Amparo Denied Over Blocked Pedestrian Access in El Pochote Informal SettlementAmparo por bloqueo de acceso peatonal en Precario El Pochote

Res. Nº 2026013516 CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at nine hours and twenty minutes on the twenty-first of April of two thousand twenty-six.

Amparo petition (recurso de amparo) filed by Nombre01, national identity document CED02, against the MUNICIPALIDAD DE SAN JOSÉ.

Background:

1.- By written submission received at the Chamber's Secretariat on March 9, 2026, the petitioner files an amparo petition against the Municipalidad de San José. The petitioner states that in the area known as Dirección01, there is a pedestrian and vehicular access used by neighbors and residents to connect with the main street. The petitioner indicates that this passage has historically served as a transit route for persons living in that part of the area. The petitioner explains that recently, following the eviction from an informal settlement (asentamiento informal) that existed on the adjacent lot, works or interventions were begun on that lot, which apparently have the authorization or knowledge of the Municipalidad de San José. The petitioner recounts that as a result of these interventions, a deep excavation (trench) was made at the site, which is currently open and without visible adequate protective measures, representing a risk to persons who pass through the area. The petitioner adds that apparently plans are underway to build a massive wall for a warehouse construction just over 1 meter from the properties. The petitioner indicates that these works have caused a significant reduction in the space available for pedestrian passage, impeding the movement of neighbors through the area and raising safety concerns for those who use this access. The petitioner further states that based on what has been observed at the site, there are also plans to build steep stairs as a possible means of access to the upper part of the area, which could further hinder the movement of persons, especially elderly persons, persons with reduced mobility, or those who need to transport objects, furniture, or other goods. The petitioner recounts that the current conditions of the site — including the open excavation, the reduction of the passage, and the possible modifications to the access — could create risks to the safety and wellbeing of neighbors, as well as difficulties for the access of emergency services such as ambulances or firefighters. The petitioner adds that the photographs attached as annexes show the current state of the site, including the excavation carried out, the excessive reduction of the passage space, and the gradient of the terrain where construction of stairs is planned. The petitioner indicates that the situation described constitutes a present and imminent threat to the fundamental rights of persons who live in or transit through the area, due to the risk conditions created by the excavation, the reduction of pedestrian access, and the planned modifications to the site such as the wall.

2.- By written submission received at the Chamber's Secretariat on March 16, 2026, the petitioner appears and makes statements.

3.- By order issued at 16:47 hours on March 17, 2026, this proceeding was admitted and the mayor and the president of the Municipal Council (Concejo), both of the Municipalidad de San José, were asked to report on the facts alleged by the petitioner.

4.- By written submission incorporated into the digital file on March 18, 2026, the petitioner appears and makes statements.

5.- By written submission incorporated into the digital file on March 24, 2026, Mariana de los Ángeles Zúñiga Pérez, in her capacity as president of the Municipal Council of the Municipalidad de San José, reports under oath that:

"The actions at issue in this proceeding fall within the administrative powers granted to the Municipal Mayor and to the municipal administration as such; the members of the Municipal Council and the council representatives have no involvement in such actions. Therefore, in this case I have no competence or capacity with respect to the facts described in this proceeding. Nevertheless, pursuant to the summons and hearing order granted, I appear before your authority, and in light of the foregoing I defer to the report that the administration provides regarding this case." 6.- By written submission incorporated into the digital file on March 25, 2026, Yariela Franciny Quirós Álvarez, in her capacity as interim mayor of the Municipalidad de San José, reports under oath that:

"FIRST: Mr. Marcelo Solano Ortiz, Director of Security, by memorandum DSCPM-487-2026, reports with respect to the subject matter of the litigation: FIRST AND SECOND FACTS: In the area indicated by the petitioner, work is being carried out on private property belonging to its registered owner, as a result of notification issued by the Municipal Administration through its Department of Environmental Services, which ordered the fencing and cleanup of the property, as it represented a danger not only to security but also to public health, having become a site for drug use and illegal activities. It is hereby clarified that the works are not being carried out by this Local Government but by the property owner. (A copy of Environmental Services Notification 2267 is attached.) THIRD, FOURTH, AND FIFTH FACTS: It should be noted that the population living in the area known as 'Precario El Pochote' lives in irregular conditions, as this type of settlement arises from lack of planning and without urban order; for this reason, they lack planned and legally authorized access routes. In this particular case, it is known that the land being fenced is private property and that, according to cadastral plan (plano catastrado) No. SJ-300731-78, no easement (servidumbre) or similar right formally authorized under our legal system is evident. (A copy of the plan is attached.) Nevertheless, this police unit is aware that according to statements made by the registered owner of the land to residents of the area, the owner donated a strip of land where a sidewalk is being built for pedestrian use, with an exit to the main street on the southern side, in order to mitigate the impact on residents of the squatter settlement (precario). SIXTH FACT: It should be noted that, as part of preventive measures, once the situation in the area became known — specifically that the vehicular access entry was not in any formal records — the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos was informed of the situation and of the existing access routes at the site for future emergencies. The Bomberos acknowledged receipt of the information and indicated it would be shared with the relevant stations so they could respond accordingly in the event of any incident at the location. (Memoranda are attached.) SEVENTH AND EIGHTH FACTS: It is concluded that the work being carried out is on private property and in compliance with the order issued by the Municipality to the property owner, with the ultimate aim of preventing renewed unauthorized occupation and mitigating the security problems that arose in the indicated area, bearing in mind the significant impact that the dismantlement of the largest drug bunker in the capital had on the security of the area. SECOND: Architect Melissa Gómez Salas, acting head of the Construction Permits Section, by memorandum No. SPC-OInsp-0363-2026, reports with respect to the subject matter of the litigation: FIRST: The property subject to the complaint corresponds to the title registration [number], cadastral plan [number], registered in the name of PARA ADUMA FOODS S.A., legal entity identification number CED01. This property is located in the Hospital district, facing Dirección02 (…) SECOND: The property subject to the complaint previously housed homeless persons and drug users, being used as an open-air bunker. As a result, the Municipality coordinated with the property owner to proceed with the cleanup and fencing of the lot, in order to address the security and public health problems associated with that situation. THIRD: In an inspection carried out on March 16 of the current year, the property was located and confirmed to be clean, having been enclosed by the construction of a perimeter wall, actions carried out in compliance with the Municipality's request made through the notification issued by the Environmental Services Section. FOURTH: Upon the commencement of the perimeter enclosure construction works, the Construction Permits Section issued Notification No. 07095, dated March 17, 2026, informing the property owner of the obligation to obtain the corresponding construction permit for these works. In response, the responsible professional filed application No. 1282441 before the Colegio Federado de Ingenieros y de Arquitectos (CFIA), which is pending municipal review for possible approval (…) FIFTH: The works are carried out within the limits of the private property and no encroachment on the land corresponding to title No. 00051192-000, registered in the name of Urbanizadora Prados del Sur S.A., where the informal settlement known as El Pochote is located, has been observed. That title has not been formally received by the Municipalidad de San José due to its cadastral complexity and the informality of the settlement. The works conform to what was filed with CFIA and are described as perimeter wall construction: (…) Based on the foregoing, it has been established that the Municipalidad de San José has carried out the relevant actions within the scope of its powers, including coordination with the property owner for the cleanup and perimeter fencing of the lot, in order to address the public health and safety conditions present on the property. Likewise, the Construction Permits Section proceeded to notify the property owner of the obligation to obtain the corresponding construction permit for the works, a process currently under review by the competent authorities, thereby ensuring compliance with applicable urban planning and construction regulations. It is also confirmed that the works are being executed within the limits of the private property corresponding to the title registration [number], with no encroachment, impact, or intervention on adjacent lots observed, and therefore no violation of fundamental rights nor any arbitrary or unlawful action by this Municipality is found. It should further be noted that the works being carried out in the area already have the construction permit processed before this Municipality, a process currently under review, reiterating that this construction is on private property. In view of the foregoing, this jurisdictional authority is respectfully requested to deny the amparo petition filed, as there is no injury to fundamental rights attributable to the Municipalidad de San José, and because its actions have been legitimate, reasonable, and aimed at the protection of the public interest." 7.- By written submission incorporated into the digital file on March 26, 2026, the petitioner appears and submits evidence to the file.

8.- By written submission incorporated into the digital file at 14:23 hours on April 17, 2026, the Director of Security and Municipal Police of San José submitted evidence.

9.- The legal requirements applicable to the proceedings have been observed.

