Document Review Case file: 26-024678-0007-CO Decision No. 2026033817 CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER (SALA CONSTITUCIONAL) OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at 9:20 a.m. on 3 September 2026.
Amparo proceeding being processed under case file no. 26-024678-0007-CO, filed by Nombre01, identity card CED01, against the INSTITUTO MIXTO DE AYUDA SOCIAL (IMAS) and the COMISIÓN NACIONAL DE EMERGENCIAS (CNE).
Background:
- 1In a written submission received by the Chamber on 9 July 2026, the applicant filed an amparo application. She states that she is the mother of four minor children, one of whom has grade 3 autism, a condition certified by an assessment issued by the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, and requires constant supervision and specialized care, for which reason she serves as his primary caregiver. She states that a drainage ditch runs behind her home and that, for many years, the Municipality has neither cleaned nor maintained it. She states that this ditch always floods the yard whenever it rains and that, as a result of the recent heavy rains, it overflowed and sewage entered her home, causing property damage and exposing her family, especially her minor children and her son with a disability, to a serious risk to their health and physical integrity. She recounts that, in response to this emergency, she submitted the corresponding reports to the 911 Emergency System under numbers 2026- 07-05-3341 and 2026-07-0302657, and sent emails to IMAS and that institution’s Office of the Comptroller of Services, as well as to the municipality and its municipal comptroller’s office.However, because personnel were on vacation, there was no effective response and no officials available to address an emergency that endangered her family’s life and dignity. She adds that she considers it unacceptable that, during a national emergency, public institutions lack effective mechanisms to assist the most vulnerable population, leaving them completely unprotected. She states that she had previously requested assistance from IMAS as the caregiver of her son with a disability, but it was denied on the ground that he receives a pension (referring to the special pension under law 8769 in the amount of 373.000 colones, which does not even cover the selective diet required by his condition, therapies, and tutoring). She states that her son has severe food selectivity and therefore tolerates only a very specific diet that is essential to preserving his health, consisting of the following: breakfast of fish fillet with mashed potatoes; lunch of steak, zucchini, and chopped kiwi; and dinner consisting of a Pediasure beverage.She recounts that these foods are very expensive and that, because they live under her sister’s protection, she managed with great effort to obtain provisions for seven days so that her son would not become malnourished, since he eats absolutely nothing else. However, all of this food was lost in the flood, and her three-year-old son lost his milk, diapers, and other items essential to his care. She adds that the flood destroyed all of their essential belongings: household appliances, couches used by her son with autism for sensory regulation, food, mattresses, clothing, hygiene and personal-use items, wardrobes, a storage cabinet, school supplies, school uniforms, school shoes, and blankets.
- 2By decision issued at 16:43 on 29 July 2026, the amparo application was accepted for processing.
- 3Alejandro José Picado Eduarte, in his capacity as President of the CNE, reports under oath as follows: “I. FACTS OUTLINED BY THE AMPARO APPLICANT (summary); FIRST: She is the mother of four minors, one of whom has level 3 autism, a condition substantiated by an assessment issued by the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, and requires constant supervision and specialized care, for which reason she serves as his primary caregiver. She states that a drainage channel runs behind her home and that, for many years, the Municipality has neither cleaned nor maintained it. FACT ONE: These are statements by the amparo applicant, as well as actions of the municipal entity. SECOND: She states that this drainage channel always floods the yard whenever it rains and that, as a result of the recent heavy rains, it overflowed and sewage entered her home, causing property damage and exposing her family, particularly her minor children and her son with a disability, to a serious risk to their health and physical integrity.She recounts that, in response to this emergency, she filed the corresponding reports with the 911 Emergency System, under numbers 202607-05-3341 and 2026-07-0302657, and sent emails to IMAS and that institution’s Office of the Comptroller of Services, as well as to the Municipality and its municipal comptroller’s office; however, because they were on vacation, there was no effective response and no officials attended to an emergency situation that endangered the life and dignity of her family. FACT TWO: These are statements by the amparo applicant. In addition, mitigation and maintenance work on public infrastructure must be performed by other authorities, whether the local government and/or other State entities (IMAS, MINISTERIO DE SALUD), because the CNE cannot provide maintenance as an ordinary measure. Furthermore, the matter does not concern harm linked to any Emergency Decree currently in force, and any potential damage is therefore not covered by a General Emergency Plan; consequently, this is not a situation that the Commission can address under either of the two areas of authority granted by Ley No. 8488.THIRD: She adds that she considers it unacceptable that, during a national emergency, public institutions lack effective mechanisms for assisting the most vulnerable population, leaving them completely unprotected. She states that she previously requested assistance from IMAS as the caregiver of her son with a disability, but it was denied on the ground that he receives a pension (referring to the special pension under Ley 8769 in the amount of 373.000 colones, which does not even cover the selective diet required by his condition, therapies, and tutoring). FACT THREE: These are subjective statements by the amparo applicant. In addition, the matter does not concern harm linked to any Emergency Decree currently in force, and any potential damage is therefore not covered by a General Emergency Plan; consequently, this is not a situation that the Commission can address under either of the two areas of authority granted by Ley No. 8488.FACT FOUR: She states that her son has severe food selectivity and therefore tolerates only a very specific diet essential to preserving his health, consisting of the following: fish fillet with mashed potatoes for breakfast; steak, zucchini, and chopped kiwi for lunch; and a Pediasure beverage for dinner. She recounts that these foods are very costly and that, because they live under her sister’s protection, she made a great effort to obtain provisions for seven days so that her son would not become malnourished, since he eats absolutely nothing else; however, all this food was lost in the flood, and her three-year-old son lost his milk, diapers, and other items essential to his care. She adds that the flood destroyed all their essential belongings: household appliances, couches used by her son with autism for sensory regulation, food, mattresses, clothing, hygiene and personal-use items, wardrobes, a storage cabinet, school supplies, school uniforms, school shoes, and blankets.FOURTH: These are statements by the amparo applicant. In addition, mitigation and maintenance work on public infrastructure must be performed by other authorities, whether the local government and/or other State entities (IMAS, MINISTERIO DE SALUD), because the CNE cannot provide maintenance as an ordinary measure. Furthermore, the matter does not concern harm linked to any Emergency Decree currently in force, and any potential damage is therefore not covered by a General Emergency Plan; consequently, this is not a situation that the Commission can address under either of the two areas of authority granted by Ley No. 8488. II. RISK MANAGEMENT IN COSTA RICA. Under Article 4 of Ley № 8488, risk management is understood as a “process through which the conditions of vulnerability affecting the population, human settlements, infrastructure, lifelines, activities producing goods and services, and the environment are positively reversed.It is a sustainable and preventive model that incorporates effective disaster-prevention and mitigation criteria into territorial, sectoral, and socioeconomic planning, as well as preparedness, response, and recovery in emergencies.” In the same vein, risk management is defined as a “continuous process of analysis, decision-making planning, and implementation of actions to identify, prevent, and reduce the possibility that a potentially destructive event (hazard) may cause harm or serious disruption to people’s lives, the socioeconomic fabric, livelihoods, and the ecosystems of the territories, as well as to establish tools for an appropriate response should an impact nevertheless materialize, with the objective of enabling efficient recovery after a disaster without rebuilding vulnerability.” Risk management has different spheres of intervention, ranging from the national, regional, and sectoral levels to the local, community, and family levels.It also requires the existence and operation of organizational and institutional systems and structures that represent those spheres and bring together, under established coordination arrangements, their agreed differentiated roles and their collective bodies representing the various social actors and interests participating in the creation, reduction, anticipation, and control of risk, all of which must be properly defined. The management of this risk is the principal basis of the National Risk Management System, understood as the comprehensive, organized, coordinated, and harmonious integration of the bodies, structures, functional relationships, methods, procedures, and resources of all