Adaptation of ambulances to Law 7600 and CTP jurisdictionAdaptación de ambulancias a Ley 7600 y competencia del CTP

* 080019290007CO * Res. No. 2008010118 CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at nineteen hours and twenty-two minutes of June seventeenth, two thousand eight.

Amparo action filed by Carlos Roy Campos Azofeifa, of legal age, bearer of identity card 1-410-694, resident of Esparza de Puntarenas; against the Costa Rican Social Security Fund and the Public Transport Council.

Resultando:

1.- By brief received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at seventeen hours five minutes of January twenty-first, two thousand eight, the petitioner files an amparo action against the Costa Rican Social Security Fund and the Public Transport Council and states that he is a person with a disability, which is why he moves about in a wheelchair. He refers that he must attend appointments and rehabilitation processes at the hospitals of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund; occasions on which, due to his disability, he is transported by ambulance. He points out that these ambulances do not have the appropriate adaptations for the transport of persons with disabilities, which is why they must be "lifted or pulled" to enter those motor vehicles, considering that in this way he is being given degrading treatment, also exposing him to the risk of suffering an accident. He indicates that the Public Transport Council has not taken the necessary measures so that the vehicles of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund adapt to the requirements established in Law number 7600 and its regulations, since that authority refuses to supervise that these transport units are equipped to provide the transport service for persons with disabilities. He adds that in the place where he resides - Urbanización Los Cedros de Esparza - there are no public transport units adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities, an additional situation that prevents him from traveling to health centers. He considers his fundamental rights harmed and therefore requests that the action be granted.

2.- Eduardo Doryan Garrón reports under oath, in his capacity as Executive President of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (folio 7), that the amparo action filed does not indicate in which hospital, clinic, or branch of his represented entity, presumably, the petitioner's fundamental rights were violated. He requests that the petitioner be ordered to indicate the authority that incurred in the alleged violation of his rights since it is unknown where the alleged grievance took place, which in his opinion, should have been requested before notifying him. He states that in the event that the petitioner expands his action and the respective hearing is granted to them, he will render the corresponding reports. He concludes by requesting that the action be dismissed.

3.- Viviana Martín Salazar reports under oath, in her capacity as President of the Board of Directors of the Public Transport Council (folio 11), that said Council was created by Law number 7969, which indicates that it is an organ of maximum deconcentration of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport, which regulates and controls, throughout the national territory, the remunerated transport of persons in the taxi modality as well as in buses and special services, as complemented by Law 3503. She points out that emergency service units, made up of the ambulances of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund, are not regulated in any way by the Public Transport Council, so the filing of this amparo against her represented entity is illogical. She adds that regarding the petitioner's allegation according to which in Urbanización Los Cedros de Esparza there are no public transport units adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities, she cannot make any statement since no further details of the location of that community are offered in order to corroborate which natural or legal persons provide the public service through that place. She reports that in accordance with Transitory Provision VIII to Law 7600, a compliance timeline is established for public transport operators so that they adapt with the devices indicated by that Law and its regulations (including ramps or platforms) in one hundred percent of the units that provide public service. She adds that by January two thousand eight, all natural or legal persons that provide the remunerated transport service of persons on regular routes must have 15% of their fleet fully adapted in accordance with the requirements established in those legal norms. She indicates that she cannot refer specifically to this case because it is not indicated which companies or natural persons provide the remunerated transport service of persons in the community where the petitioner resides.

4.- In a ruling by the Instructing Magistrate at thirteen hours forty-six minutes of April seventh, two thousand eight, evidence was requested for a better resolution from the President of the Public Transport Council of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport, and a report was requested from the Executive President of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund and the President of the Costa Rican Red Cross Association so that they would refer to the facts alleged in this amparo (folio 15).

5.- Eduardo Doryan Garrón reports under oath, in his capacity as generalísimo legal representative without limitation of amount as Executive President of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (folio 16), that the Head of the General Services Area of his represented entity referred to the facts investigated in this amparo in official letter 17983 of April eighth, in which it is indicated that previous administrations did not give the necessary support to the fleet replacement plan and therefore, since the current administration began, ambulance-type vehicles have been replaced to thus strengthen, at a national level, the transfer of patients in general, but more units still need to be acquired. He indicates that in that report it is stated that regarding ambulances for the transfer of disabled patients, this matter has been focused for the moment on the specialized hospital for this purpose, that is, the National Rehabilitation Center, which has two ambulances with a ramp to carry out this type of transfer for patients who go to scheduled appointments. He points out that each ambulance has a current cost of seventeen million five hundred seventy-five thousand colones, which for his represented entity, as a service-providing institution, makes it quite costly to locate an ambulance of this type in each healthcare center, for which reason measures are taken to strengthen the existing fleet. He adds that the General Services Area reported that up to now what has been done is the replacement of nineteen eighty-six model ambulances and at no time has any healthcare center indicated that it is necessary in any community to acquire a specialized ambulance, it having been specified that the fleet change is to serve the general population and provide good service. He argues that his represented entity has managed the modernization of its ambulance fleet in a manner consistent with the financial possibilities of the institution, and although the Constitutional Chamber has indicated that the lesser or greater financial capacity of the Fund does not constitute an element that exempts it from its duty to comply with the obligations given by the constituent, in matters of health services administration, the truth is that this obligation must be developed in accordance with the country's reality and resources must be distributed according to the needs of each sector of the population. He argues that although Law 7600 refers to equality of opportunities, in practice what must occur is "equitable treatment" for persons with disabilities so that they have the same possibilities of access as the rest of the population according to their own condition. He considers it necessary for the Chamber to analyze this amparo from the perspective of equity, given that only from that perspective can the close relationship between the State's obligation to guarantee the protection of people's health and the management of public resources destined to fulfill said obligation be understood, given that a different analysis could imply distancing the ideal of health protection as a human right from the practical aspect that every public health system faces; a reality from which the Costa Rican Social Security Fund does not escape, this with the purpose of guaranteeing the sustainability of the system. He indicates that, in summary, the Costa Rican Social Security Fund has units duly equipped for the transfer of patients as regulated in Law 7600, which are located in the specialized hospital center and fulfill their function regarding patient transfer. He adds that in addition to this, procedures are being carried out as part of the institutional policy regarding the improvement of mobile equipment to acquire units with these characteristics, which would be distributed according to what demand studies indicate in the national territory, thereby guaranteeing access to health services in an equitable manner. He concludes by requesting that the action be dismissed.

6.- Viviana Martín Salazar reports under oath, in her capacity as President of the Board of Directors of the Public Transport Council (folio 30), that said Council was created by Law 7969, which is the Regulatory Law of the Public Service of Remunerated Transport of Persons in Vehicles in the Taxi Modality, as an organ of maximum deconcentration attached to the Ministry of Public Works and Transport with powers to coordinate the correct application of public transport policies, its planning, technical review, the granting and administration of concessions, as well as the regulation of permits that legally proceed in the taxi and bus modality throughout the national territory. She states that in accordance with the foregoing, the competence of that Public Transport Council is limited to the public service of remunerated transport of persons in taxi, buseta, microbús, and autobús, and more recently, via an opinion of the Attorney General's Office, freight transport. She points out that for this reason, her represented entity has no competence assigned by law to regulate, control, or monitor compliance with Law 7600 by the ambulances belonging to the Costa Rican Social Security Fund and the Costa Rican Red Cross.

