Res. 18014-2026 Sala Constitucional — Information request regarding Río Azul Landfill partially granted

OutcomeResultado

Partially grantedParcialmente con lugar

The amparo action is partially granted due to the Ministry of Health's failure to provide copies of slope measurement studies for the Río Azul Landfill, ordering delivery within ten days, and the State is ordered to pay costs, damages, and losses. The rest of the action is denied.Se declara parcialmente con lugar el recurso de amparo por la omisión del Ministerio de Salud de entregar copias de los estudios de medición de taludes del Relleno Sanitario Río Azul, ordenando su entrega en un plazo de diez días, y se condena al Estado al pago de costas, daños y perjuicios. En lo demás, se declara sin lugar.

SummaryResumen

The Constitutional Chamber heard an amparo action against the Ministry of Health for failing to respond to an information request and complaint about the Río Azul Landfill. The petitioner sought data on contracts, leachate analyses, environmental monitoring, and other matters. The Court found that the Ministry had answered nearly all queries before the procedural ruling was notified, so no fundamental rights were violated on those points. However, regarding point 4 of the request, concerning slope measurement studies, the Ministry stated it had them but failed to provide the requested copies. The Chamber partially granted the amparo, ordering delivery of that information within ten days, and ordered the State to pay costs, damages, and losses. The complaint about bidding irregularities was declared inadmissible as a matter of ordinary legality, with the petitioner directed to the administrative litigation courts. The ruling includes a separate note and a dissenting vote on jurisdiction over administrative delay.La Sala Constitucional conoció un recurso de amparo contra el Ministerio de Salud por no atender una solicitud de información y una denuncia sobre el Relleno Sanitario Río Azul. El recurrente pidió datos sobre contratos, análisis de lixiviados, monitoreo ambiental y otros aspectos. El Tribunal determinó que el Ministerio respondió casi todas las consultas antes de la notificación de curso, por lo que no hubo lesión a los derechos fundamentales en esos puntos. Sin embargo, en el punto 4 de la solicitud, referente a estudios de medición de taludes, el Ministerio indicó que sí contaba con ellos pero omitió entregar las copias solicitadas. La Sala declaró parcialmente con lugar el recurso, ordenando entregar esa información en un plazo de diez días, y condenó al Estado al pago de costas, daños y perjuicios. Sobre la denuncia de irregularidades en la licitación, se declaró inadmisible por ser una cuestión de legalidad ordinaria, remitiendo al recurrente a la vía contencioso-administrativa. El fallo incluye una nota separada y un voto salvado sobre la competencia para conocer de la mora administrativa.

Key excerptExtracto clave

V.- Regarding point 4 of the November 28, 2025, information request. On this matter, it is noted that in point 4 of his information request, the petitioner requested the following: "Does this Ministry of Health, as owner of the land where Río Azul is located, have slope measurement studies, and whether there are displacements of these slopes? If so, I request copies of said study; I would pay the cost of the copies." In response, the Ministry of Health informed him: "Yes, we have them. The company conducts these measurements quarterly, which are included in the corresponding Monthly Work Report and reports any anomalies, if any." In this regard, it is found that the respondent Ministry did answer that point of the request, claiming that it does have such measurements, but it omitted to provide copies or explain the reasons why it cannot provide that information. It should be noted that the petitioner explicitly stated "if so, I request copies of said study, I would pay the cost of the copies," but it is reiterated that the respondent authority ignored this request. Therefore, with respect to this point, a violation of his fundamental rights is established. Therefore: The appeal is declared partially granted only for the failure to address point 4 of the petitioner's November 28, 2025, information request. Consequently, Mary Denisse Munive Angermuller, in her capacity as Minister of Health, or whoever holds the position, is ordered to take the necessary measures within her powers so that, within a period of no more than ten days from notification of this judgment, she fully addresses point 4 of the petitioner's November 28, 2025, information request and provides the requested information.V.- Sobre el punto 4 de la solicitud de información del 28 de noviembre de 2025. Sobre el particular, se denota que en el punto 4 de su solicitud de información el recurrente solicitó lo siguiente: "¿Cuenta este Ministerio de Salud como propietario del terreno donde se ubica Rio Azul, estudios de mediciones de los taludes, si existen desplazamientos de estos taludes? De ser así, solicito copias de dicho estudio, el suscrito pagaría el costo de las copias". Ante esa gestión, el Ministerio de Salud procedió a informarle lo siguiente: "Sí, se cuenta. La empresa trimestralmente realiza estas mediciones, las que se incluyen en el Informe Mensual de Labores correspondiente y reporta, de haberlas, las anomalías". Al respecto, se constata que el Ministerio recurrido sí respondió ese punto de la gestión, alegando que sí cuenta con dichas mediciones, pero omitió entregar copia de los mismos o explicar las razones por las cuáles no puede entregar esa información. Nótese que el recurrente explícitamente indicó “de ser así, solicito copias de dicho estudio, el suscrito pagaría el costo de las copias”, pero se reitera que la autoridad recurrida hizo caso omiso de esta solicitud. Por consiguiente, respecto a este punto, se constata una lesión a sus derechos fundamentales. Por tanto: Se declara parcialmente con lugar el recurso únicamente por la falta de atención al punto 4 de la solicitud de información del 28 de noviembre de 2025 del recurrente. En consecuencia, se ordena a Mary Denisse Munive Angermuller, en su condición de ministra de Salud, o a quien ocupe el cargo, tomar las medidas correspondientes y en el ámbito de sus competencias, para que, en un plazo no mayor a diez días contados a partir de la notificación de esta sentencia, atienda en su totalidad el punto 4 de la solicitud de información del 28 de noviembre de 2025 del recurrente, y se le entregue la información solicitada.

Pull quotesCitas destacadas

"el derecho de petición garantiza recibir respuesta, no que esta satisfaga la expectativa de quien gestiona."

"the right to petition guarantees receiving a response, not that it satisfies the petitioner's expectations."

Considerando IV

"el derecho de petición garantiza recibir respuesta, no que esta satisfaga la expectativa de quien gestiona."

Considerando IV

"Al respecto, se constata que el Ministerio recurrido sí respondió ese punto de la gestión, alegando que sí cuenta con dichas mediciones, pero omitió entregar copia de los mismos o explicar las razones por las cuáles no puede entregar esa información."

"In this regard, it is found that the respondent Ministry did answer that point of the request, claiming that it does have such measurements, but it omitted to provide copies or explain the reasons why it cannot provide that information."

Considerando V

"Al respecto, se constata que el Ministerio recurrido sí respondió ese punto de la gestión, alegando que sí cuenta con dichas mediciones, pero omitió entregar copia de los mismos o explicar las razones por las cuáles no puede entregar esa información."

Considerando V

"Se declara parcialmente con lugar el recurso únicamente por la falta de atención al punto 4 de la solicitud de información del 28 de noviembre de 2025 del recurrente."

"The appeal is declared partially granted only for the failure to address point 4 of the petitioner's November 28, 2025, information request."

Por tanto

"Se declara parcialmente con lugar el recurso únicamente por la falta de atención al punto 4 de la solicitud de información del 28 de noviembre de 2025 del recurrente."

Por tanto

"El magistrado Castillo Víquez pone nota. El Magistrado Cruz Castro salva el voto, únicamente en relación con el artículo 41 constitucional."

"Magistrate Castillo Víquez appends a note. Magistrate Cruz Castro dissents, solely in relation to Article 41 of the Constitution."

Por tanto

"El magistrado Castillo Víquez pone nota. El Magistrado Cruz Castro salva el voto, únicamente en relación con el artículo 41 constitucional."

Por tanto

Full documentDocumento completo

Document Review CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at nine thirty hours on the twenty-second of May of two thousand twenty-six.

Amparo action filed by Nombre01, identification card CED01, against the MINISTRY OF HEALTH.

Findings:

1By a document received at the Secretariat of the Chamber on December 17, 2025, the petitioner files an amparo action against the MINISTRY OF HEALTH and states that the Río Azul Sanitary Landfill operated from the beginning of 1970 until its closure, ordered by the Ministry of Health on July 31, 2025. He argues that said closure was carried out without a technical basis and without having completed the works intended for its technical closure. He states that, despite the fact that interventions were required to prevent impacts on future generations, the respondent ministry ordered the closure under conditions that were not optimal for the residents of the area. He adds that upon inspecting the leachate treatment plant, it was verified that it was not functioning under the conditions for which it was built, since said liquids are being discharged directly into the Churuca creek. He comments that the regulation on Sanitary Landfills No. 38928-S empowers the respondent ministry to conduct a cross-check of the reports submitted by the private company responsible for the maintenance of the works.For this reason, on November 28, 2025, he filed a petition regarding the situation of the Río Azul Sanitary Landfill. Thus, in that petition, he requested information from the Minister of Health about the cross-check that the Ministry is required by regulation to have for better control within the site and thereby prevent environmental contamination from leachate. In said complaint, it is observed that the protected party requested: “(…) Also, Madam Minister, the undersigned wishes to take this opportunity to respectfully request that the following information be provided to me. · What is the total amount that the Ministry of Health has paid to the company WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción under the contract ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACT NO. DM-HC-0453-2021, PUBLIC TENDER NO. 2020LN-000003-0013600001 "CONTRACTING OF SERVICES AND MAINTENANCE WORKS SUBSEQUENT TO THE CLOSURE OF THE RÍO AZUL SANITARY LANDFILL," up to today, including the price adjustments approved and paid by this Ministry? · I request the 2024 and 2025 laboratory analyses, carried out at the site's treatment plant, as well as from the monitoring wells and the receiving body of the effluent from the leachate treatment system. · This analysis will include the following parameters: Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Hydrogen Potential (pH), Total Solids (TS), Total Chromium (Cr), Lead (Pb), Mercury (Hg), Nickel (Ni), Electrical Conductivity, Cadmium (Cd), Chlorides, Nitrate (NO3), Nitrites (NO2), Total Organic Carbon.Likewise, Article 40 of the regulation on sanitary landfills states the following: · Article 40°- The Ministry of Health may, when it considers it appropriate, carry out sampling and analyses, both of the effluent from the leachate treatment system and of its receiving body, the groundwater monitoring wells, and the gas emissions, as a cross-check. · This is the reason for the following inquiry: does the Ministry of Health have any sampling and analysis, both of the effluent from the leachate treatment system and of its receiving body, the groundwater monitoring wells, and the gas emissions, as a cross-check, of the leachate treatment plant, the vents, and the groundwater of the former Río Azul sanitary landfill? · Does this Ministry of Health, as the owner of the land where Río Azul is located, have studies measuring the slopes, whether displacements of these slopes exist? If so, I request copies of said study; the undersigned would pay the cost of the copies. · Will the Ministry of Health continue contracting WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción through addenda, knowing that the original contract ended in May 2025 and that the last one expires on November 30, 2025, or will it carry out a new bidding process, and by what date? · What is the name of the security company that is in charge of the security of the Río Azul sanitary landfill? · Which is the laboratory responsible for carrying out the analysis of the leachate from the groundwater, as well as the gases emanating from said landfill? · Does the Institutional Procurement Office of the Ministry of Health have a copy of the agreement of the INTERMUNICIPAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT (CONVENIO COOPERATIVO INTERMUNICIPAL, COCIM) by which the lands owned by them within the Río Azul sanitary landfill are donated to the Ministry of Health?(…) This is why I ask the following: is Engineer Jorge Boza Quesada still involved in the decisions made about the Río Azul sanitary landfill? From the year 2000 until 2020, the representatives of the Ministry of Health before SETENA were the Engineer brothers, Jorge Boza Quesada and Marvin Boza Quesada, rendering said appointment akin to a monopoly; I ask you, is the same system of appointing these brothers to SETENA still maintained, or have other officials been appointed in their place?” (see evidence provided). He claims that, by official communication CARTA-HT-DM3306-2025 dated December 10, 2025, the Minister merely referred the complaint to the questioned official, without resolving the substance of the matter or ordering the corresponding opening, archiving, or processing. He accuses that, at the time of filing this proceeding, he had not received a response. He adds that the report submitted by SETENA in October 2025 points out a series of deficiencies at the site, compounded by contamination from leachate and water seepage on the hillside.He requests the following: “Based on the foregoing, I request the Honorable Constitutional Chamber to DECLARE WITH MERIT this Amparo Action and order the Minister of Health to respond and provide the information requested on November 28, 2025, as well as the award of damages and losses, and the procedural and personal costs corresponding by law.”
2By resolution at 13:30 on December 2025, this Court issued the order setting the course of proceedings for this matter.
3Mary Denisse Munive Angermuller, in her capacity as Minister of Health, reports under oath (report rendered on January 09, 2026), in the following terms: “LEGAL REPORT By electronic communication dated Friday, December 19, 2025, at 12:17 hours, through official communication MS-DSA-UGSA-438-2025, dated December 18, 2025, signed by Eng. Ricardo Morales, A.i. Head of the Environmental Health Management Unit, a response was made to the petitioner Nombre01, at the electronic address ...01, to the inquiries raised, which were the grounds for the amparo action before us. CONCLUSION: Having processed and responded to the information request required by the protected party in a timely manner, on December 19, 2025, through official communication MS-DSA-UGSA438-2025, dated December 18, 2025, signed by Eng. Ricardo Morales, A.i. Head of the Environmental Health Management Unit; with the customary due respect, the Honorable Magistrates are asked to consider the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 52 of the Law on Constitutional Jurisdiction, which indicates the following: ‘If, during the course of the amparo, an administrative or judicial resolution is issued that revokes, halts, or suspends the challenged action, the action shall be declared with merit solely for purposes of compensation and costs, if they are applicable.’ This administration acknowledges that the applicability or inapplicability of compensation and costs depends on an assessment, evaluation, or consideration by the Constitutional Court; however, it should be noted that, for the case of this Amparo Action, the content of the petitioner's claim and the Administration's conduct suggest that any impairment, injury, or alteration does not refer in any way to a patrimonial repercussion.As indicated, it is requested that it be considered that the respondent authority has remedied the eventual violation that occurred, giving a timely response to Mr. Nombre01, as the Honorable Constitutional Court has already proceeded in similar situations (see in this regard judgment No. 2021014433 at 9:15 hours on June 25, 2021).” She requests that the filed action be declared without merit.
4By a document received at the Secretariat of the Chamber on December 17, 2025, the petitioner replies to the report rendered and reiterates his allegations. He adds that the respective information was not delivered to him in a timely manner or in its entirety.
5The legal requirements have been observed in the proceedings followed.

Drafted by Magistrate Araya García; and,

Considering:

I.Object of the amparo action. The petitioner claims a violation of his fundamental rights, as he states that on November 28, 2025, he filed a complaint and a request for information concerning the Río Azul Sanitary Landfill. He accuses that, nevertheless, to date, his complaint has not been processed nor has the requested information been provided.

II.Proven facts. Of importance for the decision in this matter, the following facts are deemed duly demonstrated, either because they have been accredited or because the respondent may have omitted to refer to them as provided in the initial order:

a)On November 28, 2025, the petitioner filed a petition before the Ministry of Health where he questions situations related to a Public Tender concerning the management of the Río Azul Sanitary Landfill. Thus, in said document, he indicated the following: “As you can observe according to the chronology presented, as well as Official Communication MS-DPRSA-USA-2540-2024, dated December 16, 2024, signed by Engineers Ricardo Morales Vargas, A.i. Director of the DPRSA, and Engineer Carlos Manuel Pérez Lizano of the Environmental Health Unit, the Ministry of Health was already aware of the expiration of the Río Azul contract (…) The current contract: your subordinates knew of its expiration since before December 2024, more than a year ago, and they allowed it to expire to continue once again with the company WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción on the site without promoting a Public Tender, which would be the healthiest and most transparent course for the Ministry of Health, but the officials have done quite the opposite; they have dedicated themselves to requesting addenda, of which the last one expires on November 30, 2025, and another addendum would go against the Procurement Law.

This is why the question arises: Will the Madam Minister of Health allow them to continue contracting this company that has been on the site since 2007, without promoting a Public Tender, as ordered by the Procurement Law, or will she allow our rule of law to continue to be violated? (…) The community neighboring the site respectfully requests that you intervene in said process, so that your officials do not favor the company WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción once again; that the officials in charge of administering said contract be ordered by you to begin the Public Tender process, which would be the most transparent for your Ministry. The community is requesting, Madam Minister, transparency from some of your officials, and the only thing we ask with all due respect is that the Ministry of Health initiate the Public Tender process for the maintenance works of the Río Azul Sanitary Landfill (…) I ask you, Madam Minister, to intervene in this process as it goes against the procedures that govern us.

With all due respect, I ask you to consult the process in which, in 2019, the Office of the Comptroller General of the Republic (CGR) had to intervene because your subordinates did everything possible to contract the same company directly; the 2015 contract had just expired, and they processed procedures to contract them, but the CGR rejected the petition and forced them to carry out the contracting process through a Public Tender” (see the report rendered and the evidence provided).

b)Likewise, in the same petition of November 28, 2025, the petitioner requested the following information from the Ministry of Health: “(…) Also, Madam Minister, the undersigned wishes to take this opportunity to respectfully request that the following information be provided to me. · What is the total amount that the Ministry of Health has paid to the company WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción under the contract ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACT NO. DM-HC-0453-2021, PUBLIC TENDER NO. 2020LN-000003-0013600001 "CONTRACTING OF SERVICES AND MAINTENANCE WORKS SUBSEQUENT TO THE CLOSURE OF THE RÍO AZUL SANITARY LANDFILL," up to today, including the price adjustments approved and paid by this Ministry? · I request the 2024 and 2025 laboratory analyses, carried out at the site's treatment plant, as well as from the monitoring wells and the receiving body of the effluent from the leachate treatment system. · This analysis will include the following parameters: Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Hydrogen Potential (pH), Total Solids (TS), Total Chromium (Cr), Lead (Pb), Mercury (Hg), Nickel (Ni), Electrical Conductivity, Cadmium (Cd), Chlorides, Nitrate (NO3), Nitrites (NO2), Total Organic Carbon.

