Duty to inform about electromagnetic fields in the SIEPAC projectDeber de informar sobre campos electromagnéticos en el proyecto SIEPAC

*060118400007CO* Res. Nº 2006016794 CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at sixteen hours and thirty-four minutes on the twenty-first of November of two thousand six.

Amparo action processed under case file number 06-011840-0007-CO, filed by FRED GREINER, of legal age, psychiatrist, passport number 91819396, resident of Alajuela, of U.S. nationality, on behalf of Corporación Monte de Piedra S.A. and the communities of Barrio La Victoria in Liberia and the developments: La Carreta, Alaska, Las Brisas, El Peloncito, El Guanacaste, and Santa Lucía, against the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad.-

Whereas:

1.- By brief filed at 15:10 hours on September 26, 2006, the petitioner states that the protected company is the owner of the property in the Partido de Guanacaste, real property folio registration number 5-045776-000. He indicates that the respondent Institute years ago began the construction of a project called SIEPAC (Miravalles-Liberia Transmission Line), starting at the Miravalles Geothermal Project and ending at the Substation located in Barrio La Cruz de Guanacaste, with a length of 32.8 kilometers. The route of this project includes both the land where his property is located and the communities of Liberia, Guanacaste, Barrio La Victoria, where the high-tension lines will pass just a few meters from homes, where children and adults live, and where there are schools, churches, and all the infrastructure of a community. In the specific case of the protected company's property, ICE has even already carried out the corresponding appraisal to establish the easement (servidumbre) and tower sites that will affect the property regarding house construction, crop planting, permanence of vegetation, earthworks (movimientos de tierra), storage of flammable materials, and accumulation of materials exceeding 5 meters in height, which will have a length of 815 meters and a width of 30 meters, with two tower sites (see folios 9, 10, and 13-23 of the case file). Faced with this real and imminent threat of detriment to their rights, an evident fear is generated regarding the existence of so-called EMFs (electromagnetic fields), a force over which there has been global controversy (see folios 11 and 12 of the case file), because the community is not informed of the technological advances on the matter and the office that ICE has provides very superficial and outdated information. He considers the rights enshrined in Articles 21 and 50 of the Constitution violated, in that they are not being duly informed of the scope of the electromagnetic fields.

2.- Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez, in his capacity as Director of the SIEPAC Project, reports under oath (folio 79) that the project for the electrical interconnection system for the Central American countries consists of the creation of a Regional Electricity Market (MER) through the construction of 230 Kv electricity transmission lines and electrical substations, which will allow the exchange of electrical energy among MER agents. On December 30, 1996, the Governments of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama signed the Framework Treaty for the Central American Electricity Market, approved by Costa Rica through Law No. 7848 of November 20, 1998. Article 3 of the law approving the Treaty authorized ICE's participation as a shareholder of the Grid Owner Company. The purpose of the Treaty was to foster the development of a competitive regional electricity market through transmission lines interconnecting the national grids. ICE has been responsible for the route design of the section of the SIEPAC line that crosses Costa Rica, as well as the acquisition of the necessary easement (servidumbre) rights for the execution of the project. The physical works of the project are located from the Border with Nicaragua to the border with Panama. Paralyzing the project in question would imply not only disregarding the commitments assumed by the country in the Treaty but also affecting the normal flow of electrical energy transactions at the Central American level. He indicates that the institution proceeded to carry out administrative appraisal No. 242-2006 on March 10, 2006, in order to compensate the owner of the property registered in the Public Property Registry under Real Property Folio 5-045776-000, located in the province of Guanacaste, canton of Bagaces, the company protected in this action. He indicates that the protected party did not accept the aforementioned administrative appraisal; therefore, ICE is currently litigating the expropriation proceedings for the easement (servidumbre) right in judicial courts. The encumbrance on the property in question is 815.05 linear meters in length by 30 meters in width, for an area of 2 ha 4449.27 m2, a property whose main activity is livestock farming, with the existence of pastures and scrubland; in addition, on the property there is a dwelling house and a cattle pen, structures that are not affected by the easement (servidumbre) to be established. Regarding Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) and the regulation concerning possible health threats, the General Health Law provides the Ministry of Health with the competence to set limits regarding exposure to electric and magnetic fields in electrical energy transmission works. By virtue of the foregoing, said Ministry, jointly with MINAE, issued the Regulation to Regulate Electric and Magnetic Fields in Energy Transmission Works, Executive Decree No. 29296-SALUD-MINAE, which defines the environmental conditions to be considered in the planning, design, maintenance, and operation stages of the transmission system, as well as ICE's obligation to comply with said regulation, which was taken into account for this project. He requests that the filed action be dismissed.

3.- Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortes, in his capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, reports under oath (folio 221) that regarding the reported facts, he adheres in all respects to the statements made by Engineer Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez. He requests that the filed action be declared without merit.

4.- By resolution of this Chamber at 13:29 hours on October 24, 2006 (folio 223), the material error contained in the resolution issued at 15:23 hours on September 29, 2006, is corrected, in that what was alleged by the petitioner regarding the Miravalles-Liberia Transmission Line project is that ICE has not established an effective information and guidance program for those persons over whose properties the lines will pass and how to avoid any damage to health. He requests that the action be granted and that ICE be ordered not to continue with the establishment of the SIEPAC project, until a Risk Management and Information Department on Electromagnetic Fields, ways to prevent risks to human and animal health, and environmental protection procedures is created, both for his represented party and for all affected communities, and that timely, real, and effective attention be given to their inquiries. This is because ICE has a comprehensive risk department, which bureaucratically provides superficial and generic information, which does not satisfy the demands for information for the specific case of each affected community, and ICE often places the duty of information on SETENA and not on the mere installation of the towers on said properties, as was indicated.

5.- Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni, in his capacity as General Judicial Attorney-in-Fact without Limit of Sum of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, reports under oath (folio 232) that regarding the reported facts, he adheres in all respects to the statements made by Engineer Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez in the report dated October 31, 2006 (folio 79), and requests that the filed action be declared without merit.

6.- Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni, in his capacity as General Judicial Attorney-in-Fact without Limit of Sum of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, reports under oath (folio 234) that it is not true that the development of said project contravenes Article 50 of the Political Constitution, given that, in compliance with the Right to a free, healthy, and balanced environment, in the preliminary stages and the execution stages of the project, the environmental mitigation and compensation actions ordered by SETENA have been carried out. Regarding the petitioner's assertion that ICE has not established an effective guidance program for those persons over whose properties the SIEPAC project line will pass, he does not share it, as in session No. 4912 of October 21, 1997, article 15, the Board of Directors approved the "Institutional Policy and Strategy for the treatment of electromagnetic fields of transmission lines", by which, among other things, the "dissemination of available information" was agreed upon. He highlights the fact that when ICE studies and designs the different transmission line projects in the various areas of the country, outreach and consultation meetings are held with the residents of the area, in which all doubts of the interested persons are clarified and corresponding informational brochures are delivered. Also, information regarding electromagnetic fields is delivered at the public hearings requested by the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, as part of the environmental assessment (evaluación ambiental) that it executes by law. He reports that in the specific case of the SIEPAC Transmission project in Costa Rica, the hearings convened to inform about the project's environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental, EIA) were held in the month of June 2004 in the localities of Cañas, Esparza, and Palmar Sur; at these activities, a brochure was given to attendees with information about the transmission works, their function, main characteristics, aspects of right-of-way and Electromagnetic Fields. Regarding access to information on electromagnetic fields, it is pertinent to report that ICE channels inquiries from users, administrative staff, and persons affected by institutional projects to the various technical departments involved in the matter, so that when a query regarding Electromagnetic Fields is made, it is channeled through the Dirección Gestión Integral de Riesgos; without prejudice that due to the complexity and specificity of the matter consulted, it may be resolved by the officials of the Centro de Gestión Ambiental of the department specialized in Electricity Transportation or in Project Execution, who are the officials that collect and process updated information on the matter. He says that although there is no specialized and specific center dedicated full-time to providing information on the subject of EMFs, through its departments the necessary information is provided and the doubts of interested persons are clarified. He clearly states that ICE observed the procedures that the legal system has established to ensure the protection of health and the environment. He points out that it is not true that the lack of a Specialized Center on Electromagnetic Fields violates the petitioner's right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, especially considering that the Institution not only has the capacity to respond to the information needs of the communities and persons affected by the Electricity Transportation projects, in the case of SIEPAC, as the Institution did, but that the development of the project is executed in accordance with the legal system, including both the incorporation of the opinions and expert reports established by law and the respect for the maximum permitted values. He concludes that the Institution considers that the rights of the individual, with constitutional privilege, must be analyzed congruently with the rights of the community, the general interest, the public interest, understanding that in this case the petitioner seeks to have a personal right protected, without taking into consideration the benefits that the expansion of electric service transmission lines represents for the community. He requests that the filed action be declared without merit.

7.- Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez, in his capacity as Director of the SIEPAC Project, reports under oath (folio 282), reiterating what was stated in his previous report (folio 79) and additionally adds that it is clear that ICE observed the procedures that the legal system has established to ensure the protection of health and the environment. He points out that it is not true that the lack of a Specialized Center on Electromagnetic Fields violates the petitioner's right to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, especially considering that the Institution not only has the capacity to respond to the information needs of the communities and persons affected by the Electricity Transportation projects, in the case of SIEPAC, as the Institution did, but that the development of the project is executed in accordance with the legal system, including both the incorporation of the opinions and expert reports established by law and the respect for the maximum permitted values.

8.- Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés, in his capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, reports under oath (folio 330) that regarding the reported facts, he adheres in all respects to the statements made by Engineer Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni. He requests that the filed action be declared without merit.

9.- Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni, in his capacity as General Judicial Attorney-in-Fact without Limit of Sum of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, reports under oath (folio 332) that the required report is not signed by Engineer Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés, as he is outside of San José, for which reason he presents it in the stated capacity, clarifying that the facts answered therein will be ratified by the Executive President of the Institute upon his return, with the respective legal consequences, and in the sense that said ratification will be understood as a declaration on the facts under the faith of an oath.

10.- In the proceedings followed, the legal requirements have been observed.

Drafted by Magistrate Calzada Miranda; and,

Considering:

I.- Proven facts. Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly proven, either because they have been accredited or because the respondent omitted to refer to them as required in the initial order:

• a)The project for the electrical interconnection system for the Central American countries consists of the creation of a Regional Electricity Market (MER) through the construction of 230 Kv electricity transmission lines and electrical substations, which will allow the exchange of electrical energy among MER agents. (folio 80) b) On December 30, 1996, the Governments of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama signed the Framework Treaty for the Central American Electricity Market, approved by Costa Rica through Law No. 7848 of November 20, 1998. (folio 80) c) The Miravalles-Liberia Transmission Line project is related to the Project for the Electrical Interconnection System for the Countries of Central America (SIEPAC). (folio 235) d) ICE is carrying out administrative and judicial proceedings aimed at acquiring the easement (servidumbre) rights of 30 meters in width, following a determined route. (folio 81) e) The respondent institution, in attention to this project, proceeded to carry out administrative appraisal No. 242-2006 on March 10, 2006, in order to compensate the owner of the property registered in the Public Property Registry under Real Property Folio 5-045776-000, located in the province of Guanacaste, canton of Bagaces, which is the company protected in this action. (folio 82) f) The protected party did not accept the administrative appraisal made by the respondent Institute; therefore, ICE is currently litigating the expropriation proceedings for the easement (servidumbre) right in judicial courts. (folio 82) g) In session No. 4912 of October 21, 1997, article 15, ICE's Board of Directors approved the "Institutional Policy and Strategy for the treatment of electromagnetic fields of transmission lines", by which, among other things, the "dissemination of available information" was agreed upon, as well as the permanent updating of available information on extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF-elf). (folio 247) h) The information related to electromagnetic fields concerning this Project was disseminated to the community at the public hearings convened to hear about the environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental, EIA) in the month of June 2004, in the localities of Cañas, Esparza, and Palmar Sur, where a brochure with information was handed out. (folio 247) i) ICE channels inquiries about electromagnetic fields through the Dirección Gestión Integral de Riesgos. (folio 248) j) There is no specialized and specific center dedicated full-time to providing information on the subject of electromagnetic fields. (folio 248) II.- Purpose of the action. The petitioner considers the fundamental rights of his represented party violated, as he alleges that the respondent institution has not established a Risk Management and Information Department on Electromagnetic Fields, in order to inform about the ways to prevent risks to human and animal health from electromagnetic fields, as well as environmental protection procedures, that provides timely, real, and effective attention to their inquiries.

III.- On the merits. From the study of the case file records, it is found that the Miravalles-Liberia Transmission Line project in question is related to the Project for the Electrical Interconnection System for the Countries of Central America (SIEPAC). This project, in turn, aims for an electrical interconnection system for the Central American countries consisting of the creation of a Regional Electricity Market (MER) through the construction of 230 Kv electricity transmission lines and electrical substations, which will allow the exchange of electrical energy among MER agents. On December 30, 1996, the Governments of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama signed the Framework Treaty for the Central American Electricity Market, which was approved by Costa Rica through Law No. 7848 of November 20, 1998, and is currently being developed by ICE. It is in consideration of this project that the property of the protected company, No. 5-045776-000 located in Bagaces, was appraised so that ICE could acquire the easement (servidumbre) rights, which is under discussion in judicial proceedings. Now, regarding the purpose of this amparo action, which is the community's right to remain adequately informed about the risks posed by Electromagnetic Fields, the respondent authorities reported under oath to this Court that the information was publicly disseminated when the respective hearings were held in the month of June 2004 related to the environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental, EIA), where brochures were also distributed to the communities through which the lines will pass, and that they currently channel any inquiry regarding them through the Dirección Gestión Integral de Riesgos, which indeed is not a specialized and specific center dedicated to this full time.

IV.- Citizen participation in environmental matters: This Court has already previously referred to the subject matter under study, regarding which it has determined that citizen participation in environmental matters encompasses two essential points: the right to information relating to environmental projects, or those that could cause harm to natural resources and the environment, and the guarantee of effective participation in the decision-making process on these matters. Therefore, the Costa Rican State must not only invite citizen participation but must promote and respect it when it occurs (see decisions number 2001-10466 and 2003-6322). Thus, it is of great importance to make available to interested parties the information that public offices have on the matter, such as that related to environmental impact assessments (evaluaciones de impacto ambiental) handled by the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, or the information required for the approval of regulatory plans by the respective municipalities or sanitary landfills, as is the case. It was the Rio Convention that, in Principle 10, elevated this participation to the rank of a principle in environmental matters, by stating:

"The best way to deal with environmental issues is with the participation of all interested citizens, at the corresponding level. At the national level, every person should have adequate access to environmental information held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities, as well as the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making information available to all. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy, shall be provided." From this principle, the importance given internationally to environmental issues, and in general, above all, to the participation of civil society in decisions of great significance for the community, was clearly evidenced. Thus, as Costa Rica is a signatory State to this instrument, it is certainly bound and conditioned, for that is the consequence of its subscription, as this Court considered in decision number 8319-2000, of eight hours and eighteen minutes on September eight of two thousand:

"Thus, its purpose is for governmental decisions to be the result of a discussion that is not restricted to small official circles or partial interests, but rather that other opinions are taken into consideration, with the necessary openness to create expanded debate, while still complying, of course, with the requirements established by the corresponding legislation. It is not a matter of de-constitutionalizing the principle of legality of the Public Administration, although it certainly is a more democratic form of government, which expands the forums for debate on topics such as environmental protection, and by virtue of which, they are open to citizen intervention and opinion. We are, then, facing an option already widely accepted in the evolution of the concept of democracy, and this amparo action offers a magnificent opportunity to give it clear and effective validity, so that it does not remain mere discourse. For this very reason, the environmental issue is a matter that this Chamber has already recognized as one that grants private individuals special standing, and which is recognized as a 'reactional right' (see decisions 2233-93 and 3705-93 of this Chamber).