7.- According to the record on folio 33, the President of the Costa Rican Red Cross Association did not render the requested report despite having been duly notified as recorded on folio 27.

8.- In the proceedings followed, the legal prescriptions have been observed.

Drafted by Magistrate Araya García; and,

Considerando:

I.- Proven facts. Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly proven: a) that the Public Transport Council is not carrying out any control regarding compliance with Law 7600 by the ambulances belonging to the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (see statements rendered under oath on folio 31); b) that the National Rehabilitation Center of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund has two ambulances with a ramp to carry out the transfer of patients who go to scheduled appointments (see statements rendered under oath on folio 17).

II.- Object of the action. The petitioner alleges that he is a person with a disability who must attend rehabilitation appointments at the hospitals of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund, for which he is transported by ambulance. However, he indicates that these vehicles do not have the appropriate adaptations for the transport of persons with disabilities, and the Public Transport Council has not taken the necessary measures so that the vehicles of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund adapt to the requirements established in Law number 7600 and its regulations, in addition to the fact that this authority refuses to supervise that such transport units are equipped to provide the transport service for persons with disabilities. He considers that this situation harms his rights and those of persons with disabilities in the country, for which reason he requests that the action be granted.

III.- Regulatory framework for the rights of persons with disabilities. In the first place, it is important to note that the Political Constitution and the American Convention on Human Rights (an international instrument with force superior to law by provision of Article 7 of the Constitution) enshrine the principle of equality of persons and the prohibition of making distinctions contrary to their dignity – Articles 33 and 24 respectively. Additionally, the rights of persons with disabilities are recognized in other international instruments such as the "Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities," approved by the Legislative Assembly by Law number 7948 of November twenty-second, nineteen ninety-nine, and the "Equal Opportunities Law for Persons with Disabilities," number 7600, published in La Gaceta of May twenty-ninth, nineteen ninety-six. The cited Convention defines discrimination in its Article 1, as follows:

"The term discrimination against persons with disabilities means any distinction, exclusion, or restriction based on a disability, record of disability, consequence of present or past disability, that has the effect or purpose of preventing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise by persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms." Likewise, the obligation of the signatory States, among them Costa Rica, is enshrined to adopt:

"measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and promote integration by governmental authorities and/or private entities in the provision or supply of goods, services, facilities, programs, activities, such as employment, transport, communications, housing, recreation, education, sport, access to justice and police services, and political and administrative activities." For its part, of importance for the resolution of this matter, it is appropriate to point out the provisions of the Equal Opportunities Law for Persons with Disabilities, number 7600, which establishes in general terms the obligation that institutions, both public and private, have to provide all the technical support that is necessary for persons with disabilities in order to guarantee their rights:

"Article 5.- Technical aids and support services.- Public institutions and private public service institutions shall provide, to persons with disabilities, the support services and technical aids required to guarantee the exercise of their rights and duties." In relation to the above, it is essential to remember that this Constitutional Tribunal has recognized on repeated occasions that "Law No. 7600 aims as a fundamental objective to achieve the necessary conditions so that persons suffering from any type of disability achieve their full socio-economic participation AND INVESTMENT. In this sense, the system of updating and promoting the necessary conditions that the law establishes supposes a guarantee of their right to full equality, in addition to an attempt at insertion into the socio-economic life of the country. Precisely, due to its foundation, the enjoyment of equal opportunities for access and participation in identical circumstances ceases to be a simple aspiration for the disabled and becomes a fundamental right. To guarantee the exercise of their rights and duties, the Law and its Regulations impose on Public Administrations and private legal entities providing public services the duty to provide the disabled with the support services and technical aids they require to make this purpose a reality. Within this order of ideas, the non-compliance with the public interest that the law enshrines implies a flagrant violation of the fundamental rights of that social group." (see in this sense ruling number 2005-05895 at fourteen hours forty-seven minutes of May eighteenth, two thousand five).

IV.- In light of the foregoing, it is evident then that there exists a series of provisions in force in the Costa Rican legal system that prohibit all types of discrimination against persons by reason of their disability, which must be respected by both subjects of public law and private law, since the effective protection of the rights of these persons turns out to be one of the means by which this population group can have a life that is as independent and normal as possible, in order that their integration into society is full and effective. It is clear that within these rights is the guarantee for persons with disabilities to be able to lead an independent life both in their private sphere and in everything related to their development in society, which necessarily implies the obligation of the State that this group can access all the services and facilities that exist in a society, under equal conditions as any other person. As can be deduced from the legal framework cited supra, it is evident that in Costa Rica there exists an entire normative basis that justifies the change of the traditional paradigm that has been managed in relation to persons with disabilities. The State must adopt measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and provide persons with disabilities with the support services and technical aids required to guarantee them the exercise of their rights and duties. In this sense, the Chamber considers that the matter under study offers an important factual substrate to favor that paradigm shift, as it means, for this Tribunal, the opportunity to warn society of the need to begin to incorporate persons with disabilities under equal conditions in relation to the rest of the individuals and in each and every one of the activities that make up the social conglomerate. It should be remembered that by virtue of the principle of diversity, persons with disabilities are not only limited to moving through the streets in wheelchairs, but it must be taken into account that there are other types of disabilities that also require the attention of the State, and therefore, urban furniture, access to buildings, and their transfer to hospital centers, among other things of daily life, must guarantee to the entire population with disabilities, free access, under conditions of equality and without discrimination. The State cannot limit the measures to progressively eliminate discrimination only to access ramps or elevators or clear sidewalks, but must go further, and precisely this amparo action provides the opportunity to take into account that another of the ways to eliminate that discrimination and to foster the full insertion of persons with disabilities into society is precisely through the possibility offered to them of being able to be transferred to hospital and health centers in adequate conditions, that respect their dignity but above all that guarantee their freedom of movement to those places in conditions of safety and comfort, which is favored and fostered, without a doubt, with their transfer in ambulances that have the minimum mechanisms to attend to a person with a disability. From any point of view, admitting the contrary translates into a violation of the equality of opportunities that these persons have as part of society and would mean denying this population the possibility of inserting themselves into society naturally, of carrying out their activities adequately, but above all, their right to enjoy independence.

V.- Regarding the specific case. Based on the above regulatory framework, it is now appropriate to analyze the situation raised by the petitioner regarding two specific points: firstly, regarding the omission on the part of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund to enable ambulance vehicles that are equipped in accordance with the provisions of Law 7600 to allow the transport of persons with disabilities to be carried out under adequate conditions; and on the other hand, regarding the omission of the Public Transport Council to adopt the necessary measures to verify that the ambulance vehicles that transport persons with disabilities are adapted to the requirements established in Law number 7600 and its regulations. As far as the first aspect is concerned, Law 7600 is very clear in establishing in several of its norms the need for the means of transport in which persons with disabilities are transported to be adapted, and among them, without a doubt, are ambulance vehicles, which is obvious because precisely the purpose of an ambulance is the transfer of sick patients or persons with disabilities, to the different medical and hospital centers. In this sense, it is appropriate to cite two norms of Law 7600 that are considered relevant to the specific case:

"ARTICLE 29.- Obligations of the State. When a person insured by the State presents a disability as a consequence of an illness or injury, the Costa Rican Social Security Fund shall provide medical attention and rehabilitation, as well as the technical aids or support services required…." "ARTICLE 35.- Adapted means of transport. Public institutions that provide rehabilitation services must have means of transport adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities." Thus, it is evident then that there is indeed an obligation on the part of the State, specifically in the specific case of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund, to guarantee persons with disabilities the technical aids or required support services, among which, without a doubt, they must have means of transport adapted for that group, as provided in numeral 35 cited supra, according to which, public institutions that provide rehabilitation services must have means of transport adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities. Making a broad interpretation of these norms from the perspective of persons with disabilities, it is deduced then that an institution such as the Costa Rican Social Security Fund, which is in charge of providing health services in the country and not only rehabilitation services, must have within its fleet means of transport such as ambulances, adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities. This is logical if one starts from the assumption that a person with a disability, depending on the degree of their condition, is not under equal conditions as any other person who could well access an ambulance vehicle by their own means, and for this reason, it is necessary, as has been protected regarding the public transport service in the taxi and bus modality, that this consideration also exists in the case of ambulances, and therefore, that in the Costa Rican Social Security Fund, as in any other public or private institution in charge of transporting the sick, there are ambulances that are adapted to allow persons with disabilities to access them and be transported with the greatest possible comfort and safety. From this perspective, the petitioner is correct when he affirms that a person with a disability who cannot enter by their own means an ambulance that is not adapted, may suffer injuries or mistreatment when a third party tries to help them up, either by pulling or lifting them, in addition to also causing psychological impairment by having to be exposed to another person helping them when this would not be necessary if the ambulance were equipped for them to access it by their own means or with the least possible help. To refute the above, it is not valid to think that the ambulance service is an assisted service and that therefore the adaptation of the units to Law 7600 is not required, since such assistance would only occur eventually in emergency situations where the person requiring transport is in a serious state of health or unconscious and therefore requires being moved on a stretcher, which is not the case raised by the petitioner. In this sense, as the Constitutional Tribunal guarantor of the rights of individuals and with special attention to those of persons with disabilities, the situation denounced by the petitioner is fully valid, as it concerns the case of this sector of society that requires constant transportation to receive medical attention, and by reason of their disability requires having a means of transport that adapts to their particular situation, and again the point made supra is taken up, in the sense that it is not only about the ambulance being adapted for the transport of a person with a disability who moves in a wheelchair, since persons with disabilities are not only limited to moving through the streets in wheelchairs, but it must be taken into account that there are other types of disabilities that also require the attention of the State, and therefore their transfer to hospital centers, among other things of daily life, must guarantee free access, under conditions of equality and without discrimination, just as the principle of diversity in this matter establishes.

VI.- Thus, the Chamber considers that there is an obligation on the part of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund to provide the population with disabilities with ambulance vehicles that are adapted to their needs. Such circumstance is partially recognized in the report rendered under oath to this Chamber when it is affirmed that as part of the institutional policy regarding the improvement of mobile equipment, there is the project to acquire units that are adapted to Law 7600, but at the same time it is affirmed that, at present, there are only two units for the entire country that have a ramp to carry out transfers of patients who go to scheduled appointments at the National Rehabilitation Center.

Without a doubt, this panorama is quite disheartening because while it is true that Law 7600 does not state that all ambulance vehicles in the country must be adapted, it is also true that it does require public institutions such as the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social to have means of transport adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities, and it is evident that two ambulances for the entire country are in no way covering the need that this group has throughout the length and breadth of the national territory. For these reasons, it is necessary to order the Executive President of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social to immediately proceed to adopt the measures that are necessary so that, in consideration of the provisions of Law 7600, and the percentages of persons with disabilities managed in each of the medical and hospital care centers under the responsibility of that institution, the necessary number of ambulance vehicles be acquired to guarantee an adequate transfer of persons with disabilities who need to be transported to the different hospitals and clinics of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social. For these reasons, regarding this point, the amparo (constitutional relief) must be granted, as is hereby ordered, with the indicated consequences.

VII.- On the other hand, it is now appropriate to analyze the other claim arising from the brief filing the appeal, according to which the Consejo de Transporte Público has not taken the necessary measures for the vehicles of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social to be adapted to the requirements established in Law Number 7600 and its regulations, since that authority refuses to verify that these transport units are equipped to provide the transport service for persons with disabilities. On this matter, under oath, the President of the Consejo de Transporte Público has informed this Court that her represented entity does not have the competence to regulate, control, or monitor compliance with Law 7600 by the ambulances belonging to the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social. However, in light of the current regulations on the subject, the President of that Council is not correct in making such a statement. Indeed, it should be observed that according to the Law for the Creation of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport, Number 4786, Article 2, subsection a) and its amendments, the regulation, control, and supervision of traffic and transport on public roads is the competence of that Ministry. For its part, Article 19 of the Law of Traffic on Public Land Roads No. 7331 establishes that it corresponds to the Ministry of Public Works and Transport to verify that the vehicles circulating on national roads meet the mechanical, safety, pollutant emissions, and other conditions determined by the Law, which shall be done through the partial or total technical vehicle inspection. In turn, Article 7 of the Regulatory Law for the Public Service of Remunerated Transport of Persons in Vehicles in the Taxi Mode No. 7969, provides that it corresponds to the Consejo de Transporte Público to coordinate and verify the correct application of public transport policies, its planning, and the technical inspection, given that in Resolution Number 28 of fourteen hours of February 8, 2002, the Minister of Public Works and Transport, based on the provisions of Article 89 of the General Law of Public Administration, delegated in favor of that Consejo de Transporte Público, all the technical, operational, fiscal, administrative, and other aspects that are necessary for the due fulfillment of the comprehensive technical inspection of the country's vehicle fleet, that Council then being responsible for the due observance of the legal system regarding this matter. It must be remembered that the comprehensive technical vehicle inspection has been created to verify, control, and inspect those elements that affect the vehicle's safety, its pollutant emissions, and compliance with the technical regulations established so that it can circulate in suitable conditions (see in that regard the Regulation for the Comprehensive Technical Inspection of Motor Vehicles Circulating on Public Roads, Decreto Ejecutivo No. 30184-MOPT of February 6, 2002) and its primary purpose is to guarantee the minimum safety conditions of vehicles based on their design and manufacturing criteria; in addition to verifying that they comply with the technical regulations that affect them and that they maintain a level of pollutant emissions that does not exceed the maximum limits established in the current regulations (see in that regard the Procedures Manual for the Technical Inspection of Motor Vehicles at RTV Stations approved by the Consejo de Transporte Público in Ordinary Session 48-2002 of July 2, 2002).

VIII.- Thus, it is evident then that if the technical vehicle inspection has been created to control that the vehicles circulating on land roads are in optimal conditions and comply with the requirements demanded by the Law, including Law 7600 which forms part of the Costa Rican legal system, and if it is the responsibility of the Consejo de Transporte Público to regulate and control matters related to the technical vehicle inspection so that the vehicles circulating on the roads of the national territory comply with the established regulations, then it is evident that if one of the aspects to be controlled in the vehicles that transport persons with disabilities is precisely that they are adjusted to the provisions of Law 7600, the statement made by the President of the Consejo de Transporte Público, to the effect that it is not the competence of her represented entity to regulate, control, or monitor compliance with Law 7600 by the ambulances belonging to the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, is not valid or acceptable. From this perspective then, if the Ministry of Public Works and Transport delegated to the Consejo de Transporte Público matters relating to the technical inspection and the latter must control compliance with the adaptations established in Law 7600 in vehicles, as in the specific case of ambulances, and this control and verification is not currently being carried out, then it is imperative to declare the appeal granted because it is evident that a limitation and discrimination is occurring to the detriment of persons with disabilities by not requiring ambulances to be adjusted to Law 7600 and thereby enabling persons with disabilities to access ambulances by their own means when they need to be transported to medical or hospital centers where they need to receive medical care or treatment, the foregoing just as is currently required of the taxi vehicle fleet and the bus fleet.

