO-DARS-VV-072-2023 y la orden sanitaria MS-CO-DARS-VV-OS-134-2023, ordenando paralizar la actividad por carecer de permiso sanitario vigente (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 30 de enero de 2024, en relación con el comercio La Granja se le otorga el Permiso Sanitario de Funcionamiento N.º 11-2024, con vigencia hasta el 15 de noviembre de 2024 (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas) En enero de 2024, en relación con el comercio La Farmacia, se dictó orden sanitaria para corregir inconformidades (paredes sin condiciones, ausencia de programas documentados de higiene/desinfección y servicios sanitarios no adaptados) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
En febrero de 2024, en relación con el comercio D’ Sabor, se emitieron informes y órdenes sanitarias a fin de acondicionar el servicio sanitario conforme a la Ley 7600 (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
En relación con el comercio La Farmacia, se realizaron mediciones sónicas por denuncias de ruido, registrándose en algunas viviendas excesos sobre los límites permitidos para zonas mixtas (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas) En 09 de agosto de 2024, en relación con el comercio La Granja se le notificó orden sanitaria para corregir manejo y disposición de humo, accesibilidad (Ley 7600), estado de servicios sanitarios y ausencia de plan de emergencias (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
En agosto de 2024, se ordenó la clausura de D’ Sabor por incumplimientos (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
En octubre de 2024, se verificó el cumplimiento de las condiciones exigidas a D’ Sabor y se da por finalizado el caso (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 15 de noviembre de 2024, se renovó el permiso sanitario de La Granja hasta el 15 de noviembre de 2025, quedando aspectos pendientes de inspección integral (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
Sobre los hechos relacionados con la Municipalidad de Sarchí:
El 7 de diciembre de 2015, se emitió la Resolución de Patentes N.° 126-2015 que aprobó la patente de giro Minisúper para el local “Minisúper D’ Sabor”, a nombre de [Nombre 020] (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 7 de diciembre de 2015, se remitió al Concejo Municipal el oficio MVV-PT-OF-127-2015 con la solicitud de licencia para expendio de bebidas alcohólicas (clase D1) para “Minisúper D’ Sabor” (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 8 de diciembre de 2015, el Concejo Municipal aprobó la licencia de licores para [Nombre 020] (acta transcrita el 9 de diciembre de 2015, oficio SMVV0708-2015) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 10 de diciembre de 2015, se emitió la Resolución de Patentes N.° 129-2015 otorgando licencia de licores (clase D1) al Minisúper D’ Sabor, con horario de 8:00 a 24:00 (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 25 de agosto de 2016, mediante oficio MVV-PT-OF-091-2016, la Municipalidad previno al establecimiento acatar horario y prohibiciones conforme Ley 9047, a raíz de denuncia del 17 de agosto de 2016 (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 21 de setiembre de 2016, la Fuerza Pública informó (oficio Sub36-048-2016) la confección de un acta de observación por hechos en el local, remitida al Departamento de Patentes (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 26 de setiembre de 2016, [Nombre 020] contestó a Patentes sobre carta de vecinos relativa al [Nombre 016] D’ Sabor (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 29 de setiembre de 2016, por oficio MVV-PT-OF-105-2016, la Municipalidad previno por última vez acatar el no consumo de bebidas alcohólicas dentro y alrededores del local, según Ley 9047 (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 28 de enero de 2017, la Fuerza Pública reportó personas ingiriendo licor dentro del [Nombre 016] Licorera D’ Sabor (oficio N.° 0012185-17). (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 1 de febrero de 2017, Patentes inspeccionó el local y constató consumo de licor en el interior, con base en el informe 0012185-17 (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 2 de febrero de 2017, [Nombre 026] presentó descargo sobre la llamada de atención de la inspección del 1 de febrero de 2017 (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 7 de marzo de 2017, Patentes informó a la Vicealcaldía (oficio MVV-PT-OF-039-2017) sobre actuaciones municipales respecto del [Nombre 016] Licorera D’ Sabor (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 8 de marzo de 2017 (00:06 h), la Fuerza Pública reportó el local abierto con personas y vehículos (informe N.° 0026041-17) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 6 de abril de 2017, el encargado del establecimiento presentó descargo por el informe policial del 3 de marzo de 2017; además, vecinos reportaron incidentes del 27 de marzo de 2017 que culminaron con revisión policial (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 3 de mayo de 2017, la Fuerza Pública reportó tres atenciones (informes 0045533-17, 0045541-17 y 0050255-17) por consumo de licor en exterior e interior y efectuó llamados de atención al administrador (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 16 de mayo de 2017, el patentado manifestó disconformidad por no recibir copia de informes policiales y solicitó desestimarlos (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 18 de julio de 2017, mediante Resolución de Patentes 069-2017, la Municipalidad suspendió temporalmente la licencia comercial del [Nombre 016] Licorera D’ Sabor del 19 al 24 de julio de 2017, con cierre preventivo y sellos (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 27 de marzo de 2018, por Resolución 