"In environmental law, the procedural requirement of standing tends to extend and broaden in such a dimension that it necessarily leads to the abandonment of the traditional concept, it being understood that, in general terms, any person may be a party and that their right does not emanate from property titles, rights, or specific actions they could exercise according to the rules of conventional law, but rather their procedural action responds to what modern commentators call the diffuse interest, by which the original standing of the legitimate interested party, or even the simple interested party, is diffused among all the members of a certain category of persons who are thus equally affected by the illegal acts that violate them. In the case of environmental protection, the typically diffuse interest that legitimizes the subject to bring legal action transforms, by virtue of its incorporation into the list of human rights, into a true 'reactional right,' which, as its name indicates, empowers its holder to 'react' against violations originating from illegitimate acts or omissions." (see decision 3705-93) It is for this reason that, through Law 7412 of June 3, 1994, the Legislative Assembly reformed Article 50 of the Political Constitution, guaranteeing every person the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. In this matter, then, there is standing to denounce acts that infringe upon that right and to claim reparation for the damage caused, through effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings. In this manner, when the Political Constitution mentions that the Government of the Republic is popular, representative, alternative, and responsible, we must be clear that citizen participation is not limited to the mere exercise of the right to vote, or the aspiration to achieve a public office through popular election, but also, and in this new vision, that people should be offered the real opportunity to contribute to the making of the State's political decisions, especially when these have national significance or could potentially affect the fundamental rights of certain sectors of the population. From Articles 1 and 50 of the Constitution, therefore, is rescued the consideration that citizens deserve in a democratic state, in which they can at least have access to information on the environment held by public authorities, just as the petitioners indicate. The precept commented on, then, incorporates the cited principle through access to available information and its dissemination, so that decision-making is not circumscribed to a limited group of interests. Certainly, in the matter we now analyze, our legal system already provides that individuals may request SETENA to hold public hearings, so that the positions formulated by the interested communities are taken into account in the decision-making that affects the environment, which has been incorporated into the Ley Orgánica del Ambiente and its Regulations, as the respondent authority reported." Precisely, the Ley Orgánica del Ambiente recognizes this principle in Article 6, which textually provides, where relevant:

"Artículo 6.

Participation of the inhabitants The State and the municipalities shall foster the active and organized participation of the inhabitants of the Republic in decision-making and actions aimed at protecting and improving the environment." Likewise, in the Regulation on procedures of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, SETENA), this principle is also enshrined, as set forth in Chapter IV, which regulates the public hearing provided for within the environmental impact assessment (estudio de impacto ambiental) procedure (Articles 35 to 40), where the active participation of both civil society and the municipalities—in their capacity as an entity "[...] constituted by the group of resident neighbors of a same canton, who promote and administer their own interests through the municipal government" (Article 1 of the Municipal Code) —is contemplated.

A similar rule is found in the Urban Planning Law (Ley de Planificación Urbana), regarding the approval by the municipalities of regulatory plans, by obligating them to "1) Convene a public hearing through the Official Gazette and the necessary additional dissemination, indicating the location, date, and time to review the project, and for the verbal or written observations that neighbors or interested parties may deem appropriate to formulate. The scheduling must be done at least fifteen business days in advance" (Article 17 of the Urban Planning Law).

This principle of citizen participation in environmental matters originates and is justified precisely by the application of the positivization of the democratic principle—enshrined in Article 1 of the Political Constitution. It is important to emphasize that this participation can be achieved individually, through associative groups of a private nature, as well as through local governments, to which, by their competence assigned in Article 169 of the Constitution, full competence is recognized to promote it in matters that may in some way affect the community of their jurisdiction, and indeed, if they fail to do so, they would be failing to fulfill one of the duties assigned to them by the constituent assembly, and which has been developed in ordinary legislation:

"Municipalities shall foster the active, conscious, and democratic participation of the people in the decision-making processes of the local government. Public institutions shall be obligated to collaborate so that these decisions are duly fulfilled" (Article 5 of the Municipal Code).

It is clear that citizen and municipal participation is of transcendental importance in order to promote awareness of environmental problems and to assist in the decision-making of the institutions responsible for the preservation, surveillance, and protection of the environment and natural resources. It is not merely a right of participation, but a duty of the community and municipality in the decision-making and discussions regarding the location of a landfill (relleno sanitario). In this same vein, in judgment number 2000-10466, at ten hours and seventeen minutes of November twenty-fourth, two thousand, the Chamber indicated that in no way:

"[...] can the human being—who will receive the effects of governmental decisions on environmental matters—be excluded from participating in the decision on issues linked to this matter." Previously, this Court recognized the importance of the participation of local governments in this type of process under the following considerations:

"[...] Moreover, municipal competences regarding the preservation and protection of the environment cannot be limited to the organization of the public hearing—which by legal provision corresponds to SETENA—but go much further, such as raising awareness among citizens about citizen participation, the filing of complaints—with technical evidence—before administrative entities and courts of justice, the proper management of garbage and industrial waste, the control and oversight to ensure that environmental laws are enforced, and the promotion of pertinent legal remedies, such as the request for suspension of administrative acts deemed harmful to the environment, not in the constitutional jurisdiction, but in the contentious-administrative and civil jurisdiction of the Treasury, among other duties" (judgment number 2001-5737, at fourteen hours and forty-one minutes of June twenty-seventh, two thousand one).

The Chamber also clarified that it is an indispensable requirement that the hearing be held in a place where the neighbors can attend, and preferably at the site of the events, since otherwise, the holding of the hearing ordered by the Administration would fail to achieve its purpose, where obviously the lack of resources cannot constitute an obstacle to bringing to the record all the evidentiary elements that the Administration requires to make a decision on matters of such fundamental importance, as it will necessarily have implications for the environment and the community. Community participation in environmental decision-making forms part of the procedure to which the State must adhere, and is at the same time an integral part of the fundamental right of every person, under the terms provided in Article 50 of the Political Constitution. For this reason, constitutional jurisprudence has repeatedly held that the right to a hearing is part of substantive due process and is a form of expression of participatory democracy. Regarding the issue of information in environmental matters, it has also been stated:

"In environmental matters, we must transfer this concept of the right to information to a new perspective that every individual or community has to request information and to be informed by any state entity—[information] that cannot be obstructed by state institutions regarding any project that may affect the enjoyment of their right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. This is, then, the guarantee that will allow any individual or community to participate, making use of diffuse interests of access to participation, within the decision-making processes that affect that right, since the contrary would be illusory and the constitutional norm would be superfluous [...]" (judgment number 2331-96, cited supra).

In this special matter, every person must have adequate information about materials and activities or projects that may imply a danger or threat to communities (right to health), and to the conservation and preservation of the environment (right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment), as well as for the effective opportunity to participate in the processes of adopting such decisions; since, when dealing with the right to the environment, standing corresponds to the human being as such, because the injury to this fundamental right is suffered by both the community—as a whole—and the individual in particular. Therefore, the Administration must facilitate and foster population awareness and participation by making information available to everyone, not only the members of the community, but also the general citizenry, as in environmental matters the existence of a genuine diffuse interest has been considered (as previously noted in this judgment).

V.- In previous cases where the Chamber has had the opportunity to rule on the alleged danger posed by electromagnetic fields, the majority of this Court held that it had not been possible to determine with scientific certainty whether a causal link existed between the deterioration of health and the presence of high-tension lines near dwellings. However, in judgment No. 1998-2806, reiterated in No. 2002-8554, this Court clearly held that the Chamber understood that rules had been established imposing operational limits on high-tension lines, as well as regarding the magnitude of the electromagnetic field they generate, and the necessary updating of permissible limits based on advances in scientific knowledge, among other conditions. Hence, the amparo actions were dismissed, imposing on the respondent Institute (ICE) the responsibility to verify the permissible limits and assuming that the regulation that had been established for such purpose would be complied with as ordered. Well then, in session No. 4912 of October 21, 1997, Article 15, the Board of Directors of ICE approved the "Institutional Policy and Strategy for the treatment of electromagnetic fields from transmission lines," which regulated, among other things, the obligation to disseminate available information, as well as the permanent updating of existing information on extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (CEM-feb). In addition to the above, on February 12, 2001, the Regulation to Regulate Electric and Magnetic Fields in Electric Energy Transmission Works No. 29296-SALUD-MINAE was published, which clearly establishes in Article 15:

"Article 15.-Obligation of providers of the public electricity transmission service to inform community members about new projects for citizen participation purposes. Without prejudice to the obligation of the Municipalities to inform community members who may be affected by the construction of a new transmission line, the transmission service provider is obligated to inform the property owners directly affected by the line to be constructed, in a detailed manner, about the characteristics of the project. To this effect, as soon as a preliminary route for the line is established, the provider must take the necessary measures to establish individual communication with each of these property owners.

Likewise, and at least semi-annually, they must broadly inform all interested parties of the most relevant international scientific research and statements on electric and magnetic fields and their relationship with human health. To this end, any of the available technological or communication means shall be used so that the information reaches those affected." According to what has been indicated by the respondent authorities themselves, the project already has a preliminary line route, as ICE is even in the stage of administrative and judicial proceedings aimed at acquiring the corresponding easement (servidumbre) rights. However, it admits that the occasion on which it provided information publicly to the communities involved with electromagnetic fields was in June 2004, when public hearings were held in relation to the environmental impact assessment. Subsequent to that, they reported that the only thing done is the evacuation of individual inquiries, for which they acknowledge they do not have a specialized office on the matter. All of the foregoing allows this Court to confirm that the appellant is right in his claim. As already indicated, the right to citizen participation in matters of an environmental nature as well as health are of such relevance that they merit a responsible and constant attitude from the administration towards those involved in its projects. The foregoing is so clear that the Ministry of Health and MINAE themselves imposed on ICE the provisions of cited Article 15; however, its non-compliance is verified, as it did not even allude in its report to the duty it has to, at least semi-annually, broadly inform all interested parties of the most relevant international scientific research and statements on electric and magnetic fields and their relationship with human health. Note that this is not just any legal non-compliance, but rather the respondent institute is failing in a constitutional duty of collaboration with the rest of the public authorities responsible for ensuring the protection of the right to health and the environment. It has been clearly established in previous judgments of this Court that, although the causal link between electromagnetic fields and serious health problems has not been proven with certainty, research continues and, therefore, it is a matter that must be monitored with the greatest responsibility and deserves constant updating, even to determine the respective load of high-tension lines. This is how the Ministry of Health and MINAE seem to have understood it when they issued the aforementioned decree; however, the respondent Institute did not, considering that the dissemination of information carried out in 2004 was sufficient. Regardless of whether the protected company is discussing the appraisal amount through judicial channels, the fact is that the subject matter of this appeal is based on an injury to a fundamental right whose standing is of a diffuse nature, since what is discussed—dissemination of adequate and updated information on scientific research conducted regarding electromagnetic fields—concerns not only the members of the community but also the general citizenry, as it is an environmental matter. It is for this reason that the amparo is granted, inasmuch as this Court considers that ICE's omission violates Articles 11, 21, and 50 of the Political Constitution. However, granting this appeal does not entail granting what was requested by the protected party, in the sense that the Chamber force ICE to create a specialized Department to provide the information in question, since this constitutes an administrative matter that exceeds the powers of this Court; consequently, the appellant's claim in this regard is rejected.

Therefore:

The appeal is partially granted. Consequently, Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés, in his capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, is ordered to, immediately upon notification of this judgment, broadly inform the respective communities about the most relevant international scientific research and statements conducted on electric and magnetic fields and their relationship with human health, which must be done at least semi-annually. The foregoing under the warning that, based on the provisions of Article 71 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction, 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 fulfilled or enforced, issued in an amparo appeal, and does not fulfill it or does not enforce it, provided the offense is not subject to a more severe penalty. The Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad is ordered to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts that serve as the basis for this declaration, which shall be liquidated in the execution of judgment in the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. The appellant's claim, which consists of forcing ICE to create a Risk Management and Information Department on Electromagnetic Fields, is rejected outright. Notify this resolution personally to Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés, in his capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, or to whomever holds the position in his stead, and to the President of the Municipal Council of Liberia. Let it be communicated.- Luis Fernando Solano C.

Luis Paulino Mora M. Ana Virginia Calzada M.

Adrián Vargas B. Gilbert Armijo S.

Ernesto Jinesta L. Fernando Cruz C.

This is because ICE has a comprehensive risk department, which in a bureaucratic manner provides superficial and generic information that does not satisfy the information demands for the specific case of each affected community, and ICE often shifts the duty to inform onto SETENA, and not merely for the installation of the towers on said properties, as was indicated.

**5.-** Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni, in his capacity as General Judicial Attorney-in-Fact without Sum Limit of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (folio 232), reports under oath that regarding the denounced facts, he fully adheres to what was expressed by Eng. Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez in the report dated October 31, 2006 (folio 79), and requests that the filed appeal be declared without merit.

**6.-** Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni, in his capacity as General Judicial Attorney-in-Fact without Sum Limit of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (folio 234), reports under oath that it is not true that the development of said project contravenes Article 50 of the Political Constitution, given that, in compliance with the Right to a free, healthy, and balanced environment, the mitigation and environmental compensation actions ordered by SETENA have been carried out in the pre-construction and construction stages of the project. Regarding the petitioner's claim that ICE has not established an effective guidance program for those persons over whose properties the SIEPAC project line will pass, he does not share it, because it was in session No. 4912 of October 21, 1997, article 15, that the Board of Directors approved the "Institutional Policy and Strategy for the treatment of electromagnetic fields from transmission lines," through which, among other things, the "dissemination of available information" was agreed upon. He highlights the fact that when ICE studies and designs the different transmission line projects in the various areas of the country, outreach and consultation meetings are held with the residents of the area, in which all doubts of the interested persons are clarified, and corresponding informational brochures are delivered. Also, information regarding electromagnetic fields is delivered at the public hearings requested by the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, as part of the environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental) that it executes by law. He reports that in the particular case of the SIEPAC Transmission project in Costa Rica, the hearings convened to publicize the environmental impact study of the project were held in the month of June 2004 in the localities of Cañas, Esparza, and Palmar Sur; at these events, a brochure was given to attendees with information on the transmission works, their function, main characteristics, right-of-way aspects, and Electromagnetic Fields. Regarding access to information on electromagnetic fields, it is pertinent to report that ICE channels inquiries from users, administrative staff, and persons affected by institutional projects to the various technical departments involved in the subject, such that when a query regarding Electromagnetic Fields is made, it is channeled through the Dirección Gestión Integral de Riesgos; without prejudice that due to the complexity and specificity of the subject matter of the query, the same may be resolved by officials of the Environmental Management Center of the department specialized in Electricity Transmission or in the execution of Projects, who are the officials who compile and process updated information on the matter. He says that although there is no specialized and specific center dedicated full-time to providing information on the topic of EMFs, the necessary information is provided through its departments and the doubts of interested persons are clarified. He clearly establishes that ICE observed the procedures that the legal system has established to seek the protection of health and the environment. He points out that it is not true that the lack of a Specialized Center on Electromagnetic Fields injures the petitioner's right to the enjoyment of a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, especially considering that the Institution not only has the capacity to respond to the information needs of the communities and persons affected by the Electricity Transmission projects, in the case of SIEPAC, as the Institution did, but that the development of the project is executed in accordance with the regulations, including both the incorporation of the expert opinions and reports that the law establishes, and respect for the maximum permitted values. He concludes that the Institution considers that an individual's rights, with constitutional privilege, must be analyzed congruently with the rights of the community, the general interest, the public interest, understanding that in this case the petitioner seeks to protect a personal right, without taking into consideration the benefits that the expansion of electrical service transmission lines represents for the community. He requests that the filed appeal be declared without merit.