State institutions, while seeking the participation of the entire private sector and organized civil society. Its purpose is to promote and implement the public-policy guidelines that allow both the Costa Rican State and the various sectors of national activity to incorporate the concept of risk management as a cross-cutting component of planning and development practices.It follows from the foregoing definition: 1- That risk is a cross-cutting concern in all public and private activities; 2- That its management must be a public policy of the Costa Rican State; 3- That this policy is embodied in the National Risk Management Plan, a document prepared by the Commission that gives tangible form to that public policy and must be consulted on a mandatory basis by the State bodies and entities responsible for planning tasks, which, when preparing their respective plans, must take into account the guidance set forth in that Plan. Likewise, when urban-development plans, programs, and projects are prepared, the risk-prevention and mitigation component must be considered, all pursuant to Article 8 of Ley No. 8488. As may be discerned from the foregoing, the Commission performs a governing role in risk prevention and a coordinating role in emergency response; in other words, under the principle of legality, the Commission is responsible for directing, guiding, and steering risk prevention in Costa Rica and for coordinating State institutions in emergency matters.III. RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COSTA RICAN STATE FOR DISASTER PREVENTION. Ley № 8488 also conceives risk management as “…a cross-cutting component of the work of the Costa Rican State; it integrates public instruments, programs, and resources into ordinary and extraordinary institutional and sectoral measures aimed at preventing disasters and responding to emergencies in all their phases. Every national development policy must incorporate both the elements necessary for an adequate assessment of risk and susceptibility to the impact of disasters and the management components that enable their control” (Article № 5, Ley № 8488). Based on Articles 3, 8, 25, and 26 of the same law, all State institutions, principally including the Municipalities, are under a mandatory duty to prevent disasters and, in particular, local governments must incorporate prevention as a component of urban-development projects, including in their programs the concepts of risk and disaster and the ordinary management measures within their authority that are appropriate and timely to prevent their materialization, while fostering a culture aimed at reducing them.Similarly, all public institutions must coordinate their prevention programs and activities with the CNE, treating them as a public-policy process that must operate permanently and continuously, under the systemic approach and the National Risk Management Plan. Article 27 additionally establishes the obligation to include, in the budgets of every public institution, an allocation of resources for controlling disaster risk, treating prevention as a concept consistent with the development practices being promoted and implemented. The importance of municipalities’ shared responsibility and local commitment to risk management lies in the fact that emergencies and potential disasters may materialize within their territories, and therefore their response and, above all, prevention must form part of their everyday work. Even “large” disasters affecting the national territory are in fact the aggregate of hazards and vulnerabilities occurring simultaneously, locally, and in a highly dynamic manner within municipal territory as a result of the interconnection of physical, social, economic, and political relationships.IV. UNDECLARED OR FIRST-IMPACT EMERGENCIES. It should be noted that, as part of its extraordinary authority, Ley N°8488 empowers the CNE to respond to local and minor emergencies through the mechanism of “First Impacts,” given that the final paragraph of Article 15 provides: “(…) Except as provided in the preceding subsections, without a declaration of emergency by the Executive Branch, the Commission shall respond to local and minor emergencies which, because of the high frequency with which they occur and the serious harm they cause in communities, require the provision of a first-impact humanitarian service consisting of the delivery of blankets, food, and sleeping mats and, if necessary, the acquisition of materials to restore basic services and make shelters operational, as well as the hiring of a maximum of one hundred machine-hours to clean the most severely affected area of the zone.(Emphasis added.) The final paragraph of Article 15 refers to a first-impact humanitarian service. The Law uses the term “first impact” to refer to the first phase of response to a declared emergency. Indeed, Article 30 of the Law, which divides that response into the response, rehabilitation, and, finally, reconstruction phases, establishes that the response phase immediately follows the occurrence of the event. This phase includes urgent first-impact measures aimed at safeguarding life, the infrastructure of essential public services, property, and the environment. It also includes mitigation works intended to protect the population, infrastructure, and the environment. Article 4 defines response as measures taken immediately upon the occurrence of an emergency, intended to control a situation, safeguard structures and lives, prevent greater damage, and stabilize the area of the region directly affected by the emergency.In this regard, without a declaration of emergency, the Commission may respond to local and minor emergencies, for which purpose it may hire a maximum of 300 machine-hours to clean the affected area. Likewise, Article 30(a) of the same law establishes that the Response Phase, which is an operational phase occurring immediately after the event, includes urgent first-impact measures aimed at safeguarding life, the infrastructure of essential public services, and the production of goods and services through alert, alarm, evacuation, and relocation measures, among others. Regarding first impacts, the Procuraduría General de la Republica stated in Opinion C-030-2016 of 15 February 2016: “As indicated, response to local or minor emergencies is the responsibility of the Commission. Nevertheless, because these are measures classified as first impact, it should be considered that the Commission does not act alone.Among the coordinating bodies created by Article 10 of the Law is the Emergency Operations Center, a body of the Commission that brings together public institutions, whether governmental or nongovernmental, ‘that work in the first-response and emergency-rehabilitation phase.’ This body prepares and carries out first-response work in emergency situations. Taking into account the coordinating bodies established by the Law, it may be stated that a local or minor emergency involves all agencies having authority over the damage caused. It must be borne in mind that, to respond to such minor emergencies, Article 52 of the Law allows the Commission to transfer ‘first-response’ supplies and equipment to regional, municipal, and community committees for their custody and administration, to be used in assisting the affected population. Therefore, those committees participate in the response to such minor and local emergencies, as applicable, using the property transferred by the CNE.” V. EMERGENCIES DECLARED BY EXECUTIVE DECREE.With regard to the Exceptional Regime, it arises from a Declaration of a State of Emergency issued by the Executive Branch, as provided by Article 29 of Ley N°8488. The Declaration of Emergency permits exceptional treatment in the face of budgetary rigidity, pursuant to Article 180 of the Political Constitution, so that the Government may quickly obtain sufficient financial, material, or other resources to assist persons and address property and services that are affected or endangered (Art. 31, Ley N°8488), according to the needs arising during the various phases of the emergency, as established by Article 30 of that law. To use the exceptional regime, there must UNEQUIVOCALLY be a causal connection between the event giving rise to the state of necessity and urgency and the damage actually caused. In this regard, the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional), in Decision number 3410- 92, reiterated in Decision number 1369-2001 at fourteen hours and thirty minutes on 14 February 2001, stated: “the CNE’s intervention requires a causal connection between the event that occurred and the investment made, duly supported by an emergency decree issued by the Executive Branch and a General Emergency Plan, understood as a definition of functions, responsibilities, and general institutional response and alert procedures […]” Once a State of Emergency has been declared, the emergency response is carried out in three phases, as established by Article 30 of that law: a response phase aimed at applying urgent measures concerning life, the infrastructure of essential public services, and the production of essential goods and services; a rehabilitation phase, which concerns stabilizing the affected region through measures aimed at temporarily restoring essential water, transportation, telecommunications, health, commercial, electrical, and other services; and, finally, a reconstruction phase intended to restore the normal operation of the affected public services, including the reconstruction and replacement of damaged public and social-interest infrastructure, as well as the implementation of land-use regulation measures intended to prevent subsequent damage.Once the Executive Branch has issued the decree declaring the state of emergency, the Commission, through its Executive Directorate and in consultation with its Presidency, shall immediately convene the Institutions having authority in the matter and any others it deems necessary because they fall within the emergency’s affected area, for the preparation of the General Emergency Plan, an instrument that will make it possible to plan and