IX.- It should be recalled that this Chamber, in judgment number 2005-005895 of fourteen hours forty-seven minutes of May 18, 2005, when assessing compliance with the provisions of Law 7600 in the country's bus fleet, expressly stated:

“It is inferred then, that the determination of the aspects to be considered in the technical vehicle inspection is the absolute competence and responsibility of the governing authorities of public transport and not an attribute of the developer, who is obligated to proceed in accordance with what is predetermined in the regulation established for that purpose. In this sense, as it is undoubtedly proven that the Consejo de Transporte Público has not provided the technical measures conducive to adapting the remunerated transport of persons in the bus mode to what is provided in Law No. 7600 and the Ministry of Public Works and Transport approved the Manual for the Technical Inspection of Vehicles without contemplating what is established in that law and its regulations, the Chamber verifies the accused violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioner. Precisely, by reason of the foregoing, this Constitutional Court rules out that Riteve SyC, the Ministry of the Presidency, and the Legislative Assembly have violated any fundamental right of Rojas Villalobos regarding compliance with the provisions of Law No. 7600.” Consequently, as has been indicated, in this case it is also the competence of the Consejo de Transporte Público to verify that the ambulances of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social comply with the provisions of Law 7600, and therefore, the appropriate course is to grant the amparo (constitutional relief) on this point as well. Consequently, the Consejo de Transporte Público is ordered to immediately arrange the technical measures that are necessary to control and verify that the ambulance vehicles of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social are adapted to the provisions of the Law for Equal Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities, which is Law No. 7600 of May 29, 1996.

X.- Conclusion. By virtue of the foregoing considerations, the Chamber is of the opinion that through the reported facts, the rights of the petitioner and other persons with disabilities are indeed being violated, and therefore, it is imperative to declare the appeal granted with the consequences indicated in the preceding recitals.-

Por tanto:

The appeal is granted. Eduardo Doryan Garrón, in his capacity as Executive President of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, or whoever occupies that position in his place, is ordered to immediately adopt the measures that are necessary so that, in consideration of the provisions of Law 7600 for Equal Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities and the percentages of persons with disabilities managed in each of the medical and hospital care centers under the responsibility of that institution, the necessary number of ambulance vehicles be acquired or adapted to guarantee an adequate transfer of persons with disabilities who need to be transported to the different hospitals and clinics of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social. Furthermore, Viviana Martín Salazar, in her capacity as President of the Consejo de Transporte Público, or whoever exercises that position in her place, is ordered to immediately arrange the technical measures that are necessary to control and verify that the ambulance vehicles of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social are adapted to the provisions of Law 7600 for Equal Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities. The State and the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social are condemned 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 the judgment of the administrative contentious jurisdiction. Eduardo Doryan Garrón, in his capacity as Executive President of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, and Viviana Martín Salazar, in her capacity as President of the Consejo de Transporte Público, or whoever exercises those positions in their place, are warned that if they fail to comply with said order, they shall incur the crime of disobedience and that, in accordance with Article 71 of the Law of this jurisdiction, a prison sentence 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 appeal, and does not comply with it or does not enforce it, provided the offense is not more severely penalized. This resolution shall be personally notified to Eduardo Doryan Garrón, in his capacity as Executive President of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, and to Viviana Martín Salazar, in her capacity as President of the Consejo de Transporte Público, or to whoever exercises those positions in their place.- Teresita Rodríguez A.

Presidente a.i.

Rosa María Abdelnour G. Horacio González Q.

Marta María Vinocour F. Roxana Salazar C.

Jorge Araya G. Alexander Godínez V.

**6.-** Viviana Martín Salazar, in her capacity as President of the Board of Directors of the Public Transport Council (Consejo de Transporte Público), reports under oath (folio 30) that this Council was created by Law 7969, which is the Regulatory Law for the Public Service of Paid Transportation of Persons in Vehicles in the Taxi Mode, as a body of maximum deconcentration attached to the Ministry of Public Works and Transport (MOPT) with powers to coordinate the correct application of public transport policies, their planning, technical review, the granting and administration of concessions, as well as the regulation of legally applicable permits in the taxi and bus mode throughout the national territory. She states that, in accordance with the foregoing, the competence of this Public Transport Council is limited to the public service of paid transportation of persons by taxi, buseta, microbus, and bus, and more recently, via a ruling from the Attorney General's Office (Procuraduría General de la República), freight transport. She points out that for this reason, her represented entity has no competence assigned by law to regulate, control, or monitor compliance with Law 7600 by the ambulances belonging to the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) and the Costa Rican Red Cross (Cruz Roja Costarricense).

**7.-** According to the record on folio 33, the President of the Costa Rican Red Cross Association did not render the requested report despite having been duly notified, as recorded on folio 27.

**8.-** In the proceedings followed, the legal prescriptions have been observed.

Drafted by Magistrate **Araya García**; and, **Considering:** **I.-** **Proven facts.** Of importance for the decision in this matter, the following facts are deemed duly demonstrated: **a)** that the Public Transport Council is not carrying out any control regarding compliance with Law 7600 by the ambulances belonging to the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (see sworn statements on folio 31); **b)** that the National Rehabilitation Center (Centro Nacional de Rehabilitación) of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund has two ambulances with a ramp to carry out the transfer of patients attending scheduled appointments (see sworn statements on folio 17).

**II.- Object of the appeal (recurso).** The appellant alleges that he is a person with a disability who must attend rehabilitation appointments at the hospitals of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund, for which he is transported by ambulance. However, he indicates that these vehicles do not have the appropriate adaptations for the transportation of persons with disabilities, and the Public Transport Council has not taken the necessary measures for the vehicles of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund to adapt to the requirements established in Law number 7600 and its regulations, in addition to the fact that this authority refuses to supervise whether such transport units are equipped to provide the transportation service for persons with disabilities. He considers that this situation harms his rights and those of persons with disabilities in the country, and therefore requests that the appeal be granted.

**III.- Regulatory framework for the rights of persons with disabilities.** First of all, it is important to note that the Political Constitution and the American Convention on Human Rights (an international instrument with force superior to the law by provision of Article 7 of the Constitution) enshrine the principle of equality of persons and the prohibition of making distinctions contrary to their dignity –Articles 33 and 24 respectively–. Additionally, the rights of persons with disabilities are recognized in other international instruments such as the "Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities," approved by the Legislative Assembly through Law number 7948 of November twenty-second, nineteen ninety-nine, and the "Equal Opportunities Law for Persons with Disabilities" (Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad), number 7600, published in La Gaceta of May twenty-ninth, nineteen ninety-six. The aforementioned Convention defines discrimination in its Article 1, as follows:

"The term discrimination against persons with disabilities means any distinction, exclusion, or restriction based on a disability, record of disability, consequence of present or past disability, which has the effect or purpose of preventing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise by persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms." Likewise, the obligation of the States that signed it, among them Costa Rica, to adopt:

"measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and promote integration by governmental authorities and/or private entities in the provision or supply of goods, services, facilities, programs, activities, such as employment, transportation, communications, housing, recreation, education, sports, access to justice and police services, and political and administrative activities." For its part, of importance for the resolution of this matter, it is convenient to point out the provisions of the Equal Opportunities Law for Persons with Disabilities number 7600, which establishes in general terms the obligation of institutions, both public and private, to provide all the technical support necessary for persons with disabilities in order to guarantee their rights:

“Article 5.- Technical aids and support services.- Public institutions and private public service institutions must provide persons with disabilities with the support services and technical aids required to guarantee the exercise of their rights and duties.” In relation to the foregoing, it is essential to remember that this Constitutional Court has repeatedly recognized that “Law No. 7600’s fundamental objective is to achieve the necessary conditions so that persons suffering from any type of disability can achieve their full socio-economic participation AND INCLUSION. In this sense, the system of updating and promoting the necessary conditions established by law implies a guarantee of their right to full equality, as well as an attempt at insertion into the country's socio-economic life. Precisely, because of its basis, the enjoyment of equal opportunities for access and participation in identical circumstances ceases to be a simple aspiration for the disabled and becomes a fundamental right. To guarantee the exercise of their rights and duties, the Law and its Regulations impose on Public Administrations and private legal entities that provide public services the duty to provide the disabled with the support services and technical aids they require to realize this purpose. Within this order of ideas, non-compliance with the public interest that the law enshrines implies a flagrant violation of the fundamental rights of that social group.” (see in this sense judgment number 2005-05895 of fourteen hours forty-seven minutes of May eighteenth, two thousand five).

**IV.-** In light of the foregoing, it is evident then that there are a series of provisions in force in the Costa Rican legal system that prohibit all types of discrimination against persons on the basis of their disability, which must be respected by both public and private legal entities because the effective protection of these persons' rights is one of the means by which this population group can lead a life as independent and normal as possible, for the sake of their full and effective integration into society. It is clear that within these rights is the guarantee for persons with disabilities to lead an independent life both in their private sphere and in everything related to their development in society, which necessarily implies the State's obligation for this group to be able to access all services and facilities that exist in a society under the same conditions as any other person. As can be deduced from the legal framework cited above, it is evident that in Costa Rica there is an entire normative basis that justifies the change from the traditional paradigm that has been handled in relation to persons with disabilities. The State must adopt measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and provide persons with disabilities with the support services and technical aids required to guarantee them the exercise of their rights and duties. In this sense, the Chamber considers that the matter under study offers an important factual substratum to favor that paradigm shift because it means, for this Court, the opportunity to warn society about the need to begin incorporating persons with disabilities under equal conditions in relation to the rest of the individuals and in each and every one of the activities that make up the social conglomerate. It should be remembered that by virtue of the principle of diversity, persons with disabilities are not only limited to traveling the streets in wheelchairs, but it must also be taken into account that there are other types of disabilities that also require the State's attention, and therefore, urban furniture, access to buildings, and their transfer to hospital centers, among other things of daily life, must guarantee the entire population with disabilities free access, under conditions of equality and without discrimination. The State cannot limit measures to progressively eliminate discrimination only to access ramps or elevators or clear sidewalks, but must go further, and precisely this amparo appeal (recurso de amparo) provides the opportunity to take into account that another way to eliminate this discrimination and to foster the full insertion of persons with disabilities into society is precisely through the possibility provided to them of being able to be transferred to hospital and health centers under adequate conditions that respect their dignity, but above all that guarantee their freedom of movement to those places under conditions of safety and comfort, which is favored and fostered, without a doubt, by their transfer in ambulances that have the minimum mechanisms to attend to a person with a disability. From any point of view, admitting the contrary translates into a violation of the equality of opportunities that these persons have as part of society and would mean denying this population the possibility of inserting themselves into society naturally, of carrying out their activities adequately, but above all, their right to enjoy independence.

**V.- On the specific case.** Based on the previous regulatory framework, it is now appropriate to analyze the situation raised by the appellant regarding two specific points: firstly, the omission by the Costa Rican Social Security Fund to equip ambulance vehicles that are enabled in accordance with the provisions of Law 7600 to allow the transport of persons with disabilities to be carried out under adequate conditions; and secondly, the omission by the Public Transport Council to adopt the necessary measures to verify that the ambulance vehicles that transport persons with disabilities are adapted to the requirements established in Law number 7600 and its regulations. Regarding the first aspect, Law 7600 is very clear in establishing in several of its norms the need for the means of transport in which persons with disabilities are transported to be adapted, and among these, undoubtedly, are ambulance vehicles, which is obvious because precisely the purpose of an ambulance is the transfer of sick patients or persons with disabilities to different medical and hospital centers. In this sense, it is convenient to cite two norms of Law 7600 that are considered pertinent to the specific case:

"ARTICLE 29.- Obligations of the State. When a person insured by the State presents a disability as a consequence of an illness or injury, the Costa Rican Social Security Fund will provide them with medical attention and rehabilitation, as well as the required technical aids or support services….” "ARTICLE 35.- Adapted means of transport. Public institutions that provide rehabilitation services must have means of transport adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities." Thus, it is evident then that there is indeed an obligation on the part of the State, specifically in the specific case of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund, to guarantee persons with disabilities the required technical aids or support services, among which, without a doubt, they must have means of transport adapted for that group as provided in numeral 35 cited above, according to which, public institutions that provide rehabilitation services must have means of transport adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities. Making a broad interpretation of these norms from the perspective of persons with disabilities, it is deduced then that an institution such as the Costa Rican Social Security Fund, which is in charge of providing health services in the country and not only rehabilitation services, must have within its fleet means of transport such as ambulances, adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities. This is logical if one starts from the assumption that a person with a disability, depending on the degree of their condition, is not under equal conditions as any other person who could well access an ambulance vehicle by their own means, and for this reason, it is necessary, as has been protected regarding the public transport service in the taxi and bus mode, that this consideration also exists in the case of ambulances, and therefore, that the Costa Rican Social Security Fund, as in any other public or private institution in charge of transporting the sick, has ambulances that are adapted to allow persons with disabilities to access them and be transported with the greatest possible comfort and safety. From this perspective, the appellant is right when he states that a person with a disability who cannot enter by their own means an ambulance that is not adapted may suffer injuries or mistreatment when a third party tries to help them up, either by pulling or lifting them, in addition to the fact that psychological harm is also caused to them by having to be exposed to another person helping them when this would not be necessary if the ambulance were equipped for them to access it by their own means or with the least possible assistance. To refute the foregoing, it is not valid to think that the ambulance service is an assisted service and that therefore the adaptation of the units to Law 7600 is not required, because such assistance would only occur eventually in emergency situations where the person requiring transport is in a serious state of health or unconscious and therefore requires being mobilized on a stretcher, which is not the case raised by the appellant. In this sense, as the Constitutional Court guarantor of the rights of individuals and with special attention to those of persons with disabilities, the situation denounced by the appellant is fully valid because it concerns this group in society that needs to be moving around to receive medical attention and, due to their disability, requires a means of transport that adapts to their particular situation. Again, what has been stated above is reiterated, in the sense that it is not only about the ambulance being adapted for the transport of a person with a disability who moves in a wheelchair, because persons with disabilities are not only limited to traveling the streets in wheelchairs, but it must be taken into account that there are other types of disabilities that also require the State's attention, and therefore their transfer to hospital centers, among other things of daily life, must guarantee free access, under conditions of equality and without discrimination, as established by the principle of diversity in this matter.