Written by Magistrate Garro Vargas; and,

Considering:

I.- Subject matter of the petition. The petitioner states that in the area known as Dirección01 there is a pedestrian and vehicular access used by neighbors and residents to connect with the main street; however, the petitioner objects that following an eviction from an informal settlement, works or interventions were begun at that location, which apparently have the Municipalidad de San José's authorization. The petitioner explains that a deep excavation was made that is open and without visible protective measures, representing a risk to persons transiting the area, with the added concern that plans exist to build a massive wall. The petitioner considers that these works impede the movement of neighbors and raise safety concerns for those using the access. The petitioner requests the intervention of the Chamber to ensure safe and adequate access.

II.- Established facts. For the purposes of deciding this matter, the following facts are deemed duly established:

a. The petitioner refers to the property with title registration [number], cadastral plan No. SJ-300731-78, registered in the name of PARA ADUMA FOODS S. A., legal entity identification number CED01. This property previously housed homeless persons and drug users (see sworn report and evidence submitted); b. The property with title registration [number], cadastral plan No. SJ-300731-78, does not have a formally authorized easement or similar right (see sworn report); c. The interventions are being carried out by the private owner within the limits of the property, at the request of the Department of Environmental Services of the Municipalidad de San José, which ordered and set a deadline for enclosing and cleaning up the property due to a problem of environmental contamination and insecurity (see sworn report and evidence submitted); d. The Municipalidad de San José's action has included proper oversight of the works carried out by the private property owner (see sworn report and evidence submitted); e. The squatter settlement known as El Pochote is an illegal settlement that lacks any form of urban planning or order (see sworn report and evidence submitted); f. The private owner donated a strip of land for the construction of a sidewalk for pedestrian use, with an exit to the main street on the southern side, in order to mitigate the impact on residents of the squatter settlement (see sworn report); g. Staff of the Municipalidad de San José informed the Operational Directorate of the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos de Costa Rica of the existing access routes to the squatter settlement known as El Pochote, so that they could respond to any eventuality or circumstance. The Directorate accordingly expressed its commitment to sharing the information with the relevant stations (see sworn report and evidence submitted).

III.- On the specific case. In the sub lite, the petitioner states that in the area known as Dirección01 there is a pedestrian and vehicular access used by neighbors and residents to connect with the main street; however, the petitioner objects that following an eviction from an informal settlement, works or interventions were begun at that location, which apparently have the Municipalidad de San José's authorization. The petitioner explains that a deep excavation was made that is open and without visible protective measures, representing a risk to persons transiting the area, with the added concern that plans exist to build a massive wall. The petitioner considers that these works impede the movement of neighbors and raise safety concerns for those using the access. The petitioner requests the intervention of the Chamber to ensure safe and adequate access.

In this regard, having reviewed the petitioner's allegations, the Chamber notes that recently, in a case similar to the one now before it, this Chamber in decision No. 2026-012431 of 09:20 hours on April 10, 2026, held:

"III.- On the specific case. In the sub lite, the petitioner states that the Municipalidad de San José carried out an intervention on a property that has been used as an entrance and exit by residents of the El Pochote community; however, the petitioner claims that these interventions affect this passage and therefore the entry and exit of the community. On this basis, the petitioner considers fundamental rights to have been violated.

In this regard, from the analysis of the evidentiary elements submitted by the parties and the sworn reports filed by the respondent authorities — with timely warning of the consequences provided for under article 44 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional — it is established that the petitioner refers to the property with title registration [number], cadastral plan No. SJ-300731-78, registered in the name of PARA ADUMA FOODS S. A., legal entity identification number CED01. That is, this land is private property. Accordingly, based on the information provided, it follows that the interventions are being carried out by the private property owner at the request of the Department of Environmental Services of the Municipalidad de San José, which ordered and set a deadline for enclosing and cleaning up the property due to a problem of environmental contamination and insecurity.

In light of the foregoing, this Tribunal observes that the claim raised by the petitioner does not succeed, because — contrary to what was alleged — it was established that the challenged interventions are not being carried out by the respondent municipality but by the private owner of the lot, which interventions are based on a technical assessment issued by the relevant department of the respondent municipality, in order to safeguard the environment and security in the community. In any event, it is important to note that it was reported that El Pochote squatter settlement is an illegal settlement that lacks urban planning or order. Despite this, the mayor indicated: '[Nombre02]e is aware that the owner of the lot being enclosed voluntarily donated a strip of land and is constructing a sidewalk for the area's residents, in order to minimize the impact on access to the public road.' Additionally, it is established that staff of the Municipalidad de San José informed the Operational Directorate of the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos de Costa Rica of the existing access routes to the squatter settlement known as El Pochote, so that they could respond to any eventuality or circumstance. The Directorate accordingly expressed its commitment to sharing the information with the relevant stations. In these circumstances, it is concluded that the municipality's intervention in this case has been in strict adherence to technical criteria and the exercise of its discretion to promote solutions to the various environmental and security problems presented by the lot in question that connects with the El Pochote community, and therefore no action or omission is found that injures the fundamental rights of the protected party in the terms set forth in the initial filing. Accordingly, the proper course of action is to deny the petition." The precedent partially transcribed above, together with the facts established for the resolution of this proceeding, supports the conclusion that the considerations set forth apply to the specific case, since, as noted, the challenged interventions are not being carried out by the respondent municipality but by the private property owner, which interventions are based on a technical assessment issued by the relevant department of the respondent municipality, in order to safeguard the environment and security in the community. Indeed, it is important to note that the respondent municipality has taken steps to protect the safety of the area by informing the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos of the existing access routes for future emergencies, and the Bomberos received the information and will share it with their stations. Additionally, as reported, the private property owner donated a strip of land for the construction of a sidewalk for pedestrian use and an exit to the main street on the southern side, in order to mitigate the impact on residents of the squatter settlement.

In light of the foregoing considerations, the proper course of action is to deny the petition filed, as the actions of the Municipalidad de San José have been aimed at protecting the public interest.

IV.- Documentation submitted to the file. The petitioner is advised that if any paper document, as well as any objects or evidence contained in an additional electronic, computer, magnetic, optical, telematic, or new-technology-generated device has been submitted, these must be retrieved from the office within a maximum period of 30 business days from notification of this judgment. Otherwise, all material not retrieved within this period will be destroyed, pursuant to the "Reglamento sobre Expediente Electrónico ante el Poder Judicial," approved by the Plenary Court in Session No. 27-11 of August 22, 2011, Article XXVI, and published in Boletín Judicial No. 19 of January 26, 2012, as well as the resolution approved by the Superior Council of the Judiciary in Session No. 43-12 held on May 3, 2012, Article LXXXI.

Por tanto:

The petition is denied.

Fernando Castillo V. President Fernando Cruz C.

Paul Rueda L. Luis Fdo. Salazar A.

Jorge Araya G. Anamari Garro V.

Ingrid Hess H.

Digitally Signed Document -- Verification Code -- Telephone: Telf01 / ALA-4TA (Telf02). Fax: Telf03 / Telf04. Electronic address: www.poder-judicial.go.cr/salaconstitucional. Address: (Dirección03, Dirección04, 100 meters south of the Church of Perpetuo Socorro).

[The petition] indicates that the described situation constitutes a present and imminent threat to the fundamental rights of persons who live in or transit through the area, due to the risk conditions generated by the excavation carried out, the reduction of pedestrian access, and the planned modifications to the site, such as the wall.

**2.-** By a written submission received by the Clerk's Office of the Chamber on 16 March 2026, the petitioner appeared and made representations.

**3.-** By resolution issued at 16:47 hours on 17 March 2026, this proceeding was admitted and a report was requested from the mayor and the president of the Municipal Council, both of the Municipalidad de San José, regarding the facts alleged by the petitioner.

**4.-** By a written submission added to the digital case file on 18 March 2026, the petitioner appeared and made representations.