Likewise, Article 40 of the regulation on sanitary landfills states the following: · Article 40°- The Ministry of Health may, when it considers it appropriate, carry out sampling and analyses, both of the effluent from the leachate treatment system and of its receiving body, the groundwater monitoring wells, and the gas emissions, as a cross-check. · This is the reason for the following inquiry: does the Ministry of Health have any sampling and analysis, both of the effluent from the leachate treatment system and of its receiving body, the groundwater monitoring wells, and the gas emissions, as a cross-check, of the leachate treatment plant, the vents, and the groundwater of the former Río Azul sanitary landfill? · Does this Ministry of Health, as the owner of the land where Río Azul is located, have studies measuring the slopes, whether displacements of these slopes exist? If so, I request copies of said study; the undersigned would pay the cost of the copies. · Will the Ministry of Health continue contracting WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción through addenda, knowing that the original contract ended in May 2025 and that the last one expires on November 30, 2025, or will it carry out a new bidding process, and by what date? · What is the name of the security company that is in charge of the security of the Río Azul sanitary landfill? · Which is the laboratory responsible for carrying out the analysis of the leachate from the groundwater, as well as the gases emanating from said landfill? · Does the Institutional Procurement Office of the Ministry of Health have a copy of the agreement of the INTERMUNICIPAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT (CONVENIO COOPERATIVO INTERMUNICIPAL, COCIM) by which the lands owned by them within the Río Azul sanitary landfill are donated to the Ministry of Health?

(…) This is why I ask the following: is Engineer Jorge Boza Quesada still involved in the decisions made about the Río Azul sanitary landfill? From the year 2000 until 2020, the representatives of the Ministry of Health before SETENA were the Engineer brothers, Jorge Boza Quesada and Marvin Boza Quesada, rendering said appointment akin to a monopoly; I ask you, is the same system of appointing these brothers to SETENA still maintained, or have other officials been appointed in their place?” (see the report rendered and the evidence provided).

c)Through official communication no. MS-DSA-UGSA-438-2025 dated December 18, 2025, the head of the Environmental Health Management Unit of the Ministry of Health responded to the petitioner as follows: “In relation to CARTA-HT-DM-3306-2025 ‘Presentation of the Río Azul landfill case by Mr. Nombre01,’ the following is reported: (…) R/ We inform you that attached to this communication is the Excel file named ‘Complete Report of processed invoices from WPP’ prepared by the Administrative Division - Financial Directorate of Goods and Services, which details what was requested by you (…) 1- Information corresponding to the state oversight actions carried out in accordance with the provisions of Article 38 of Executive Decree No. 44421-S, Regulations for environmental parks for the separation, treatment, utilization, and final disposal of solid waste, executed by this Directorate during the years 2023 and 2024, is attached. 2- Regarding the Operational Reports submitted by the operator, summary tables of the laboratory analyses are shared, the information for which is extracted from the System for the Registration of Operational Reports on Wastewaters (Sistema para el registro de reportes operacionales de aguas residuales, SIRROAR) supported by Article 5 of the Regulation on the Discharge and Reuse of Wastewaters No. 33601-S-MINAE of August 9, 2006.

Table 1: General information on the reports, periods 2024 - 2025. Source: SIRROAR Table 1: General information on the reports, periods 2024 - 2025. Source: SIRROAR Table 2: Dates and laboratory that performed the samplings. Source: SIRROAR Table 3: Parameters entered into the operational report registration system. Source: SIRROAR Entered Date Created Date Ticket No. Operational Rep. No. Frequency Period From Period To 29/1/2024 29/1/2024 15-2024 2 SEMIANNUAL 1/7/2023 31/12/2023 1/8/2024 1/8/2024 80-2024 1 SEMIANNUAL 1/1/2024 30/6/2024 18/1/2025 18/1/2025 .03-2025 2 SEMIANNUAL 1/7/2024 31/12/2024 1/8/2025 1/8/2025 60-2025 1 SEMIANNUAL 1/1/2025 30/6/2025. Table 2: Dates and laboratory that performed the samplings. Source: SIRROAR Table 3: Parameters entered into the operational report registration system. Source: SIRROAR Entered Date Created Date Ticket No. Operational Rep. No. Frequency Period From Period To 29/1/2024 29/1/2024 15-2024 2 SEMIANNUAL 1/7/2023 31/12/2023 1/8/2024 1/8/2024 80-2024 1 SEMIANNUAL 1/1/2024 30/6/2024 18/1/2025 18/1/2025 .03-2025 2 SEMIANNUAL 1/7/2024 31/12/2024 1/8/2025 1/8/2025 60-2025 1 SEMIANNUAL 1/1/2025 30/6/2025 Operational Rep.

No. Frequency Period From Period ToName Chemical Laboratory Num Chem Lab Analysis 2 SEMIANNUAL 1/7/2023 31/12/2023 LABORATORIO AQYLASA 15122023.1 1 SEMIANNUAL 1/1/2024 30/6/2024 LABORATORIO AQYLASA 14062024.1 2 SEMIANNUAL 1/7/2024 31/12/2024 LABORATORIO AQYLASA 19122024.1 1 SEMIANNUAL 1/1/2025 30/6/2025 LABORATORIO AQYLASA 13062025.2 Flowrate BOD5 TSS S Sed FOG SAAM Temp pH COD 3680 87 15 0 5 5 25 80 76 364.8 39 86 0 5 0.5 22 8.4 418 410 2 5 0 5 5 24 78 29 187.7 166 48 0 5 5 25 86 545 (…) Heavy metals are reported through the Monthly Work Reports, corresponding to the contract. The report for the month of September 2025 is shown as an example (…) R/ Yes, see response to point 2, which indicates the analyses and parameters evaluated (…) R/ Yes, they exist. The company performs these measurements quarterly, which are included in the corresponding Monthly Work Report and reports anomalies, if any (…) R/ The Public Tender 2020LN-000003-0013600001 called ‘Contratación de servicios y obras de mantenimiento posteriores al cierre del Relleno Sanitario Río Azul,’ Contract DM-HC0453-2021 and its addenda ended last November of this year.

The Ministry of Health is in the process of conducting a new tender, which is under the legality of the General Public Procurement Law No. 9986 and its regulations (…) R/ The security company that was at the Río Azul Sanitary Landfill under Public Tender 2020LN-000003-0013600001 is Continental Security Group S.A., and the Central North Regional Directorate of the Public Force is also present, having been granted space in the landfill facilities under an Interinstitutional Agreement (…) R/ In the attached documents, it is observed that these have been carried out by the CHEMLABS laboratory during the State Oversight conducted by the Ministry of Health. The regular monitoring conducted by the company contracts the AQYLASA laboratory. The gases emanating from the landfill are not monitored in terms of regular laboratory reports; in previous years and as part of a specific study, they were carried out by the National University (…) R/ Yes, the Ministry of Health indeed has a copy of said Agreement, which is attached for your information (…) R/ Since late 2019, Engineer Boza has been assigned to the Plenary Commission of SETENA and does not handle matters of the Environmental Health Directorate in relation to the Río Azul Sanitary Landfill (…) R/ Eng.

Marvin Boza has not been part of this Ministry of Health since 2022, and as previously indicated, Eng. Jorge Boza is assigned by this Ministry of Health as a member of the Plenary Commission of SETENA.” The foregoing was communicated to the petitioner on December 19, 2025, via the medium indicated for that purpose (see the report rendered and the evidence provided).

d)On December 30, 2025, the order setting the course of proceedings was notified to the respondent authority (see notification record).

III.On the merits. The specific inquiries formulated by the protected party and the responses provided by the respondent party will now be analyzed, in order to determine whether each of these was fully addressed or not, as required.

What was requested Whether what was requested is amenable to amparo or not Whether what was requested was or was not addressed “What is the total amount that the Ministry of Health has paid to the company WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción under the contract ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACT NO. DM-HC-0453-2021, PUBLIC TENDER NO. 2020LN-000003-0013600001 "CONTRACTING OF SERVICES AND MAINTENANCE WORKS SUBSEQUENT TO THE CLOSURE OF THE RÍO AZUL SANITARY LANDFILL," up to today, including the price adjustments approved and paid by this Ministry?” Yes, it is amenable to amparo.

Yes, through official communication no. MS-DSA-UGSA-438-2025 dated December 18, 2025, notified to the petitioner prior to the notification of the order setting the course of proceedings for this amparo action.

“I request the 2024 and 2025 laboratory analyses, carried out at the site's treatment plant, as well as from the monitoring wells and the receiving body of the effluent from the leachate treatment system. · This analysis will include the following parameters: Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Hydrogen Potential (pH), Total Solids (TS), Total Chromium (Cr), Lead (Pb), Mercury (Hg), Nickel (Ni), Electrical Conductivity, Cadmium (Cd), Chlorides, Nitrate (NO3), Nitrites (NO2), Total Organic Carbon.” Yes, it is amenable to amparo.

“does the Ministry of Health have any sampling and analysis, both of the effluent from the leachate treatment system and of its receiving body, the groundwater monitoring wells, and the gas emissions, as a cross-check, of the leachate treatment plant, the vents, and the groundwater of the former Río Azul sanitary landfill?” Yes, it is amenable to amparo.

“Does this Ministry of Health, as the owner of the land where Río Azul is located, have studies measuring the slopes, whether displacements of these slopes exist? If so, I request copies of said study” Yes, it is amenable to amparo.

It has not been addressed in its entirety.