043-2018, se traspasó la patente del [Nombre 016] D’ Sabor de [Nombre 020] a [Nombre 026] (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 1 de agosto de 2018, Patentes elevó al Concejo la solicitud de licencia de licores para el [Nombre 016] D’ Sabor a nombre de [Nombre 026] (oficio MVV-PT-OF-075-2018) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 6 de agosto de 2018, el Concejo aprobó la licencia de licores para D’ Sabor (oficio SMVV368-2018 del 14 de agosto de 2018) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 7 de setiembre de 2018, por Resolución 101-2018, la Municipalidad aceptó la renuncia de la patente de [Nombre 020] (local sin operación al 6 de setiembre de 2018) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 25 de marzo de 2019, se solicitó cambio de actividad para Restaurante a nombre de [Nombre 027] (trámite 20831) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 24 de mayo de 2019, la Municipalidad previno a D’ Sabor por posible incumplimiento de horario (oficio MVV-PT-OF-037-2019 del 25 de marzo y seguimiento MS-PT-OF-118-2019 del 26 de setiembre de 2019).(ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 22 y 27 de marzo de 2023, se remitió al Concejo la solicitud de licencia de licores para [Nombre 040] (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 3 de abril de 2023, el Concejo aprobó la licencia de licores para La Granja (oficio MS-SCM-AC-0166-2023) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 13 de abril de 2023, se expidió la Resolución de Patentes 03-01-2023 con la boleta de licencia de licores para La Granja (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 28 de abril y 10/19 de mayo de 2023, se tramitó y aprobó la licencia de licores en Bar para [Nombre 032] (oficios MS-AL-OF-0238-2023, MS-SCM-AC-0228-2023, MS-SCM-AC-0259-2023) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 24 de mayo de 2023, se expidió la Resolución de Patentes 06-01-2023 otorgando la licencia de licores a [Nombre 015] (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 18 de julio de 2023, la Municipalidad previno a [Nombre 015] cumplir que venta y consumo de bebidas alcohólicas solo ocurriera dentro del local (oficio MS-PA-OF-197-2023) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 8 y 21 de setiembre de 2023, Alcaldía solicitó e Intendencia de Patentes respondió información integral sobre patentes de La Granja, D’ Sabor y La Farmacia (oficios MS-AL-OF-0376-2023 y MS-PA-OF-245-2023) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 15 de marzo de 2024, la Asesoría Jurídica remitió denuncia vecinal por presuntas irregularidades de D’ Sabor, La Farmacia y La Granja (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 2 y 3 de abril de 2024, Hacienda notificó a La Granja, La Farmacia y D’ Sabor los resultados de inspecciones del 15 de marzo de 2024 (consumo en vía pública, exceso de ruido y otras situaciones), previniendo eventuales infracciones a la Ley 9047 (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 9 de abril de 2024, el Concejo trasladó a Hacienda oficio del MSP sobre consumo de licor en vía pública en inmediaciones de Licorera Sabor. (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas) El 17 de abril de 2024, la Alcaldía respondió al grupo vecinal de Sarchí Norte, detallando acciones municipales e información de patentes. (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 12 de junio de 2024, el Consejo Cantonal de Coordinación Institucional celebró sesión (acta 3-2024) y acordó: informes de Salud y Municipalidad sobre extractores e inspecciones; colocación de cadenas en accesos de parqueo al cierre; y gestiones ante MINAE por posible naciente (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 21 de junio de 2024, se remitió a Salud informes de inspecciones (05 de junio) y trasladó a D’ Sabor, La Farmacia y La Granja los hallazgos de Bomberos (incumplimientos preventivos y aforos máximos: 42 personas en La Farmacia; 41 en La Granja) y observaciones críticas de seguridad (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 10 de julio de 2024, se recibió denuncia telefónica anónima por actividad musical en La Granja; se coordinó inspección con Fuerza Pública (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 12 de julio de 2024, se previno formalmente a La Granja abstenerse de realizar eventos musicales sin autorización (oficio MS-DH-OF-043-2024) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 22 y 24 de julio de 2024, el patentado de La Granja impugnó la prevención y la Municipalidad reiteró la medida (oficio MS-DH-OF-046-2024) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 31 de julio de 2024, el patentado apeló ante Alcaldía; el 8 de agosto de 2024, la Alcaldía declaró inadmisible la apelación por preclusión (oficio MS-AL-OF-0388-2024) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 27 y 28 de agosto de 2024, se recibió denuncia anónima por consumo de licor dentro del Minisúper D’ Sabor y la Municipalidad previno acatar la prohibición de consumo en el establecimiento y alrededores (oficio MS-PA-OF-062-2024) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 29 de agosto de 2024, 911 reportó incidentes por desorden público y escándalo en La Granja, La Farmacia y D’ Sabor (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 5 de setiembre de 2024, el Concejo trasladó a la Administración municipal la gestión de [Nombre 020] y [Nombre 026] sobre denuncias e imparcialidad (oficio MS-SCM-AC-0581-2024) (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
El 3 de octubre de 2024, la Alcaldía respondió al Concejo y adjuntó el oficio MS-DH-OF-064-2024 con la atención dada a la solicitud de información sobre los comercios involucrados (ver informe rendido por parte de las autoridades accionadas).