**5.-** By a written submission added to the digital case file on 24 March 2026, Mariana de los Ángeles Zúñiga Pérez, in her capacity as president of the Municipal Council of the Municipalidad de San José, reported under oath that:

"The actions at issue in this proceeding fall within the administrative competencies vested in the Municipal Mayor and the municipal administration as such; the members of the Municipal Council and the council representatives (regidurías) have no involvement in those actions. Accordingly, the undersigned has neither competence nor authority with respect to the facts set forth in this proceeding. Nonetheless, in compliance with the summons and hearing order issued, I appear before this authority, and in light of the foregoing I defer to the report that the administration provides on this matter." **6.-** By a written submission added to the digital case file on 25 March 2026, Yariela Franciny Quirós Álvarez, in her capacity as interim mayor (alcaldesa interina) of the Municipalidad de San José, reported under oath that:

"FIRST: MS.p Marcelo Solano Ortiz, Director of Security, by official memorandum DSCPM-487-2026, reports in relation to the subject matter of the litigation: FIRST AND SECOND FACTS: In the area identified by the petitioner, work is being carried out on private property belonging to its registered owner, as a result of a notice issued by the Municipal Administration through its Department of Environmental Services (Departamento de Servicios Ambientales), which ordered the fencing and cleaning of the property, as it represented a danger not only to public safety but also to public health, having become a site for drug use and illicit activities. It is clarified that the works are not being carried out by this Local Government, but by the property owner. (A copy of notification 2267 from Environmental Services is attached.) THIRD, FOURTH, AND FIFTH FACTS: It is noted that the population inhabiting the area known as 'Precario El Pochote' lives in irregular conditions, as this type of informal settlement (asentamiento) arises from unplanned development and in the absence of urban planning; for this reason, such settlements lack legally planned and authorized access routes. In the particular case at hand, it is known that the property in the process of being fenced is private property, and that according to cadastral survey plan (plano catastrado) N° SJ-300731-78, no easement (servidumbre) or similar right formally authorized under the legal framework is apparent. (A copy of the survey plan is attached.) Nonetheless, this police force is aware that, according to what the registered owner of the property has communicated to residents of the area, the owner donated a strip of the land where a pedestrian sidewalk (acera) is being built, providing access to the main street on the southern side, in order to mitigate the impact on residents of the informal settlement. SIXTH FACT: It is noted that, as part of preventive measures, once the situation in the area became known and it was established that the street access previously in place was not formally recorded, steps were taken to inform the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos of the situation and to identify the existing access points to the site for future emergencies; the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos acknowledged receipt and indicated that the information would be passed on to the relevant stations to respond accordingly in the event of any incident at the site. (Official correspondence is attached.) SEVENTH AND EIGHTH FACTS: It is concluded that the works being carried out are on private property and in compliance with the order issued by the Municipalidad to the property owner, with the ultimate purpose of preventing the property from being occupied again and mitigating the security incidents occurring in the indicated area, taking into account the significant impact on the security of the sector from the dismantling of the largest drug bunker in the capital. SECOND: Arch. Melissa Gómez Salas, interim head of the Construction Permits Section (Sección de Permisos de Construcción a.i.), by official memorandum n° SPC-OInsp-0363-2026, reports in relation to the subject matter of the litigation: FIRST: The property at issue in the complaint corresponds to the registered property title (finca matrícula) [—], cadastral survey plan [—], registered in the name of PARA ADUMA FOODS S.A., legal entity identification CED01. The property is located in the Hospital district, across from Dirección02 (…) SECOND: The property at issue in the complaint previously sheltered homeless individuals and drug users, being used as an open-air drug den. For this reason, the Municipalidad coordinated with the property owner to proceed with cleaning the lot and enclosing it, seeking to address the security and sanitation problems associated with that condition. THIRD: During an inspection carried out on 16 March of the current year, the property was located, confirming that it is clean and that a perimeter wall (tapia perimetral) had been built, in compliance with the Municipalidad's request through the notice issued by the Environmental Services Section. FOURTH: Upon commencement of the construction works for the perimeter enclosure, the Construction Permits Section issued notification N.° 07095, dated 17 March 2026, informing the owner of the obligation to obtain the corresponding construction permit (permiso de construcción) for these works. In response, the responsible professional filed application N.° 1282441 with the Federated College of Engineers and Architects (Colegio Federado de Ingenieros y de Arquitectos, CFIA), which is currently awaiting municipal review for potential approval (…) FIFTH: The works are carried out within the boundaries of the private property, and no encroachment is observed on the land corresponding to registered title N.° 00051192-000, registered in the name of Urbanizadora Prados del Sur S.A., where the informal settlement known as El Pochote is located. That property has not been formally received by the Municipalidad de San José, due to its cadastral complexity and the informal nature of the settlement. These conform to what was filed with the CFIA and are described as wall construction: (…) In accordance with the foregoing, it is established that the Municipalidad de San José has carried out the appropriate measures within the scope of its competencies, including coordination with the property owner for the cleaning of the lot and its perimeter enclosure, in order to address the conditions of insalubrity and insecurity that existed on the property. Likewise, the Construction Permits Section notified the owner of the obligation to obtain the corresponding construction permit for the works, a process currently under review. Finally, as confirmed by the inspection carried out, the works are executed within the boundaries of the private property corresponding to registered title [—], with no encroachment or impact on neighboring properties observed. REGARDING THE STATED FACTS: In accordance with the facts set forth and the actions taken, it is concluded that the Municipalidad de San José has acted in strict compliance with the legal framework and within the scope of its legal competencies, adopting the necessary and proportionate measures to address a pre-existing risk situation concerning public safety and sanitation on the property under analysis. To that end, the municipal actions have at all times been directed toward coordinating with the owner of registered title [—] for the cleaning of the land and the perimeter enclosure — actions that have been duly carried out and verified by inspection, demonstrating the correction of the irregular conditions that prompted the administrative intervention. Likewise, the municipal action has included proper oversight of the works carried out, through the corresponding notification for the obtainment of the construction permit, a process currently under review by the competent authorities, thereby ensuring compliance with the applicable urban and construction regulations. It is further confirmed that the works carried out are within the limits of the private property, with no encroachment, impact, or intervention on neighboring properties; accordingly, no violation of fundamental rights or arbitrary or illegitimate action by this Municipalidad is found. It is also important to note that the works being carried out in the area already have a construction permit processed before this Municipality, a process currently under review, with the further reiteration that the construction is on private property. In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully requested that the judicial authority dismiss the amparo petition (recurso de amparo) filed, as there is no violation of fundamental rights attributable to the Municipalidad de San José, and because its actions have been legitimate, reasonable, and oriented toward the protection of the public interest." **7.-** By a written submission added to the digital case file on 26 March 2026, the petitioner appeared and submitted evidence.

**8.-** By a written submission added to the digital case file at 14:23 hours on 17 April 2026, the Director of Security and Municipal Police of San José submitted evidence.

**9.-** The legal requirements have been observed in the proceedings conducted.

The opinion is authored by Justice **Garro Vargas**; and, **Considering:** **I.- Subject of the appeal.** The petitioner states that in the area known as Dirección01 there is a pedestrian and vehicular access used by residents to connect to the main street; however, the petitioner objects that following an eviction of an informal settlement, works or interventions were begun in that location, which apparently have the authorization of the Municipalidad de San José. The petitioner states that a deep excavation was carried out that is open and without visible protective measures, representing a risk to people who transit that area, with the added concern that a large wall is planned to be built. The petitioner considers that these works impede the movement of residents and raise safety concerns for people using that access route. The petitioner requests the intervention of the Chamber to ensure safe and adequate access.

**II.- Established facts.** The following facts are considered duly proven as relevant to the decision in this matter:

a. The petitioner refers to the registered property title [—], cadastral survey plan no. SJ-300731-78, held in the name of PARA ADUMA FOODS S.A., legal entity identification CED01. The property previously housed homeless individuals and drug users (see sworn report and evidence submitted); b. The registered property title [—], cadastral survey plan no. SJ-300731-78, does not have a formally authorized easement or similar right (see sworn report); c. The interventions are being carried out by the private owner within the limits of the property at the request of the Department of Environmental Services of the Municipalidad de San José, which ordered and granted a deadline to fence and clean the property due to problems of environmental contamination and insecurity (see sworn report and evidence submitted); d. The conduct of the Municipalidad de San José has included proper oversight of the works carried out by the private owner (see sworn report and evidence submitted); e. The informal settlement (precario) known as El Pochote is an illegal settlement that lacks any form of urban planning or zoning (see sworn report and evidence submitted); f. The private owner donated a strip of the land for the construction of a pedestrian sidewalk providing access to the main street on the southern side, in order to mitigate the impact on residents of the informal settlement (see sworn report); g. Personnel of the Municipalidad de San José informed the Operations Directorate of the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos about the existing access points to the informal settlement known as El Pochote, so that they could respond to any emergency or incident. Accordingly, that directorate expressed its commitment to pass the information on to the relevant stations (see sworn report and evidence submitted).