“Will the Ministry of Health continue contracting WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción through addenda, knowing that the original contract ended in May 2025 and that the last one expires on November 30, 2025, or will it carry out a new bidding process, and by what date?” Yes, it is amenable to amparo.

“What is the name of the security company that is in charge of the security of the Río Azul sanitary landfill?” Yes, it is amenable to amparo.

“Which is the laboratory responsible for carrying out the analysis of the leachate from the groundwater, as well as the gases emanating from said landfill?” Yes, it is amenable to amparo.

“Does the Institutional Procurement Office of the Ministry of Health have a copy of the agreement of the INTERMUNICIPAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT (CONVENIO COOPERATIVO INTERMUNICIPAL, COCIM) by which the lands owned by them within the Río Azul sanitary landfill are donated to the Ministry of Health?” Yes, it is amenable to amparo.

“is Engineer Jorge Boza Quesada still involved in the decisions made about the Río Azul sanitary landfill?” Yes, it is amenable to amparo.

“From the year 2000 until 2020, the representatives of the Ministry of Health before SETENA were the Engineer brothers, Jorge Boza Quesada and Marvin Boza Quesada, rendering said appointment akin to a monopoly; I ask you, is the same system of appointing these brothers to SETENA still maintained, or have other officials been appointed in their place?”” Yes, it is amenable to amparo.

IV.Regarding the information request of November 28, 2025. After analyzing the evidentiary elements provided, this Court verifies that there has been no violation of the fundamental rights of the appellant regarding this point. The foregoing, because in the report rendered by the representative of the respondent authority—which is taken as given under oath with the consequences, including criminal ones, provided for in Article 44 of the Law governing this Jurisdiction—and the evidence provided for the resolution of the matter, it has been duly accredited that in the management of November 28, 2025, the appellant requested the following information from the Ministry of Health: “(…) Likewise, Madam Minister, the undersigned wishes to take this opportunity to respectfully request that the following information be provided to me. · What is the total amount that the Ministry of Health has paid to the company WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción for the contract CONTRATO ADMINISTRATIVO N° DM-HC-0453- 2021, LICITACION PUBLICA N° 2020LN- 000003-0013600001 "CONTRATCION DE SERVICIOS Y OBRAS DE MANTENIMIENTO POSTERIORES AL CIERRE DEL RELLENO SANITARIO RIO AZUL," up to today, including the price adjustments approved and paid by this Ministry? · I request the 2024 and 2025 laboratory analyses conducted at the site's treatment plant, as well as from the monitoring wells and the receiving body of the effluent from the leachate treatment system. · This analysis will include the following parameters: Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) Hydrogen Potential (pH) Total Solids (TS) Total Chromium (Cr) Lead (Pb) Mercury (Hg) Nickel (Ni) Electrical Conductivity.

Cadmium (Cd) Chlorides. Nitrate (NO3) Nitrites (NO2) Total Organic Carbon. Likewise, Article 40 of the sanitary landfill regulation (reglamento de rellenos sanitarios) mentions the following; · Article 40°- The Ministry of Health may, when it deems convenient, carry out sampling and analysis, both of the effluent from the leachate treatment system and of its receiving body, the groundwater monitoring wells, and gas emissions, as cross-control. · Therefore, the following query: does the Ministry of Health have any sampling and analysis, both of the effluent from the leachate treatment system and of its receiving body, the groundwater monitoring wells, and gas emissions, as cross-control, from the leachate treatment plant, the vents, and the groundwater of the former Rio Azul sanitary landfill? · Does this Ministry of Health, as the owner of the land where Rio Azul is located, have slope measurement studies, and do any displacements of these slopes exist?

If so, I request copies of said study; the undersigned would pay the cost of the copies. · Will the Ministry of Health continue contracting WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción through addenda, knowing that the original contract ended in May 2025 and that the latest one expires on November 30, 2025, or will it carry out a new bidding process, and by what date? · What is the name of the security company in charge of the security of the Rio Azul sanitary landfill? · Which laboratory is responsible for carrying out the analyses of the leachate from the groundwater, as well as the gases emanating from said landfill? · Does the Institutional Procurement Office of the Ministry of Health have a copy of the INTER-MUNICIPAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT (CONVENIO COOPERATIVO INTERMUNICIPAL, COCIM) agreement by which the lands owned by it within the Rio Azul sanitary landfill are donated to the Ministry of Health?

(…) That is why I ask the following: is Engineer Jorge Boza Quesada still involved in the decisions made about the Rio Azul sanitary landfill? From the year 2000 until 2020, the representatives of the Ministry of Health before SETENA were the Engineer brothers, Jorge Boza Quesada and Marvin Boza Quesada, turning said appointment into something resembling a monopoly. I ask you, is the same appointment system for these brothers maintained before SETENA, or have other officials been appointed in their place?”. Thus, prior to the notification of the resolution of course, through official letter no. MS-DSA-UGSA-438-2025 of December 18, 2025, the head of the Environmental Health Management Unit of the Ministry of Health responded to the appellant as follows: “In relation to CARTA-HT-DM-3306-2025 ‘Presentation of the Rio Azul landfill case by Mr. Nombre01’, the following is reported: (…) R/ We inform you that the Excel file with the file name ‘Reporte Completo de facturas tramitadas de WPP’ prepared by the Administrative Division - Financial Directorate of Goods and Services, detailing what you requested, is attached to this official letter (…) 1- Information corresponding to the state oversight actions carried out in accordance with the provisions of Article 38 of Decreto Ejecutivo N.° 44421-S, Reglamento de parques ambientales para la separación, tratamiento, aprovechamiento y disposición final de residuos sólidos, executed by this Directorate during the years 2023 and 2024, is attached. 2- Regarding the Operational Reports submitted by the operator, summary tables of the laboratory analyses are shared, the information of which is extracted from the System for the Registration of Operational Reports of Wastewater (Sistema para el registro de reportes operacionales de aguas residuales, SIRROAR), supported by Article 5 of the Reglamento de Vertido y Reúso de Aguas Residuales N.°33601-S-MINAE of August 9, 2006.

Table 1: General information of the reports, periods 2024 - 2025. Source: SIRROAR Table 1: General information of the reports, periods 2024 - 2025. Source: SIRROAR Table 2: Dates and laboratory that performed the sampling. Source: SIRROAR Table 3: Parameters entered into the operational report registration system. Source: SIRROAR Fec Ingreso Fec Creado No. Boleta No. Rep. Operacional Frecuencia Periodo De Periodo Hasta 29/1/2024 29/1/2024 15-2024 2 SEMESTRAL 1/7/2023 31/12/2023 1/8/2024 1/8/2024 80-2024 1 SEMESTRAL 1/1/2024 30/6/2024 18/1/2025 18/1/2025 .03-2025 2 SEMESTRAL 1/7/2024 31/12/2024 1/8/2025 1/8/2025 60-2025 1 SEMESTRAL 1/1/2025 30/6/2025. Table 2: Dates and laboratory that performed the sampling. Source: SIRROAR Table 3: Parameters entered into the operational report registration system. Source: SIRROAR Fec Ingreso Fec Creado No. Boleta No. Rep. Operacional Frecuencia Periodo De Periodo Hasta 29/1/2024 29/1/2024 15-2024 2 SEMESTRAL 1/7/2023 31/12/2023 1/8/2024 1/8/2024 80-2024 1 SEMESTRAL 1/1/2024 30/6/2024 18/1/2025 18/1/2025 .03-2025 2 SEMESTRAL 1/7/2024 31/12/2024 1/8/2025 1/8/2025 60-2025 1 SEMESTRAL 1/1/2025 30/6/2025 No. Rep.

Operacional Frecuencia Periodo De Periodo HastaNombre Laboratorio Químico Num Analisis Lab Qui 2 SEMESTRAL 1/7/2023 31/12/2023 LABORATORIO AQYLASA 15122023.1 1 SEMESTRAL 1/1/2024 30/6/2024 LABORATORIO AQYLASA 14062024.1 2 SEMESTRAL 1/7/2024 31/12/2024 LABORATORIO AQYLASA 19122024.1 1 SEMESTRAL 1/1/2025 30/6/2025 LABORATORIO AQYLASA 13062025.2 Caudal Dbo5 Sst S Sed Gya Saam Temp Ph Dqo 3680 87 15 0 5 5 25 80 76 364,8 39 86 0 5 0,5 22 8,4 418 410 2 5 0 5 5 24 78 29 187,7 166 48 0 5 5 25 86 545 (…) Heavy metals are reported through the Monthly Work Reports, corresponding to the contract. The report corresponding to the month of September 2025 is shown as an example (…) R/ Yes, see response to point 2, where the analyses and parameters evaluated are indicated (…) R/ Yes, they are available. The company performs these measurements quarterly, which are included in the corresponding Monthly Work Report and reports anomalies, if any (…) R/ The Licitación Pública 2020LN-000003-0013600001 called “Contratación de servicios y obras de mantenimiento posteriores al cierre del Relleno Sanitario Río Azul”, Contract DM-HC0453-2021 and its addenda ended last November of this year.