En reiteradas ocasiones este Tribunal ha desarrollado el contenido de este derecho, contemplado en el artículo 50 de la Constitución Política. La protección del ambiente es un mecanismo adecuado para tutelar y mejorar la calidad de vida de todos, lo que hace necesaria la intervención de los Poderes Públicos sobre los factores que pueden alterar su equilibrio y obstaculizar que la persona se desarrolle y desenvuelva en un ambiente sano. El Estado se constituye en el garante en la protección y tutela del medio ambiente y los recursos naturales. En este sentido, el control y fiscalización de la materia y actividad ambiental se constituye en una función esencial del Estado, por lo que, tratándose de la protección ambiental, las funciones de rectoría, control y fiscalización de la materia ambiental, corresponden al Estado, a cargo de las diversas dependencias administrativas.
Tal y como ha sido reiterado en la jurisprudencia de esta Sala, 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. Se ha sostenido también, que la procedencia del recurso de amparo está condicionada a que se acredite la existencia de una perturbación o amenaza a uno o más de los derechos o garantías contemplados en la Carta Política o en los instrumentos internacionales de derechos humanos suscritos por el país. Esta última circunstancia pone de relieve el carácter eminentemente sumario del proceso de amparo, cuya tramitación no se aviene bien con la práctica de diligencias probatorias lentas y complejas, o con la necesidad de entrar previamente a examinar -con carácter declarativo- si existen en realidad o no derechos de rango infra constitucional que las partes citen como parte del elenco fáctico del recurso de amparo o del informe de ley, según sea el caso, toda vez que es evidente que esa es una competencia de la que esta Sala carece.
Ante esta situación, no resulta procedente que la Sala vierta pronunciamiento alguno (positivo o negativo) en estos casos, porque para dilucidar si ha habido infracción o no de derechos fundamentales primero se debe resolver dicho conflicto en el plano de la legalidad.
La actuación de las instituciones públicas debe ser célere y eficiente, sobre todo cuando se trata de proveer los servicios que les competen. En el caso de las municipalidades, al asignárseles la labor genérica de atender los intereses y servicios locales, se abarca un amplio conjunto de actividades. En la sentencia No. 2011-012886, de las 12:44 horas del 23 de setiembre de 2011, se abordó esta materia, y en esa oportunidad la Sala indicó:
“…Conforme lo establece el artículo 169 de la Constitución Política y el Código Municipal, corresponde a las municipalidades la administración de los servicios e intereses locales, con el fin de promover el desarrollo integral de los cantones en armonía con el desarrollo nacional. En consecuencia, la Municipalidad debe establecer una política integral de planeamiento urbano de acuerdo con la ley respectiva, que persiga el desarrollo eficiente y armónico de los centros urbanos y que garantice -al menos- eficientes servicios de electrificación y de comunicación; buenos sistemas de provisión de agua potable y evacuación de aguas servidas, adecuados sistemas de acueductos y alcantarillado, sistemas de iluminación y ornato de las ciudades; servicios de construcción, reparación y limpieza de calles y otras vías públicas; en general planes concretos y prácticos para hacer confortable y segura la vida de la población. (…) Por consiguiente, a juicio de este Tribunal, con su omisión, la Municipalidad ha puesto en situación de peligro el libre transitar de los recurrentes y vecinos de la comunidad en cuestión, así como el derecho a disfrutar de un ambiente sano y equilibrado, reconocidos en los artículos 27 y 50 de la Constitución Política, por lo que, en cuanto a esta entidad, el presente recurso deberá ser declarado con lugar…”.