**III.- On the specific case.** In the *sub lite*, the petitioner states that in the area known as Dirección01 there is a pedestrian and vehicular access used by residents to connect to the main street; however, the petitioner objects that following an eviction of an informal settlement, works or interventions were begun in that location, which apparently have the authorization of the Municipalidad de San José. The petitioner states that a deep excavation was carried out that is open and without visible protective measures, representing a risk to people who transit that area, with the added concern that a large wall is planned to be built. The petitioner considers that these works impede the movement of residents and raise safety concerns for people using that access route. The petitioner requests the intervention of the Chamber to ensure safe and adequate access.

In this regard, having reviewed the petitioner's arguments, the Chamber notes that it recently addressed a similar matter in ruling no. 2026-012431 of 09:20 hours on 10 April 2026, wherein it held:

"**III.- On the specific case.** In the *sub lite*, the petitioner states that the Municipalidad de San José carried out an intervention on a property that has been used as an entry and exit point by residents of the El Pochote community; the petitioner alleges, however, that those interventions affect that passage and therefore the community's access routes. On that basis, the petitioner considers fundamental rights to have been violated.

In this regard, from an analysis of the evidentiary elements submitted by the parties and the sworn reports rendered by the respondent authorities — with timely notice of the consequences set forth in article 44 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional — it is established that the petitioner refers to the registered property title [—], cadastral survey plan no. SJ-300731-78, held in the name of PARA ADUMA FOODS S.A., legal entity identification CED01. That is, the land in question is private property. In light of the foregoing, and based on the information provided, it follows that the interventions are being carried out by the private owner at the request of the Department of Environmental Services of the Municipalidad de San José, which ordered and granted a deadline to fence and clean the property due to problems of environmental contamination and insecurity.

In light of the foregoing, this Tribunal finds that the claim raised by the petitioner is without merit, since, contrary to what was alleged, it was established that the challenged interventions are not carried out by the respondent municipality but by the private owner of the property, and they are based on a technical assessment issued by the corresponding division of the respondent municipality, for the purpose of safeguarding the environment and security in the community. In any event, it is important to note that the Chamber was informed that El Pochote is an illegal settlement that lacks urban planning or zoning.

Nevertheless, the mayor stated: "[Nombre02]e has knowledge that the owner of the parcel carrying out the enclosure (cerramiento) voluntarily donated a strip of his land and is constructing a sidewalk for the residents of that area, so as to minimally affect their access to the public road." Additionally, personnel from the Municipalidad de San José informed the Dirección Operativa of the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos de Costa Rica about the existing access routes to the informal settlement (precario) known as El Pochote, so that they may respond to any eventuality or circumstance. As a result, that directorate expressed its commitment to share the information with the relevant stations. In light of the foregoing, it is concluded that the municipality's intervention in this case has been guided by strict adherence to technical criteria and by the aim of promoting solutions to the various environmental and safety issues arising on the property in question, which connects to the El Pochote community. Accordingly, any action or omission that would injure the fundamental rights of the protected party in the terms set forth in the initial brief is ruled out. Consequently, the appropriate course is to dismiss the appeal.

The precedent partially transcribed above, together with the facts established for the resolution of this proceeding, leads to the conclusion that the considerations advanced therein are applicable to the present case. As noted, the challenged interventions were not carried out by the respondent municipality but by the private owner of the property, and they follow a technical opinion issued by the corresponding unit of the defendant municipality, in the interest of safeguarding the environment and safety in the community. In fact, it is important to note that the defendant municipality has taken steps to protect the safety of the area by informing the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos about the existing access routes for future emergencies; the fire department received the information and will share it with its stations. Additionally, as reported, the private owner of the land ceded a strip for the construction of a sidewalk for pedestrian use and access to the main street on the southern side, in order to mitigate the impact on the residents of the informal settlement.

In light of the considerations stated, the appropriate course is to dismiss the appeal filed, as the actions of the Municipalidad de San José have been oriented toward the protection of the public interest.

**IV.- Documentation submitted to the file.** The appellant is hereby notified that if any document in paper form, as well as objects or evidence contained in any additional electronic, computer, magnetic, optical, telematic, or new-technology device, were submitted, these must be retrieved from the office within a maximum period of 30 business days counted from the notification of this judgment.

Otherwise, any material not retrieved within this period will be destroyed, pursuant to the provisions of the "Reglamento sobre Expediente Electrónico ante el Poder Judicial," approved by the Corte Plena in session N° 27-11 of August 22, 2011, Article XXVI, and published in the Boletín Judicial number 19 of January 26, 2012, as well as pursuant to the agreement approved by the Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial in session N° 43-12 held on May 3, 2012, Article LXXXI.

Por tanto:

The appeal is dismissed.- Fernando Castillo V. President Fernando Cruz C.

Paul Rueda L.

The content you've sent doesn't contain a translatable Spanish legal text. What arrived is a block of base64-encoded binary data (likely an embedded image from a Word or RTF document export), followed by a partial HTML fragment ending in `Luis Fdo.` Please paste the actual Spanish text of the legal excerpt you want translated, and I'll translate it according to the specified rules.

Res. Nº 2026013516 **SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, at nine hours and twenty minutes on the twenty-first of April, two thousand twenty-six.** Amparo petition (recurso de amparo) filed by **Nombre01**, national identity document (cédula de identidad) **CED02**, against the **MUNICIPALIDAD DE SAN JOSÉ.** **Background:** **1.-** By written submission received at the Secretariat of the Sala on March 9, 2026, the petitioning party files an amparo petition against the Municipalidad de San José. The petitioner states that in the area known as Dirección01, there is a pedestrian and vehicular access route used by neighbors and residents to connect with the main street. The petitioner indicates that this passageway has historically been used as a transit route by persons who live in that part of the area. The petitioner explains that recently, following the eviction of an informal settlement (asentamiento informal) that existed on the adjacent property, construction works or interventions began on that land, which apparently have the authorization or knowledge of the Municipalidad de San José. The petitioner recounts that as a result of these interventions, a deep excavation (zanja) was made at the site, which is currently open and without adequate visible protective measures, representing a risk to persons who pass through the area. The petitioner adds that a massive wall is apparently planned as part of a warehouse construction project at a distance of just over 1 meter from the properties. The petitioner indicates that these works have caused a significant reduction in the space available for pedestrian passage, impeding the movement of neighbors and raising concerns about the safety of those who use the access route. The petitioner further states that, based on observations at the site, the construction of steep stairs is also planned as a possible means of access to the upper part of the area, which could further impede the movement of persons, especially the elderly, persons with reduced mobility, or those who must transport objects, furniture, or other goods. The petitioner recounts that the current conditions at the site — including the open excavation, the reduction of the passageway, and the possible modifications to the access route — could pose risks to the physical integrity and safety of residents, as well as difficulties for access by emergency services such as ambulances or firefighters. The petitioner adds that the photographs attached as annexes show the current state of the site, including the excavation carried out, the excessive reduction of the passageway, and the slope of the terrain where the stairway construction is planned. The petitioner indicates that the situation described constitutes a current and imminent threat to the fundamental rights of persons who live in or pass through the area, due to the risk conditions created by the excavation, the reduction of pedestrian access, and the projected modifications at the site such as the wall.

**2.-** By written submission received at the Secretariat of the Sala on March 16, 2026, the petitioning party appears in the proceeding and makes further statements.

**3.-** By resolution issued at 16:47 hours on March 17, 2026, this proceeding was admitted and a report was requested from the mayor (alcalde) and the president of the Municipal Council (Concejo), both of the Municipalidad de San José, on the facts alleged by the petitioning party.

Salazar A.        Jorge Araya G.

Anamari Garro V.        Ingrid Hess H.

Digitally Signed Document -- Verification Code -- **EXPEDIENTE N° 26-008353-0007-CO** Telephone: Telf01 / ALA-4TA (Telf02). Fax: Telf03 / Telf04. Electronic address: www.poder-judicial.go.cr/salaconstitucional. Address: (Dirección03, Dirección04, 100 m. south of the Iglesia del Perpetuo Socorro).

**4.-** By written submission filed in the digital case file on March 18, 2026, the petitioning party appears and makes representations.