The Ministry of Health is in the process of conducting a new tender, which is under the legality of the Ley General de Contratación Pública N° 9986 and its regulation (…) R/ The security company that was at the Rio Azul Sanitary Landfill under the Licitación Pública 2020LN-000003-0013600001 is Continental Security Group S.A., and the North Central Regional Directorate of the Public Force is also present, to which space has been ceded in the landfill facilities under the figure of an Inter-institutional Agreement (…) R/ In the attached documents, it is observed that they have been performed by the CHEMLABS laboratory during the State Oversight carried out by the Ministry of Health. The regular monitoring performed by the company is contracted to the AQYLASA laboratory. The gases emanating from the landfill are not monitored regularly in terms of laboratory reports; in previous years and as part of a particular study, they were carried out by the Universidad Nacional (…) R/ Yes, the Ministry of Health indeed has a copy of said Agreement, which is attached for your knowledge (…) R/ Since the end of 2019, Engineer Boza has been assigned to the Plenary Commission of SETENA and does not handle Environmental Health Directorate matters related to the Rio Azul Sanitary Landfill (…) R/ Ing. Marvin Boza has no longer been part of this Ministry of Health since 2022, and as previously indicated, Ing. Jorge Boza is assigned by this Ministry of Health as a member of the Plenary Commission of SETENA”. The foregoing was communicated to the appellant on December 19, 2025, to the means indicated for that purpose.

In this sense, it is verified that the Ministry of Health responded to and delivered the information requested by the appellant prior to the notification of the resolution of course for practically all the requested items, that is, without the intervention of this Court. Thus, as almost all inquiries were answered and the information delivered, harm to the fundamental rights of the appellant is ruled out.

In any case, the appellant questions this response by disagreeing with the chemical results reports delivered or by indicating that data on the amounts paid to the company are missing or that there has been a lack of adequate oversight by the Ministry of Health in the response given. In this regard, this Constitutional Chamber considers that the party's disagreement with the content of what was delivered does not transform the response into a fundamental rights violation. This is because it must be remembered that the right to petition guarantees receiving a response, not that it satisfies the expectation of the person making the request. Here, the response existed, was congruent with what was requested, and was accompanied by documentary evidence. Accordingly, the grievance alleged by the appellant is reduced to dissatisfaction with the response provided. Therefore, if the petitioner considers that there are specific omissions, this must be channeled before the same ministry or through ordinary proceedings.

However, as indicated, the Ministry of Health responded to and delivered the information requested by the appellant for practically all the requested items, except one: point 4 of the appellant's management, which will be analyzed in the next consideration.

V.Regarding point 4 of the information request of November 28, 2025. On this matter, it is noted that in point 4 of his information request, the appellant requested the following: “Does this Ministry of Health, as the owner of the land where Rio Azul is located, have slope measurement studies, and do any displacements of these slopes exist? If so, I request copies of said study; the undersigned would pay the cost of the copies.” In response to this management, the Ministry of Health proceeded to inform him of the following: “Yes, they are available. The company performs these measurements quarterly, which are included in the corresponding Monthly Work Report and reports anomalies, if any.” In this regard, it is verified that the respondent Ministry did respond to that point of the management, alleging that it does have such measurements, but it omitted to deliver copies of the same or explain the reasons why it cannot deliver that information. Note that the appellant explicitly stated “if so, I request copies of said study, the undersigned would pay the cost of the copies,” but it is reiterated that the respondent authority ignored this request. Consequently, regarding this point, a violation of his fundamental rights is verified.

VI.Regarding the complaint concerning the public tender related to the management of the Río Azul Sanitary Landfill. On the other hand, it is verified that, in the same management of November 28, 2025, the appellant also questions situations concerning a Public Tender related to the management of the Río Azul Sanitary Landfill. Thus, in said document, he indicated the following: “As you can observe according to the chronology presented, as well as Oficio MS-DPRSA-USA-2540-2024, dated December 16, 2024, signed by the Engineers, Ricardo Morales Vargas, Director a.i. of the DPRSA and Engineer Carlos Manuel Pérez Lizano of the Environmental Health Unit, the Ministry of Health was already clear about the expiration of the Rio Azul contract (…) The current contract, your subordinates knew of its expiration since before December 2024, more than a year ago, and they allowed it to expire to continue again with the company WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción, on the site without promoting a Public Tender, which would be the healthiest and most transparent thing for the Ministry of Health, but the officials have done the complete opposite, they have dedicated themselves to requesting addenda, of which the latest one expires on November 30, 2025, and another addendum would go against the Contracting Law.

That is why the question arises: will the Madam Minister of Health allow them to continue contracting this company that has been on the site since the year 2007, without promoting a Public Tender, as ordered by the Contracting Law, or will she allow our rule of law to continue being violated? (…) The community neighboring the site respectfully requests that you intervene in said process, so that your officials do not once again favor the company WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción, that the officials in charge of administering said contract be ordered by you to start the Public Tender process, which would be the most transparent thing for your Ministry. The community is requesting, Madam Minister, transparency from some of your officials, and the only thing we respectfully ask is that the Ministry of Health initiate the Public Tender process for the maintenance works of the Rio Azul Sanitary Landfill (…) I ask you, Madam Minister, to intervene in said process as it goes against the procedures that govern us.

With due respect, I ask you to consult the process in which, in the year 2019, the CGR had to intervene because your subordinates did everything possible to contract the same company directly. The 2015 contract had just expired; they made the arrangements to contract them, but the CGR rejected the management and forced them to carry out the contracting process through Public Tender.”

In this regard, it is noted that this part of the management is not a pure and simple information request, but rather is a complaint referring to a Public Tender related to the management of the Río Azul Sanitary Landfill, for which reason it exhorts the Ministry of Health to act on said situation. Note that the appellant questions a possible mismanagement of the tender contract that has favored a particular company, that is, it is not an environmental complaint per se. Therefore, if the appellant considers that said management has not been addressed within a reasonable period, it is indicated to him that, should such a delay exist, the matter raised would constitute a possible violation of the provisions of Article 41 of the Political Constitution, a reason for which this claim is inadmissible, in accordance with the following considerations.

VII. NEW ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE

A SWIFT AND EFFECTIVE MECHANISM FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE SUBSTANTIAL LEGAL SITUATIONS OF THE ADMINISTERED. The Constitutional Chamber, since its founding, has used broad admissibility criteria in view of the absence of expedite and swift procedural channels for the protection of substantial legal situations that are grounded in the infra-constitutional legal system or parameter of legality, which have an indirect connection with fundamental rights and the Law of the Constitution. In this regard, it should not be lost from perspective that the Constitution, due to its supremacy, super-legality, and direct and immediate efficacy, provides indirect grounding for any conceivable substantial legal situation of persons. However, under better consideration and before the enactment of the Código Procesal Contencioso-Administrativo (Code of Contentious-Administrative Procedure, Law No. 8508 of April 24, 2006) and its entry into force as of January 1, 2008, it has become clear that litigants now have a plenary and universal contentious-administrative jurisdiction, extremely expedite and swift due to the various procedural mechanisms that this legislation incorporates into the legal system, such as the shortening of deadlines to perform various procedural acts, the breadth of standing, precautionary measures, the numerus apertus of admissible claims, orality—and its sub-principles of concentration, immediacy, and celerity—the single instance with an appeal remedy in expressly limited situations, intra-procedural conciliation, the unified process, the preferential process or "recurso de amparo de legalidad," pure legal processes, new enforcement measures (coercive fines, substitute or commissarial execution, seizure of fiscal domain and some public domain assets), the broad powers of the enforcement judges, the extension and adaptation of the effects of jurisprudence to third parties, and the flexibility of the cassation appeal.

All these novel procedural institutes have as their manifest end and purpose achieving procedural economy, celerity, promptness, and the effective or fulfilled protection of the substantial legal situations of the administered, all with the guarantee of basic fundamental rights such as due process, defense, and adversarial proceedings. In sum, the new contentious-administrative jurisdiction is an ideal channel, due to its new characteristics of simplicity, celerity, and promptness, for the protection and effective safeguarding of the substantial legal situations of the administered in which it is necessary to gather evidence or define some ordinary legality issues.

VIII. VERIFICATION OF THE DEADLINES SET BY LAW FOR RESOLVING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

A MATTER OF EVIDENT ORDINARY LEGALITY. It is evident that determining whether the public administration complies or not with the deadlines set by the Ley General de la Administración Pública (General Law of Public Administration, Articles 261 and 325) or the sectoral laws for special administrative procedures, to resolve through a final act an administrative procedure—initiated ex officio or at the request of a party—or to hear the appropriate administrative remedies, is an evident matter of ordinary legality that, going forward, can be discussed and resolved before the contentious-administrative jurisdiction with the application of the principles that nourish constitutional jurisdiction, such as those of vicarious standing, the possibility of material defense—that is, appearing without legal representation—and gratuity for the appellants. Consequently, rejection de plano is imposed and the petitioning party is informed that, if they so wish, they may go to the contentious-administrative jurisdiction.

IX.Conclusion. By virtue of the foregoing, it is proper to partially grant the remedy solely for the lack of attention to point 4 of the appellant's information request of November 28, 2025. As for the rest, the remedy is denied.