De los antecedentes fácticos reseñados y de los informes rendidos por la autoridad municipal, se constató que la Municipalidad de Sarchí ha emitido resoluciones de patentes y licencias de licores, ha practicado inspecciones, ha atendido denuncias vecinales y, en algunos supuestos, ha prevenido a los patentados sobre el cumplimiento de horarios, prohibiciones y condiciones de funcionamiento de los comercios señalados. No obstante, de los múltiples reportes vecinales, inspecciones de Fuerza Pública y actas de reuniones interinstitucionales (CCCI), se evidencia que las medidas adoptadas por el ente local han sido insuficientes, fragmentadas y tardías para garantizar de manera efectiva el derecho fundamental de los vecinos a vivir en un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado (art. 50 Constitución Política). El deber constitucional de la municipalidad no se agota en emitir patentes o prevenciones formales; implica velar de forma activa por la tranquilidad, salubridad y seguridad en la comunidad, aplicando oportunamente las potestades de clausura, revocatoria de patentes o imposición de sanciones administrativas cuando las conductas reiteradas así lo ameritan.
En este caso, el exceso de ruido, la venta y consumo de licor fuera de los locales, el desorden público y la afectación a la salud de los vecinos se acreditaron como una problemática prolongada en el tiempo, que evidencia una omisión municipal en la tutela efectiva del interés local. Por ello, en lo que concierne a esta autoridad, el recurso debe declararse con lugar, ordenándosele reforzar las inspecciones, aplicar las medidas correctivas inmediatas y coordinar con otras instituciones competentes para garantizar la cesación de las conductas lesivas a los derechos fundamentales de los recurrentes.
Del informe rendido por la autoridad sanitaria, se acreditó que desde noviembre de 2023 se tramitaron las denuncias D-VV-088-2023, D-VV-089-2023 y D-VV-090-2023, relativas a los establecimientos “La Granja”, “D’ Sabor” y “La Farmacia”. Se dictaron órdenes sanitarias, se realizaron mediciones de ruido, se clausuró temporalmente un local (D’ Sabor) y se renovaron permisos sanitarios condicionados. Aun cuando la institución ha demostrado diligencias importantes, en especial la emisión de órdenes sanitarias y la práctica de inspecciones técnicas, persisten aspectos pendientes de fiscalización integral, particularmente en lo relativo a ruido excesivo, planes de emergencia, servicios sanitarios adaptados y extractores de humo. La jurisprudencia de esta Sala ha establecido que el derecho al ambiente sano exige que las autoridades sanitarias actúen de manera eficaz y preventiva, de modo que la inercia o la prolongación indefinida de trámites administrativos genera una vulneración constitucional.
En este caso, la actuación del Ministerio de Salud fue parcialmente adecuada, pero no suficiente para garantizar una protección integral frente a la afectación de la salud y el ambiente de los vecinos. Por ello, respecto de esta autoridad, el recurso se declara parcialmente con lugar, ordenándole concluir con celeridad los procedimientos administrativos en curso, practicar las inspecciones integrales pendientes y adoptar, dentro del marco de sus competencias, las medidas correctivas necesarias para garantizar el cumplimiento de la normativa sanitaria.
De los informes rendidos por la Dirección General de Policía de Tránsito y la Delegación de Occidente, se acreditó que la mayoría de incidentes reportados al Sistema 911 fueron asignados como primer respondedor al Ministerio de Seguridad Pública, así como, en casos específicos que también se tuvo participación de la Policía de Tránsito como segundo respondedor o para infracciones de tránsito. En los reportes revisados, no se constató inacción de las autoridades de Fuerza Pública o de tránsito dentro de sus ámbitos competenciales, ni omisión en los deberes que les corresponden. Debe recordarse que, el recurso de amparo no procede cuando la autoridad recurrida actúa dentro de los límites de su competencia legal y no se acredita vulneración alguna de derechos fundamentales atribuible a ella. En este caso, no se desprende omisión atribuible ni la Policía de Tránsito ni a la Fuerza Pública, ya que las denuncias referidas correspondían mayoritariamente al orden público y no al control del tránsito vehicular. En consecuencia, en relación con la Policía de Tránsito y la Fuerza Pública, el recurso debe declararse sin lugar.