channel, rationally, efficiently, and systematically, the measures to be taken, the necessary supervision, and the allocation of the required resources. For this purpose, within a maximum period of two months, the institutions convened must submit an official report on the damage suffered within their respective areas of authority, including an estimate of the costs and needs to be covered. This damage report must unequivocally establish a cause-and-effect relationship.The General Emergency Plan shall be prepared using the reports submitted and the other documentation substantiated by the Commission. The General Emergency Plan is the planning instrument that establishes the causal relationship among the event that occurred, the measures taken, and the investment made to address the emergency. It consists of a description of the causal event, an assessment of the damage, and an estimate of the resulting losses, itemized by canton and sector; it also includes the delineation of the measures that each institution must undertake, including those assigned to the Commission itself, as well as details of the amount of investment required in each phase of the emergency response, from the response phase through reconstruction of the affected area. It must likewise specify immediate-action measures, the human and material resources needed to address the event, and medium-term measures, such as those concerning the rehabilitation and reconstruction of the affected areas and the eradication and prevention of the risk conditions that caused the emergency.All institutions are required by this Law to contribute as necessary by providing information and technical support for the preparation of the General Emergency Plan. The drafting of this Plan and the responsibilities relating to its subsequent implementation shall take priority over the ordinary work of each individual institution while the state of emergency remains in effect. To implement the measures, works, and contracts, the Commission shall appoint as Implementing Units those public institutions having authority in the area where the measures will be undertaken, provided they have a sufficient structure to fulfill the commitments; both the Commission and the implementing units shall be required to prepare investment plans setting forth in detail the measures, works, and financial resources they will use to carry out their assignments, and those plans must be approved by the Commission’s Board of Directors.The appointment of Implementing Units allows emergency resources to be allocated, which entails the use and administration of resources in accordance with the corresponding procedures. In this regard, it must be borne in mind that the second paragraph of Article 51 of the Law provides that the procurement of goods and services financed with resources from the Fund for declared-emergency response shall be governed by the principles of the Ley de la Contratación Administrativa, the provisions of the Internal Regulations of the institutional Procurement Office, and specific provisions issued for such procurement. In Legal Opinion N° 044 - J of 20 July 2012, the Procuraduría General de la República addressed the subject as follows: “(…) Although the General Plan must set forth all the measures to be taken to respond to the emergency in its various phases, the agencies responsible for those measures, and the overall investment that the emergency will require in its various phases, the fact remains that, once an agency is appointed as an implementing unit, it becomes obligated to prepare an investment plan describing the measures, works, and financial resources that it will use to carry out the tasks assigned to it.That is, an action plan concerning its obligations in relation to the emergency, as those obligations arise from the General Plan. That investment plan cannot be limited to mentioning broad areas of action, because the law not only specifies that it must contain a detailed description, but adds that the description must be itemized; this requires the measures to be described in their various elements so as to specify how the needs caused will be addressed. It follows from the foregoing that the investment plan is a consequence of the General Plan. Accordingly, it must include the measures provided for in the General Plan and maintain the corresponding causal connection between the emergency and the measures to be financed through that new plan (…)” (Emphasis added.) VI. POWERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN RISK PREVENTION THROUGH TERRITORIAL PLANNING. It is the duty of the municipal government to ensure, through planning and the exercise of its police power, that urban development complies with criteria of safety, public health, and environmental sustainability.This is necessary to safeguard citizens’ rights. As follows directly from Article 169 of the Political Constitution, the Código Municipal, the Ley de Planificación Urbana, the Ley de Construcciones, and related regulations, municipalities have absolute and exclusive responsibility for planning the territory under their jurisdiction. This unavoidable duty has been elaborated upon in various opinions of the Procuraduría General de la República, including C-093-2007 of 27 March 2007, C-020-2009 of 29 January 2009, C-118-2009 of 4 May 2009, C-155- 2009 of 01 June 2009, C-091-2010 of 03 May 2010, and several others to the same effect. The Sala Constitucional has confirmed this responsibility in decisions including numbers 2153-93, 5305-93, 6706-93, 4205-96, 2000-431, 2000-06653, 2001- 07485, 2002-01220, 2002-05996, 2002-07751, 2003-11397, 2004-1915, 2004-14404, 2004-01915, 2004-09439, 2005-04002, and 2005-07516, among many others.In this regard, jurist Eduardo Ortiz Ortiz, quoted in Opinion C-032-98 of 25 February 1998 of the Procuraduría General de la República, stated: “The municipal authority to issue urban plans derives from the law, because it covers a subject constitutionally reserved to legislation, but it also has a constitutional basis because it is a local matter. This means that the law may delegate that authority only to the Municipality and that a law doing otherwise and empowering, for example, the Executive Branch would be unconstitutional for violating municipal autonomy.” In addition, the Tribunal de lo Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda has issued judgments consistent with the position of the Procuraduría General, including Decision N°128-2008 at 10:30 on 7 March 2008, Decision N°209-2011 at 14:30 on 16 June 2011, and Decision N°124-2011 at 09:50 on 15 April 2012, among many others, emphasizing the absolute responsibility of local governments for territorial planning.Agreement N°0443 of 30 November 2011 of the Board of Directors of the Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, adopted at Extraordinary Session No.10-11 held on Wednesday, 09 November 2011 and published in La Gaceta N°230 of 30 November 2011, entitled: “Recommends that mayors immediately proceed to evict the occupants of recognized risk and imminent-danger zones and demolish the buildings located therein,” concludes verbatim by stating: a. Recommend to all mayors in the country: i. That, pursuant to the duties and powers imposed on them by Articles 50 and 169 of the Political Constitution, the Código Municipal, the Ley de Planificación Urbana, the Ley de Construcciones, the Ley Orgánica del Ambiente, Article 33 of the Ley Forestal, related regulations, the Ley General de Salud, and the extensive case law on the subject, they immediately proceed to evict the occupants of recognized risk and imminent-danger zones, demolish the buildings located therein, and ensure that such zones are not again occupied by human settlements, applying the procedural sequence cited in Reason IV, drawn from Decision Nº 12485-2010 of the Sala Constitucional. ii.That, because of the binding nature conferred upon them by the Sala Constitucional, they immediately implement the recommendations that CNE technicians and academic institutions have repeatedly provided to them over many years, and of which they are aware, concerning concrete and timely measures to safeguard human life in recognized risk and imminent-danger zones. The studies and technical recommendations historically issued in each case shall be made available to the municipalities at the CNE offices. Internal Audit Offices and Municipal Councils must ensure compliance with these provisions. Disobedience shall be deemed a breach of duties and must be referred by the Internal Audit Offices to the appropriate authority. (…) d. Formally communicate this Agreement to all mayors and to the Defensoría de los Habitantes. e. Publish this Agreement and the national summary map of natural hazards (available on the website www.cne.go.cr) in the official gazette and in a newspaper of national circulation.(Emphasis added.) At this point, it is necessary to recall that, because the administration of the canton’s local interests and services falls within the authority of the Local Government under a constitutional mandate, and because, in this particular case, the Municipality, as a State legal entity with its own assets and legal personality (Article 2 of Código Municipal N° 7794), has full legal capacity to execute all acts and contracts necessary to fulfill its purposes. VII. THE SPECIFIC CASE. Regarding the CNE’s ordinary authority (Ley N°8488): “… Article 14.