X. SEPARATE NOTE BY JUDGE CASTILLO VÍQUEZ

I have supported this Court's thesis that when a litigant alleges a violation of the right to prompt and effective justice in the administrative venue, those who must hear the legal controversy are the Contentious-Administrative Tribunals and not this Chamber. However, with the recent enactment of Law n.° 9097, Ley de Regulación del Derecho de Petición (Law Regulating the Right to Petition), it has been established that this right is susceptible to judicial protection through the recurso de amparo established by Article 32 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, in relation to Article 27 of the Political Constitution of the Republic of Costa Rica, in those cases where the petitioner considers that the material actions of the Administration, its administrative acts, or its response are affecting their fundamental rights. In my view, the recently enacted regulation does not imply that this Court must modify its jurisprudential line, as it is this Court, based on numeral 7 of its Law, that is exclusively responsible for defining its own competence.

This is because legal-constitutional controversies concerning minors, the environment, salary payments, payment of benefits upon a person's retirement, non-contributory regime pensions, and cases of profound cerebral palsy, disabled persons, foreigners outside the country, potable water service, older adults when not referring to pension issues, corruption complaints, indigenous rights, claims for lack of insurance with the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, and maternity leave are matters heard by this jurisdiction through the constitutional garantía process of amparo. In all other cases, and for the reasons given in this judgment, the competent judges are those of the contentious-administrative jurisdiction, all of which is in accordance with numeral 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights, the Law of the Constitution (values, principles, and norms), and the corresponding legal norms based on a logical, systemic, and teleological interpretation of the legal system.

XI. DISSENTING VOTE BY JUDGE CRUZ CASTRO

Although in the past I have sustained the majority criterion of the Court, under a better consideration of the fundamental rights being claimed, I consider that administrative delay constitutes harm to a fundamental procedural guarantee. For this reason, I change the criterion I had expressed, admitting the possible infringement of the right to prompt and effective administrative justice, separating myself from the majority view of the Court, in the sense that—save for very few exceptions—this type of reproach must be resolved in the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. On the contrary, I consider that one of the rights this jurisdiction is called upon to protect is that of prompt and effective justice, expressly enshrined in Article 41 of the Constitution. This is in accordance with the scope of competence assigned to this Court in matters of fundamental rights protection, pursuant to the provisions of Articles 10 and 48 of the Political Constitution.

While I understand the importance of the reforms to the contentious-administrative jurisdiction since the entry into force of Law 8508 of April 24, 2006, the fact is that this situation does not justify the referral to said instance of matters that fall within the competence of this Chamber, which has demonstrated over the years that it is a swift and effective means for the protection of the fundamental rights of the country's inhabitants.

XII. DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED TO THE FILE

The parties are warned that if any document on paper has been provided, as well as objects or evidence contained in any additional electronic, computer, magnetic, optical, telematic device or one produced by new technologies, these must be withdrawn from the office within a maximum period of 30 business days counted from the notification of this judgment. Otherwise, all material not withdrawn within this period will be destroyed, in accordance with 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 in the agreement approved by the Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial, in session N° 43-12 held on May 3, 2012, Article LXXXI.

Therefore:

The remedy is partially granted solely for the lack of attention to point 4 of the appellant's information request of November 28, 2025. Consequently, Mary Denisse Munive Angermuller, in her capacity as Minister of Health, or whoever holds the position, is ordered to take the corresponding measures, within the scope of her competencies, so that, within a period not exceeding ten days counted from the notification of this judgment, she fully addresses point 4 of the appellant's information request of November 28, 2025, and provides the requested information. It is warned that the information must be provided safeguarding any sensitive data and restricted-access data protected by Article 24 of the Political Constitution and the Ley de Protección de la Persona frente al Tratamiento de sus Datos Personales, Law Nº 8968. The respondent is warned that in accordance with the provisions of Article 71 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, imprisonment of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, shall be imposed on anyone who receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in a recurso de amparo, and does not comply with it or does not enforce it, provided the crime is not more severely punished.

The State is condemned to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the events that have given rise to this declaration, which shall be liquidated in the enforcement of the ruling in the contentious-administrative forum. As for the rest, the remedy is denied. Judge Castillo Víquez makes a note. Judge Cruz Castro dissents, solely in relation to Constitutional Article 41. Notify.- Fernando Castillo V. President Fernando Cruz C.

Paul Rueda L. Luis Fdo. Salazar A.

Jorge Araya G. Anamari Garro V.

Ingrid Hess H.

Telephones: Telf01/ ALA-4TA (Telf02). Fax: Telf03 / Telf04. Electronic address: www.poder-judicial.go.cr/salaconstitucional. Address: (Dirección01, Dirección02, 100 mts. Sur de la iglesia del Perpetuo Socorro).

Revisión del Documento SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, a las nueve horas treinta minutos del veintidos de mayo de dos mil veintiseis .

Recurso de amparo interpuesto por Nombre01, cédula de identidad CED01, contra el MINISTERIO DE SALUD.

Resultando:

1Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala el 17 de diciembre de 2025, el recurrente interpone recurso de amparo contra el MINISTERIO DE SALUD y manifiesta que el Relleno Sanitario de Río Azul funcionó desde principio de 1970 hasta su cierre, dispuesto por el Ministerio de Salud el 31 de julio de 2025. Sostiene que dicha clausura se realizó sin base técnica y sin haberse concluido las obras que destinadas a su cierre técnico. Manifiesta que, a pesar de que se requerían intervenciones para evitar afectaciones a futuras generaciones, la cartera recurrida dispuso el cierre en condiciones que no eran óptimas para los vecinos de la zona. Agrega que al inspeccionar la planta de tratamiento de lixiviados se constató que esta no funcionaba bajo las condiciones para lo que fue construida, toda vez que dicho líquidos se vertiendo directamente en la quebrada Churuca. Comenta que el reglamento sobre Rellenos Sanitarios nro. 38928-S faculta al ministerio recurrido para realizar un control cruzado de los informes que presenta la empresa privada encargada del mantenimiento de las obras.Por esta razón, el 28 de noviembre de 2025 planteó una gestión sobre la situación del Relleno Sanitario Río Azul. Así, en esa gestión le solicitó información a la ministra de salud sobre el control cruzado que por reglamento el Ministerio debe de tener para un mejor control dentro del sitio y con ello evitar contaminación ambiental con los lixiviados. En dicha denuncia se observa que el tutelado solicitó: “(…) Así mismo señora Ministra, el suscrito desea aprovechar para solicitarle con el debido respeto se me entregue la siguiente información. · ¿Cuánto es el monto total que le ha cancelado el Ministerio de Salud a la empresa WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción por el contrato CONTRATO ADMINISTRATIVO N° DM-HC-0453- 2021, LICITACION PUBLICA N° 2020LN- 000003-0013600001 " CONTRATCION DE SERVICIOS Y OBRAS DE MANTENIMIENTO POSTERIORES AL CIERRE DEL RELLENO SANITARIO RIO AZUL, hasta el día de hoy, incluyendo los ajustes de precios aprobados y cancelados por este Ministerio? · Solicito los análisis de laboratorio de 2024 y 2025, practicados en la planta de tratamiento del sitio, así como de los pozos de monitoreo y del cuerpo receptor del efluente del sistema de tratamiento de lixiviados. · Este análisis incluirá los siguientes parámetros: Demanda Química de Oxígeno (DQO) Potencial Hidrógeno (pH) Sólidos Totales (ST) Cromo Total (Cr) Plomo (Pb) Mercurio (Hg) Níquel (Ni) Conductividad Eléctrica.Cadmio. (Cd) Cloruros. Nitrato. (NO3) Nitritos. (NO2) Carbono Orgnánico Total. Así mismo el articulo 40 del reglamento de rellenos sanitarios menciona lo siguiente; · Articulo 40°- El Ministerio de Salud podrá realizar cuando lo considere conveniente muestreos y análisis, tanto del efluente del sistema de tratamiento de lixiviados como de su cuerpo receptor, de los pozos de monitoreo de las aguas subterráneas y de las emanaciones de gases, como control cruzado. · Es por ello la siguiente consulta, ¿cuenta el Ministerio de Salud con algún muestreo y análisis, tanto del efluente del sistema de tratamiento de lixiviados como de su cuerpo receptor, de los pozos de monitoreo de las aguas subterráneas y de las emanaciones de gases, como control cruzado, de la planta de tratamiento de lixiviados, de las chimeneas y de las aguas subterráneas del antiguo relleno sanitario de Rio Azul? · ¿Cuenta este Ministerio de Salud como propietario del terreno donde se ubica Río Azul, estudios de mediciones de los taludes, si existen desplazamientos de estos taludes?De ser así, solicito copias de dicho estudio, el suscrito pagaría el costo de las copias · ¿El Ministerio de Salud, continuara contratando a la WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción a través de adendas, a sabiendas de que el contrato original finalizo en mayo de 2025 y que la última se les vence el 30 de noviembre de 2025, o realizara un proceso licitatorio nuevo, y para cual fecha? · ¿Cuál es el nombre de la empresa de Vigilancia que se encuentra a cargo de la seguridad del relleno sanitario de Rio Azul? · ¿Cuál es el Laboratorio encargado de realizar los análisis de los lixiviados de las aguas subterráneas, así como de los gases que emana de dicho relleno? · ¿Tiene la Proveeduría Institucional del Ministerio de Salud copia del acuerdo del CONVENIO COOPERATIVO INTERMUNICIPAL (COCIM) mediante el cual le donan los terrenos propiedad ello dentro del relleno sanitario de Río Azul al Ministerio de Salud?(…) Es por ello que consulto lo siguiente: ¿se mantiene el Ingeniero Jorge Boza Quesada dentro de las decisiones que se toman sobre el relleno sanitario Río Azul? Desde el año 2000 y hasta el 2020, el representante del Ministerio de Salud ante la SETENA fueron los hermanos Ingenieros, Jorge Boza Quesada y Marvin Boza Quesada, convirtiendo dicho nombramiento parecido a un monopolio, le consulto ¿se mantiene el mismo sistema de nombramiento de estos hermanos ante la SETENA o se ha nombrado a otros funcionarios en su lugar?” (ver prueba aportada). Reclama que, mediante oficio CARTA-HT-DM3306-2025 del 10 de diciembre de 2025, la ministra se limitó a remitir la denuncia al funcionado cuestionado, sin resolver el fondo del asunto ni disponer la apertura, archivo o trámite correspondiente. Acusa que, al momento de interposición de este proceso, no ha recibido respuesta. Agrega que el informe que presentó SETENA en octubre de 2025 señala una serie de deficiencias en el sitio, con el agravante de contaminación de lixiviados y afloramiento de aguas en la parte del cerro.Solicita lo siguiente: “Con fundamento en lo anterior, solicito a la Honorable Sala Constitucional DECLARAR CON LUGAR, el presente Recurso de Amparo y ordenar a la Ministra de Salud, a dar respuesta y brindar la información solicitada el día 28 de noviembre de 2025, así como la condenatoria en daños y perjuicios, y a las costas procesales y personales que en derecho corresponden”.
2Mediante resolución de las 13:30 de diciembre de 2025, este Tribunal dictó la resolución del curso del presente asunto.
3Informa bajo juramento Mary Denisse Munive Angermuller, en su condición de ministra de Salud (informe rendido el 09 de enero de 2026), en los siguientes términos: “INFORME DE LEY Mediante comunicación electrónica de fecha viernes 19 de diciembre del 2025, a las 12:17 horas, mediante oficio MS-DSA-UGSA-438-2025, de fecha 18 de diciembre del 2025, suscrito por el Ing. Ricardo Morales, Jefe a.i. Unidad de Gestión en Salud Ambiental, se respondió al recurrente Nombre01, a la dirección electrónica ...01 las consultas planteadas, mismas que motivaron el amparo que nos ocupa. CONCLUSIÓN: Habiéndosele dado trámite y respuesta a la solicitud de información requerida por la parte amparada en tiempo, el día 19 de diciembre de 2025, mediante el oficio MS-DSA-UGSA438-2025, de fecha 18 de diciembre del 2025, suscrito por el Ing. Ricardo Morales, Jefe a.i. Unidad de Gestión en Salud Ambiental; con el debido respeto acostumbrado se les pide a los honorables Magistrados que se considere lo dispuesto en el párrafo 1° del artículo 52 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, que indica lo siguiente: “Si, estando en curso el amparo, se dictare resolución, administrativa o judicial, que revoque, detenga o suspenda la actuación impugnada, se declarará con lugar el recurso únicamente para efectos de indemnización y de costas, si fueren procedentes” Esta administración reconoce que la procedencia o improcedencia de la indemnización y costas depende de una valoración, apreciación o ponderación del Tribunal Constitucional, no obstante, cabe indicarse que, para el caso de este Recurso de Amparo, el contenido de la pretensión de la parte recurrente y la conducta de la Administración, sugieren que cualquier menoscabo, lesión o alteración no se refiere en ninguna forma a una repercusión patrimonial.Por lo indicado, se solicita se considere que la autoridad recurrida ha remediado la eventual vulneración acaecida, dando respuesta oportuna al señor Nombre01, como ya el honorable Tribunal Constitucional ha procedido en situaciones similares (ver en ese sentido sentencia Nº 2021014433 de las 9:15 horas del 25 de junio de 2021)”. Solicita que se declare sin lugar el recurso planteado.
4Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala el 17 de diciembre de 2025, el recurrente replica el informe rendido y reitera sus alegatos. Añade que la información respectiva no le fue entregada de forma oportuna ni en su totalidad.
5En los procedimientos seguidos se ha observado las prescripciones legales.