**VI.-** Thus, the Chamber considers that there is an obligation on the Costa Rican Social Security Fund to provide the population with disabilities with ambulance vehicles that are adapted to their needs. Such a circumstance is partially acknowledged in the report rendered under oath to this Chamber when it is stated that, as part of the institutional policy regarding the improvement of mobile equipment, there is a project to acquire units that are adapted to Law 7600, but at the same time it is stated that, currently, there are only two units for the entire country that have a ramp to carry out transfers of patients attending scheduled appointments at the National Rehabilitation Center. Without a doubt, this panorama is quite discouraging because, although it is true that Law 7600 does not indicate that all ambulance vehicles in the country must be adapted, it is also true that it does require public institutions like the Costa Rican Social Security Fund to have means of transport adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities, and it is evident that two ambulances for the entire country are in no way covering the need that this group has throughout the national territory. For these reasons, it is necessary to order the Executive President of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund to proceed immediately to adopt the measures that are necessary so that, in accordance with the provisions of Law 7600, and the percentages of persons with disabilities managed in each of the medical and hospital care centers under that institution's charge, the necessary number of ambulance vehicles be acquired to guarantee an adequate transfer of persons with disabilities who need to be mobilized to the different hospitals and clinics of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund. For these reasons, regarding this point, the amparo must be granted as is hereby ordered, with the indicated consequences.

**VII.-** On the other hand, it is now appropriate to analyze the other claim arising from the brief filing the appeal, according to which the Public Transport Council has not taken the necessary measures for the vehicles of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund to be adapted to the requirements established in Law number 7600 and its regulations, because that authority refuses to supervise whether those transport units are equipped to provide the transportation service for persons with disabilities. On this matter, under oath, the President of the Public Transport Council has informed this Court that her represented entity has no competence to regulate, control, or monitor compliance with Law 7600 by the ambulances belonging to the Costa Rican Social Security Fund. However, in light of the regulations in force on the matter, the President of that Council is not correct in making such a statement. Indeed, it should be noted that according to the Creation Law of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport (Ley de Creación del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes) number 4786, Article 2, subsection a) and its amendments, it is the competence of that Ministry to regulate, control, and monitor traffic and transport on public roads. For its part, Article 19 of the Law of Traffic on Public Land Routes (Ley de Tránsito por Vías Públicas Terrestres) No. 7331 establishes that it is the responsibility of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport to verify that vehicles circulating on national roads meet the mechanical, safety, polluting emissions, and other conditions determined by Law, which shall be done through the partial or total technical vehicle review. In turn, Article 7 of the Regulatory Law for the Public Service of Paid Transportation of Persons in Vehicles in the Taxi Mode No. 7969 provides that it is the responsibility of the Public Transport Council to coordinate and verify the correct application of public transport policies, their planning, and the technical review, being that in resolution number 28 of fourteen hours of February eighth, two thousand two, the Minister of Public Works and Transport, based on the provisions of Article 89 of the General Law of Public Administration (Ley General de la Administración Pública), delegated to that Public Transport Council all the technical, operational, fiscal, administrative, and other necessary aspects for the due compliance with the integral technical review of the country's vehicle fleet, that Council then being responsible for the due observance of the legal system as far as this matter is concerned. It must be remembered that the integral technical review of vehicles has been created to verify, control, and inspect those elements that affect vehicle safety, their polluting emissions, and compliance with the established technical regulations so that they can circulate under suitable conditions (see in that sense the Regulation for the Integral Technical Review of Motor Vehicles Circulating on Public Roads (Reglamento para la Revisión Técnica Integral de Vehículos Automotores que Circulen por las Vías Públicas) Executive Decree No. 30184-MOPT of February sixth, two thousand two) and its primary objective is to guarantee the minimum safety conditions of vehicles based on their design and manufacturing criteria; also to verify that they comply with the technical regulations that affect them and that they maintain a level of polluting emissions that does not exceed the maximum limits established in the regulations in force (see in that sense the Procedures Manual for the Technical Review of Motor Vehicles at RTV Stations (Manual de Procedimientos para la Revisión técnica de Vehículos Automotores en las Estaciones de RTV) approved by the Public Transport Council in ordinary session 48-2002 of July second, two thousand two).

**VIII.-** Thus, it is evident that if the vehicle technical inspection has been created to control that vehicles circulating on public roads are in optimal condition and comply with the requirements demanded by the Law, among them the 7600 which forms part of the Costa Rican legal system, and if it is the responsibility of the Public Transport Council to regulate and control matters relating to the vehicle technical inspection so that vehicles circulating on the national territory's roads comply with the established regulations, then it is evident that if one of the aspects to control in vehicles that transport persons with disabilities is precisely that they are adjusted to the provisions of Law 7600, the statement made by the President of the Public Transport Council to the effect that it is not within her represented entity's competence to regulate, control, or monitor compliance with Law 7600 by the ambulances belonging to the Costa Rican Social Security Fund is neither valid nor acceptable. From this perspective then, if the Ministry of Public Works and Transport delegated to the Public Transport Council matters relating to the technical inspection and this Council must control in vehicles compliance with the adaptations established in Law 7600, as in the specific case of ambulances, and this control and verification is not currently being carried out, then it is necessary to grant the appeal because it is evident that a limitation and discrimination is occurring to the detriment of persons with disabilities by not requiring ambulances to be adjusted to Law 7600 and thereby facilitating that persons with disabilities can access ambulances by their own means when they need to be transported to medical centers or hospitals where they require medical attention or treatment, the foregoing just as is currently required of the taxi vehicle fleet and the bus fleet.

**IX.-** It should be recalled that this Chamber, in judgment number 2005-005895 of fourteen hours forty-seven minutes of the eighteenth of May of two thousand five, when assessing compliance with the provisions of Law 7600 in the country's bus fleet, expressly stated that:

“It is inferred then, that the determination of the aspects to be considered in the vehicle technical inspection is the absolute competence and responsibility of the governing authorities of public transport and not an attribution of the developer, who is obligated to proceed in accordance with what is predetermined in the regulation established for that purpose. In this sense, as it is undoubtedly proven that the Public Transport Council has not provided the conducive technical measures to adapt the remunerated transport of persons, bus modality, to the provisions of Law No. 7600 and the Ministry of Public Works and Transport approved the Vehicle Technical Inspection Manual without contemplating what is stipulated in that law and its regulations, the Chamber confirms the accused violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioner. Precisely, for the reasons stated, this Constitutional Court rules out that Riteve SyC, the Ministry of the Presidency, and the Legislative Assembly have violated any fundamental right of Rojas Villalobos with respect to compliance with the provisions of Law No. 7600”.

Consequently, as has been indicated, in this case it is also the competence of the Public Transport Council to verify that the ambulances of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund comply with the provisions of Law 7600, and therefore, it is appropriate to grant the amparo also regarding this point. Consequently, the Public Transport Council is ordered to immediately provide the technical measures that are necessary to control and verify that the ambulance vehicles of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund are adapted to the provisions of the Equal Opportunities Law for Persons with Disabilities, which is Law No. 7600 of the twenty-ninth of May of nineteen hundred and ninety-six.