-Ordinary preventive authority of the Commission. The Commission shall be the governing entity for risk prevention and preparedness to address emergency situations. It shall exercise the following authority: a) Integrate and coordinate national policy concerning risk prevention and preparedness to address emergency situations. It shall also promote, organize, direct, and coordinate, as appropriate, the assignments required to integrate the National Risk Management System and its components and instruments.It shall carry out this work in permanent consultation with the bodies and entities participating in the process. b) Promote awareness of the subject through permanent education and outreach programs. c) Issue binding decisions concerning situations of risk, disaster, and imminent danger, based on technical and scientific criteria, aimed at guiding regulatory and oversight measures for their effective prevention and management, and regulating or ordering their effective implementation by State institutions, the private sector, and the general population. Officials of the bodies and entities responsible for executing or implementing such binding decisions may under no circumstances decline to apply them. Natural or legal persons, whether public or private, that build in or improperly use areas restricted through such binding decisions shall be subject to the obligation to demolish or remove the structure, pursuant to Article 36 of this Law. d) Exercise oversight over the regulatory function performed by State institutions to control risk-generating processes, according to their respective areas of authority, based on the Commission’s power to issue binding decisions concerning risk conditions and emergency response. e) Exercise permanent oversight to ensure that State bodies and entities include risk-management criteria in the planning and implementation of plans, programs, and projects promoting the country’s development. f) Promote and support studies and research on matters related to its purposes, as well as the preparation of projects advancing physical, technical, and educational systems aimed at disaster prevention and mitigation and preparedness to address them. g) Promote and foster the monitoring and management of risk situations by studying or implementing observation, monitoring, and alert measures that make it possible to anticipate, reduce, and prevent the impact and damage of potential disaster events.In addition, where necessary, coordinate the monitoring and management of such situations. h) Advise municipalities on managing information concerning the risk conditions affecting them, including guidance for an effective land-use and territorial-planning policy. Such advice must contribute to the preparation of regulatory plans, the adoption of oversight measures, and the promotion of organization aimed at reducing people’s vulnerability, bearing in mind that responsibility for addressing this problem at the municipal level rests in the first instance with the municipality. i) Establish and coordinate a permanent multi-institutional body for planning, coordinating, and directing emergency operations. j) Establish and maintain relationships with national and international, governmental and nongovernmental entities whose missions are related to that of the institution; enter into such exchange and cooperation agreements, conventions, or contracts with those entities as may be deemed appropriate. k) Foster the creation and strengthening of regional, municipal, and local capacities to manage emergency situations.Where necessary, this includes participation in alert, alarm, mobilization, and population-assistance measures. l) Manage international assistance from agencies and countries, in coordination with the Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores y Culto, for prevention programs and emergency response. m) Coordinate international assistance that Costa Rica may offer to other nations that have declared emergencies in their territories, when agreed upon by the President of the Republic and the Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores y Culto. Such cooperation shall consist of human resources, technical advice, or donations of goods and services, as the country’s capabilities permit…” b. Extraordinary Authority: Established in Article 15 of Ley 8488;1 “Article 15.-Extraordinary authority of the Commission. Once the state of emergency established in Article 29 of this Law has been declared, the Commission shall be responsible for planning, coordinating, directing, and overseeing measures aimed at addressing urgent needs and implementing protection, rescue, and rehabilitation programs and activities.For that purpose, it shall implement at least the following measures: a) The coordination, direction, and oversight of response to emergencies declared as such by the Executive Branch shall be carried out in accordance with the phases defined in Article 30 of this Law; for that purpose, the Commission, through the Executive Directorate, must prepare the General Emergency Plan under the terms set forth in Chapter VI of this Law. b) It must coordinate the damage assessment, for which purpose the institutions of the Central Administration, the State’s Decentralized Public Administration, Local Governments, and State-owned enterprises shall be responsible for assessing the damage and coordinating that assessment with the Commission. c) Plan, coordinate, organize, and supervise the implementation of rescue measures by public and private national and international organizations. d) Coordinate the scientific and technical research necessary for the Plan, as well as physical and economic recovery programs, and conduct the necessary follow-up. e) Appoint as implementing units those public institutions whose area of authority encompasses the implementation of the works defined in the General Emergency Plan, and supervise their implementation. f) Hire such special personnel as it may require for specified periods and pursuant to the emergency declaration.Except as provided in the preceding subsections, without a declaration of emergency by the Executive Branch, the Commission shall provide blankets, food, and sleeping mats; acquire materials to restore basic services and make shelters operational; and hire a maximum of three hundred machine-hours for cleanup and priority response. The provisions of this paragraph apply to each case involving local and minor emergencies which, because of the high frequency with which they occur or the serious harm they cause in communities, require the provision of extraordinary assistance. (The preceding paragraph was amended by Article 1 of the law to improve the response to damage caused by natural disasters, N° 9641 of 6 March 2019)…” Article 25 of Ley 8488 states that the Costa Rican State is responsible for preventing disasters; therefore, all institutions are required to include the concepts of risk and disaster in their programs and to incorporate the ordinary management measures within their authority that are appropriate and timely to prevent their materialization, while fostering a culture aimed at reducing them.Agreement N°0443 of 30 November 2011 of the Board of Directors of the Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias, adopted at Extraordinary Session No.10-11 held on Wednesday, 09 November 2011 and published in La Gaceta N°230 of 30 November 2011, must also be borne in mind; it “Recommends that mayors immediately proceed to evict the occupants of recognized risk and imminent-danger zones and demolish the buildings located therein.” At this point, it is necessary to recall that, because the administration of the canton’s local interests and services falls within the authority of the Local Government under a constitutional mandate, and because, in this particular case, the Municipality (…), as a State legal entity with its own assets and legal personality (Article 2 of Código Municipal N° 7794), has full legal capacity to execute all acts and contracts necessary to fulfill its purposes.In another connection, within the budget and as part of local governments’ powers concerning risk prevention, under Ley N° 9907 of 27 October 2020, Article 46 bis, concerning the application of the three percent that the municipal sector previously had to transfer to the Commission, was added to Ley 8488. It is the duty of the municipal government to ensure, through planning and the exercise of its police power, that urban development complies with criteria of safety, public health, and environmental sustainability. This is necessary to safeguard citizens’ rights. As follows directly from Article 169 of the Political Constitution, the Código Municipal, the Ley de Planificación Urbana, the Ley de Construcciones, and related regulations, municipalities have absolute and exclusive responsibility for planning the territory under their jurisdiction. Finally, through Official Letter CNE-CS-OF-012-2026 of 31 July 2026, the CNE’s Office of the Comptroller of Services, through Mr.Alfredo Artavia Solano, issued a report concerning the amparo applicant’s allegations. The relevant portion states as follows (image inserted); (…) IN SUMMARY. 1. The procurement procedures under the Exceptional Regime (forms of CNE intervention) are described; 1.1 Extraordinary Procurement for Immediate and Nondeferrable Response: procurement carried out immediately to safeguard life, the infrastructure of essential public services, the production of goods and services, property, and the environment, through alert measures, public information, the evacuation and temporary relocation of persons and animals to safe locations, and the recovery, rescue, and search for victims; the provision of basic necessities of life, such as food, clothing, water, medicine, and medical assistance; and the safeguarding of material property. Such procurement is carried out within seventy-two (72) hours following the occurrence of the event.The applicable conditions are: • Imminent danger. • Actual isolation of the population. • Availability of services, goods, or machinery at the location. • Situation report identifying the damage requiring intervention through the rental of machinery (causal connection). • Request for intervention. 1.2 Extreme-Urgency Procurement: procurement that may be carried out once a national emergency has been declared but before the General Emergency Plan has been approved. The CNE may use this type of procurement when it is necessary to safeguard the lives of persons or property in situations of exceptional danger. The requesting institution or entity, as well as the requesting CNE Units, must ask the Institutional Procurement Office to process the matter, for which purpose they must submit an Investment Plan in accordance with the procedure to be established for this purpose, which must be published on the CNE website.