**5.-** By written submission filed in the digital case file on March 24, 2026, Mariana de los Ángeles Zúñiga Pérez, in her capacity as president of the Municipal Council of the Municipalidad de San José, reports under oath that:

"*The actions that are the subject of the present proceeding fall within the administrative competencies granted to the Municipal Mayor and to the municipal administration itself; neither the officers of the Municipal Council nor the council members (regidurías) have any involvement in such actions. Accordingly, in the present case, the undersigned has no jurisdiction or authority with respect to the facts set forth in this proceeding. Nonetheless, in compliance with the summons and hearing order issued, I appear before your authority and, in light of the foregoing, defer to the report that the administration provides regarding this matter.*" **6.-** By written submission filed in the digital case file on March 25, 2026, Yariela Franciny Quirós Álvarez, in her capacity as acting mayor of the Municipalidad de San José, reports under oath that:

"*FIRST: MS.p Marcelo Solano Ortiz, Director of Security, through official memorandum DSCPM-487-2026, reports with respect to the subject matter of the litigation: FIRST AND SECOND FACTS: In the area identified by the petitioner, work is being carried out on private property belonging to its registered owner, as a result of a notification issued by the Municipal Administration through its Environmental Services Department; the notification ordered the fencing and cleanup of the property, since it represented a danger not only to public safety but also to public health, the property having become a site for drug consumption and illicit activities. It is noted for the record that the works are being carried out by the property owner, and not by this Local Government. (A copy of Environmental Services notification 2267 is attached.) THIRD, FOURTH, AND FIFTH FACTS: It is noted that the population residing in the area known as "Precario El Pochote" lives in irregular conditions, since this type of squatter settlement (precario) arises from unplanned development without urban zoning; for this reason, the residents lack access routes that have been planned and authorized by law. In this particular case, it is understood that the property in the process of being fenced is private property and that, as shown in cadastral plan No. SJ-300731-78, no easement (servidumbre) or similar right of way formally authorized under our legal framework is recorded. (A copy of the plan is attached.) Nonetheless, this police unit has learned, based on information the registered owner of the property communicated to area residents, that the owner ceded a strip of his land where a sidewalk for pedestrian use is being built, providing an exit to the main road on the southern side, thereby mitigating the impact on residents of the squatter settlement. SIXTH FACT: It is noted that, as part of preventive measures, once the situation in the area became known, specifically that the vehicular entrance that had been in use was not recorded in formal registries, the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos was informed of the situation and of the existing access points at the site for future emergencies; the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos acknowledged receipt and indicated that the information would be shared with its stations so that they may respond accordingly in the event of any incident at the location. (Official memoranda attached.) SEVENTH AND EIGHTH FACTS: It is concluded that the works being carried out are on private property and are being performed in compliance with the order issued by the Municipality to the property owner; the ultimate purpose is to prevent renewed occupation of the property and to mitigate the public safety problems generated in the indicated area, bearing in mind the significant impact on security in the sector resulting from the dismantling of the largest drug bunker in the capital. SECOND: Architect Melissa Gómez Salas, acting head of the Construction Permits Section, through official memorandum No. SPC-OInsp-0363-2026, reports with respect to the subject matter of the litigation: FIRST: The property that is the subject of the complaint corresponds to the property registered under matriz [blank], cadastral plan [blank], registered in the name of PARA ADUMA FOODS S.A., legal identification number CED01. Said property is located in the Hospital district, across from Dirección02 (...) SECOND: The property that is the subject of the complaint previously housed street dwellers and drug users and was being used as an open-air bunker. In view of this, the Municipality carried out coordinated actions with the property owner in order to proceed with the cleanup of the lot and the fencing thereof, with the aim of addressing the security and public health problems associated with those conditions. THIRD: During an inspection carried out on March 16 of the present year, the property was located and confirmed to be clean; it had been addressed through the construction of a perimeter wall (tapia perimetral), actions carried out in compliance with the Municipality's request as set forth in the notification issued by the Environmental Services Section. FOURTH: Upon the commencement of the perimeter fencing construction works, the Construction Permits Section issued notification No. 07095, dated March 17, 2026, informing the property owner of the obligation to obtain the corresponding construction permit for said works. In response, the responsible professional filed application No. 1282441 with the CFIA, which is currently pending municipal review for eventual approval (...) FIFTH: The works are being executed within the boundaries of the private property, and no encroachment on the land corresponding to property No. 00051192-000, registered in the name of Urbanizadora Prados del Sur S.A., where the informal settlement (asentamiento informal) known as El Pochote is located, has been observed. Said property has not been formally transferred to the Municipalidad de San José, owing to its cadastral complexity and the informal condition of the settlement. The works correspond to what was filed with the CFIA and are described as the construction of perimeter walls: (...) In light of the foregoing, it is established that the Municipalidad de San José has carried out the corresponding actions within the scope of its competencies, including coordination with the property owner for the cleanup of the lot and the perimeter fencing, in order to address the conditions of insalubrity and insecurity present on the property. Likewise, the Construction Permits Section notified the property owner of the obligation to obtain the corresponding construction permit for said works, an application currently under review. Finally, as verified during the inspection, the works are being executed within the boundaries of the private property registered under matriz [blank], and no encroachment on or impact to neighboring properties has been observed. REGARDING THE FACTS PRESENTED: In light of the facts set forth and the actions taken, it is concluded that the Municipalidad de San José has acted in strict compliance with the legal order and within the scope of its legal competencies, adopting the necessary and proportionate measures to address a pre-existing situation of risk to public safety and health on the property under analysis. In this regard, the municipal actions have been directed, at all times, toward coordinating with the owner of the property registered under matriz [blank] for the cleanup of the lot and the perimeter fencing, actions that have been duly executed and verified through inspection, demonstrating the correction of the irregular conditions that prompted the administrative intervention. Likewise, the municipal action has included proper oversight of the works carried out, through the corresponding notification for the obtaining of a construction permit, an application currently under review before the competent authorities, thereby ensuring compliance with applicable urban planning and construction regulations. It is further noted that the works executed are being carried out within the boundaries of the private property, with no encroachment on, impact to, or intervention on neighboring properties, and accordingly no violation of fundamental rights or arbitrary or unlawful action by this Municipality is apparent. It is also important to note that the works being carried out in the sector already have a construction permit application filed with this Municipality, currently under review, and it is reiterated that said construction is on private property. In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully requested that the judicial authority declare the amparo petition (recurso de amparo) without merit, as there is no injury to fundamental rights attributable to the Municipalidad de San José, and because its actions have been legitimate, reasonable, and oriented toward the protection of the public interest.*" **7.-** By written submission filed in the digital case file on March 26, 2026, the petitioning party appears and submits evidence into the record.

**8.-** By written submission filed in the digital case file at 14:23 hours on April 17, 2026, the Director of Municipal Security and Police of San José submitted evidence.

**9.-** In the proceedings conducted, the applicable legal requirements have been observed.

The opinion is drafted by Magistrada **Garro Vargas**; and,

Considering:

**I.- Object of the appeal.** The petitioner states that in the area known as Dirección01 there is a pedestrian and vehicular access route used by residents to connect to the main road; however, the petitioner objects that, following an eviction from a squatter settlement, works or interventions were begun at that location, apparently with authorization from the Municipalidad de San José. The petitioner describes a deep excavation that is open and without visible protective measures, posing a risk to persons who travel through the area, compounded by plans to construct a large wall. The petitioner contends that such works impede residents' transit and raise safety concerns for those who use the access route. The petitioner requests the intervention of the Constitutional Chamber (Sala) to ensure a safe and adequate access route.

**II.- Proven facts.** The following facts are considered to have been duly established as relevant to the decision in this matter:

a. The petitioner refers to the property registered under matriz [blank], cadastral plan no. SJ-300731-78, registered in the name of PARA ADUMA FOODS S.A., legal identification number CED01. Said property previously housed street dwellers and drug users (see sworn report and evidence submitted); b. The property registered under matriz [blank], cadastral plan no. SJ-300731-78, does not have a formally authorized easement or similar right of way (see sworn report); c. The interventions are being carried out by the private owner within the boundaries of his property at the request of the Environmental Services Department of the Municipalidad de San José, which ordered and set a deadline for the fencing and cleanup of the property due to problems of environmental contamination and public insecurity (see sworn report and evidence submitted); d. The actions of the Municipalidad de San José have included proper oversight of the works carried out by the private owner (see sworn report and evidence submitted); e. The squatter settlement known as El Pochote is an illegal settlement with no form of urban planning or zoning (see sworn report and evidence submitted); f. The private owner ceded a strip of his land for the construction of a sidewalk for pedestrian use, with an exit to the main road on the southern side, in order to mitigate the impact on residents of the squatter settlement (see sworn report); g. Personnel of the Municipalidad de San José informed the Dirección Operativa de Bomberos de Costa Rica of the existing access points to the squatter settlement known as El Pochote, so that they may respond to any eventuality or circumstance. The Dirección accordingly expressed its commitment to share the information with the competent fire stations (see sworn report and evidence submitted).