7.- Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez, in his capacity as Director of the SIEPAC Project (folio 282), reports under oath, reiterating what was said in his previous report (folio 79) and furthermore adds that it is clear that ICE observed the procedures that the legal system has established to seek the protection of health and the environment. He points out that it is not true that the lack of a Specialized Center on Electromagnetic Fields injures the petitioner's right to the enjoyment of a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, especially considering that the Institution not only has the capacity to respond to the information needs of the communities and persons affected by the Electricity Transmission projects, in the case of SIEPAC, as the Institution did, but that the development of the project is executed in accordance with the regulations, including both the incorporation of the expert opinions and reports that the law establishes, and respect for the maximum permitted values.

8.- Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés, in his capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (folio 330), reports under oath that regarding the denounced facts, he fully adheres to what was expressed by Eng. Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni. He requests that the filed appeal be declared without merit.

**9.-** Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni, in his capacity as General Judicial Attorney-in-Fact without Sum Limit of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (folio 332), reports under oath that the required report is not signed by Eng. Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés, since he is outside of San José, reasons for which he submits it in the stated capacity, clarifying that the facts answered therein will be ratified by the Executive President of the Institute, once he returns, with the respective legal consequences and in the sense that said ratification shall be understood as a declaration on the facts under the faith of oath.

**10.-** The legal prescriptions have been observed in the proceedings followed.

Drafted by Magistrate **Calzada Miranda**; and, **Considering:** **I.- Proven facts.** Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly proven, either because they have been thus accredited or because the respondent has omitted to refer to them as provided in the initial order:

**a)** The electrical interconnection system project for the Central American countries consists of the creation of a Regional Electricity Market (MER) through the construction of 230 Kv electricity transmission lines and electrical substations, which will allow the exchange of electrical energy between the agents of the MER. (folio 80) **b)** On December 30, 1996, the Governments of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama signed the Framework Treaty for the Central American Electricity Market, approved by Costa Rica through law No. 7848 of November 20, 1998. (folio 80) **c)** The Miravalles-Liberia Transmission Line project is related to the Electrical Interconnection System Project for the Countries of Central America (SIEPAC). (folio 235) **d)** ICE is currently executing the administrative and judicial proceedings aimed at acquiring the 30-meter-wide easement (servidumbre) rights, following a determined route. (folio 81) **e)** The respondent institution, in attention to this project, proceeded to carry out administrative appraisal No. 242-2006 on March 10, 2006, with the purpose of indemnifying the owner of the property registered in the Public Registry of Property under Folio Real 5-045776-000, located in the province of Guanacaste, canton of Bagaces, which is the company protected in this appeal. (folio 82) **f)** The protected company did not accept the administrative appraisal carried out by the respondent Institute; therefore, ICE is currently litigating in judicial courts the proceedings for the expropriation of the easement (servidumbre) right. (folio 82) **g)** In session No. 4912 of October 21, 1997, article 15, the Board of Directors of ICE approved the "Institutional Policy and Strategy for the treatment of electromagnetic fields from transmission lines," through which, among other things, the "dissemination of available information" was agreed upon, as well as the permanent updating of available information on extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF-ELF). (folio 247) **h)** The information related to electromagnetic fields regarding this Project was disseminated to the community in the public hearings convened to discuss the environmental impact study in the month of June 2004, in the localities of Cañas, Esparza, and Palmar Sur, where a brochure with information was delivered. (folio 247) **i)** ICE channels inquiries about electromagnetic fields through the Dirección Gestión Integral de Riesgos. (folio 248) **j)** There is no specialized and specific center dedicated full-time to providing information on the topic of electromagnetic fields. (folio 248) **II.- Object of the appeal.** The petitioner considers that the fundamental rights of his represented party have been violated, because he accuses the respondent institution of not having established a Department of Risk Management and Information on Electromagnetic Fields, for the purpose of informing about ways to prevent risks to human and animal health from electromagnetic fields, as well as environmental protection procedures, that provides them with timely, real, and effective attention to their inquiries.

**III.- On the merits.** From the study of the case file, it is found that the Miravalles-Liberia Transmission Line project in question is related to the Electrical Interconnection System Project for the Countries of Central America (SIEPAC). This project, in turn, aims for an electrical interconnection system for the Central American countries, consisting of the creation of a Regional Electricity Market (MER) through the construction of 230 Kv electricity transmission lines and electrical substations, which will allow the exchange of electrical energy between the agents of the MER. On December 30, 1996, the Governments of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama signed the Framework Treaty for the Central American Electricity Market, which was approved by Costa Rica through law No. 7848 of November 20, 1998, and is currently developed by ICE. It is in attention to this project that the property of the protected company No. 5-045776-000, located in Bagaces, was valued so that ICE could acquire the easement (servidumbre) rights, which is currently under judicial discussion. Now, regarding the object of this amparo, which is the community's right to stay adequately informed about the risks involved with Electromagnetic Fields, the respondent authorities reported under oath to this Tribunal that the information was publicly disseminated when the respective hearings were held in June 2004 related to the environmental impact study, where brochures were also distributed to the communities through which the lines will pass, and that they currently channel any inquiry regarding them through the Dirección Gestión Integral de Riesgos, which indeed is not a specialized and specific center dedicated to this full-time.

**IV.- Citizen participation in environmental matters:** This Tribunal has previously referred to the subject matter under study, regarding which it has stipulated that citizen participation in environmental matters encompasses two essential points: the right to information relating to environmental projects, or those that could cause harm to natural resources and the environment, and the guarantee of effective participation in decision-making on these matters. Therefore, the Costa Rican State must not only invite citizen participation but must promote it and respect it when it occurs (see rulings number 2001-10466 and 2003-6322). Thus, it is of great importance to make available to interested parties the information that public offices have on the matter, such as the environmental impact studies in charge of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, or the information required for the approval of regulatory plans by the respective municipalities or sanitary landfills, as is the case. It was the Rio Convention that, in principle 10, elevated this participation to the rank of a principle in environmental matters, by stating:

*"Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making information widely available. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy, shall be provided."* From this principle, the importance given at the international level to environmental issues, and in general, above all, to the participation of civil society in decisions of great significance for the community, was clearly evidenced. Thus, since Costa Rica is a signatory State to this instrument, it is certainly obliged and conditioned, for that is the consequence of its signature, as this Tribunal considered, in ruling number 8319-2000, of ten hours and eighteen minutes of September eight, two thousand:

"Its purpose, then, is for governmental decisions to be the consequence of a discussion that is not restricted to small official circles or biased interests, but rather that other opinions are taken into consideration, with the necessary openness to create broadened debate, while still complying, of course, with the requirements established by the corresponding legislation. It is not a matter of deconstitutionalizing the principle of legality of the Public Administration, though it is certainly a more democratic form of government, which expands the forums for debate on topics such as environmental protection, and by virtue of that, they are open to citizen intervention and opinion. We are, then, facing a very accepted option in the evolution of the concept of democracy, and this amparo offers a magnificent opportunity to give it clear and effective validity, so that it does not remain mere discourse. For this very reason, the environmental issue is a topic that this Chamber has already recognized as one of those that grant individuals a special standing, and which is recognized as a "reactional right" (vid. rulings 2233-93 and 3705-93 of this Chamber).

"In environmental law, the procedural requirement of standing tends to extend and broaden to such a dimension that it necessarily leads to the abandonment of the traditional concept, it being understood that, in general terms, any person can be a party and that their right does not emanate from property titles, rights, or specific actions they might exercise according to the rules of conventional law, but rather that their procedural action responds to what modern jurists call the diffuse interest, through which the original standing of the legitimate interested party, or even the simple interested party, diffuses among all members of a certain category of persons who are thus equally affected by the illegal acts that violate them. In the case of environmental protection, the typically diffuse interest that legitimizes the subject to sue is transformed, by virtue of its incorporation into the list of human rights, becoming a true 'reactional right', which, as its name indicates, empowers its holder to 'react' against the violation originating from illegitimate acts or omissions." (vid. ruling 3705-93) It is for this reason that, through Law 7412 of June 3, 1994, the Legislative Assembly reformed Article 50 of the Political Constitution, guaranteeing every person the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. In this matter, therefore, standing exists to denounce acts that infringe upon that right and to claim reparation for the damage caused, through effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings. In this way, when the Political Constitution mentions that the Government of the Republic is popular, representative, alternative, and responsible, we must be clear that citizen participation would not be limited to the mere exercise of the right to vote, or to the aspiration of attaining a public office of popular election, but rather, in this new vision, also to offering people the real opportunity to contribute to the making of the State's political decisions, especially when these have national significance, or could eventually affect the fundamental rights of certain sectors of the population. From Articles 1 and 50 of the Constitution, then, the consideration that citizens deserve in a democratic state is rescued, in which they can at least have access to the information on the environment held by public authorities, as the petitioners indicate. The commented precept, then, encompasses the cited principle through access to the information held and its dissemination, so that decision-making is not limited to a restricted group of interests. Certainly, in the matter we now analyze, our legal system already provides that individuals may request SETENA to hold public hearings, so that the positions formulated by the interested communities are taken into account in the decision-making process affecting the environment, which has been incorporated into the Organic Environmental Law and its Regulations, as reported by the respondent authority." Precisely, the Organic Environmental Law recognizes this principle in Article 6, which textually stipulates in the relevant part:

*"Article 6. Participation of the inhabitants* *The State and municipalities shall foster the active and organized participation of the inhabitants of the Republic in decision-making and actions aimed at protecting and improving the environment."* Likewise, in the Regulation on procedures of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, this principle is also encompassed, stipulating in Chapter IV, which regulates matters relating to the public hearing provided for within the environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental) procedure (articles 35 to 40), which provides for the active participation of both civil society and municipalities –in their condition as an entity "[...] constituted by the group of resident neighbors of the same canton, who promote and administer their own interests through the municipal government" (article 1 of the Municipal Code).

A similar rule exists in the Urban Planning Law, regarding the approval by municipalities of regulatory plans, obligating it to "1) Convene a public hearing through the Official Gazette and the additional dissemination necessary indicating the venue, date, and time to discuss the project and the verbal or written observations that neighbors or interested parties may wish to formulate. The notice must be made no less than fifteen business days in advance" (article 17 of the Urban Planning Law).

This principle of citizen participation in environmental matters is born from and precisely justified by the application of the positivization of the democratic principle - enshrined in Article 1 of the Political Constitution. It is important to highlight that this participation can be achieved individually, through associative groups of a private nature, as well as through local governments, who, due to their assigned competence in Article 169 of the Constitution, are recognized as having full competence to promote it in matters that may somehow affect the community within their jurisdiction, and moreover, if they do not do so, they would be failing to fulfill one of the duties assigned by the constitutional framers, which has been developed in ordinary legislation:

*"Municipalities shall foster the active, conscious, and democratic participation of the people in local government decision-making. Public institutions shall be obligated to collaborate so that these decisions are duly fulfilled" (article 5 of the Municipal Code).* It is clear that citizen and municipal participation is of transcendental importance in order to promote awareness of environmental problems and to contribute to decision-making by the institutions responsible for the preservation, surveillance, and protection of the environment and natural resources. It is not only a right of participation, but a duty of the community and municipality in the decision-making and discussions on the location of a sanitary landfill.

In this same vein, in judgment number 2000-10466, at ten hours and seventeen minutes of November twenty-fourth, two thousand, the Chamber indicated that in no way:

"[...] can the human being who will receive the effects of governmental decisions on environmental matters be excluded from their participation in deciding matters linked to this area." Previously, this Court recognized the importance of participation by local governments in this type of process under the following considerations:

"[...] Moreover, municipal competencies regarding the preservation and protection of the environment cannot be limited to the organization of the public hearing—which by legal provision corresponds to the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, SETENA)—but go much further, such as raising awareness among citizens for public participation, the reporting—with technical evidence—to administrative entities and courts of justice, adequate management of garbage and industrial waste, control and oversight so that environmental laws are complied with, and the promotion of pertinent legal remedies, such as the request for suspension of administrative acts deemed harmful to the environment, but not through the constitutional avenue, but in the contentious-administrative and civil Treasury jurisdiction, among other tasks" (judgment number 2001-5737, at fourteen hours and forty-one minutes of June twenty-seventh, two thousand one).

The Chamber also specified that it is an indispensable requirement that the hearing be held in a place where neighbors can attend, and preferably at the place of the events, since otherwise, the celebration of the hearing ordered by the Administration would not achieve its purpose, where obviously the lack of resources cannot constitute an obstacle to bringing to the case file all the evidentiary elements that the Administration requires to make a decision in matters of such fundamental importance, as it will necessarily have implications for the environment and the community. Community participation in environmental decision-making forms part of the procedure to which the State must subject itself, and at the same time is an integral part of the fundamental right of every person, under the terms provided in Article 50 of the Political Constitution (Constitución Política). For this reason, constitutional case law has repeatedly held that the right to a hearing is part of substantive due process and is a form of expression of participatory democracy. On the topic of information in environmental matters, it has furthermore been indicated:

"In the matter of the environment, we must transfer this concept of the right to information to a new perspective that every individual or community has: to request information and to be informed by any state entity [information] that cannot be obstructed by state institutions regarding any project that may affect the enjoyment of their right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. This, then, is the guarantee that will allow any individual or community to participate, making use of diffuse interests for access to participation, within the decision-making processes that affect that right, because the opposite would be illusory and the constitutional norm would be superfluous [...]" (judgment number 2331-96, cited above).

In this special matter, every person must have adequate information about materials and activities or projects that may imply a danger or threat to communities (right to health), and to the conservation and preservation of the environment (right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment), as well as for the effective opportunity to participate in the processes of adopting such decisions; given that, concerning the right to the environment, standing corresponds to the human being as such, since the injury to this fundamental right is suffered both by the community—as a whole—and by the individual in particular. Therefore, the Administration must facilitate and promote awareness and participation of the population by making information available to all, not only to the members of the community, but also to the citizenry in general, insofar as in environmental matters the existence of a true diffuse interest has been considered (as previously noted in this judgment).