If the investment plan based on extreme urgency is accepted, that is, if it meets every requirement established for this modality, the Legal Advisory Unit will issue a favorable opinion, and the Executive Directorate or Presidency of the CNE will issue the decision approving the procedure. 1.3 First-impact procurement: an expedited procedure for procuring goods, services, and machinery, in effect during the Response Phase of an event declared a National Emergency by the Executive Branch. This entails intervention in response to a triggering event that must have a direct causal nexus to a manifest impact and require urgent action aimed at providing humanitarian assistance and safeguarding life, vital services, and affected transportation routes, without involving construction work, road-network maintenance, or infrastructure improvements; accordingly, the procurement of goods or services may be authorized.
There must be a cause-and-effect relationship between the reported damage and the work to be performed (an indispensable requirement of the causal nexus (nexo de causalidad) prescribed by law). A technical report must be submitted in the established format, setting forth the specific request for assistance and endorsed by the highest-ranking official and by an engineering or architecture professional who must be an employee of the requesting entity. A situation report from the Municipal Emergency Committee (Comité Municipal de Emergencias, CME), endorsed by the CNE Liaison Officer, must be submitted. 1.4 Procurement for an undeclared emergency: this entails intervention in response to a triggering event that must have a direct causal nexus to a manifest impact and require urgent action after the event occurs, aimed at safeguarding life and vital services. Such procurement is authorized pursuant to the final paragraph of Article 15 of the Ley Nacional de Emergencias N° 8488. a. There must be a cause-and-effect relationship between the reported damage and the triggering occurrence (local event) (causal nexus). b. A situation report from the Municipal Emergency Committee (CME), endorsed by the CNE Liaison Officer, must be submitted. c. A technical report must be submitted in the established format, setting forth the specific request for assistance and endorsed by the highest-ranking official and by an engineering or architecture professional who must be an employee of the requesting entity. d. It is important to note that, as established by Article N°169(a) of the Reglamento para las Contrataciones Públicas Amparadas al Régimen de Excepción de la Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias: The request for intervention must be made immediately using the form available on the website of the Comisión Nacional de Prevención de Riesgos y Atención de Emergencias or through such mechanism as may be established for that purpose, and must be submitted within the first 120 hours (5 calendar days) after the event occurred. 2.
These forms of intervention must be pursued by the competent institution, whether the local government or State institutions, in compliance with the established requirements. 3. In addition, as is well known, mitigation and maintenance work on public infrastructure must be performed by other authorities, whether the local government and/or other State entities (IMAS, MINISTERIO DE SALUD), because maintenance, as an ordinary activity, cannot be provided by the CNE. Under Ley N° 8488, published in the Official Gazette La Gaceta N° 8, dated 11 January 2006, which establishes that the CNE is the governing entity for risk prevention, emergency response, preparedness, and reconstruction processes when emergencies arise, the following is provided: • Municipalities are responsible for administering cantonal interests and services and for approving and executing budgets as established by the Código Municipal. • Prevention is the responsibility of the State; therefore, all State institutions are required to incorporate the concepts of risk and disaster into their programs and include such ordinary management measures as are appropriate and timely within their respective areas of responsibility (Article 25, Ley 8488). • As provided in Article 27 of Ley 8488, the budget of each public institution must include an allocation of resources for disaster-risk control, treating prevention as a concept consistent with the development practices that are promoted and implemented. • The advisory assistance that this Commission provides to institutions is directed toward an effective land-use and land-planning policy and must contribute to the adoption of control measures intended to reduce people’s vulnerability, considering that, at the municipal level, primary responsibility for addressing this problem rests with the municipality.
(Article 14(h)). 4. The amparo applicant submitted her request by sending an email to ...03 (see attached image), although the official channel is ...01, as stated by the CNE’s Service Comptroller in Oficio CNE-CS-OF-012-2026 of 31 July 2026. (…) In short, the CNE has acted proactively within our legal framework and in accordance with the parameters established by the Honorable Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional), both by providing prompt and proper responses to amparo applicants and by making recommendations, within our areas of authority, to other government institutions and directly to the Municipal Corporation. In other words, no violation whatsoever of the fundamental rights protections alleged by the amparo applicant has been established.”