**III.- On the specific case.** In the *sub lite*, the petitioner states that in the area known as Dirección01 there is a pedestrian and vehicular access route used by residents to connect to the main road; however, the petitioner objects that, following an eviction from a squatter settlement, works or interventions were begun at that location, apparently with authorization from the Municipalidad de San José. The petitioner describes a deep excavation that is open and without visible protective measures, posing a risk to persons who travel through the area, compounded by plans to construct a large wall. The petitioner contends that such works impede residents' transit and raise safety concerns for those who use the access route. The petitioner requests the intervention of the Constitutional Chamber to ensure a safe and adequate access route.

In this regard, having reviewed the petitioner's arguments, it is noted that this Chamber, in a recently decided case similar to the one now before it, in ruling no. 2026-012431 of 09:20 hours on April 10, 2026, held:

"*III.- On the specific case. In the sub lite, the petitioning party states that the Municipalidad de San José carried out an intervention on a property that has been used as an entry and exit point by residents of the El Pochote community; however, the petitioner claims that such interventions affect said passage and therefore the access to and from the community. On this basis, the petitioner considers fundamental rights to have been violated.* *In this regard, from the analysis of the evidentiary elements submitted by the parties and the sworn reports filed by the respondent authorities, with due notice of the consequences established by Article 44 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, it is established that the petitioner refers to the property registered under matriz [blank], cadastral plan no. SJ-300731-78, registered in the name of PARA ADUMA FOODS S.A., legal identification number CED01. That is, the property in question is privately owned. Accordingly, as reported, it is apparent that the interventions are being carried out by the private owner at the request of the Environmental Services Department of the Municipalidad de San José, which ordered and set a deadline for the fencing and cleanup of the property due to problems of environmental contamination and public insecurity.* *In light of the foregoing, this Tribunal finds that the claim raised by the petitioning party is without merit, since it has been established that the challenged interventions are carried out by the private owner of the property rather than by the respondent municipality, in response to a technical determination issued by the relevant department of the respondent municipality, with the aim of safeguarding the environment and security in the community. In any event, it is important to note that it was reported that El Pochote is an illegal squatter settlement that lacks urban planning or zoning. Notwithstanding this, the mayor stated: "[Nombre02]e is aware that the owner of the property being fenced voluntarily donated a strip of his land and is building a sidewalk for the residents of that sector, so as to minimize the impact on their access to the public road." Additionally, it is established that personnel of the Municipalidad de San José informed the Dirección Operativa de Bomberos de Costa Rica of the existing access points to the squatter settlement known as El Pochote, so that they may respond to any eventuality or circumstance. The Dirección accordingly expressed its commitment to share the information with the competent fire stations. In view of all the foregoing, it is concluded that the municipality's intervention in the present case has been in strict compliance with technical criteria and in pursuit of solutions to the various environmental and security problems arising on the property in question, which connects with the El Pochote community; accordingly, any action or omission that would injure the fundamental rights of the protected party in the terms set out in the initial filing is ruled out.*" Accordingly, the appropriate course of action is to deny the appeal." The partially transcribed precedent, read together with the facts established for the resolution of this proceeding, leads to the conclusion that the considerations advanced therein are applicable to the specific case at hand, for, as noted, the challenged interventions were carried out not by the respondent municipality but by the private owner of the property, and those interventions were performed in accordance with a technical opinion issued by the relevant department of the respondent municipality, in order to safeguard the environment and public safety in the community. Indeed, it is important to note that the respondent municipality has taken steps to protect public safety in the area by notifying the Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos of the existing access routes for use in future emergencies; the fire service received the information and will share it with its stations. Additionally, as reported, the private landowner granted a strip of land for the construction of a sidewalk for pedestrian use and as an exit to the main road on the southern side, with the aim of mitigating the impact on the residents of the informal settlement (precario).

In light of the foregoing considerations, the appropriate course of action is to deny the appeal filed, as the actions of the Municipalidad de San José have been directed toward the protection of the public interest.

**IV.- Documentation submitted to the record.** The petitioner is hereby notified that any documents submitted in paper form, as well as objects or evidence contained in any additional device of an electronic, computer-based, magnetic, optical, telematic, or new-technology nature, must be retrieved from the court office within a maximum period of 30 días hábiles counted from notification of this judgment.

Otherwise, any material not retrieved within this period will be destroyed, pursuant to the provisions of the "Reglamento sobre Expediente Electrónico ante el Poder Judicial," approved by the Corte Plena in session N° 27-11 of August 22, 2011, Article XXVI, and published in the Boletín Judicial number 19 of January 26, 2012, as well as pursuant to the agreement approved by the Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial in session N° 43-12 held on May 3, 2012, Article LXXXI.

Por tanto:

The appeal is dismissed.- Fernando Castillo V. President Fernando Cruz C.

Paul Rueda L.

The content you've sent doesn't contain a translatable Spanish legal text. What arrived is a block of base64-encoded binary data (likely an embedded image from a Word or RTF document export), followed by a partial HTML fragment ending in `Luis Fdo.` Please paste the actual Spanish text of the legal excerpt you want translated, and I'll translate it according to the specified rules.

[signature image] Salazar A.

[signature image] Jorge Araya G.

[signature image] Anamari Garro V.

[signature image] Ingrid Hess H.

Digitally Signed Document -- Verification Code -- Telephones: Telf01/ ALA-4TA (Telf02). Fax: Telf03 / Telf04. Electronic address: www.poder-judicial.go.cr/salaconstitucional. Address: (Dirección03, Dirección04, 100 meters south of the Perpetuo Socorro church).

Revisión del Documento  Res. Nº 2026013516 SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, a las nueve horas veinte minutos del veintiuno de abril de dos mil veintiseis .

Recurso de amparo interpuesto por Nombre01, cédula de identidad CED02, contra la MUNICIPALIDAD DE SAN JOSÉ.

Resultando:

1.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala el 9 de marzo de 2026, la parte recurrente interpone recurso de amparo contra la Municipalidad de San José. Manifiesta que en el sector conocido como Dirección01, existe un acceso peatonal y vehicular utilizado por vecinos y residentes para comunicarse con la calle principal. Indica que este paso ha sido históricamente utilizado como vía de tránsito para las personas que habitan en esa parte del sector. Expone que recientemente, tras el desalojo de un asentamiento informal que existía en el terreno contiguo, se iniciaron obras o intervenciones en dicho terreno, las cuales aparentemente cuentan con autorización o conocimiento de la Municipalidad de San José. Narra que a raíz de estas intervenciones, se realizó una excavación profunda (zanja) en el lugar, la cual se encuentra actualmente abierta y sin medidas visibles de protección adecuadas, lo que representa un riesgo para las personas que transitan por el área. Agrega que, aparentemente se proyecta hacer un muro gigante de una construcción de bodegas a tan solo poco más de 1 metro de distancia de las propiedades. Indica que estas obras han provocado una reducción significativa del espacio disponible para el paso peatonal, dificultando el tránsito de los vecinos y generando preocupación por la seguridad de quienes utilizan dicho acceso. Añade que según lo observado en el lugar, se proyecta además la construcción de escaleras empinadas como posible medio de acceso hacia la parte superior del sector, lo cual podría dificultar aún más el tránsito de personas, especialmente adultos mayores, personas con movilidad reducida o quienes deban trasladar objetos, muebles u otros bienes. Narra que las condiciones actuales del sitio incluyendo la excavación abierta, la reducción del paso y las posibles modificaciones al acceso podrían generar riesgos para la integridad y seguridad de los vecinos, así como dificultades para el acceso de servicios de emergencia como ambulancias o bomberos. Agrega que las fotografías que adjunta como anexos, muestran el estado actual del lugar, incluyendo la excavación realizada, la reducción exagerada del espacio de paso y la pendiente existente en el terreno donde se proyecta la construcción de escaleras. Indica que la situación descrita constituye una amenaza actual e inminente a los derechos fundamentales de las personas que habitan o transitan por el sector, debido a las condiciones de riesgo generadas por la excavación realizada, la reducción del acceso peatonal y las modificaciones proyectadas en el lugar como el muro.

2.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala el 16 de marzo de 2026, la parte recurrente se apersona y realiza manifestaciones.

3.- Mediante resolución de las 16:47 horas del 17 de marzo de 2026, se dio curso a este proceso y se le solicitó informe al alcalde y al presidente del Concejo, ambos de la Municipalidad de San José, sobre los hechos alegados por la parte recurrente.

4.- Por escrito incorporado al expediente digital el 18 de marzo de 2026, la parte recurrente se apersona y realiza manifestaciones.