Redacta el Magistrado Araya García; y,

Considerando:

I.Objeto del recurso. El recurrente reclama violación a sus derechos fundamentales, pues manifiesta el 28 de noviembre de 2025 presentó una denuncia y una solicitud de información referente al Relleno Sanitario de Río Azul. Acusa que, no obstante, a la fecha, no se tramitado su denuncia ni se ha entregado la información solicitada.

II.Hechos probados. De importancia para la decisión de este asunto, se estiman como debidamente demostrados los siguientes hechos, sea porque así han sido acreditados o bien porque el recurrido haya omitido referirse a ellos según lo prevenido en el auto inicial:

a)El 28 de noviembre de 2025, el recurrente presentó una gestión ante el Ministerio de Salud en donde cuestiona situaciones referentes a una Licitación Pública relacionada con el manejo de Relleno Sanitario de Río Azul. Así, en dicho documento indicó lo siguiente: “Como puede observar según la cronología presentada, así como el Oficio MS-DPRSA-USA-2540-2024, de fecha 16 de diciembre de 2024, firmado por los Ingenieros, Ricardo Morales Vargas, Director a.i. de la DPRSA y el Ingeniero Carlos Manuel Pérez Lizano de la Unidad de Salud Ambiental, el Ministerio de Salud, ya tenía claro el vencimiento del contrato de Rio Azul (…) El contrato actual, sus subalternos sabían del vencimiento desde antes de diciembre de 2024, hace más de un año, y permitieron que venciera para continuar nuevamente con la empresa WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción, en el sitio sin promover una Licitación Pública, que sería lo más sano y transparente para el Ministerio de Salud, pero los funcionarios se han hecho todo lo contrario, se han dedicado a solicitar adendas de las cuales, la última se les vence el 30 de noviembre de 2025, y otra adenda iría en contra de la ley de Contratación.

Es por ello que, nos surge la pregunta, la señora Ministra de Salud, permitirá que sigan contratando a esta empresa que está en el sitio desde el año 2007, sin promover una Licitación Publica, como lo ordena la Ley de Contratación o ¿permitirá que se continúe violentando nuestro estado de derecho? (…) La comunidad vecina al sitio le solicita respetuosamente, intervenga dicho proceso, para que sus funcionarios no favorezcan una vez más a la empresa WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción, que se les ordene de su parte a los funcionarios encargados de administrar dicho contrato, que empiecen con el proceso de Licitación Pública, que sería lo más transparente para su Ministerio, la comunidad lo que está, solicitando señora Ministra, es transparencia de algunos de sus funcionarios, y lo único quile solicitamos con todo el respeto, es que el Ministerio de Salud inicie el proceso de Licitación Pública de las obras de mantenimiento del Relleno Sanitario de Rio Azul (…) Le solicito señora Ministra intervenir en dicho proceso pues el mismo va en contra de lo procedimientos que nos rigen, con el debido respeto le pido que consulte el proceso de cual en el año 2019, la CGR tuvo que intervenir pues sus subalternos hicieron todo lo posible por contratar a la misma empresa de forma directa, recién había vencido e contrato del año 2015, hicieron los trámites para contratarles pero la CGR les rechazó la gestión y les obligó a realizar el proceso de contratación mediante Licitación Pública” (ver el informe rendido y la prueba aportada).

b)Igualmente, en la misma gestión del 28 de noviembre de 2025, el recurrente le solicitó al Ministerio de Salud la siguiente información: “(…) Así mismo señora Ministra, el suscrito desea aprovechar para solicitarle con el debido respeto se me entregue la siguiente información. · ¿Cuánto es el monto total que le ha cancelado el Ministerio de Salud a la empresa WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción por el contrato CONTRATO ADMINISTRATIVO N° DM-HC-0453- 2021, LICITACION PUBLICA N° 2020LN- 000003-0013600001 " CONTRATCION DE SERVICIOS Y OBRAS DE MANTENIMIENTO POSTERIORES AL CIERRE DEL RELLENO SANITARIO RIO AZUL, hasta el día de hoy, incluyendo los ajustes de precios aprobados y cancelados por este Ministerio? · Solicito los análisis de laboratorio de 2024 y 2025, practicados en la planta de tratamiento del sitio, así como de los pozos de monitoreo y del cuerpo receptor del efluente del sistema de tratamiento de lixiviados. · Este análisis incluirá los siguientes parámetros: Demanda Química de Oxígeno (DQO) Potencial Hidrógeno (pH) Sólidos Totales (ST) Cromo Total (Cr) Plomo (Pb) Mercurio (Hg) Níquel (Ni) Conductividad Eléctrica.