Esta Sala recuerda que el artículo 50 de la Constitución Política impone a todas las autoridades públicas una obligación positiva de prevención y tutela frente a afectaciones ambientales y sanitarias que comprometan la calidad de vida. Ese deber no se satisface con actuaciones aisladas o meramente formales, sino mediante respuestas coordinadas, eficaces y oportunas, especialmente cuando la problemática -como en el sub lite- exige concurrencia de competencias (municipalidad, área de salud, policía y control de tránsito en el entorno vial). El principio de cooperación y coordinación interadministrativa, exige que las instituciones involucradas compartan información útil, planifiquen acciones conjuntas, ejecuten operativos coordinados y evalúen resultados, evitando duplicidades, lagunas de control o dilaciones que vacíen de contenido los derechos fundamentales. En consecuencia, la tutela efectiva del derecho a un ambiente sano, a la salud, a la intimidad y a la propiedad de los vecinos requiere, la planificación interinstitucional con metas verificables, un control sostenido y no episódico en los horarios y momentos críticos identificados, la aplicación y ejecución del régimen sancionatorio proporcional y progresivo frente a reincidencias, y, la rendición de cuentas a la ciudadanía, a través de informes periódicos que permitan verificar la corrección de los incumplimientos detectados. Consecuentemente, se estima el presente proceso de amparo, únicamente, en contra de la Municipalidad de Sarchí y el Área Rectora de Salud Central Occidente del Ministerio de Salud.
He apoyado la tesis de este Tribunal, de que cuando el justiciable alega una vulneración al derecho a una justicia pronta y cumplida en sede administrativa, quienes deben conocer la controversia jurídica son los Tribunales de lo Contencioso-Administrativo y no esta Sala. Ahora bien, con la reciente promulgación de la Ley n.° 9097, Ley de Regulación del Derecho de Petición, se ha establecido que ese derecho es susceptible de tutela judicial por medio del recurso de amparo establecido por el artículo 32 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, en relación con el artículo 27 de la Constitución Política de la República de Costa Rica, en aquellos casos en que el peticionario considere que las actuaciones materiales de la Administración, sus actos administrativos o su respuesta le estén afectando sus derechos fundamentales. A mi modo de ver, la normativa recién promulgada no implica que este Tribunal deba modificar su línea jurisprudencial, quien, con base en el numeral 7 de su Ley, le corresponde definir exclusivamente su propia competencia.
Por ende, salvo aquellas controversias jurídico-constitucionales que han sido reconocidas por esta misma Sala como supuestos de excepción, que sí proceden ser conocidas en esta jurisdicción a través del proceso constitucional de garantía del amparo, en los demás casos, y por las razones que ha dado este Tribunal (sentencia N° 2008-02545 de las 8:55 horas de 22 de febrero de 2008), los competentes son los Jueces de la jurisdicción de lo contencioso-administrativo, todo lo cual es conforme al numeral 25, de la Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos, el Derecho de la Constitución (valores, principios y normas) y las normas legales correspondientes con base en una interpretación lógica, sistémica y teleológica del ordenamiento jurídico.
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 30 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 N° 27-11 del 22 de agosto del 2011, artículo XXVI y publicado en el Boletín Judicial número 19 del 26 de enero del 2012, así como en el acuerdo aprobado por el Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial, en la sesión N° 43-12 celebrada el 3 de mayo del 2012, artículo LXXXI.
POR TANTO:
Se declara PARCIALMENTE CON LUGAR el recurso, únicamente, en contra de la Municipalidad de Sarchí y el Área Rectora de Salud Central Occidente del Ministerio de Salud. Consecuentemente, se ordena a [Nombre 039], en condición de Alcalde y MARIELA CASTRO PACHECO, en condición de Presidenta del Concejo Municipal, ambos de la Municipalidad de Sarchí, así como, a DANILO GRANADO ALVARADO, en condición de Director del Área Rectora de Salud Central Occidente del Ministerio de Salud, o a quienes ocupen esos cargos que, en el plazo de TRES MESES, contado a partir de la notificación de esta sentencia, de forma organizada y coordinada ejecuten las acciones necesarias a efectos de dar cabal cumplimiento a las Órdenes Sanitarias pendientes por cumplir que se encuentren relacionadas con el funcionamiento de los locales comerciales ([Nombre 040], [Nombre 016] [Nombre 016]). Se advierte a la autoridades recurridas que, de conformidad con el artículo 71 de la Ley de esta jurisdicción, 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.
En relación con la Policía de Tránsito del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes y la Delegación Policial de la Fuerza Pública, se desestima el recurso. Se condena a la Municipalidad de Sarchí y al Estado 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. El Magistrado Castillo pone nota. Notifíquese.
Fernando Castillo V.
Fernando Cruz C.
Paul Rueda L.
Jorge Araya G.
Anamari Garro V.
Ingrid Hess H.
Jose Roberto Garita N.
Document not found. Documento no encontrado.