**V.-** In previous cases where the Chamber has had the opportunity to pronounce on the alleged danger posed by electromagnetic fields, the majority of this Tribunal determined that it had not been possible to determine with scientific certainty whether a causal link existed between the deterioration of health and the presence of high-tension lines in the vicinity of homes. However, in judgment No. 1998-2806, reiterated in No. 2002-8554, this Tribunal clearly stated that the Chamber understood that norms had been established that imposed operational limits on high-tension lines, as well as regarding the magnitude of the electromagnetic field these generate and the necessary updating of permissible limits due to advances in scientific knowledge, among other conditions. Hence the amparo remedies were dismissed, imposing on the respondent Institute the responsibility of verifying the permissible limits and counting on the fact that the regulation that had been established for that purpose would be complied with as ordered. Indeed, in session No. 4912 of October 21, 1997, Article 15, the Board of Directors of ICE approved the "Institutional Policy and Strategy for the Treatment of Electromagnetic Fields from Transmission Lines" ("Política y Estrategia Institucional para el tratamiento de campos electromagnéticos de líneas de transmisión"), where it regulated, among other things, the obligation to disseminate available information, as well as the permanent updating of existing information on extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (CEM-feb). In addition to the above, on February 12, 2001, the Regulation to Regulate Electric and Magnetic Fields in Electric Energy Transmission Works No. 29296-SALUD-MINAE (Reglamento para Regular Campos Eléctricos y Magnéticos en Obras de Transmisión de Energía Eléctrica) was published, which clearly establishes in Article 15:

"Article 15.- Obligation of the providers of the public electricity transmission service to inform community members about new projects for purposes of public participation. Without prejudice to the obligation of the Municipalities to inform the members of the community who may be affected by the construction of a new transmission line, the transmission service provider is obligated to inform the property owners directly affected by the line to be built, in a detailed manner, about the characteristics of the project. To that effect, as soon as a preliminary line route has been established, the provider must take the necessary measures to establish individual communication with each of these property owners.

Likewise, and at least semi-annually, they must broadly inform all interested parties of the most relevant international scientific research and findings carried out on electric and magnetic fields and their relationship with human health. To that effect, any of the technological or communication means available shall be used so that the information reaches those affected." According to what was indicated by the respondent authorities themselves, the project already has a preliminary line route, since ICE is even in the stage of administrative and judicial proceedings aimed at acquiring the corresponding easement (servidumbre) rights. However, it admits that the occasion on which it provided information publicly to the communities involved regarding electromagnetic fields was in June 2004, when public hearings were held in relation to the environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental). Subsequent to that, they stated that only individual consultations have been evacuated, for which they acknowledge they do not have an office specialized in the matter. All of the above allows this Tribunal to verify that the petitioner is correct in their argument. As already indicated, the right of public participation in matters of an environmental nature as well as health are of such relevance that they merit a responsible and constant attitude from the administration towards those involved in its projects. The foregoing is so clear that the Ministry of Health (Ministerio de Salud) and MINAE themselves imposed on ICE what is set forth in cited Article 15; however, its non-compliance is verified, as it did not even mention in its report the duty it has to, at least semi-annually, broadly inform all interested parties of the most relevant international scientific research and findings carried out on electric and magnetic fields and their relationship with human health. Note that this is not just any legal non-compliance, but that the respondent institute is failing in a constitutional duty of collaboration with the rest of the public authorities charged with ensuring the protection of the right to health and the environment. It has been clearly established in previous judgments of this Tribunal that, although the causal link of electromagnetic fields with serious health problems has not been conclusively proven, research continues, and therefore it is a matter that must be monitored with the greatest responsibility and that merits its constant updating, including to determine the respective load of high-tension lines. This is how the Ministry of Health and MINAE seem to have understood it when they issued the cited decree; however, the respondent Institute did not, considering that the dissemination of information carried out in 2004 is sufficient. Regardless of whether the protected company is discussing the appraisal amount through judicial channels, the truth is that the object of study in this remedy is based on an injury to a fundamental right whose standing is of a diffuse nature, since what is discussed—dissemination of adequate and updated information on the scientific research conducted regarding electromagnetic fields—pertains not only to the members of the community, but also to the citizenry in general, as it deals with environmental matters. It is for this reason that the amparo remedy is deemed admissible, in that this Tribunal, due to the omissive conduct of ICE, considers Articles 11, 21, and 50 of the Political Constitution to have been violated. However, the granting of this remedy does not entail granting what was requested by the protected party, in the sense that the Chamber forces ICE to create a specialized Department to provide the information in question, as this constitutes a matter of administrative purview that exceeds the powers of this Tribunal; consequently, the petitioner's claim in this regard is rejected.

**Therefore (Por tanto):** The remedy is declared partially with merit. Consequently, Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés, in his capacity as Executive President of the Costa Rican Electricity Institute (Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad), is ordered, immediately upon notification of this judgment, to broadly inform the respective communities of the most relevant international scientific research and findings carried out on electric and magnetic fields and their relationship with human health, which must be done at least semi-annually. The above under the warning that, based on the provisions of Article 71 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional), imprisonment of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, shall be imposed on whoever receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in an amparo remedy, and does not comply with it or enforce it, provided that the offense is not more severely punished. The Costa Rican Electricity Institute is condemned to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts serving as the basis for this declaration, which shall be liquidated in the enforcement of judgment of the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. The petitioner's claim, consisting of forcing ICE to create a Risk Management and Information on Electromagnetic Fields Department, is outright rejected. Notify this resolution to Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés in his capacity as Executive President of the Costa Rican Electricity Institute, or to whoever holds the position in his stead, personally, and to the President of the Municipal Council of Liberia. Let it be communicated.- Luis Fernando Solano C.

Luis Paulino Mora M. Ana Virginia Calzada M.

Adrián Vargas B. Gilbert Armijo S.

Ernesto Jinesta L. Fernando Cruz C.

**"V.-** In previous cases where this Chamber has had the opportunity to express its opinion regarding the alleged danger posed by electromagnetic fields, the majority of this Court determined that it had not been possible to establish with scientific certainty whether a causal link existed between the deterioration of health and the presence of high-voltage lines in the vicinity of dwellings. However, in Judgment No. 1998-2806, reiterated in No. 2002-8554, this Court clearly ruled that the Chamber understood that regulations had been enacted imposing operational limits for high-voltage lines, as well as regarding the magnitude of the electromagnetic field they generate and the necessary updating of permissible limits due to advances in scientific knowledge, among other conditions. Hence, the amparo actions were dismissed, with the respondent Institute being assigned the responsibility of verifying the permissible limits, relying on the fact that the regulation established for that purpose would be complied with as ordered. Well, in Session No. 4912 of October 21, 1997, Article 15, the Board of Directors of ICE approved the "Institutional Policy and Strategy for the treatment of electromagnetic fields from transmission lines," which regulated, among other things, the obligation to disseminate available information, as well as the permanent updating of existing information on extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields (CEM-feb). In addition to the above, on February 12, 2001, the Regulation to Regulate Electric and Magnetic Fields in Electrical Energy Transmission Works No. 29296-SALUD-MINAE was published, which clearly establishes in Article 15:

"*Article 15.-Obligation of providers of the public electricity transmission service to inform community members about new projects for citizen participation purposes. Without prejudice to the obligation of the Municipalities to inform community members who may be affected by the construction of a new transmission line, the transmission service provider is obligated to inform the property owners directly affected by the line to be constructed, in a detailed manner, about the characteristics of the project. To this end, as soon as a preliminary line route has been established, the provider must take the necessary measures to establish individual communication with each of these property owners.