**X.- Conclusion.** By virtue of the foregoing considerations, the Chamber is of the opinion that the denounced facts are effectively violating the rights of the petitioner and other persons with disabilities, so it is necessary to grant the appeal with the consequences indicated in the preceding considerandos.- **Por tanto:** The appeal is granted. Eduardo Doryan Garrón, in his capacity as Executive President of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund, or whoever holds that position, is ordered to immediately adopt the measures that are necessary so that, in accordance with the provisions of Law 7600 on Equal Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities and the percentages of persons with disabilities managed in each of the medical and hospital care centers under that institution's charge, the number of ambulance vehicles needed to guarantee an adequate transfer of persons with disabilities who require being mobilized to the different hospitals and clinics of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund be acquired or adapted. On the other hand, Viviana Martín Salazar, in her capacity as President of the Public Transport Council, or whoever holds that position, is ordered to immediately provide the technical measures that are necessary to control and verify that the ambulance vehicles of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund are adapted to the provisions of Law 7600 on Equal Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities. The State and the Costa Rican Social Security Fund are 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 judgment of the contentious-administrative proceeding. Eduardo Doryan Garrón, in his capacity as Executive President of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund, and Viviana Martín Salazar, in her capacity as President of the Public Transport Council, or whoever holds those positions, are warned that if they fail to comply with said order, they shall incur the crime of disobedience and that, in accordance with article 71 of the Law of this jurisdiction, a prison sentence 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 proceeding, and does not comply with it or does not enforce it, provided that the crime is not more severely punished. Let this resolution be notified to Eduardo Doryan Garrón, in his capacity as Executive President of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund, and to Viviana Martín Salazar, in her capacity as President of the Public Transport Council, or to whoever holds those positions, personally.- **Teresita Rodríguez A.** **Presidenta a.i.** **Rosa María Abdelnour G. Horacio González Q.** **Marta María Vinocour F. Roxana Salazar C.** **Jorge Araya G. Alexander Godínez V.** III.- Regulatory framework for the rights of persons with disabilities. First, it is important to note that the Political Constitution and the American Convention on Human Rights (an international instrument with force superior to the law by provision of Article 7 of the Constitution) enshrine the principle of equality of persons and the prohibition of making distinctions contrary to their dignity – Articles 33 and 24 respectively. Additionally, the rights of persons with disabilities are recognized in other international instruments such as the "Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities," approved by the Legislative Assembly by Law number 7948 of November twenty-second, nineteen hundred and ninety-nine, and the "Equal Opportunities Law for Persons with Disabilities (Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad)," number 7600, published in La Gaceta of May twenty-ninth, nineteen hundred and ninety-six. The cited Convention defines discrimination in its Article 1, as follows:

"The term discrimination against persons with disabilities means any distinction, exclusion, or restriction based on a disability, record of disability, condition of previous or subsequent disability, which has the effect or purpose of preventing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise by persons with disabilities of their human rights and fundamental freedoms." Likewise, the obligation of the States that signed it, among them Costa Rica, is enshrined to adopt:

"measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and promote integration by governmental authorities and/or private entities in the provision or supply of goods, services, facilities, programs, and activities, such as employment, transportation, communications, housing, recreation, education, sports, access to justice and police services, and political and administrative activities." For its part, of importance for the resolution of the present matter, it is appropriate to point out what is provided in the Equal Opportunities Law for Persons with Disabilities (Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad) number 7600, which establishes in general terms the obligation that institutions, both public and private, have to provide all the technical support necessary for persons with disabilities in order to guarantee their rights:

"Article 5.- Technical aids and support services.- Public institutions and private public service institutions must provide, to persons with disabilities, the support services and technical aids required to guarantee the exercise of their rights and duties." In relation to the above, it is essential to remember that this Constitutional Chamber has recognized on repeated occasions that "Law No. 7600 aims as its fundamental objective to achieve the necessary conditions so that persons who suffer any type of disability achieve their full socio-economic participation AND INVESTMENT. In this sense, the system of updating and promoting the necessary conditions established by law supposes a guarantee of their right to full equality, in addition to an attempt at insertion into the socio-economic life of the country. Precisely, because of its foundation, the enjoyment of equal opportunities for access and participation in identical circumstances ceases to be a simple aspiration for the disabled and becomes a fundamental right. To guarantee the exercise of their rights and duties, the Law and its Regulation impose on Public Administrations and private legal entities that provide public services the duty to provide the disabled with the support services and technical aids they require to make that purpose a reality. Within this order of ideas, non-compliance with the public interest that the law enshrines implies a flagrant violation of the fundamental rights of that social group." (see in that sense judgment number 2005-05895 of fourteen hours forty-seven minutes of May eighteenth, two thousand five).

IV.- In light of the foregoing, it is evident then that there exists a series of provisions in force in the Costa Rican legal system that prohibit all types of discrimination against persons by reason of their disability, which must be respected by subjects of public law as well as private law since the effective protection of the rights of those persons turns out to be one of the means by which this group of the population can have a life as independent and normal as possible, in the interests of their full and effective integration into society. It is clear that within these rights is the guarantee for persons with disabilities that they can lead an independent life both in their private sphere and in everything that has to do with their development in society, which necessarily implies the State's obligation that this group can access all the services and facilities that exist in a society, under equal conditions as any other person. As is deduced from the legal framework cited supra, it is evident that there exists in Costa Rica an entire normative support that justifies the change of the traditional paradigm that has been handled in relation to persons with disabilities. The State must adopt measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and provide persons with disabilities with the support services and technical aids required to guarantee them the exercise of their rights and duties. In that sense, the Chamber considers that the matter under study offers an important factual substrate to favor that paradigm shift because it means, for this Tribunal, the opportunity to warn society of the need to begin incorporating persons with disabilities on equal conditions in relation to the rest of the individuals and in each and every one of the activities that make up the social conglomerate. Let it be remembered that by virtue of the principle of diversity, persons with disabilities are not only limited to moving along the streets in wheelchairs, but it must be taken into account that there exist other types of disability that also require the attention of the State and therefore, urban furniture, entrance to buildings and their transfer to hospital centers, among other things of daily life, must guarantee the entire population with disability, free access, under conditions of equality and without discrimination. The State cannot limit the measures to progressively eliminate discrimination only to access ramps or elevators or free sidewalks but must go further and precisely this amparo appeal provides the opportunity to take into account that another of the ways to eliminate that discrimination and to foster the full insertion of persons with disabilities into society, is precisely through the possibility offered to them of being able to be transferred to hospital and health centers in adequate conditions, that respect their dignity but above all that guarantee their freedom of movement to those sites under conditions of safety and comfort, which is favored and fostered, without a doubt, with their transfer in ambulances that have the minimum mechanisms to attend to a person with a disability. From any point of view, admitting the contrary translates into a violation of the equality of opportunities that those persons have as part of society and would mean denying this population the possibility of inserting themselves into society in a natural way, of carrying out their activities adequately but above all their right to enjoy independence.