- 4Yorleni León Marchena, in her capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Mixto de Ayuda Social, states under oath as follows: “First: ‘That she is the mother of 4 minors, one of whom has grade 3 autism, a condition established by an opinion issued by the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, and requires permanent supervision and specialized care, which is why she serves as his primary caregiver. She states that a drainage channel (caño) runs behind her home and that, for many years, the Municipality has neither cleaned nor maintained it.’ Response to the allegation: Mr. Nombre02, acting head of the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón, states verbatim in official letter IMAS-DDS-ARDSHC-ULDSLIM-0070-2026 as follows: ‘Partially True. According to the record updating the Social Information Form (Ficha de Información Social), the amparo applicant has 4 minors in her care. One of the minors has Grade III Autism, a fact verified by a medical opinion uploaded to the institution’s digital case file.There is no record regarding the fact stated by the amparo applicant: “She states that a drainage channel runs behind her home and that, for many years, the Municipality has neither cleaned nor maintained it,” because, in an interview conducted by the competent IMAS official, variable N°13 does not indicate the existence of a channel that floods the home, and the steps taken before the municipality are unknown. An image of the Social Information Form and an image of the medical opinion are attached. (…) Second: “That this drainage channel always floods the yard whenever it rains and, as a result of the recent heavy rains, it overflowed and sewage entered her home, causing property damage and exposing her family, especially her minor children and her son with a disability, to a serious risk to their health and physical integrity.” Response to the allegation: Mr. Nombre02, acting head of the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón, states verbatim in official letter IMAS-DDS-ARDSHC-ULDSLIM-0070-2026 as follows: “Partially True.It is unknown whether the yard where the amparo applicant resides floods whenever it rains; however, based on the incident numbers provided by the amparo applicant in her initial filing, there is evidence that the matter was reported to the Comisión Nacional de Emergencia.” Third: “That, in response to this emergency, she filed the corresponding reports with the 911 Emergency System under numbers 2026-07-05-3341 and 2026-07-0302657, and sent emails to IMAS and that institution’s Contraloría de Servicios, to the municipality, and to its municipal comptroller’s office, but because they were on vacation, there was no effective response or any officials available to address an emergency that endangered the life and dignity of her family.” Response to the allegation: Mr. Nombre02, acting head of the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón, states verbatim in official letter IMAS-DDS-ARDSHCULDSLIM-0070-2026 as follows: “Partially true.This local unit was not made aware of the reports while the emergency was being addressed; they were reported to the CNE on 03 July 2026. A review of the emails shows that they were sent to officials from the IMAS Executive Presidency and to the Contraloría de Servicios, which forwarded them to the head of the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social de Limón on 13 July. However, given the volume of incidents reported as a result of Tropical Wave #19, which affected the cantons of Limón and Matina, and commitments within the local schedule, a competent IMAS official is scheduled to visit the amparo applicant’s home on Monday, 03 August 2026.” Likewise, Ms. Loryi Valverde Cordero, Comptroller of Services, states verbatim in official letter IMAS-CD-CS-1122-2026 as follows: “TRUE. The case is detailed below: 1. On 3 July 2026, the Contraloría de Servicios received a first email sent by the user. Because the facts described concerned an emergency, the matter was forwarded by email on 13 July 2026 to the head of the competent Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social so that it could be addressed as appropriate within its authority. 2.On 6 July 2026, the Contraloría de Servicios received a second email concerning the same situation, which was forwarded by email on 14 July 2026 to the head of the corresponding Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social for attention. 3. On 14 July 2026, the Contraloría de Servicios informed the user by email that her matter had been forwarded to the head of the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social for the corresponding locality so that she could be given the appropriate guidance and assistance within its authority. 4. On 31 July 2026, the head of the corresponding Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social informed the user directly by email that a visit would be made to her home to conduct the appropriate social assessment based on the situation described in her submission. She was also informed that the visit was scheduled for the morning. 5. Subsequently, the Contraloría de Servicios asked the head of the corresponding Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social to report the outcome of the home visit in order to follow up on the matter raised by the user.” Fourth: “That she considers it unacceptable that, during a national emergency, public institutions lack effective mechanisms for assisting the most vulnerable population, leaving them completely unprotected.” Response to the allegation: Mr.Nombre02, acting head of the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón, states verbatim in official letter IMAS-DDS-ARDSHCULDSLIM-0070-2026 as follows: “Denied as inaccurate. The emergency was not declared nationwide; rather, the flooding resulted from the effects of Tropical Wave #19, which directly affected the Caribbean slope.” Fifth: “That she had previously asked IMAS for assistance as the caregiver of her son with a disability, but it was denied on the ground that he receives a pension (referring to the special pension under Ley 8769 in the amount of 373.000 colones, which does not even cover the selective diet required by his condition, therapies, and tutoring).” Response to the allegation: Mr. Nombre02, acting head of the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón, states verbatim in official letter IMAS-DDS-ARDSHCULDSLIM-0070-2026 as follows: “Denied as inaccurate. This office scheduled an appointment for a social assessment on 02 February 2026, which the amparo applicant did not attend, as confirmed by the attendance records in the SACI computer system, and as of this date no request for an appointment is recorded in our system.Images from the attendance-control system and appointment-request system are attached.” (…) Sixth: “That her son has severe food selectivity and therefore tolerates only a very specific diet essential to preserving his health, consisting of the following: breakfast of fish fillet with mashed potatoes; lunch of steak, zucchini, and chopped kiwi; and dinner consisting of a Pediasure beverage.” Response to the allegation: Mr. Nombre02, acting head of the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón, states verbatim in official letter IMAS-DDS-ARDSHC-ULDSLIM-0070-2026 as follows: “Not Established. There is no record in the most recent social assessment, dated 22/05/2025, that the amparo applicant stated or submitted any medical opinion regarding the type of diet the minor must follow.” Seventh: “That these foods are very expensive and, because they live under her sister’s protection, she made a great effort to obtain provisions for 7 days so that her son would not become malnourished, since he eats absolutely nothing else; however, all this food was lost in the flood, and her 3-year-old son lost his milk, diapers, and other items essential to his care.” Response to the allegation: Mr.Nombre02, acting head of the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón, states verbatim in official letter IMAS-DDS-ARDSHC-ULDSLIM-0070-2026 as follows: “Not Established. As part of the initial response measures, the Comisión Municipalidad de Emergencia distributes humanitarian assistance in communities affected by the flooding, and therefore there is no record as to whether such assistance was delivered to the amparo applicant. Moreover, in order to verify the losses, this office scheduled a home visit by a competent IMAS official for a social assessment on Monday, 03 August 2026. An image of the email notifying the amparo applicant of the visit is attached.” (…) Eighth: “That the flood destroyed all her essential property: major appliances, couches used by her son with autism for sensory regulation, food, mattresses, clothing, hygiene and personal-use supplies, wardrobes, a kitchen cabinet, school supplies, school uniforms, school shoes, and blankets.” Response to the allegation: Mr.Nombre02, acting head of the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón, states verbatim in official letter IMAS-DDS-ARDSHCULDSLIM-0070-2026 as follows: “Established. This unit conducted a home visit for a social assessment through a competent IMAS official on Monday, 03 August 2026, in order to verify the losses reported by the amparo applicant.” Ninth: “The respondent authority must report whether the email address to which the applicant sent the request for information is designated as an official mechanism for receiving submissions from users.” Response to the allegation: Mr. Nombre02, acting head of the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón, states verbatim in official letter IMAS-DDS-ARDSHCULDSLIM-0070-2026 as follows: “Established. The email address ...04 is an active and official mechanism for submissions from the public; in addition, this office makes the email address ...02 available to users for matters falling directly within the authority of this local unit.Finally, it should be noted that, after the home visit was conducted on 03 August, this office recommended granting the Emergency Assistance benefit for the purchase of essential household goods for the amparo applicant’s home, as well as financial resources for basic needs; she will be notified of this by an Administrative Approval Decision sent to the email address she provided.” On the merits: Pursuant to Article 2 of Ley N°4760 Ley de Creación del Instituto Mixto de Ayuda Social, the purpose of that institute is to address extreme poverty in the country: “Article 2.