5.- Por escrito incorporado al expediente digital el 24 de marzo de 2026, Mariana de los Ángeles Zúñiga Pérez, en su condición de presidenta del Concejo de la Municipalidad de San José, informa bajo juramento que:

“Las actuaciones objeto del presente proceso son propias de las competencias administrativas otorgadas al Alcalde Municipal y a la administración municipal como tal, no teniendo injerencia en dichas actuaciones los personeros del Concejo Municipal ni las regidurías, por lo que en el presente caso la suscrita, no tiene competencia ni acción en relación a los hechos expuestos en el presente proceso. No obstante, de conformidad con la orden de emplazamiento y audiencia otorgada me apersono ante a su autoridad, y, en vista de lo anterior me apego al informe que brinde la administración sobre este caso”.

6.- Por escrito incorporado al expediente digital el 25 de marzo de 2026, Yariela Franciny Quirós Álvarez, en su condición de alcaldesa interina de la Municipalidad de San José, informa bajo juramento que:

“PRIMERO: El MS.p Marcelo Solano Ortiz, Director de Seguridad , con oficio DSCPM-487-2026, informa con relación al objeto del litigio: HECHO PRIMERO Y SEGUNDO: En el sector indicado por la recurrente se están realizando labores en propiedad privada perteneciente al dueño registral de este, esto producto de notificación realizada por la Administración Municipal a través de su Departamento de Servicios Ambientales; donde se ordeno el cercado y limpieza; ya que el mismo representaba un peligro no solo para la Seguridad; si no también para la Salud Pública al haberse convertido en punto consumo y actividades ilícitas. Dejando claridad que las obras no se desarrollan por parte de este Gobierno Local, si no por el dueño del terreno. (Se aporta copia de la notificación 2267 de Servicios Ambientales). HECHOS TERCERO, CUARTO Y QUINTO: Se destaca que la población que habita el sector conocido como "Precario El Pochote" vive en condiciones irregulares, ya que este tipo de asentamientos surge de la des planificación y sin ordenamiento urbano; razón por la cual carecen de accesos planificados y autorizados por Ley. En el caso particular, se conoce que el terreno en proceso de cercamiento es propiedad privada y que según consta en plano catastrado N° SJ-300731-78 no se visualiza servidumbre o similar autorizada de manera formal por nuestro ordenamiento jurídico. (Se aporta copia del plano). No obstante, se tiene conocimiento por parte de este cuerpo policial que según lo indicado por parte del propietario registral del terreno a los vecinos del sector; este cedió una franja de su terrero donde se esta construyendo una acera para uso peatonal y que tenga salida a la calle principal por el sector sur, mitigando la afectación a los vecinos del precario. HECHO SEXTO: Se destaca que, como parte de las acciones preventivas, una vez conocida la situación de la zona y que el ingreso que había por calle no estaba en registros formales, se procedió a informar al Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos la situación y a indicar los accesos existentes en el sitio para futuras emergencias; dando acuse de recibido e indicando que se hará de conocimiento de sus estaciones para que procedan según corresponda en caso de alguna incidencia en el lugar. (Se adjuntan oficios). HECHOS SÉPTIMO Y OCTAVO: Se concluye que los trabajos que se están realizando son en propiedad privada y en cumplimiento a lo ordenado por la Municipalidad al dueño del terreno; con el fin último de evitar su invasión nuevamente y mitigar los fenómenos de inseguridad que se generaban en el área indicada; teniendo en cuenta el gran impacto que generó para la seguridad del sector la desarticulación del bunker más grande de la capital. SEGUNDO: La Arq. Arquitecta Melissa Gómez Salas, jefe Sección de Permisos de Construcción a.i, con el oficio n° SPC-OInsp-0363-2026, informa con relación al objeto del litigio: PRIMERO: La propiedad objeto de la denuncia corresponde a la finca matrícula , plano catastrado , inscrita a nombre de PARA ADUMA FOODS S.A., cédula jurídica CED01. Dicha propiedad se ubica en el distrito Hospital, frente a la Dirección02 (…) SEGUNDO: La propiedad objeto de la denuncia albergaba anteriormente habitantes de calle y consumidores de droga, siendo utilizada como un búnker a cielo abierto. Debido a lo anterior, la Municipalidad realizó gestiones coordinadas con el propietario del inmueble con el fin de proceder con la limpieza del lote y el cerramiento de este, procurando atender las problemáticas de seguridad y salubridad asociadas a dicha condición. TERCERO: En inspección realizada el día 16 de marzo del presente año, se logró ubicar la propiedad, confirmándose que la misma se encuentra limpia y que fue intervenida mediante la construcción de una tapia perimetral, acciones realizadas en cumplimiento de lo solicitado por la Municipalidad mediante la notificación emitida por la Sección de Servicios Ambientales. CUARTO: Ante el inicio de las obras de construcción del cerramiento perimetral, la Sección de Permisos de Construcción procedió a emitir la notificación N.° 07095, de fecha 17 de marzo de 2026, mediante la cual se indicó al propietario la obligación de tramitar el respectivo permiso de construcción para dichas obras. En atención a lo anterior, el profesional responsable presentó el trámite N.° 1282441 ante el Colegio Federado de Ingenieros y de Arquitectos (CFIA), el cual se encuentra próximo a la revisión municipal para su eventual aprobación (…) QUINTO: Las obras se ejecutan dentro de los límites de la propiedad privada y no se observa invasión sobre los terrenos correspondientes a la finca N.° 00051192-000, registrada a nombre de Urbanizadora Prados del Sur S.A., donde se ubica el asentamiento informal denominado El Pochote. Dicha finca no ha sido debidamente recibida por la Municipalidad de San José, debido a su complejidad catastral y a la condición de informalidad del asentamiento. Estas se ajustan a lo tramitado ante el CFIA y se describen como construcción de tapias: (…) De conformidad con lo expuesto, se tiene que la Municipalidad de San José ha realizado las gestiones correspondientes dentro del ámbito de sus competencias, incluyendo la coordinación con el propietario del inmueble para la limpieza del lote y el cerramiento perimetral del mismo, con el fin de atender las condiciones de insalubridad y seguridad que se presentaban en la propiedad. Asimismo, la Sección de Permisos de Construcción procedió a notificar al propietario sobre la obligación de tramitar el respectivo permiso constructivo para dichas obras, trámite que actualmente se encuentra en proceso de revisión. Finalmente, según lo constatado en la inspección realizada, las obras se ejecutan dentro de los límites de la propiedad privada correspondiente a la finca matrícula , sin que se observe invasión o afectación sobre terrenos colindantes. EN RELACIÓN CON LOS HECHOS MANIFESTADOS De conformidad con los hechos expuestos y las actuaciones realizadas, se concluye que la Municipalidad de San José ha actuado en estricto apego al ordenamiento jurídico y dentro del ámbito de sus competencias legales, adoptando las medidas necesarias y proporcionales para atender una situación de riesgo en materia de seguridad y salubridad pública previamente existente en el inmueble objeto de análisis. En ese sentido, las gestiones municipales se han orientado, en todo momento, a coordinar con la persona propietaria de la finca matrícula la limpieza del terreno y el cerramiento perimetral, acciones que han sido debidamente ejecutadas y verificadas mediante inspección, evidenciando la corrección de las condiciones irregulares que motivaron la intervención administrativa. Asimismo, la actuación municipal ha incluido la debida fiscalización de las obras realizadas, mediante la notificación correspondiente para la obtención del permiso constructivo, trámite que se encuentra en proceso de revisión ante las instancias competentes, garantizando con ello el cumplimiento de la normativa urbanística y constructiva vigente. Se constata, además, que las obras ejecutadas se desarrollan dentro de los límites de la propiedad privada, sin que exista invasión, afectación o intervención sobre inmuebles colindantes, por lo que no se advierte vulneración de derechos fundamentales ni actuación arbitraria o ilegítima por parte de esta Municipalidad. Asimismo, es importante señalar, que las obras que se realizan en el sector ya cuentan con el permiso de construcción tramitado ante este Municipio, trámite que actualmente se encuentra en proceso de revisión, reiterándose que dicha construcción se encuentra en propiedad privada En virtud de lo anterior, se solicita respetuosamente a la autoridad jurisdiccional declarar sin lugar el recurso de amparo interpuesto, al no existir lesión alguna a derechos fundamentales atribuible a la Municipalidad de San José, y debido a que sus actuaciones han sido legítimas, razonables y orientadas a la protección del interés público”.

7.- Por escrito incorporado al expediente digital el 26 de marzo de 2026, la parte recurrente se apersona y aporta prueba al expediente.