Cadmio. (Cd) Cloruros. Nitrato. (NO3) Nitritos. (NO2) Carbono Orgánico Total. Así mismo el artículo 40 del reglamento de rellenos sanitarios menciona lo siguiente; · Artículo 40°- El Ministerio de Salud podrá realizar cuando lo considere conveniente muestreos y análisis, tanto del efluente del sistema de tratamiento de lixiviados como de su cuerpo receptor, de los pozos de monitoreo de las aguas subterráneas y de las emanaciones de gases, como control cruzado. · Es por ello la siguiente consulta, ¿cuenta el Ministerio de Salud con algún muestreo y análisis, tanto del efluente del sistema de tratamiento de lixiviados como de su cuerpo receptor, de los pozos de monitoreo de las aguas subterráneas y de las emanaciones de gases, como control cruzado, de la planta de tratamiento de lixiviados, de las chimeneas y de las aguas subterráneas del antiguo relleno sanitario de Rio Azul? · ¿Cuenta este Ministerio de Salud como propietario del terreno donde se ubica Río Azul, estudios de mediciones de los taludes, si existen desplazamientos de estos taludes?

De ser así, solicito copias de dicho estudio, el suscrito pagaría el costo de las copias · ¿El Ministerio de Salud, continuara contratando a la WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción a través de adendas, a sabiendas de que el contrato original finalizo en mayo de 2025 y que la última se les vence el 30 de noviembre de 2025, o realizara un proceso licitatorio nuevo, y para cual fecha? · ¿Cuál es el nombre de la empresa de Vigilancia que se encuentra a cargo de la seguridad del relleno sanitario de Rio Azul? · ¿Cuál es el Laboratorio encargado de realizar los análisis de los lixiviados de las aguas subterráneas, así como de los gases que emana de dicho relleno? · ¿Tiene la Proveeduría Institucional del Ministerio de Salud copia del acuerdo del CONVENIO COOPERATIVO INTERMUNICIPAL (COCIM) mediante el cual le donan los terrenos propiedad ello dentro del relleno sanitario de Río Azul al Ministerio de Salud?

c)Mediante oficio no. MS-DSA-UGSA-438-2025 del 18 de diciembre de 2025, el jefe de la Unidad de Gestión en Salud Ambiental del Ministerio de Salud le respondió al recurrente lo siguiente: “En relación con la CARTA-HT-DM-3306-2025 “Exposición del caso del relleno de Rio Azul por parte del Sr. Nombre01”, se informa lo siguiente: (…) R/ Le indicamos que se anexa a este oficio el archivo de Excel con nombre de archivo “Reporte Completo de facturas tramitadas de WPP” elaborado por parte de la División Administrativa - Dirección Financiera de Bienes y Servicios donde se detalla lo solicitado por su persona (…) 1- Se adjunta información correspondiente a las acciones de vigilancia estatal realizadas conforme a lo establecido en el artículo 38 del Decreto Ejecutivo N.° 44421-S, Reglamento de parques ambientales para la separación, tratamiento, aprovechamiento y disposición final de residuos sólidos, ejecutadas por esta Dirección durante los años 2023 y 2024. 2- Sobre los Reportes Operacionales presentados por el operador, se comparte tablas resumen de los análisis de laboratorio cuya información es extrae del Sistema para el registro de reportes operacionales de aguas residuales (SIRROAR) respaldado por el artículo 5 del Reglamento de Vertido y Reúso de Aguas Residuales N.°33601-S-MINAE del 09 de agosto de 2006.

Tabla 1: Información general de los reportes, períodos 2024 - 2025. Fuente: SIRROAR Tabla 1: Información general de los reportes, períodos 2024 - 2025. Fuente: SIRROAR Tabla 2: Fechas y laboratorio que realizó los muestreos. Fuente: SIRROAR Tabla 3: Parámetros ingresados al sistema de registro de reportes operacionales. Fuente: SIRROAR Fec Ingreso Fec Creado No. Boleta No. Rep. Operacional Frecuencia Periodo De Periodo Hasta 29/1/2024 29/1/2024 15-2024 2 SEMESTRAL 1/7/2023 31/12/2023 1/8/2024 1/8/2024 80-2024 1 SEMESTRAL 1/1/2024 30/6/2024 18/1/2025 18/1/2025 .03-2025 2 SEMESTRAL 1/7/2024 31/12/2024 1/8/2025 1/8/2025 60-2025 1 SEMESTRAL 1/1/2025 30/6/2025. Tabla 2: Fechas y laboratorio que realizó los muestreos. Fuente: SIRROAR Tabla 3: Parámetros ingresados al sistema de registro de reportes operacionales. Fuente: SIRROAR Fec Ingreso Fec Creado No. Boleta No. Rep. Operacional Frecuencia Periodo De Periodo Hasta 29/1/2024 29/1/2024 15-2024 2 SEMESTRAL 1/7/2023 31/12/2023 1/8/2024 1/8/2024 80-2024 1 SEMESTRAL 1/1/2024 30/6/2024 18/1/2025 18/1/2025 .03-2025 2 SEMESTRAL 1/7/2024 31/12/2024 1/8/2025 1/8/2025 60-2025 1 SEMESTRAL 1/1/2025 30/6/2025 No. Rep.

Operacional Frecuencia Periodo De Periodo HastaNombre Laboratorio Químico Num Analisis Lab Qui 2 SEMESTRAL 1/7/2023 31/12/2023 LABORATORIO AQYLASA 15122023.1 1 SEMESTRAL 1/1/2024 30/6/2024 LABORATORIO AQYLASA 14062024.1 2 SEMESTRAL 1/7/2024 31/12/2024 LABORATORIO AQYLASA 19122024.1 1 SEMESTRAL 1/1/2025 30/6/2025 LABORATORIO AQYLASA 13062025.2 Caudal Dbo5 Sst S Sed Gya Saam Temp Ph Dqo 3680 87 15 0 5 5 25 80 76 364,8 39 86 0 5 0,5 22 8,4 418 410 2 5 0 5 5 24 78 29 187,7 166 48 0 5 5 25 86 545 (…) Los metales pesados son reportados a través de los Reportes Mensuales de Labores, correspondientes a la contratación. Se muestra a manera de ejemplo, el reporte correspondiente al mes de setiembre 2025 (…) R/ Sí, ver respuesta a punto 2, donde se indica los análisis y parámetros evaluados (…) R/ Sí, se cuenta. La empresa trimestralmente realiza estas mediciones, las que se incluyen en el Informe Mensual de Labores correspondiente y reporta, de haberlas, las anomalías (…) R/ La Licitación Pública 2020LN-000003-0013600001 denominada “Contratación de servicios y obras de mantenimiento posteriores al cierre del Relleno Sanitario Río Azul”, Contrato DM-HC0453-2021 y sus adendas finalizaron el pasado noviembre del presente año.

El Ministerio de Salud esta en proceso de realizar una licitación nueva la cual es bajo la legalidad de la Ley General de Contratación Pública N° 9986 y su reglamento (…) R/ La empresa de seguridad que se encontraba en el Relleno Sanitario de Rio Azul por parte de la Licitación Pública 2020LN-000003-0013600001 es Continental Security Group S.A. y también se encuentra la Dirección Regional Central Norte de la Fuerza Pública, a la que se le ha cedido espacio en las instalaciones de un relleno, bajo la figura de un Convenio Interinstitucional (…) R/ En los documentos adjuntos se observa que los mismos han sido realizados por el laboratorio CHEMLABS durante la Vigilancia Estatal que realiza el Ministerio de Salud. El monitoreo regular que realiza la empresa los contrata al laboratorio AQYLASA. Los gases que emanan del relleno no se monitorean en cuanto a reportes de laboratorio regularmente; en años anteriores y como parte de un estudio particular, fueron realizados por la Universidad Nacional (…) R/ Si, efectivamente el Ministerio de Salud cuenta con copia de dicho Convenio el que se adjunta para su conocimiento (…) R/ Desde finales del año 2019 el Ingeniero Boza se encuentra destacado en la Comisión Plenaria de SETENA y no lleva temas de la Dirección de Salud Ambiental en relación con el Relleno Sanitario de Rio Azul (…) R/ El Ing. Marvin Boza desde el 2022 ya no forma parte de este Ministerio de Salud y como se le indico anteriormente el Ing. Jorge Boza se encuentra destacado por parte de este Ministerio de Salud como miembro de la Comisión Plenaria de la SETENA”. Lo anterior, le fue comunicado al recurrente el 19 de diciembre de 2025 al medio señalado para tal efecto (ver el informe rendido y la prueba aportada).

d)El 30 de diciembre de 2025, se notificó la resolución de curso a la autoridad recurrida (ver acta de notificación).

III.Sobre el fondo. Se pasará a analizar las consultas puntuales formuladas por la parte amparada y las respuestas brindadas por la parte recurrida, con el fin de determinar si cada una de estas fueron atendidas o no íntegramente, según lo requerido.

Lo requerido Resulta o no amparable lo requerido Fue o no atendido lo solicitado “¿Cuánto es el monto total que le ha cancelado el Ministerio de Salud a la empresa WPP Manejos de Desechos y Construcción por el contrato CONTRATO ADMINISTRATIVO N° DM-HC-0453- 2021, LICITACION PUBLICA N° 2020LN- 000003-0013600001 " CONTRATCION DE SERVICIOS Y OBRAS DE MANTENIMIENTO POSTERIORES AL CIERRE DEL RELLENO SANITARIO RIO AZUL, hasta el día de hoy, incluyendo los ajustes de precios aprobados y cancelados por este Ministerio?” Sí es amparable.