- The purpose of IMAS is to resolve the problem of extreme poverty in the country, for which it shall plan, direct, implement, and oversee a national plan intended for that purpose. To achieve that objective, it shall use all human and financial resources placed at its disposal by the country’s employers and workers, domestic or foreign public-sector institutions, private organizations of every kind, religious institutions, and any other groups interested in participating in the Plan Nacional de Lucha contra la Pobreza.” Pursuant to the cited provision, the Instituto Mixto de Ayuda Social is subject to the principle of legality in force under our rule of law.It must therefore verify that the beneficiaries for whom public funds are intended qualify for the benefits provided by the Institution; in addition, it must distribute those public funds, which are limited, in the manner that best fulfills the public purpose. The failure to approve and disburse financial assistance at a particular time does not arise from an arbitrary or deliberate decision, but rather from adherence to the principle of legality, because the Public Administration may perform only those acts that are permitted to it. It is therefore inappropriate to approve and disburse resources unless the requirements established in the institution’s regulations have first been met. It is important to clarify that the benefits granted by IMAS are based on an applicant’s demonstrated circumstances, on a “specified duration” established by regulation or professional social-work criteria, and on the regulations governing their implementation.It is entirely lawful and consistent with the legal system for a benefit to be provided, for a defined period and in accordance with current institutional regulations, to a person who is in need and qualifies under the prioritization criteria. In this regard, the Constitutional Chamber (Sala Constitucional), in decision number 2025019695 issued at twenty minutes past nine on 27 June 2025, stated: “(…) Additionally, on this matter, it should be noted that this Constitutional Court agrees with the respondent authorities that the benefits granted by the Instituto Mixto de Ayuda Social are temporary and not permanent, and are assigned on the basis of socioeconomic assessments conducted for families or individuals by the competent Social Development Professionals; they are also subject to budgetary availability and compliance with the requirements established in the institution’s regulations.This constitutional jurisdiction has no involvement in those matters because they concern mere legality. (…)” Likewise, Article 176 of the Political Constitution provides: “Public administration shall be conducted in a sustainable, transparent, and responsible manner, based on a multiyear budgeting framework intended to ensure the continuity of the services provided…”; it must therefore be borne in mind that, in the case of IMAS, that budget cannot be implemented without the support, resources, and participation of the various sectors and social actors. Nevertheless, even with the combined efforts contemplated by Ley N°4760, the scarcity of investment resources in relation to the demand for assistance received by IMAS makes it materially impossible to satisfy every person subject to its administration, because social-investment resources are indisputably very limited and demand is so extensive that it exceeds them.It is therefore appropriate to establish parameters, conditions, and priorities in advance so that the institution can provide a more efficient public service; that is, so that it can meet the needs of those in the greatest need among persons experiencing extreme poverty and economic vulnerability. For this reason, the relevant decisions have been made to ensure that persons meeting those conditions and priorities receive the benefits offered through IMAS programs, because they reliably demonstrate that they are in the most urgent circumstances. Accordingly, resources from social programs directed toward sectors experiencing poverty and extreme poverty are distributed under a duty to prioritize assistance according to the poverty line. Thus, the granting of benefits is time-limited, as the Constitutional Chamber stated in decision number 2025021551 issued at twenty minutes past nine on 11 July 2025: “(…) In this particular matter, the claimant should note that, regarding social assistance, this Chamber has clearly stated that such assistance consists of benefits, not rights, and that their granting arises from a voluntary act by the State.(…)” It should also be noted that IMAS, as a decentralized institution, enjoys administrative autonomy, which confers regulatory authority on the Administration. Through that authority, it creates a body of regulations subordinate to and limited by statute, intended to govern the provision of services and the granting of benefits, subsidies, and monetary transfers provided by the institution within the Programa de Protección y Promoción Social, in fulfillment of the purposes established in Ley N° 4760. This regulatory authority forms part of the discretionary public powers held by the entity by virtue of its decentralized nature. It thus enacted the Reglamento para la Prestación de Servicios y Otorgamiento de Beneficios, Subsidios y Transferencias Monetarias del IMAS, which in turn establishes the requirements for the assistance, assessment, processing, monitoring, evaluation, suspension, denial, or revocation of benefits, subsidies, and monetary transfers within the IMAS program offerings.Those requirements must be implemented by the bodies or persons defined in its provisions and related provisions when assisting individuals, households, public- or private-law entities and/or communities (Article 1: Purpose and Scope). For the specific case, and insofar as relevant here, Article 3, subsection ss), provides: “Subsidy: A public benefit of an economic nature and defined duration intended to meet a specific need”; and subsection xx) provides: “Monetary transfer: Financial support of a defined duration granted to individuals, households, or organizations benefiting from the Programa de Protección y Promoción Social, for the purpose of contributing wholly or partially to meeting a specific need.” It may be concluded from the foregoing text that a subsidy granted by IMAS, as well as a monetary transfer, has a defined duration and is granted to individuals, households, or organizations benefiting from the Programa de Protección y Promoción Social.In other words, IMAS provides benefits for a specified period, according to the established grant period, and for a specific need. It must also be considered that IMAS administers limited public resources intended to meet social demand that substantially exceeds its operational and budgetary capacity, a circumstance that requires the Administration to establish technical and objective prioritization mechanisms to ensure fulfillment of the public purpose assigned by Article 2 of its enabling statute. In this specific case, with respect to the amparo applicant’s allegation that she requested assistance from IMAS as the caregiver of her son with a disability, it has been established that the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón scheduled an appointment for assistance on 02 February 2026, which the amparo applicant did not attend. After that date, there is no record of any new request to IMAS for assistance as her son’s caregiver.As to the response to the emergency resulting from Tropical Wave N°19, the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón learned of the amparo applicant’s case on 13 July 2026 through a communication from the institution’s Contraloría de Servicios. Because of the volume of incidents, a home visit to conduct the corresponding assessment of the case was scheduled for 03 August 2026. It is important to note that IMAS responded to the amparo applicant’s request for assistance, both through the Contraloría de Servicios by email on 14 July 2026 and through the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón by email dated 31 July 2026. It should be considered that the amparo applicant’s emergency assessment was addressed by the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón once it learned of the matter on 13 July 2026, and a home visit was scheduled for 03 August 2026. It should be noted that the present amparo proceeding was filed by the amparo applicant before the Constitutional Chamber on 08 July 2026 and communicated to this office on 30 July 2026; however, it bears repeating that the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón did not learn of the case until 13 July 2026.Thus, considering the follow-up conducted on 13 July and 03 August, the amparo applicant’s household was assisted promptly by the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón. It must therefore be considered that no disproportionate or unreasonable period elapsed before the case was addressed, as this honorable Chamber has regularly stated. It should be noted that the present proceeding was served on the institution I represent on 23 February 2026, and therefore the amparo applicant’s claim is premature. Regarding the foregoing, the Constitutional Chamber stated as follows in decision N° 2024007825 issued at 09:20 hours on 22 March 2024: “IV.- Regarding the authorities of the Instituto Mixto de Ayuda Social. The applicant alleges that, on 22 June 2023, the protected person appeared at the Ciudad Quesada de San Carlos branch of the Instituto Mixto de Ayuda Social to request socioeconomic assistance for herself and her family unit; however, he complains that she was not granted any benefit, despite being classified as experiencing extreme poverty according to report 0237F983 in the institution’s form.In this regard, upon examining the record, this Court finds that this aspect of the application must be denied. Specifically, the record shows that, on 22 June 2023, the protected person did in fact appear at the Ciudad Quesada de San Carlos branch of the Instituto Mixto de Ayuda Social, where the corresponding assessment was conducted, after which her request was placed on the waiting list for the granting of a subsidy in accordance with institutional prioritization parameters and criteria. For that reason, on that same day, the authorities of the Ciudad Quesada de San Carlos branch of the Instituto Mixto de Ayuda Social notified the protected person as follows: ‘approval of an institutional subsidy shall proceed in accordance with the procedures for granting it and with institutional prioritization parameters and criteria.’ Based on the foregoing, it is evident that, between the date on which the protected person appeared before the IMAS authorities—22 June 2023—and the date on which she sought amparo—29 July 2023—no disproportionate period had elapsed for a proper determination, because only 1 month and 6 days had passed since the request.In other words, the claim made by the applicant is premature, and therefore no violation of fundamental rights is found…” As to the visit conducted on 03 August 2026, the Unidad Local de Desarrollo Social Limón recommended granting the Emergency Assistance benefit for the purchase of essential household goods, as well as financial resources for basic needs. Ms. Nombre01 will be notified of these benefits by an administrative decision sent by email to the address she provided. In accordance with the foregoing, it has been established that IMAS acted in conformity with the legal system and the institution’s regulations, as demonstrated by this filing and the attached evidence, because it followed up on the matter concerning the amparo applicant’s household and addressed it within the corresponding institutional timeframes, taking into account the prioritization and targeting guidelines for the program offerings directed toward the target population. Accordingly, it is respectfully requested that the present amparo proceeding be denied, without a separate award of costs, damages, or losses.”