8.- Mediante escrito incorporado al expediente digital a las 14:23 horas del 17 de abril de 2026, el director de Seguridad y Policía Municipal de San José aportó prueba.

9.- En los procedimientos seguidos se ha observado las prescripciones legales.

Redacta la Magistrada Garro Vargas; y,

Considerando:

I.- Objeto del recurso. El recurrente manifiesta que en el sector conocido como Dirección01 existe un acceso peatonal y vehicular utilizado por vecinos y residentes para comunicarse con la calle principal; sin embargo, reprocha que ante un desalojo de un asentamiento informal se iniciaron obras o intervenciones en dicho lugar, los cuales aparentemente cuentan con la autorización de la Municipalidad de San José. Expone que se realizó una excavación profunda que se encuentra abierta y sin medidas visibles de protección lo que representa un riesgo para las personas que transitan en dicha zona, con el agravante de que se proyecta construir un muro gigante. Estima que tales obras dificultan el tránsito de los vecinos y provoca preocupaciones en la seguridad de las personas que utilizan dicho acceso. Solicita la intervención de la Sala para que se asegure un acceso seguro y adecuado.

II.- Hechos probados. De importancia para la decisión de este asunto, se estiman como debidamente demostrados los siguientes hechos:

a. La recurrente hace alusión al terreno matrícula , plano catastrado nro. SJ-300731-78, que se encuentra a nombre de PARA ADUMA FOODS S. A. cédula jurídica CED01. Dicha propiedad albergaba habitantes de la calle y consumidores de droga (ver informe rendido bajo juramento y prueba aportada); b. El terreno matrícula , plano catastrado nro. SJ-300731-78, no cuenta con una servidumbre o similar autorizada de manera formal (ver informe rendido bajo juramento); c. Las intervenciones son realizadas por el propietario privado dentro de los límites de su propiedad a solicitud del Departamento de Servicios Ambientales de la Municipalidad de San José, quien ordenó y otorgó un plazo para cerrarlo y limpiarlo, debido a una problemática de contaminación ambiental e inseguridad (ver informe rendido bajo juramento y prueba aportada); d. La actuación de la Municipalidad de San José ha incluido la debida fiscalización de las obras realizadas por parte del propietario privado (ver informe rendido bajo juramento y prueba aportada); e. El precario conocido como El Pochote es un asentamiento ilegal que no presenta ninguna clase de planificación u ordenamiento urbano (ver informe rendido bajo juramento y prueba aportada); f. El propietario privado cedió una franja de su terreno para la construcción de una acera para uso peatonal y que tenga salida a la calle principal por el sector sur, con la finalidad de mitigar la afectación de los vecinos del precario (ver informe rendido bajo juramento); g. El personal de la Municipalidad de San José le informó a la Dirección Operativa de Bomberos de Costa Rica sobre los accesos existentes al precario conocido como El Pochote, con la finalidad de que puedan atender cualquier eventualidad o circunstancia. Por lo anterior, dicha dirección expresó el compromiso de brindar la información a las estaciones competentes (ver informe rendido bajo juramento y prueba aportada).

III.- Sobre el caso concreto. En el sub lite, el recurrente manifiesta que en el sector conocido como Dirección01 existe un acceso peatonal y vehicular utilizado por vecinos y residentes para comunicarse con la calle principal; sin embargo, reprocha que ante un desalojo de un asentamiento informal se iniciaron obras o intervenciones en dicho lugar, los cuales aparentemente cuentan con la autorización de la Municipalidad de San José. Expone que se realizó una excavación profunda que se encuentra abierta y sin medidas visibles de protección lo que representa un riesgo para las personas que transitan en dicha zona, con el agravante de que se proyecta construir un muro gigante. Estima que tales obras dificultan el tránsito de los vecinos y provoca preocupaciones en la seguridad de las personas que utilizan dicho acceso. Solicita la intervención de la Sala para que se asegure un acceso seguro y adecuado.

Al respecto, vistos los alegatos de la recurrente, se le hace saber que, recientemente, en un caso similar al que ahora nos ocupa, esta Sala en la sentencia nro. 2026-012431 de las 09:20 horas del 10 de abril de 2026, dispuso:

“III.- Sobre el caso concreto. En el sub lite, la parte recurrente señala que la Municipalidad de San José realizó una intervención en una propiedad la cual ha sido utilizada como entrada y salida por los vecinos de la comunidad El Pochote, sin embargo, reclama que tales intervenciones afectan dicho paso, por ende, el ingreso y salida de la comunidad. Con base en lo dicho, estima lesionados derechos fundamentales.

Al respecto, del análisis de los elementos probatorios aportados por las partes y los informes rendidos bajo juramento por las autoridades recurridas -con oportuno apercibimiento de las consecuencias previstas por el artículo 44 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional- se tiene por acreditado que la recurrente hace alusión al terreno matrícula , plano catastrado nro. SJ-300731-78, que se encuentra a nombre de PARA ADUMA FOODS S. A. cédula jurídica CED01. Es decir, dicho terreno se trata de una propiedad privada. Por lo anterior, según lo informado se desprende que las intervenciones son realizadas por el propietario privado a solicitud del Departamento de Servicios Ambientales de la Municipalidad de San José, quien ordenó y otorgó un plazo para cerrarlo y limpiarlo, debido a una problemática de contaminación ambiental e inseguridad.

En virtud de lo expuesto, este Tribunal observa que el reclamo planteado por la parte accionante no lleva lugar, por cuanto contrario a lo alegado, se tuvo por demostrado que las intervenciones acusadas no son realizadas por la municipalidad recurrido sino por el propietario privado del predio, las cuales obedecen a un criterio técnico emitido por la dependencia respectiva del municipio accionado, en aras de salvaguardar el ambiente y la seguridad en la comunidad. En todo caso, es importante señalar que se informó que el precario El Pochote es un asentamiento ilegal que carece de planificación u ordenamiento urbano. Pese a ello, la alcaldesa indicó: “[Nombre02]e tiene conocimiento que voluntariamente el propietario del predio que realiza el cerramiento donó una franja de su terreno y está construyendo una acera a los habitantes del sector dicho, para así afectar de la menor forma la salida a la vía pública”. Adicionalmente, se tiene que el personal de la Municipalidad de San José le informó a la Dirección Operativa de Bomberos de Costa Rica sobre los accesos existentes al precario conocido como El Pochote, con la finalidad de que puedan atender cualquier eventualidad o circunstancia. Por lo anterior, dicha dirección expresó el compromiso de brindar la información a las estaciones competentes. Así las cosas, se concluye que la intervención de la municipalidad en el presente caso ha sido bajo un estricto apego a criterios técnicos y de oportunidad en promover soluciones a las distintas problemáticas tanto ambientales como de seguridad presentadas en el predio en cuestión que conecta con la comunidad El Pochote, por lo que se descarta alguna acción u omisión que lesione los derechos fundamentales de la parte amparada en los términos formulados en el escrito inicial. En consecuencia, lo procedente es declarar sin lugar el recurso”.

El precedente parcialmente transcrito, así como de los hechos acreditados para la resolución de este proceso, se estima que las consideraciones esgrimidas resultan aplicables al caso concreto, pues como se indicó las intervenciones acusadas no son realizadas por la municipalidad recurrido sino por el propietario privado del predio, las cuales obedecen a un criterio técnico emitido por la dependencia respectiva del municipio accionado, en aras de salvaguardar el ambiente y la seguridad en la comunidad. De hecho, es importante señalar que el municipio accionado ha adoptado acciones en procura de resguardar la seguridad de la zona al informarle al Benemérito Cuerpo de Bomberos sobre los accesos existentes por futuras emergencias, quienes recibieron la información y la harán de conocimiento de sus estaciones. Adicionalmente, según se informó el propietario privado del terreno cedió una franja para la construcción de una acera para uso peatonal y salida a la calle principal por el sector sur, con la finalidad de mitigar la afectación de los vecinos del precario.

En virtud de las consideraciones indicadas, lo procedente es declarar sin lugar el recurso planteado, pues las actuaciones de la Municipalidad de San José han sido orientadas a la protección del interés público.

IV.- Documentación aportada al expediente. Se previene a la parte recurrente 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, éstos 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 sin lugar el recurso.- Fernando Castillo V.

Fernando Cruz C.

Paul Rueda L.

Luis Fdo. Salazar A.

Jorge Araya G.

Anamari Garro V.

Ingrid Hess H.

Documento Firmado Digitalmente -- Código verificador -- 