Likewise, and at least every six months, they must widely inform all interested parties of the most relevant international scientific research and pronouncements regarding electric and magnetic fields and their relationship with human health. For this purpose, any available technological or communication means shall be utilized to ensure the information reaches those affected."* According to what the respondent authorities themselves have indicated, the project already has a preliminary line route, as ICE is even in the stage of administrative and judicial proceedings aimed at acquiring the corresponding easement rights. However, it admits that the occasion on which it publicly provided information to the communities involved regarding electromagnetic fields was in June 2004, when the public hearings were held concerning the environmental impact assessment (estudio de impacto ambiental, EIA). Subsequent to that, they stated that the only thing carried out has been responding to individual inquiries, for which they acknowledge they do not have an office specialized in the matter. All of the above allows this Court to verify that the petitioner's claim is well-founded. As previously indicated, the right of citizen participation in matters of an environmental and health nature is of such relevance that it warrants a responsible and constant attitude from the administration towards those involved in its projects. The foregoing is so clear that the Ministry of Health and MINAE themselves imposed upon ICE the provisions set forth in Article 15 cited above; however, its non-compliance is evident, since ICE did not even allude in its report to the duty it has, at least every six months, to widely inform all interested parties of the most relevant international scientific research and pronouncements on electric and magnetic fields and their relationship with human health. Note that this is not just any legal non-compliance, but that the respondent institute is failing in a constitutional duty of collaboration with the rest of the public authorities charged with ensuring the protection of the right to health and the environment. It has been clearly established in previous judgments of this Court that, although it has not been possible to demonstrate with certainty the causal link between electromagnetic fields and serious health problems, research continues, and therefore it is a matter that must be monitored with the utmost responsibility and which warrants its constant updating, even to determine the respective load of high-voltage lines. The Ministry of Health and MINAE seem to have understood it this way when they issued the cited decree; however, the respondent Institute did not, considering that the disclosure of information it carried out in 2004 is sufficient. Regardless of whether the protected company is discussing the appraisal amount in court, the fact remains that the subject matter of this amparo action is based on an injury to a fundamental right whose legal standing is of a diffuse nature, since what is being discussed—dissemination of adequate and updated information on scientific research conducted regarding electromagnetic fields—concerns not only the members of the community but also the general citizenry, as it deals with environmental matters. For this reason, the amparo action is upheld, in that this Court considers that Articles 11, 21, and 50 of the Political Constitution have been violated due to ICE's omission. However, the granting of this amparo action does not entail the granting of what was requested by the petitioner, in terms that this Chamber compel ICE to create a specialized Department to provide the information in question, since this constitutes an administrative matter that exceeds the powers of this Court; therefore, the petitioner's claim in this regard is rejected." and from the communities of Barrio La Victoria in Liberia and the Developments (Urbanizaciones): La Carreta, Alaska, las Brisas, el Peloncito, El Guanacaste, and Santa Lucía against the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad.- <p align=center style='text-align:center'><b>Resultando:</b> </p> <p><b> 1.-</b> By a writing filed at 3:10 p.m. on September 26, 2006, the petitioner states that the protected company is the owner of the farm in the Partido de Guanacaste, recorded under real folio number 5-045776-000. He indicates that the respondent Institute years ago began construction of a project called SIEPAC (Miravalles-Liberia Transmission Line), starting at the Miravalles Geothermal Project and ending at the Substation located in Barrio La Cruz de Guanacaste, with a length of 32.8 kilometers. <span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>The route of said project includes both the land where its farm is located, as well as the communities of Liberia, Guanacaste, Barrio La Victoria, where the high-tension lines will pass just a few meters from houses, in which children and adults live, and where there are schools, churches, and all the infrastructure typical of a community. In the particular case of the protected company's farm, ICE has even already performed the corresponding appraisal in order to establish the easement (servidumbre) and tower sites that will affect the property in terms of house construction, crop planting, preservation of vegetation, earthworks (movimientos de tierra), storage of flammable materials, and accumulation of materials with a height exceeding 5 meters, which will have a length of 815 meters and a width of 30 meters, with two tower sites (see folios 9, 10, and 13-23 of the case file). Faced with this real and imminent threat of infringement upon its rights, an evident fear arises due to the existence of so-called EMF (electromagnetic fields), a force regarding which there has been a worldwide controversy (see folios 11 and 12 of the case file), as the community is not informed of the technological advances on the matter and the office that ICE has provides very superficial and outdated information. He considers the rights enshrined in Articles 21 and 50 of the Constitution to be violated, since they are not being duly informed of the scope of the electromagnetic fields. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> 2.-</span></b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez, in his capacity as Director of the SIEPAC Project, reports under oath (folio 79) that the electrical interconnection system project for the countries of Central America consists of the creation of a Regional Electricity Market (MER) through the construction of 230 Kv electricity transmission lines and electrical substations, which will allow the exchange of electrical energy among the agents of the MER. On December 30, 1996, the Governments of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama signed the Framework Treaty for the Central American Electricity Market, approved by Costa Rica through Law No. 7848 of November 20, 1998. Article 3 of the law approving the Treaty authorized ICE's participation as a shareholder of the Grid Owner Company. The purpose of the Treaty was to promote the development of a competitive regional electricity market through transmission lines that interconnect the national grids. ICE has been responsible for designing the route of the section of the SIEPAC line that crosses Costa Rica, as well as for acquiring the necessary easement rights for the execution of the project. The physical works of the project are located from the border with Nicaragua to the border with Panama. Paralyzing the project in question would imply not only disregarding the commitments the country undertook in the Treaty, but also affecting the normal flow of electrical energy transactions at the Central American level. He indicates that the institution proceeded to perform administrative appraisal No. 242-2006 on March 10, 2006, in order to compensate the owner of the farm registered in the Public Property Registry under Real Folio 5-045776-000, located in the province of Guanacaste, canton of Bagaces, the company protected by this remedy. He indicates that the protected party did not accept the aforementioned administrative appraisal; therefore, ICE is currently litigating the expropriation proceedings for the easement right before the judicial courts. The impact on the farm in question is 815.05 linear meters in length by 30 meters in width, for an area of 2 ha 4449.27 m2, a farm whose main activity is livestock operations, with the existence of pastures and scrublands; in addition, on the property there is a dwelling house and a cattle pen, structures that are not affected by the easement to be established. Regarding Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) and the regulation related to possible health threats, the General Health Law provides for the competence of the Ministry of Health to set limits regarding exposure to electric and magnetic fields in electrical energy transmission works. By virtue of the foregoing, said Ministry, jointly with MINAE, issued the Regulation to Regulate Electric and Magnetic Fields in Energy Transmission Works, Executive Decree No. 29296-SALUD-MINAE, which defines the environmental conditions to be considered in the planning, design, maintenance, and operation stages of the transmission system, as well as the obligation of ICE to comply with said regulation, which were taken into account for this project. He requests that the filed remedy be dismissed. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>3.-</b> Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortes, in his capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, reports under oath (folio 221) that regarding the reported facts, he fully adheres to what was expressed by Engineer Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez. He requests that the filed remedy be declared without merit. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>4.-</b> By a resolution of the Chamber at 1:29 p.m. on October 24, 2006 (folio 223), the material error contained in the resolution issued at 3:23 p.m. on September 29, 2006, is corrected, in that what was referred to as accused by the petitioner in relation to the Miravalles-Liberia Transmission Line project is that ICE has not established an effective information and guidance program for those persons over whose properties the lines will pass and how to avoid any health damage. He requests that the remedy be granted and that ICE be ordered not to continue with the establishment of the SIEPAC project, until a Risk Management and Information Department on Electromagnetic Fields, ways to prevent risks to human and animal health, as well as procedures for environmental protection, is created, both for its represented party and for all the affected communities, and that timely, real, and effective attention be provided to their queries. This is because ICE has a comprehensive risk department that, in a bureaucratic manner, provides superficial and generic information, which does not satisfy the information demands for the specific case of each affected community, and ICE often shifts the duty of information onto SETENA and not for the mere installation of the towers on said properties, as indicated. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>5.-</b> Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni, in his capacity as General Judicial Attorney-in-Fact without Sum Limit of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, reports under oath (folio 232) that regarding the reported facts, he fully adheres to what was expressed by Engineer Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez in the report dated October 31, 2006 (folio 79), and requests that the filed remedy be declared without merit. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>6.- </b> Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni, in his capacity as General Judicial Attorney-in-Fact without Sum Limit of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, reports under oath (folio 234) that it is not true that the development of said project contravenes Article 50 of the Political Constitution, given that, in compliance with the Right to a free, healthy, and balanced environment, in the preliminary stages and in the execution stages of the project, the mitigation and environmental compensation actions ordered by SETENA have been carried out. Regarding the petitioner's statement that ICE has not established an effective guidance program for those persons over whose properties the SIEPAC project line will pass, he does not share it, because in session No. 4912 of October 21, 1997, article 15, the Board of Directors approved the "Institutional Policy and Strategy for the Treatment of Electromagnetic Fields from Transmission Lines," by which it was agreed, among other things, the "dissemination of available information." He highlights the fact that when ICE studies and designs the different transmission line projects in the various areas of the country, outreach and consultation meetings are held with the residents of the zone, at which all the doubts of the interested persons are clarified, and corresponding informational brochures are handed out. Also, information regarding electromagnetic fields is provided at the public hearings requested by the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental), as part of the environmental impact assessment it executes by law. He reports that in the particular case of the SIEPAC Transmission project in Costa Rica, the hearings convened to publicize the project's environmental impact study were held in the month of June 2004 in the localities of Cañas, Esparza, and Palmar Sur. At these activities, a brochure was given to attendees with information about the transmission works, their function, main characteristics, aspects of rights-of-way, and Electromagnetic Fields. Regarding access to information about electromagnetic fields, it should be reported that ICE channels the queries of users, administrative personnel, and persons affected by institutional projects to the different technical units involved in the matter, so that when a query regarding Electromagnetic Fields is made, it is channeled through the Integral Risk Management Directorate (Dirección Gestión Integral de Riesgos); without prejudice to the fact that, due to the complexity and specificity of the matter consulted, it may be addressed by officials of the Environmental Management Center of the unit specialized in Electricity Transmission or in Project Execution, who are the officials that compile and process updated information on the matter. He states that although there is no specialized and specific center that is dedicated full-time to providing information on the subject of EMF, through its units, the necessary information is provided and the doubts of interested persons are clarified. He clearly establishes that ICE observed the procedures that the legal system has established to ensure the protection of health and the environment. He points out that it is not true that the lack of a Center Specialized in Electromagnetic Fields injures the petitioner's right to the enjoyment of a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, especially considering that the Institution not only has the capacity to respond to the information needs of the communities and persons affected by the Electricity Transmission projects, in the case of SIEPAC, as the Institution did, but also that the project's development is executed in accordance with the legal system, including both the incorporation of the opinions and expert reports that the law establishes, and respect for the maximum permitted values. He concludes that the Institution considers that the rights of the individual, with constitutional privilege, must be analyzed congruently with the rights of the community, the general interest, the public interest, understanding that in this case the petitioner seeks protection of a personal right, without taking into consideration the benefits that the expansion of electrical service transmission lines represents for the community. He requests that the filed remedy be declared without merit. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>7.- Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez, in his capacity as Director of the SIEPAC Project, reports under oath (folio 282), reiterating what was stated in his previous report (folio 79) and further adding that it is clear that ICE observed the procedures that the legal system has established to ensure the protection of health and the environment. He points out that it is not true that the lack of a Center Specialized in Electromagnetic Fields injures the petitioner's right to the enjoyment of a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, especially considering that the Institution not only has the capacity to respond to the information needs of the communities and persons affected by the Electricity Transmission projects, in the case of SIEPAC, as the Institution did, but also that the project's development is executed in accordance with the legal system, including both the incorporation of the opinions and expert reports that the law establishes, and respect for the maximum permitted values <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>8.- Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés, in his capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, reports under oath (folio 330) that regarding the reported facts, he fully adheres to what was expressed by Engineer Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni. He requests that the filed remedy be declared without merit. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>9.-</b> Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni, in his capacity as General Judicial Attorney-in-Fact without Sum Limit of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, reports under oath (folio 332) that the required report is not signed by Engineer Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés, as he is out of San José, for which reasons he presents it in the stated capacity, clarifying that the facts answered therein will be ratified by the Executive President of the Institute, once he returns, with the respective legal consequences and in the sense that said ratification will be understood as a declaration on the facts under oath. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>10.-</b> The legal prescriptions have been observed in the proceedings followed. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> Drafted by Magistrate<b> Calzada Miranda</b>; and, <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p align=center style='text-align:center'><b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language: EN'>Considerando:</span></b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>I.- Proven facts.</b> Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly demonstrated, either because they have been thus accredited or because the respondent has omitted to refer to them as prescribed in the initial order: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>a)</b> The electrical interconnection system project for the countries of Central America consists of the creation of a Regional Electricity Market (MER) through the construction of 230 Kv electricity transmission lines and electrical substations, which will allow the exchange of electrical energy among the agents of the MER. (folio 80) <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>b)</b> On December 30, 1996, the Governments of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama signed the Framework Treaty for the Central American Electricity Market, approved by Costa Rica through Law No. 7848 of November 20, 1998. (folio 80) <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>c)</b> The Miravalles-Liberia Transmission Line project is related to the Electrical Interconnection System Project for the Countries of Central America (SIEPAC). (folio 235) <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>d)</b> ICE is executing the administrative and judicial proceedings aimed at acquiring the easement rights of 30 meters in width, following a determined route. (folio 81) <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>e)</b> The respondent institution, in attention to this project, proceeded to perform administrative appraisal No. 242-2006 on March 10, 2006, in order to compensate the owner of the farm registered in the Public Property Registry under Real Folio 5-045776-000, located in the province of Guanacaste, canton of Bagaces, which is the company protected by this remedy. (folio 82) <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> f)</span></b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> The protected party did not accept the administrative appraisal performed by the respondent Institute; therefore, ICE is currently litigating the expropriation proceedings for the easement right before the judicial courts. (folio 82) <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>g)</b> In session No. 4912 of October 21, 1997, article 15, ICE's Board of Directors approved the "Institutional Policy and Strategy for the Treatment of Electromagnetic Fields from Transmission Lines," by which it was agreed, among other things, the "dissemination of available information," as well as the permanent updating of available information on extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF-elf). (folio 247) <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>h)</b> The information related to electromagnetic fields in relation to this Project was disseminated to the community at the public hearings convened to learn about the environmental impact study in the month of June 2004, in the localities of Cañas, Esparza, and Palmar Sur, where a brochure with information was handed out. (folio 247) <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> i)</span></b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> ICE channels queries about electromagnetic fields through the Integral Risk Management Directorate. (folio 248) <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> j)</span></b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> There is no specialized and specific center that is dedicated full-time to providing information on the subject of electromagnetic fields. (folio 248) <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>II.- Subject matter of the remedy</b>. The petitioner considers the fundamental rights of its represented party to be violated, as it accuses the respondent institution of not having established a Risk Management and Information Department on Electromagnetic Fields, for the purpose of informing about ways to prevent risks to human and animal health from electromagnetic fields, as well as environmental protection procedures, and to provide timely, real, and effective attention to their queries. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <b>III.- On the merits.</b> From the study of the case records, it is understood that the Miravalles-Liberia Transmission Line project in question is related to the Electrical Interconnection System Project for the Countries of Central America (SIEPAC). This project, in turn, seeks an electrical interconnection system for the countries of Central America that consists of the creation of a Regional Electricity Market (MER) through the construction of 230 Kv electricity transmission lines and electrical substations, which will allow the exchange of electrical energy among the agents of the MER. On December 30, 1996, the Governments of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama signed the Framework Treaty for the Central American Electricity Market, which was approved by Costa Rica through Law No. 7848 of November 20, 1998, and is currently being developed by ICE. It is in attention to this project that the property of the protected company No. 5-045776-000 located in Bagaces was valued so that ICE could acquire the easement rights, which is under discussion in judicial proceedings. Now, regarding the subject matter of this amparo, which is the community's right to remain adequately informed about the risks posed by Electromagnetic Fields, the respondent authorities reported under oath to this Court that the information was publicly disseminated when the respective hearings were held in the month of June 2004 related to the environmental impact study, where brochures were also distributed to the communities through which the lines will pass, and that they currently channel any query regarding them through the Integral Risk Management Directorate, which indeed is not a specialized and specific center dedicated to this full time. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> IV.- Citizen participation in environmental matters:</span></b><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> This Court has previously referred to the subject matter under study, regarding which it has established that citizen participation in environmental matters encompasses two essential points: the right to information concerning environmental projects, or those that may cause harm to natural resources and the environment, and the guarantee of effective participation in decision-making on these matters. Therefore, the Costa Rican State must not only invite citizen participation but must also promote and respect it when it occurs (see rulings number 2001-10466 and 2003-6322). Thus, making available to interested parties the information that public offices have on the matter is of great importance, including the information related to the environmental impact studies under the responsibility of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental), or that required for the approval of the regulatory plans of the respective municipalities or sanitary landfills, as in this case. It was the Rio Convention that, in principle 10, elevated this participation to the rank of a principle in environmental matters, stating: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><i><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>"The best way to deal with environmental matters is with the participation of all interested citizens, at the appropriate level. At the national level, every person shall have adequate access to environmental information held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making information widely available. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy, shall be provided."</span></i><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'> From this principle, the importance given at the international level to environmental matters, and in general, above all, to the participation of civil society in decisions of great significance for the community, was clearly evidenced. Thus, as Costa Rica is a signatory State to this instrument, it is certainly bound and conditioned, for that is the consequence of its signing, as this Court considered, in ruling number 8319-2000, of ten hours eighteen minutes on September eight, two thousand: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'>"Thus, its purpose is for governmental decisions to result from a discussion that is not restricted to small official or biased-interest circles, but rather that other opinions be taken into consideration, with the necessary openness to create broadened debate, while still meeting, of course, the requirements established by the corresponding legislation. It is not a matter of deconstitutionalizing the principle of legality of the Public Administration, although it is, of course, a more democratic form of government, which expands the forums for debate on topics such as environmental protection, and which by virtue of that, are open to citizen intervention and opinion. We are, therefore, before an option already widely accepted in the evolution of the concept of democracy, and this amparo offers a magnificent opportunity to give it clear and effective validity, so that it does not remain as mere discourse. For that very reason, the environmental issue is a subject that this Chamber has already recognized as one that grants individuals special standing, and which is recognized as a 'reactional right' (see rulings 2233-93 and 3705-93 of this Chamber)." <o:p></o:p></span></p> "In environmental law, the procedural prerequisite of standing tends to extend and broaden to such a dimension that it necessarily leads to the abandonment of the traditional concept; it must be understood that, in general terms, any person can be a party and that their right does not emanate from property titles, rights, or concrete actions they might exercise according to the rules of conventional law. Rather, their procedural action responds to what modern commentators call the diffuse interest, through which the original standing of the legitimate interested party, or even the simply interested party, is diffused among all members of a certain category of persons who are thereby equally affected by the illegal acts that violate them. In the case of environmental protection, the typically diffuse interest that legitimizes the subject to bring an action is transformed, by virtue of its incorporation into the list of human rights, becoming a true 'reactional right,' which, as its name indicates, empowers its holder to 'react' against the violation originating from illegitimate acts or omissions." (see judgment 3705-93) It is for this reason that, through Law 7412 of June 3, 1994, the Legislative Assembly reformed Article 50 of the Political Constitution, guaranteeing every person the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. In this matter, then, standing exists to denounce acts that infringe this right and to claim reparation for the harm caused, through effective access to judicial and administrative procedures. In this way, when the Political Constitution mentions that the Government of the Republic is popular, representative, alternating, and responsible, we must be clear that citizen participation would not be limited to the mere exercise of the right to vote, or to the aspiration of attaining a popularly elected public office, but rather, and in this new vision, to offering people a real opportunity to contribute to the State's political decision-making, especially when these decisions have national significance, or eventually could affect the fundamental rights of certain sectors of the population. From Articles 1 and 50 of the Constitution, then, the consideration that citizens deserve in a democratic state is rescued, in which they can at least have access to the information on the environment held by public authorities, just as the appellants indicate. The commented precept, then, incorporates the cited principle through access to the available information and its dissemination, so that decision-making is not circumscribed to a limited group of interests. Certainly, in the matter we are now analyzing, our legal system already provides that private individuals may request SETENA to hold public hearings, so that the positions formulated by the communities interested in decision-making that affects the environment are taken into account, which has been included in the Organic Law of the Environment and its Regulations, as reported by the respondent authority." Precisely, the Organic Law of the Environment recognizes this principle in Article 6, which textually provides, in pertinent part:

"*Article 6. Participation of the inhabitants* *The State and the municipalities shall foster the active and organized participation of the inhabitants of the Republic in decision-making and actions aimed at protecting and improving the environment.*" Likewise, in the Regulations on Procedures of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat, this principle is also incorporated, as provided in Chapter IV, which regulates matters relating to the public hearing provided for within the environmental impact assessment (estudio de impacto ambiental) procedure (Articles 35 to 40), in which the active participation of both civil society and the municipalities is contemplated —in their capacity as an entity "[...] constituted by the group of resident neighbors of the same canton, who promote and administer their own interests through the municipal government" (Article 1 of the Municipal Code).

The Urban Planning Law has a similar norm, regarding the approval by municipalities of regulatory plans, by obligating them to "1) Convene a public hearing by means of the Official Gazette and the additional dissemination necessary, indicating the location, date, and time to learn about the project and any verbal or written observations that the neighbors or interested parties may wish to formulate. The notice must be made no fewer than fifteen business days in advance" (Article 17 of the Urban Planning Law).

This principle of citizen participation in environmental matters is born and justified precisely from the application of the positivization of the democratic principle —enshrined in Article 1 of the Political Constitution—. It is important to highlight that this participation can be achieved individually, through private associative groups, as well as through local governments, which, by their competence assigned in Article 169 of the Constitution, are recognized as having full competence to promote it in matters that in some way may affect the community of their jurisdiction. Moreover, if it does not do so, it would be failing to fulfill one of the tasks that the constituent power assigned to it, and which has been developed in ordinary legislation:

"*Municipalities shall foster the active, conscious, and democratic participation of the people in local government decision-making. Public institutions shall be obligated to collaborate so that these decisions are duly complied with*" (Article 5 of the Municipal Code).