- 5The legal requirements have been observed in the proceedings conducted.
Justice Rueda Leal drafted the decision; and, Reasons:
I.Preliminary matter. Before analyzing the merits of the matter—concerning the alleged violation of the right to prompt and effective proceedings—it must be clarified that, beginning with Voto nro. 2008-02545 issued at 8:55 hours on 22 February 2008, this Chamber has held that matters concerning whether the Public Administration has complied with the time limits established by the Ley General de la Administración Pública (Articles 261 and 325) or by sector-specific statutes governing special administrative proceedings must—with certain exceptions—be referred to the administrative-litigation jurisdiction (jurisdicción contencioso-administrativa). This applies to time limits for concluding, by a final administrative act, an administrative proceeding initiated ex officio or at the request of a party, or for considering the applicable administrative remedies. In the sub lite, precisely such an exception is presented, because the matter concerns a request for assistance on behalf of minors. Having clarified that point, the Chamber proceeds to decide the specific situation raised in this proceeding.
II.Subject matter of the application. The amparo applicant states that, because of the heavy rains, a drainage channel near her house overflowed and flooded it. She asserts that she requested assistance from the CNE and IMAS. However, she has not yet received it.
III.Proven facts. The following facts, which are material to the determination of this matter, are deemed duly established, either because they were proven or because the respondent authority failed to address them as required by the initial order:
- a)On 6 July 2026, the amparo applicant sent an email to the address ...05 concerning the subject matter of this proceeding. (See evidence submitted).
- b)The address through which the CNE’s Contraloría de Servicios assists users is ...01. (See report rendered and evidence submitted).
- c)On 3 July 2026, the amparo applicant requested assistance from IMAS because her house had flooded. (Undisputed fact).
- d)On 3 August 2026, IMAS conducted a home visit and recommended granting the Emergency Assistance benefit for the purchase of essential household goods for the amparo applicant’s home, as well as financial resources for basic needs. (See report rendered and evidence submitted).
IV.Regarding the specific case. In the sub examine, the amparo applicant states that, because of the heavy rains, a drainage channel near her house overflowed and flooded it. She asserts that she requested assistance from the CNE and IMAS. However, she has not yet received it.
With respect to the CNE, the Chamber deemed it proven that, on 6 July 2026, the amparo applicant sent an email to the address ...05 concerning the subject matter of this proceeding. However, the address through which the CNE’s Contraloría de Servicios assists users is ...01. Accordingly, no violation to the detriment of the protected person is established, because she sent her email to an address that was not the official mechanism for handling such matters.
With respect to IMAS, the Chamber confirmed that, on 3 July 2026, the amparo applicant requested assistance from that institute because her house had flooded. Subsequently, on 3 August 2026, IMAS conducted a home visit and recommended granting the Emergency Assistance benefit for the purchase of essential household goods for the amparo applicant’s home, as well as financial resources for basic needs.
Considering that the request to IMAS was submitted on 3 July 2026, the Chamber finds that, when this amparo proceeding was filed on 9 July 2026, an unreasonable amount of time had not elapsed before it was addressed. In any event, the Chamber notes that IMAS has already inspected the interested party’s home and recommended granting the corresponding benefit. In view of the foregoing, the application is denied.
V.Separate note by Justice Castillo Víquez regarding prompt and effective administrative justice. I have supported this Court’s position that, when a person seeking judicial protection alleges a violation of the right to prompt and effective justice in administrative proceedings, the legal dispute must be heard by the Administrative-Litigation Courts rather than by this Chamber. However, the recent enactment of Ley n.° 9097, Ley de Regulación del Derecho de Petición, established that this right is eligible for judicial protection through the amparo proceeding provided for in 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 cases in which the petitioner considers that the Administration’s material conduct, administrative acts, or response are affecting the petitioner’s fundamental rights. In my view, the recently enacted legislation does not require this Court to alter its line of precedent, as, under Article 7 of its Law, this Court has exclusive authority to define its own jurisdiction.
Therefore, except for those constitutional-law disputes that this Chamber itself has recognized as exceptional cases that may be heard in this jurisdiction through the constitutional guarantee proceeding of amparo, all other cases fall within the authority of the judges of the administrative-litigation jurisdiction, for the reasons stated by this Court (decision N° 2008-02545 issued at 8:55 hours on 22 February 2008). All of this is consistent with Article 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights, the Law of the Constitution—its values, principles, and rules—and the corresponding statutory provisions, based on a logical, systemic, and purposive interpretation of the legal system.
VI. SEPARATE NOTE BY JUSTICE SALAZAR ALVARADO
In environmental matters, it is also my view that, if the Public Administration has already intervened, the matter should be heard and decided by the administrative-litigation jurisdiction. Nevertheless, I do address the merits when other rights of persons affected by the source of contamination are at stake, including health, quality of life, and the right to enjoy a healthy and pollution-free environment (Article 50 of the Political Constitution), as occurs in this case, in which the applicant submitted a request for assistance on behalf of minors, involving a violation of the right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment and a dignified standard of quality of life.
VII.Documentation submitted to the case file. The parties are advised that, if they have submitted any paper document or any objects or evidence contained on an additional electronic, computer, magnetic, optical, or telematic device, or on a device produced using new technologies, they must retrieve them within a maximum period of 30 business days from notice of this judgment. The parties are warned that any material not collected within that period will be destroyed pursuant to the “Reglamento sobre Expediente Electrónico ante el Poder Judicial” (approved by the Corte Plena in Article XXVI of session nro. 27-11 of 22 August 2011 and published in Boletín Judicial nro. 19 of 26 January 2012) and Article LXXXI of session nro. 43-12 of the Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial of 3 May 2012.
Therefore:
The application is denied. Justice Castillo Víquez files a separate note. Justice Salazar Alvarado files a separate note.
Fernando Castillo V.
President Fernando Cruz C.
Paul Rueda L.
Luis Fdo. Salazar A.
Jorge Araya G.
Anamari Garro V.
Ingrid Hess H.
CASE FILE N° 26-024678-0007-CO Telephone numbers: 2549-1500 / 800-SALA-4TA (800-7252-482). Fax: 2220-4607 / 2220-4844. Website: www.poder-judicial.go.cr/salaconstitucional. Address: (Dirección01).