It is clear that citizen and municipal participation is of transcendental importance in order to promote awareness of environmental problems and to contribute to the decision-making of the institutions responsible for the preservation, oversight, and protection of the environment and natural resources. It is not only a right of participation, but a duty of the community and municipality in the decision-making and discussions regarding the location of a landfill (relleno sanitario). In this same sense, in judgment number 2000-10466, at ten hours seventeen minutes of November twenty-fourth, two thousand, the Chamber indicated that in no way:

"[...] can the human being who will receive the effects of governmental decisions in environmental matters be excluded from participating in the decision of affairs linked to this matter." Previously, this Tribunal recognized the importance of the participation of local governments in this type of process under the following considerations:

"[...] Furthermore, municipal competences regarding the preservation and protection of the environment cannot be seen as limited to organizing the public hearing —which by legal provision is the responsibility of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat— but go much further, such as raising awareness among the municipal inhabitants regarding citizen participation, reporting —with technical evidence— to administrative entities and the courts of justice, the proper handling of garbage and industrial waste, the control and oversight so that environmental laws are complied with, and the promotion of pertinent legal remedies, such as the request for suspension of administrative acts deemed harmful to the environment, but not through the constitutional channel, but rather in the contentious-administrative and civil Treasury jurisdiction, among other duties" (judgment number 2001-5737, at fourteen hours forty-one minutes of June twenty-seventh, two thousand one).

The Chamber also specified that it is an indispensable requirement that the hearing be held in a place where the neighbors can attend, and preferably at the location of the events, since otherwise, the holding of the hearing ordered by the Administration would not achieve its purpose, where obviously the lack of resources cannot constitute an obstacle to bringing to the case file all the evidentiary elements that the Administration requires to make a decision on matters of such fundamental importance, since it will necessarily have implications for the environment and the community. Community participation in environmental decision-making forms part of the procedure to which the State must adhere, and at the same time, it is an integral part of the fundamental right of every person, in the terms provided in Article 50 of the Political Constitution. Therefore, constitutional jurisprudence has repeatedly held that the right to a hearing forms part of substantive due process and that it is a form of expression of participatory democracy. On the topic of information in environmental matters, it has also been indicated:

"In environmental matters, we must transfer this concept of the right to information to a new perspective that every individual or community has to request information and to be informed by any state entity [information] that cannot be obstructed by state institutions regarding any project that may affect the enjoyment of their right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. This, then, is the guarantee that will allow any individual or community to participate, making use of diffuse interests regarding access to participation, within the decision-making processes that affect that right, because the opposite would be illusory and the constitutional norm would be superfluous [...]" (judgment number 2331-96, cited above).

In this special matter, every person must have adequate information about materials and activities or projects that may pose a danger or threat to communities (right to health), and for the conservation and preservation of the environment (right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment), as well as for the effective opportunity to participate in the processes of adopting such decisions; given that, when dealing with the right to the environment, standing belongs to the human being as such, because the injury to this fundamental right is suffered by both the community —as a whole— and the individual in particular. Therefore, the Administration must facilitate and foster the sensitivity and participation of the population by making information available to all, not only to the members of the community, but also to the citizenry in general, insofar as in environmental matters the existence of a true diffuse interest has been considered (as was previously noted in this judgment).

**V.-** In previous cases where the Chamber had the opportunity to express itself regarding the alleged danger posed by electromagnetic fields, the majority of this Tribunal determined that it had not been possible to determine with scientific certainty whether a causal link existed between the deterioration of health and the presence of high-tension lines in the vicinity of homes. However, in Judgment No. 1998-2806, reiterated in No. 2002-8554, this Tribunal clearly established that the Chamber understood that norms had been put in place that imposed operational limits for high-tension lines, as well as limits regarding the magnitude of the electromagnetic field these generate and the necessary updating of permissible limits based on advances in scientific knowledge, among other conditions. Hence, the amparo (amparo) actions were dismissed, imposing upon the respondent Institute the responsibility of verifying the permissible limits and relying on the fact that the regulation that had been established for this purpose would be complied with as ordered. Well, in Session No. 4912 of October 21, 1997, Article 15, the Board of Directors of ICE approved the "Institutional Policy and Strategy for the treatment of electromagnetic fields from transmission lines," where it regulated, among other things, the obligation to disseminate the available information, as well as the permanent updating of existing information on extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (ELF-EMF). In addition to the foregoing, on February 12, 2001, the Regulation to Regulate Electric and Magnetic Fields in Electric Energy Transmission Works No. 29296-SALUD-MINAE was published, which clearly establishes in Article 15:

"*Article 15.—Obligation of the providers of the public electricity transmission service to inform community members about new projects for the purposes of citizen participation. Without prejudice to the obligation of Municipalities to inform members of the community who may be affected by the construction of a new transmission line, the provider of the transmission service is obligated to inform the owners directly affected by the line to be built, in a detailed manner, about the characteristics of the project. To this end, as soon as a preliminary route for the line has been established, the provider must take the necessary measures to establish individual communication with each of these owners.* *Likewise, and at least every six months, they must broadly inform all interested parties of the most relevant scientific research and findings carried out internationally regarding electric and magnetic fields and their relationship with human health. To this end, any available technological or communication means shall be used so that the information reaches those affected.*" According to what was indicated by the respondent authorities themselves, the project already has a preliminary line route, as ICE is even at the stage of administrative and judicial proceedings aimed at acquiring the corresponding easement (servidumbre) rights. However, it admits that the occasion on which it provided information publicly to the communities involved regarding electromagnetic fields was in the month of June 2004, when public hearings were held in relation to the environmental impact assessment. Subsequent to that, they reported that the only thing carried out was the handling of individual consultations, for which they acknowledge they do not have a specialized office on the matter. All of the foregoing allows this Tribunal to verify that the appellant is correct in his claim. As already indicated, the right to citizen participation in matters of an environmental and health nature is of such relevance that it merits a responsible and constant attitude from the administration vis-à-vis those involved in its projects. The foregoing is so clear that the Ministry of Health and MINAE themselves imposed upon ICE the provisions of Article 15 cited above; however, its non-compliance is confirmed, since the Institute did not even allude in its report to the duty it has to, at least every six months, broadly inform all interested parties of the most relevant scientific research and findings carried out internationally regarding electric and magnetic fields and their relationship with human health. It should be noted that this is not just any legal violation, but that the respondent institute is failing in a constitutional duty of collaboration with the other public authorities charged with ensuring the protection of the right to health and the environment. It has been clearly established in previous judgments of this Tribunal that, although the causal link of electromagnetic fields with serious health problems has not been conclusively demonstrated, research continues, and therefore, it is a matter that must be monitored with the utmost responsibility and that merits its constant updating, even to determine the respective load of high-tension lines. This is how the Ministry of Health and MINAE seem to have understood it when they issued the cited decree; however, the respondent Institute did not, considering that the dissemination of information it carried out in 2004 is sufficient. Regardless of whether the protected company is judicially contesting the appraisal amount, the fact remains that the object of study of this recurso (recurso) is based on an injury to a fundamental right whose standing is diffuse in nature, since what is being discussed —the dissemination of adequate and updated information on the scientific research carried out concerning electromagnetic fields— concerns not only members of the community, but also the citizenry in general, as it is an environmental matter. It is for this reason that the amparo is upheld, inasmuch as this Tribunal considers that Articles 11, 21, and 50 of the Political Constitution have been violated by the omission of ICE. However, the granting of this recurso does not entail the awarding of what was requested by the amparado (amparado), in the sense that the Chamber should force ICE to create a specialized Department to provide the information in question, because this constitutes a matter of administrative purview that exceeds the powers of this Tribunal; therefore, the appellant's claim in this regard is rejected.

**Por tanto:** The recurso is partially granted. Consequently, Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés, in his capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, is ordered to, immediately upon notification of this judgment, broadly inform the respective communities about the most relevant scientific research and findings carried out internationally regarding electric and magnetic fields and their relationship with human health, which must be carried out at least every six months. The foregoing under warning that, based on the provisions of Article 71 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction, imprisonment from 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 fulfilled or enforced, issued in an amparo proceeding, and does not fulfill it or does not have it fulfilled, provided that the crime is not more severely punished. The Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad is condemned to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the acts that serve as the basis for this declaration, which shall be liquidated in the execution of the judgment in the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. The appellant's claim, consisting of forcing ICE to create a Department of Risk Management and Information on Electromagnetic Fields, is rejected outright. Notify this resolution to Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés in his capacity as Executive President of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, or to whomever holds the position in his stead, personally, and to the President of the Municipal Council of Liberia. Let it be communicated.— Luis Fernando Solano C.

Luis Paulino Mora M. Ana Virginia Calzada M.

Adrián Vargas B. Gilbert Armijo S.

Ernesto Jinesta L. Fernando Cruz C.

*060118400007CO* *060118400007CO* Res. Nº 2006016794 SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, a las dieciséis horas y treinta y cuatro minutos del veintiuno de noviembre del dos mil seis.

Recurso de amparo que se tramita en expediente número 06-011840-0007-CO, interpuesto por FRED GREINER, mayor, psiquiatra, pasaporte número 91819396, vecino de Alajuela, de nacionalidad estadounidense, a favor de Corporación Monte de Piedra S.A. y de las comunidades de Barrio La Victoria en Liberia y Urbanizaciones: La Carreta, Alaska, las Brisas, el Peloncito, El Guanacaste y Santa Lucía contra el Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad.-

Resultando:

1.- Por escrito presentado a las 15:10 horas del 26 de setiembre del 2006, el recurrente manifiesta que la empresa amparada es titular de la finca del Partido de Guanacaste, matrícula de folio real 5-045776-000. Indica que el Instituto recurrido hace años dio inicio a la construcción de un proyecto denominado SIEPAC (Línea de Transmisión Miravalles-Liberia), comenzando en el Proyecto Geotérmico Miravalles y concluyendo en la Subestación ubicada en Barrio La Cruz de Guanacaste, con una longitud de 32,8 kilómetros. El trayecto de dicho proyecto incluye tanto el terreno donde se ubica su finca, como las comunidades de Liberia, Guanacaste, Barrio La Victoria, donde las líneas de alta tensión pasarán a solo unos metros de las casas, en las cuales habitan niños y adultos, existen escuelas, iglesias y toda la infraestructura propia de una comunidad. En el caso particular de la finca de la empresa amparada, el ICE incluso ya realizó el avalúo correspondiente a fin de establecer la servidumbre y sitios de torre que afectará la propiedad en cuanto a construcción de casas, siembra de cultivos, permanencia de vegetación, movimientos de tierra, almacenamiento de materiales inflamables y acumulación de materiales con una altura superior a los 5 metros, la cual tendrá una longitud de 815 metros y un ancho de 30 metros, con dos sitios de torre (ver folios 9, 10 y 13-23 del expediente). Ante esa amenaza real e inminente de afectación a sus derechos, se genera un evidente temor ante la existencia de los llamados CEM (campos electromagnéticos), fuerza sobre la cual ha existido una polémica a nivel mundial (ver folios 11 y 12 del expediente), por cuanto no se informa a la comunidad de los avances tecnológicos que hay al respecto y que la oficina que tiene el ICE brinda información muy somera y desactualizada.. Considera violentados los derechos consagrados en los artículos 21 y 50 constitucionales, por cuanto no están siendo debidamente informados de los alcances de los campos electromagnéticos.

2.- Informa bajo juramento Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez, en su calidad de Director del Proyecto SIEPAC (folio 79), que el proyecto del sistema de interconexión eléctrica para los países de América Central consiste en la creación de un Mercado Eléctrico regional (MER) mediante la construcción de líneas de transmisión de electricidad de 230 Kv. y subestaciones eléctricas, que permitirán el intercambio de energía eléctrica entre los agentes del MER. El 30 de diciembre de 1996, los Gobiernos de Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica y Panamá suscribieron el Tratado Marco del Mercado Eléctrico de América Central, aprobado por Costa Rica mediante la ley No. 7848 del 20 de noviembre de 1998. El artículo 3 de la ley de aprobación del Tratado autorizó la participación del ICE como accionista de la Empresa Propietaria de la Red. La finalidad del Tratado fue propiciar el desarrollo de un mercado eléctrico regional competitivo a través de líneas de transmisión que interconecten las redes nacionales. El ICE ha tenido bajo su responsabilidad el diseño de la ruta del tramo de la línea SIEPAC que atraviesa Costa Rica, así como la adquisición de los derechos de servidumbre necesarios para la ejecución del proyecto. La obra física del proyecto se ubica a partir de la Frontera con Nicaragua hasta la frontera con Panamá. Paralizar el proyecto en cuestión implicaría no solo desconocer los compromisos que asumió el país en el Tratado, sino también afectar el flujo normal de transacciones de energía eléctrica a nivel centroamericano. Indica que la institución procedió a realizar el avalúo administrativo No. 242-2006 el 10 de marzo del 2006, con el fin de indemnizar al propietario de la finca inscrita en el Registro Público de la Propiedad bajo el Folio Real 5-045776-000, ubicada en la provincia de Guanacaste, cantón de Bagaces, la empresa amparada en este recurso. Indica que la amparada no aceptó el avalúo administrativo antes indicado, por tanto el ICE actualmente está ventilando en estrados judiciales las diligencias de es de 815.05 m. lineales de largo por 30 metros de ancho, para un área de 2 ha 4449.27 m2, finca cuya actividad principal son las labores pecuarias, con la existencia de potreros y charrales, además en el inmueble existe una casa de habitación y un corral para ganado, estructuras que no son afectadas por la servidumbre a establecer. Respecto a los Campos Electromagnéticos (CEM) y la regulación relativa a posibles amenazas a la salud, la Ley General de Salud prevé la competencia del Ministerio de Salud para fijar límites respecto de la eléctrica. En virtud de lo anterior dicho Ministerio, conjuntamente con el MINAE, emitió el Reglamento para Regular Campos Eléctricos y Magnéticos en Obras de Transmisión de Energía, Decreto Ejecutivo No. 29296-SALUD-MINAE, el cual define las condiciones ambientales a considerar en las etapas de planificación, diseño, mantenimiento y operación del sistema de transmisión, como la obligación del ICE de cumplir con dicha reglamentación, las cuales fueron tomadas en cuenta para este proyecto. Solicita que se desestime el recurso planteado.

3.- Informa bajo juramento Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortes, en su calidad de Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (folio 221), que respecto a los hechos denunciados se adhiere en todos sus extremos a lo expresado por el Ing. Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez. Solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso planteado.

4.- Por resolución de la Sala de las 13:29 horas del 24 de octubre del 2006 (folio 223), se corrige el error material contenido en la resolución dictada a las 15:23 horas del 29 de setiembre del 2006, en que lo referido a lo acusado por el recurrente con relación al proyecto de Línea de Transmisión Miravalles-Liberia, es que el ICE no ha establecido un programa efectivo de información y orientación para aquellas personas sobre cuyas propiedades pasarán las líneas y como evitar cualquier daño a la salud. Solicita se declare con lugar el recurso y ordenar al ICE no continuar con la instauración del proyecto SIEPAC, hasta tanto no se cree un Departamento de Gestión de Riesgos e Información sobre los Campos Electromagnéticos, formas de prevenir riesgos a la salud humana y animal, así de procedimientos de protección al medio ambiente, tanto para su representada como para todas las comunidades afectadas, que se les brinde la atención oportuna, real y efectiva a sus consultas. Esto por cuanto el ICE cuanta con un departamento integral de riesgo, que de manera burocrática brinda información somera y genérica, que no satisface las demandas de información para el caso concreto de cada comunidad afectada y el ICE muchas veces hacer recaer el deber de información en SETENA y no por la mera instalación de las torres en dichas propiedades, como se indicó.

5.- Informa bajo juramento Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni, en su calidad de Apoderado General Judicial sin Límite de Suma del Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (folio 232), que respecto a los hechos denunciados se adhiere en todos los extremos a lo expresado por el Ing. Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez en el informe de fecha 31 de octubre del 2006 (folio 79), solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso planteado.

6.- Informa bajo juramento Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni, en su calidad de Apoderado General Judicial sin Límite de Suma del Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (folio 234), que no es cierto que el desarrollo de dicho proyecto contraríe el artículo 50 de la Constitución Política, toda vez que, en cumplimiento del Derecho a un ambiente libre, sano y equilibrado, en las etapas previas y en las etapas de ejecución del proyecto se han realizado las acciones de mitigación y compensación ambiental que dispuso la SETENA. Con respecto a la afirmación del recurrente de que el ICE no ha establecido un programa efectivo de orientación para aquellas personas sobre cuyas propiedades pasará la línea del proyecto SIEPAC, no lo comparte, por ser en sesión No. 4912 del 21 de octubre de 1997, artículo 15, que el Consejo Directivo aprobó la "Política y Estrategia Institucional para el tratamiento de campos electromagnéticos de líneas de transmisión", mediante lo cual se acordó entre otras cosas la "diseminación de la información disponible". Destaca el hecho de que cuando el ICE estudia y diseña los diferentes proyectos de líneas de transmisión de las diversas áreas del país, se realizan reuniones de acercamiento y consulta con los pobladores de la zona, en las cuales se aclaran todas las dudas de las personas interesadas y se entregan en los folletos informativos correspondientes. También la información referente a campos electromagnéticos es entregada en las audiencias públicas solicitadas por la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, como parte de la evaluación ambiental que ésta ejecuta por ley. Informa que en el caso particular del proyecto de Transmisión SIEPAC en Costa Rica, las audiencias convocadas para dar a conocer sobre el estudio de impacto ambiental del proyecto se efectuaron el mes de junio del año 2004 en las localidades de Cañas, Esparza y Palmar Sur, en las actividades se entregó a los asistentes un folleto con información sobre las obras de transmisión, su función, características principales, aspectos de los derechos de paso y de Campos Electromagnéticos. En cuanto al acceso a información sobre los campos electromagnéticos, conviene informar que el ICE canaliza las consultas de los usuarios, administrativos y personas afectadas por los proyectos institucionales hacia las distintas dependencias técnicas involucradas en el tema, de suerte que cuando se realiza una consulta referente a Campos Electromagnéticos, la misma se canaliza a través de la Dirección Gestión Integral de Riesgos; sin perjuicio que por la complejidad y especificidad de la materia consultada, la misma sea evacuada por medio de los funcionarios del Centro de Gestión Ambiental de la dependencia especializada en Transporte de Electricidad o en la ejecución de Proyectos, quienes son los funcionarios que recopilan y procesan la información actualizada sobre la materia. Dice que si bien no existe un centro especializado y específico que se dedique a tiempo completo a dar información sobre el tema de los CEM, a través de sus dependencias se brinda la información necesaria y se aclaran las dudas de las personas interesadas. Establece claro que el ICE observó los tramites que el ordenamiento jurídico ha establecido para procurar la protección de la salud y el medio ambiente. Señala no ser cierto que la falta de un Centro Especializado en Campos Electromagnéticos lesione el derecho del recurrente al disfrute de un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado, máxime si se considera que la Institución no solo tiene la capacidad de responder las necesidades de información de las comunidades y personas afectadas por los proyectos de Transporte de Electricidad, en el caso del SIEPAC, como lo hizo la Institución sino que el desarrollo del proyecto se ejecuta de conformidad con el ordenamiento, incluyendo, tanto la incorporación de los dictámenes y peritajes que la ley establece, como el respeto por los valores máximos permitidos. Concluye, que la Institución considera que los derechos del particular, con privilegio constitucional, deben ser analizados en forma congruente con los derechos de la colectividad, del interés general, del interés público, en la inteligencia que en este caso el recurrente pretende que se tutele un derecho personal, sin tomar en consideración los beneficios que para la colectividad representa la ampliación de las líneas de transmisión de servicio eléctrico. Solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso planteado.

7.- Informa bajo juramento Juan Carlos Torres Rodríguez, en su calidad de Director del Proyecto SIEPAC (folio 282), reiterando lo dicho en su informe previo (folio 79) y además agrega que es claro que el ICE observó los trámites que el ordenamiento jurídico ha establecido para procurar la protección de la salud y del medio ambiente. Señala no ser cierto que la falta de un Centro Especializado en Campos Electromagnéticos lesione el derecho del recurrente al disfrute de un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado, máxime si se considera que la Institución no solo tiene la capacidad de responder las necesidades de información de las comunidades y personas afectadas por los proyectos de Transporte de Electricidad, en el caso del SIEPAC, como lo hizo la Institución sino que el desarrollo del proyecto se ejecuta de conformidad con el ordenamiento, incluyendo, tanto la incorporación de los dictámenes y peritajes que la ley establece, como el respeto por los valores máximos permitidos 8.- Informa bajo juramento Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés, en su calidad de Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (folio 330), que respecto a los hechos denunciados se adhiere en todos sus extremos a lo expresado por el Ing. Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni. Solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso planteado.

9.- Informa bajo juramento Geovanni Bonilla Goldoni, en su calidad de Apoderado General Judicial sin Límite de Suma del Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (folio 332), que el informe requerido no lo suscribe el Ing. Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés, por encontrarse fuera de San José, motivos por el cual lo presenta en la condición dicha, aclarando que los hechos ahí contestados serán ratificados por el Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto, una vez que regrese, con las consecuencias legales respectivas y en el sentido de que dicha ratificación se entenderá como una declaración sobre los hechos bajo la fe de juramento.

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

Redacta la Magistrada Calzada Miranda; y,

Considerando:

I.- 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 proyecto del sistema de interconexión eléctrica para los países de América Central consiste en la creación de un Mercado Eléctrico regional (MER) mediante la construcción de líneas de transmisión de electricidad de 230 Kv. y subestaciones eléctricas, que permitirán el intercambio de energía eléctrica entre los agentes del MER. (folio 80) b) El 30 de diciembre de 1996, los Gobiernos de Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica y Panamá suscribieron el Tratado Marco del Mercado Eléctrico de América Central, aprobado por Costa Rica mediante la ley No. 7848 del 20 de noviembre de 1998. (folio 80) c) El proyecto de Línea de Transmisión Miravalles-Liberia está relacionado con el Proyecto del Sistema de Interconexión Eléctrica para los Países de América Central (SIEPAC). (folio 235) d) El ICE se encuentra ejecutando las diligencias administrativas y judiciales tendientes a la adquisición de los derechos de servidumbre de 30 metros de ancho, siguiendo un trazado determinado. (folio 81) e) La institución recurrida en atención a este proyecto procedió a realizar el avalúo administrativo No. 242-2006 el 10 de marzo del 2006, con el fin de indemnizar al propietario de la finca inscrita en el Registro Público de la Propiedad bajo el Folio Real 5-045776-000, ubicada en la provincia de Guanacaste, cantón de Bagaces, que es la empresa amparada en este recurso. (folio 82) f) La amparada no aceptó el avalúo administrativo realizado por el Instituto recurrido, por tanto el ICE actualmente está ventilando en estrados judiciales las diligencias de expropiación del derecho de servidumbre. (folio 82) g) En sesión No. 4912 del 21 de octubre de 1997, artículo 15, el Consejo Directivo del ICE aprobó la "Política y Estrategia Institucional para el tratamiento de campos electromagnéticos de líneas de transmisión", mediante lo cual se acordó entre otras cosas la "diseminación de la información disponible", así como la actualización permanente de la información disponible sobre campos electromagnéticos de frecuencia extremadamente baja (CEM-feb). (folio 247) h) La información relacionada con los campos electromagnéticos con relación a este Proyecto fue difundida a la comunidad en las audiencias públicas convocadas para conocer del estudio de impacto ambiental en el mes de junio del 2004, en las localidades de Cañas, Esparza y Palmar Sur, donde se entregó un folleto con información. (folio 247) i) El ICE canaliza las consultas sobre campos electromagnéticos a través de la Dirección Gestión Integral de Riesgos. (folio 248) j) No existe un centro especializado y específico que se dedique a tiempo completo a dar información sobre el tema de los campos electromagnéticos. (folio 248) II.- Objeto del recurso. El recurrente estima vulnerados los derechos fundamentales de su representada, por cuanto acusa que la institución recurrida no ha dispuesto de un Departamento de Gestión de Riesgos e Información sobre los Campos Electromagnéticos, con el fin de informar las formas de prevenir riesgos a la salud humana y animal por los campos electromagnéticos, así como de procedimientos de protección al ambiente, que les brinde atención oportuna, real y efectiva a sus consultas.

III.- Sobre el fondo. Del estudio de los autos se tiene que el Proyecto de Línea de Transmisión Miravalles-Liberia en cuestión, está relacionado con el Proyecto del Sistema de Interconexión Eléctrica para los Países de América Central (SIEPAC). Este proyecto a su vez, intenta un sistema de interconexión eléctrica para los países de América Central que consiste en la creación de un Mercado Eléctrico Regional (MER) mediante la construcción de líneas de transmisión de electricidad de 230 Kv. y subestaciones eléctricas, que permitirán el intercambio de energía eléctrica entre los agentes del MER. El 30 de diciembre de 1996, los Gobiernos de Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica y Panamá suscribieron el Tratado Marco del Mercado Eléctrico de América Central, el cual fue aprobado por Costa Rica mediante ley No. 7848 del 20 de noviembre de 1998 y actualmente es desarrollado por el ICE. Es en atención a este proyecto, que la propiedad de la empresa amparada No. 5-045776- 000 ubicada en Bagaces, fue valorada con el fin de que el ICE adquiriese los derechos de servidumbre, lo cual se encuentra en discusión en vía judicial. Ahora bien, en lo que respecta al objeto de este amparo, que es el derecho que tiene la comunidad de mantenerse informado adecuadamente sobre los riesgos que implican los Campos Electromagnéticos, las autoridades recurridas informaron bajo juramento a este Tribunal, que la información se difundió públicamente cuando se realizaron las audiencias respectivas en el mes de junio del 2004 relacionadas con el estudio de impacto de ambiental, donde se repartieron además folletos a las comunidades por donde pasarán las líneas y que actualmente canalizan toda consulta respecto a las mismas a través de la Dirección Gestión Integral de Riesgos, que efectivamente no es un centro especializado y específico que se dedique a ello tiempo completo.

IV.- Participación ciudadana en los asuntos ambientales: Este Tribunal ya se ha referido anteriormente al tema objeto de estudio, sobre lo cual ha dispuesto que la participación ciudadana en los asuntos ambientales abarca dos puntos esenciales: el derecho a la información relativa a los proyectos ambientales, o que puedan causar una lesión a los recursos naturales y al medio ambiente, y la garantía de una efectiva participación en la toma de decisiones en estos asuntos. Por ello, el Estado costarricense no sólo debe invitar a la participación ciudadana, sino que debe promoverla y respetarla cuando se produzca (ver sentencias número 2001-10466 y 2003-6322). De esta suerte, resulta de gran importancia la puesta a disposición de los interesados de la información que en la materia tengan en las oficinas públicas, caso de la relativa a los estudios de impacto ambiental a cargo de la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, o la requerida para la aprobación de los planes reguladores de las respectivas municipalidades o de los rellenos sanitarios, como es el caso. Fue la Convención de Río la que en el principio 10 elevó esta participación a rango de principio en materia ambiental, al señalar "El mejor modo de tratar las cuestiones ambientales es con la participación de todos los ciudadanos interesados, en el nivel que corresponda. En el plano nacional, toda persona debe tener adecuada formación sobre el medio ambiente que dispongan las autoridades públicas, incluida la información sobre los materiales y las actividades que encierran peligro en sus comunidades, así como la oportunidad de participar en los procesos de adopción de decisiones. Los Estados deberán facilitar y fomentar la sensibilización y la participación de la población poniendo la información a disposición de todos. Deberá proporcionarse acceso efectivo a los procedimientos judiciales y administrativos, entre éstos el resarcimiento de daños y los recursos pertinentes." De este principio, se evidenció claramente, la importancia que a nivel internacional se da a las cuestiones ambientales, y en general, sobre todo, a la participación de la sociedad civil en decisiones de gran trascendencia para la comunidad. De modo que, al ser Costa Rica un Estado signatario de este instrumento, ciertamente se le obliga y condiciona, pues esa es la consecuencia de su suscripción, según lo consideró este Tribunal, en sentencia número 8319- 2000, de las diez horas dieciocho minutos del ocho de setiembre del dos mil:

"Así, su propósito es que las decisiones gubernamentales sean consecuencia de una discusión que no se constriña a pequeños núcleos oficiales o de intereses parcializados, sino que sean tomadas en consideración otras opiniones, con la apertura necesaria para crear el debate ampliado, aunque sin dejar de cumplirse, claro, los requisitos que establece la legislación correspondiente. No se trata de una desconstitucionalización del principio de legalidad de la Administración Pública, aunque sí por supuesto, de una forma de gobierno más democrático, que amplía los foros de debate sobre temas como el de la protección al medio ambiente, y que por virtud de ello, quedan abiertos a la intervención y opinión ciudadana. Estamos, pues, ante una opción ya muy aceptada en la evolución del concepto de democracia y este amparo ofrece una magnífica oportunidad de darle clara y efectiva vigencia, para que no se quede en el mero discurso. Por eso mismo es que la cuestión ambiental es un tema que ya la Sala ha reconocido como aquellos que otorgan a los particulares una legitimación especial, y de la que se reconoce como un "derecho reaccional" (vid. sentencia 2233-93 y 3705-93 de esta Sala).

"En el derecho ambiental, el presupuesto procesal de la legitimación tiende a extenderse y ampliarse en una dimensión tal, que lleva necesariamente al abandono del concepto tradicional, debiendo entender que en términos generales, toda persona puede ser parte y que su derecho no emana de títulos de propiedad, derechos o acciones concretas que pudiera ejercer según las reglas del derecho convencional, sino que su actuación procesal responde a lo que los modernos tratadistas denominan el interés difuso, mediante el cual la legitimación original del interesado legítimo o aún del simple interesado, se difunde entre todos los miembros de una determinada categoría de personas que resultan así igualmente afectadas por los actos ilegales que los vulneran. Tratándose de la protección del ambiente, el interés típicamente difuso que legitima al sujeto para accionar, se transforma, en virtud de su incorporación al elenco de los derechos de la persona humana, convirtiéndose en un verdadero "derecho reaccional", que, como su nombre lo indica, lo que hace es apoderar a su titular para "reaccionar" frente a la violación originada en actos u omisiones ilegítimos." (vid. sentencia 3705-93) Es por ello, que por Ley 7412 del 03 de junio de 1994, la Asamblea Legislativa reformó el artículo 50 de la Constitución Política, garantizando a toda persona el derecho al ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado. En esta materia, entonces, existe la legitimación para denunciar actos que infrinjan ese derecho y para reclamar la reparación del daño causado, a través del acceso efectivo a los procedimientos judiciales y administrativos. De esta manera, cuando la Constitución Política hace mención de que el Gobierno de la República es popular, representativo, alternativo y responsable, hemos de tener claro que la participación ciudadana no se limitaría al mero ejercicio del derecho al voto, o a la aspiración de alcanzar un cargo público de elección popular, sino, además y en esta nueva visión, a la de que a las personas se les ofrezca la oportunidad real de contribuir a la toma de las decisiones políticas del Estado, especialmente cuando éstas tengan trascendencia nacional, o eventualmente pudieren afectar los derechos fundamentales de ciertos sectores de la población. De los artículos 1 y 50 Constitucionales se rescata pues, la consideración que los ciudadanos merecen en un estado democrático, en el cual puedan al menos tener acceso a la información sobre el medio ambiente de que dispongan las autoridades públicas, tal y como lo señalan los recurrentes. El precepto comentado, entonces, recoge el principio citado a través del acceso a la información de que se dispone y a la divulgación de ella, para que la toma de decisiones no se circunscriba a un limitado grupo de intereses. Ciertamente, que en la materia que ahora analizamos, nuestro ordenamiento jurídico ya prevé que los particulares pueden solicitar a la SETENA llevar a cabo audiencias públicas, para efecto de que se tomen en cuenta las posiciones formuladas por las comunidades interesadas en la toma de decisiones que afectan el ambiente, lo que ha sido recogido en la Ley Orgánica del Ambiente y de su Reglamento, como informó la autoridad recurrida." Precisamente, la Ley Orgánica del Ambiente reconoce este principio en el artículo 6, que textualmente dispone en lo que interesa:

"Artículo 6. Participación de los habitantes El Estado y las municipalidades, fomentarán la participación activa y organizada de los habitantes de la República, en la toma de decisiones y acciones tendientes a proteger y mejorar el ambiente." Asimismo, en el Reglamento sobre procedimientos de la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, también se recoge este principio, al disponerse en el Capítulo IV, en el que se regula lo relativo a la audiencia pública prevista dentro del procedimiento del estudio de impacto ambiental (artículos 35 a 40), en el que se tiene prevista la participación activa, tanto de la sociedad civil como de las municipalidades -en su condición de ente "[...] constituido por el conjunto de vecinos residentes de un mismo cantón, que promueven y administran sus propios intereses por medio del gobierno municipal" (artículo 1° del Código Municipal).

Norma similar tiene la Ley de Planificación Urbana, en lo relativo a la aprobación por las municipalidades de los planes reguladores, al obligarlo a "1) Convocar a una audiencia pública por medio del Diario Oficial y la divulgación adicional necesaria con la indicación de local, fecha y hora para conocer el proyecto y de las observaciones verbales o escritas que tengan a bien formular los vecinos o interesados. El señalamiento deberá hacerse con antelación no menor de quince días hábiles" (artículo 17 de la Ley de Planificación Urbana).

Este principio de la participación ciudadana en los asuntos ambientales, nace y se justifica precisamente de la aplicación de la positivización del principio democrático - consagrado en el artículo 1° de la Constitución Política-. Es importante resaltar que esta participación se puede lograr en forma individual, a través de grupos asociativos de orden particular, así como también a través de los gobiernos locales, a quienes, por su competencia asignada en el artículo 169 de la Constitución, se les reconoce plena competencia para promoverla en los asuntos que de algún modo puedan afectar la comunidad de su jurisdicción, y más bien, si no lo hace, estaría incumpliendo uno de sus cometidos que el constituyente le asignó, y que ha sido desarrollada en la legislación ordinaria:

"Las municipalidades fomentarán la participación activa, consciente y democrática del pueblo en las tomas de decisiones del gobierno local. Las instituciones públicas estarán obligadas a colaborar para que estas decisiones se cumplan debidamente" (artículo 5 del Código Municipal).

Queda claro que la participación ciudadana y de las municipalidades es de trascendental importancia a fin de promover la conciencia en los problemas ambientales y para coadyuvar en la toma de decisiones de las instituciones encargadas de la preservación, vigilancia y protección del medio ambiente y los recursos naturales. No se trata únicamente de un derecho de participación, sino de un deber de la comunidad y municipalidad en la toma de decisiones y discusiones sobre la ubicación de un relleno sanitario. En este mismo sentido, en la sentencia número 2000-10466, de las diez horas diecisiete minutos del veinticuatro de noviembre del dos mil, la Sala señaló que en modo alguno:

"[...] puede excluirse al ser humano que recibirá los efectos de las decisiones gubernamentales en materia ambiental-, de su participación en la decisión de asuntos vinculados con esta materia." Con anterioridad, este Tribunal, reconoció la importancia de la participación de los gobiernos locales en este tipo de procesos bajo las siguientes consideraciones:

"[...] Por lo demás, las competencias municipales en lo que respecta a la preservación y protección del medio ambiente no pueden verse limitadas a la organización de la audiencia pública -que por disposición legal le corresponde a la Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental-, sino que va mucho más allá, como lo es la concientización de los munícipes en la participación ciudadana, la denuncia -con pruebas técnicas- ante entidades administrativas y los tribunales de justicia, el manejo adecuado de la basura y de los desechos industriales, el control y fiscalización para que las leyes ambientales se cumplan, y la promoción de los recursos legales pertinentes, como lo sería la solicitud de suspensión de los actos administrativos que estimen nocivos para el ambiente, pero no en la vía constitucional, sino en la jurisdicción contenciosa- administrativa y civil de Hacienda, entre otros cometidos" (sentencia número 2001-5737, de las catorce horas cuarenta y un minutos del veintisiete de junio del dos mil uno).

La Sala precisó también que es requisito indispensable que la audiencia se lleve a cabo en el lugar donde los vecinos puedan asistir, y con preferencia en el lugar de los hechos, ya que de lo contrario, la celebración de la audiencia ordenada por la Administración no lograría cumplir su finalidad, donde obviamente la falta de los recursos no puede constituirse en un obstáculo para hacer llegar al expediente todos los elementos probatorios que la Administración requiere para tomar una decisión en asuntos de tan fundamental importancia, ya que necesariamente tendrá implicaciones sobre el medio ambiente y la comunidad. La participación comunal en la toma de decisiones en materia ambiental forma parte del procedimiento al que debe sujetarse el Estado, y a la vez es integrante del derecho fundamental de toda persona, en los términos previstos en el artículo 50 de la Constitución Política. Por ello, reiteradamente la jurisprudencia constitucional ha sostenido que el derecho de audiencia hace parte del debido proceso sustantivo y que es una forma de expresión de la democracia participativa. Sobre el tema de información en materia de ambiente, se ha indicado además:

"En materia del medio ambiente debemos trasladar este concepto sobre el derecho de información a una nueva perspectiva que tiene todo individuo o colectividad de solicitar información y de ser informado por cualquier ente estatal [información] que no puede ser obstruida por las instituciones estatales referentes a cualquier proyecto que pueda afectar el goce de su derecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado. Es entonces esta, la garantía que permitirá participar a cualquier individuo o colectividad, haciendo uso de los intereses difusos del acceso a la participación, dentro de los procesos de toma de decisiones que afecten ese derecho, pues lo contrario sería ilusorio y la norma constitucional resultaría superflua [...]" (sentencia número 2331-96, supra citada).

En esta especial materia, toda persona debe tener adecuada información sobre los materiales y las actividades o proyectos que pueden implicar un peligro o amenaza para las comunidades (derecho a la salud), y para la conservación y preservación del medio ambiente (derecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado), así como para la efectiva oportunidad de participar en los procesos de adopción de tales decisiones; toda vez que tratándose del derecho al ambiente, la legitimación corresponde al ser humano como tal, pues la lesión a este derecho fundamental la sufre tanto la comunidad -como un todo-, como el individuo en particular. Por ello, la Administración debe facilitar y fomentar la sensibilidad y la participación de la población poniendo la información a disposición de todos, no sólo de los miembros de la comunidad, sino también de la ciudadanía en general, en tanto en materia ambiental se ha considerado la existencia de un verdadero interés difuso (según se había anotado anteriormente en esta sentencia).

V.- En casos anteriores donde la Sala ha tenido oportunidad de manifestarse respecto al peligro alegado que implican los campos electromagnéticos, la mayoría de este Tribunal dispuso que no había sido posible determinar con certeza científica, si existía un nexo causal entre el desmejoramiento de la salud y la presencia de líneas de alta tensión en las proximidades de las viviendas. Sin embargo, en la sentencia No. 1998-2806 reiterada en la No. 2002-8554, este Tribunal dispuso claramente que la Sala entendía que se habían dispuesto normas que han impuesto límites operativos de las líneas de alta tensión, así como respecto de la magnitud del campo electromagnético que estas generen y la necesaria actualización de los límites permisibles en razón del avance en el conocimiento científico, entre otras condiciones. De ahí que fueron desestimados los amparos, imponiéndole al Instituto recurrido la responsabilidad de verificar los límites permisibles y contando con que la regulación que había sido establecida para tal efecto sería cumplida según se había dispuesto. Pues bien, en sesión No. 4912 del 21 de octubre de 1997, artículo 15, el Consejo Directivo del ICE aprobó la "Política y Estrategia Institucional para el tratamiento de campos electromagnéticos de líneas de transmisión", donde reguló entre otras cosas la obligación de diseminar la información disponible, así como la actualización permanente de la información existente sobre campos electromagnéticos de frecuencia extremadamente baja (CEM-feb). Aunado a lo anterior, el 12 de febrero del 2001 fue publicado el Reglamento para Regular Campos Eléctricos y Magnéticos en Obras de Transmisión de Energía Eléctrica No. 29296-SALUD-MINAE, que establece claramente en el artículo 15:

"Artículo 15.-Obligación de los prestatarios del servicio público de transmisión de electricidad de informar a los miembros de la comunidad sobre proyectos nuevos para efectos de participación ciudadana. Sin perjuicio de la obligación que tienen las Municipalidades de informar a los miembros de la comunidad que puedan verse afectados por la construcción de una línea de transmisión nueva, el prestatario del servicio de transmisión está obligado a informar a los propietarios directamente afectados por la línea a construir, en forma detallada, sobre las características del proyecto. A tal efecto, tan pronto se tenga establecido un trazado preliminar de la línea, el prestatario deberá tomar las medidas necesarias para establecer comunicación individual con cada uno de estos propietarios.

Asimismo y al menos semestralmente, deberán informar ampliamente a todos los interesados, de las investigaciones y pronunciamientos científicos más relevantes que a nivel internacional se realicen sobre los campos eléctricos y magnéticos y su relación con la salud humana. A tal efecto se aprovechará cualquiera de los medios tecnológicos o de comunicación de que se disponga, para que la información llegue a los afectados." Según lo indicado por las mismas autoridades recurridas el proyecto ya tiene un trazado preliminar de línea, pues incluso el ICE está en la etapa de las diligencias administrativas y judiciales tendentes a la adquisición de los derechos de servidumbre correspondientes. Sin embargo, admite que la ocasión en la que brindó información en forma pública a las comunidades involucradas con los campos electromagnéticos fue en el mes de junio del 2004, cuando se realizaron las audiencias públicas con relación al estudio de impacto ambiental. Posterior a ello, refirieron que lo único realizado es la evacuación de consultas individuales, para lo cual reconocen que no tienen una oficina especializada en el asunto. Todo lo anterior permite constatar a este Tribunal que el recurrente lleva razón en su alegato. Como ya se indicó el derecho de participación ciudadana en asuntos de índole ambiental así como de salud, son de tal relevancia que ameritan una actitud responsable y constante de la administración frente a los involucrados en sus proyectos. Lo anterior es tan claro, que el mismo Ministerio de Salud y el MINAE le impusieron al ICE lo dispuesto en el artículo 15 citado, sin embargo se constata su incumplimiento, pues ni siquiera hizo alusión en su informe al deber que tiene de al menos semestralmente, informar ampliamente a todos los interesados, de las investigaciones y pronunciamientos científicos más relevantes que a nivel internacional se realicen sobre los campos eléctricos y magnéticos y su relación con la salud humana. Nótese que no se trata de cualquier incumplimiento legal, sino que el instituto recurrido está faltando a un deber constitucional de colaboración con el resto de las autoridades públicas encargadas de velar por la protección del derecho a la salud y del ambiente. Ha quedado claramente establecido en sentencias anteriores de este Tribunal, que si bien no se ha logrado demostrar certeramente el nexo causal de los campos electromagnéticos con problemas graves de salud, las investigaciones continúan y por ello es un asunto que debe ser fiscalizado con la mayor responsabilidad y que amerita la actualización constante del mismo, incluso para determinar la carga respectiva de las líneas de alta tensión. Así parece haberlo entendido el Ministerio de Salud y el MINAE cuando emitieron el decreto citado, sin embargo el Instituto recurrido no, al considerar que es suficiente la divulgación de la información que realizó en el año 2004. Independientemente de que la empresa amparada esté discutiendo en vía judicial el monto del avalúo, lo cierto es que el objeto de estudio de este recurso se ampara en una lesión a un derecho fundamental cuya legitimación es de carácter difuso, pues lo discutido -difusión de adecuada y actualizada información sobre las investigaciones científicas realizadas alrededor de los campos electromagnéticos-, atañe no sólo a los miembros de la comunidad, sino también de la ciudadanía en general, por tratarse de materia ambiental. Es por ello que el amparo resulta estimatorio, en tanto este Tribunal por conducta omisiva del ICE se consideran violentados los artículos 11, 21 y 50 de la Constitución Política. No obstante, la estimatoria de este recurso no conlleva el otorgamiento de lo pedido por el amparado, en el sentido de que la Sala obligue al ICE a crear un Departamento especializado para brindar la información en cuestión, por cuanto ello constituye un asunto de resorte administrativo que excede las potestades de este Tribunal, por consiguiente se rechaza la pretensión del recurrente en este sentido.

Por tanto:

Se declara parcialmente con lugar el recurso. En consecuencia, se ordena a Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés en su condición de Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, que de forma inmediata a la comunicación de esta sentencia informe ampliamente a las comunidades respectivas sobre las investigaciones y pronunciamientos científicos más relevantes que a nivel internacional se realicen sobre los campos eléctricos y magnéticos y su relación con la salud humana, lo cual deberá realizar al menos semestralmente. Lo anterior bajo el apercibimiento de que, con base en lo establecido en el artículo 71 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, se impondrá prisión de tres meses a dos años, o de veinte a sesenta días multa, a quien recibiere una orden que deba cumplir o hacer cumplir, dictada en un recurso de amparo y no la cumpliere o no la hiciere cumplir, siempre que el delito no esté más gravemente penado. Se condena al Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad al pago de las costas, daños y perjuicios causados con los hechos que sirven de base a esta declaratoria, los que se liquidarán en ejecución de sentencia de lo contencioso administrativo. Se rechaza de plano la pretensión del recurrente, que consiste en obligar al ICE a crear un departamento de Gestión de Riesgos e Información sobre los Campos Electromagnéticos. Notifíquese esta resolución a Pedro Pablo Quirós Cortés en su condición de Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, o a quien en su lugar ejerza el cargo, en forma personal y al Presidente del Concejo Municipal de Liberia. Comuníquese.- Luis Fernando Solano C.

Luis Paulino Mora M. Ana Virginia Calzada M.

Adrián Vargas B. Gilbert Armijo S.

Ernesto Jinesta L. Fernando Cruz C.