V.- Regarding the specific case. Based on the foregoing regulatory framework, it is now appropriate to analyze the situation raised by the petitioner regarding two specific points: first, regarding the omission by the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) to enable ambulance vehicles that are equipped in accordance with the provisions of Law 7600 to allow the transportation of persons with disabilities to be carried out in adequate conditions; and on the other hand, regarding the omission of the Public Transportation Council (Consejo de Transporte Público) to adopt the necessary measures to verify that the ambulance vehicles that transport persons with disabilities are adapted to the requirements established in Law number 7600 and its regulation. Regarding the first aspect, Law 7600 is very clear in establishing in several of its norms the need for the means of transportation used to transport persons with disabilities to be adapted, and among them, without a doubt, are ambulance vehicles, which is obvious because precisely the purpose of an ambulance is the transfer of sick patients or persons with disabilities to different medical and hospital centers. In that sense, it is advisable to cite two norms of Law 7600 that are considered relevant to the specific case:

"ARTICLE 29.- Obligations of the State. When a person insured by the State presents a disability as a consequence of an illness or injury, the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) shall provide medical care and rehabilitation, as well as the required technical aids or support services…." "ARTICLE 35.- Adapted means of transportation. Public institutions that provide rehabilitation services must have means of transportation adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities." Thus, it is evident then that there indeed exists on the part of the State, specifically in the specific case of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social), an obligation to guarantee persons with disabilities the required technical aids or support services, among which, without a doubt, must include means of transportation adapted for that group as provided in numeral 35 cited supra according to which, public institutions that provide rehabilitation services must have means of transportation adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities. Making a broad interpretation of these norms from the perspective of persons with disabilities, it is deduced then that an institution like the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social), which is in charge of providing health services in the country and not only rehabilitation ones, must have within its fleet means of transportation such as ambulances, adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities. This is logical if one starts from the premise that a person with a disability, depending on the degree of condition they have, is not under equal conditions as any other person who could well access an ambulance vehicle by their own means and for that reason, it is necessary, as has been protected regarding the public transportation service in the taxi and bus modality, that this consideration also exist in the case of ambulances and therefore, that the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) as well as any other public or private institution in charge of transporting sick people, have ambulances that are adapted to allow persons with disabilities to access them and be transported with the greatest comfort and safety possible. From this perspective, the petitioner is correct when stating that a person with a disability who cannot enter by their own means an ambulance that is not adapted, can suffer injuries or mistreatment when a third party tries to help them get in by pulling them or lifting them, in addition to the fact that psychological impairment is also caused by having to be exposed to another person helping them when that would not be necessary if the ambulance were equipped for them to access it by their own means or with the least possible help. To disprove the foregoing, it is not valid to think that the ambulance service is an assisted service and that therefore the adaptation of the units to Law 7600 is not required since such assistance would only occur eventually in emergency situations where the person requiring transportation is in a serious state of health or unconscious and therefore requires being moved on a stretcher, which is not the case raised by the petitioner. In that sense, as the Constitutional Chamber guarantor of the rights of individuals and with special attention to those of persons with disabilities, the situation denounced by the petitioner is fully valid because it concerns the case of this group of society that requires being transferred to receive medical care and by reason of their disability requires having a means of transportation that adapts to their particular situation, and it is taken up again what has been said supra in the sense that it is not only about the ambulance being adapted for the transport of a person with a disability who moves in a wheelchair because persons with disabilities are not only limited to moving along the streets in wheelchairs, but it must be taken into account that there exist other types of disability that also require the attention of the State and therefore their transfer to hospital centers, among other things of daily life, must guarantee free access, under conditions of equality and without discrimination, as established by the principle of diversity in this matter.

VI.- Thus, the Chamber considers that there exists an obligation of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) to provide the population with disabilities, ambulance vehicles that are adapted to their needs. Such circumstance is partially acknowledged in the report rendered under oath to this Chamber when it is stated that as part of the institutional policy regarding the improvement of mobile equipment, there is the project to acquire units that are adapted to Law 7600, but at the same time it is stated that, currently, there are only two units for the entire country that have a ramp to carry out transfers of patients who go to scheduled appointments at the National Rehabilitation Center (Centro Nacional de Rehabilitación). Without a doubt, this panorama is quite discouraging because although it is true that Law 7600 does not indicate that all ambulance vehicles in the country must be adapted, it is also true that it does require public institutions like the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social), to have means of transportation adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities, and it is evident that two ambulances for the entire country are not covering in any way the need that that group has throughout the length and breadth of the national territory. For such reasons, it is necessary to order the Executive President of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social), to proceed immediately to adopt the measures that are necessary so that, in attention to the provisions of Law 7600, and to the percentages of persons with disabilities handled in each of the medical and hospital care centers under the charge of that institution, the quantity of ambulance vehicles that are necessary be acquired to guarantee an adequate transfer of persons with disabilities who require being moved to the different hospitals and clinics of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social). For such reasons, as to this point, the amparo must be granted as is indeed ordered, with the indicated consequences.

VII.- On the other hand, it is now appropriate to analyze the other claim that derives from the filing brief of the appeal according to which, the Public Transportation Council (Consejo de Transporte Público) has not taken the necessary measures so that the vehicles of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) adapt to the requirements established in Law number 7600 and its regulation, since that authority refuses to supervise that those transportation units are conditioned to provide transportation service for persons with disabilities. On the matter, under oath, this Tribunal has been informed by the President of the Public Transportation Council (Consejo de Transporte Público) that her represented entity does not have competence to regulate, control, or monitor compliance with Law 7600 by the ambulances belonging to the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social). However, in light of the regulations in force on the matter, the President of that Council is not correct in making such an assertion. Indeed, observe that according to the Law of Creation of the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation (MOPT) number 4786, Article 2, subsection a) and its amendments, it is the competence of that Ministry to regulate, control, and monitor traffic and transportation on public roads. For its part, Article 19 of the Law of Traffic on Public Land Roads No. 7331 establishes that it corresponds to the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation (MOPT), to verify that the vehicles that circulate on national roads meet the mechanical, safety, polluting emission conditions and others determined by Law, which it will do through the partial or total technical review of vehicles. In turn, Article 7 of the Regulatory Law of the Public Service of Remunerated Transportation of Persons in Vehicles in the Taxi Modality No. 7969, provides that it corresponds to the Public Transportation Council (Consejo de Transporte Público) to coordinate and verify the correct application of public transportation policies, their planning, and the technical review, it being that in resolution number 28 of fourteen hours of February eighth, two thousand two, the Minister of Public Works and Transportation (MOPT), based on the provisions of Article 89 of the General Law of Public Administration, delegated in favor of that Public Transportation Council (Consejo de Transporte Público), all technical, operational, fiscal, administrative aspects and others of any other nature that are necessary for the due fulfillment of the comprehensive technical review of the country's vehicle fleet, that Council then being responsible for the due observance of the legal system regarding this matter. It must be remembered that the comprehensive technical review of vehicles has been created to verify, control, and inspect those elements that affect the safety of the vehicle, its polluting emissions, and compliance with the technical regulations established so that it can circulate in suitable conditions (see in that sense Regulation for the Comprehensive Technical Review of Automotive Vehicles that Circulate on Public Roads, Executive Decree No. 30184-MOPT of February sixth, two thousand two) and its primary objective is to guarantee the minimum safety conditions of vehicles based on their design and manufacturing criteria; also to verify that they comply with the technical regulations that affect them and that they maintain a level of polluting emissions that does not exceed the maximum limits established in the regulations in force (see in that sense Manual of Procedures for the Technical Review of Automotive Vehicles at RTV Stations approved by the Public Transportation Council (Consejo de Transporte Público) in ordinary session 48-2002 of July second, two thousand two).

VIII.- Thus, it is evident then that if the technical vehicle review has been created to control that the vehicles that circulate on land roads are in optimal conditions and comply with the requirements demanded by Law, among them 7600 which forms part of the Costa Rican legal system, and if it corresponds to the Public Transportation Council (Consejo de Transporte Público) to regulate and control matters related to the technical vehicle review so that the vehicles that circulate on the roads of the national territory comply with the established regulations, then it is evident that if one of the aspects to control in the vehicles that transport persons with disabilities is precisely that they are adjusted to what is established in Law 7600, the statement made by the President of the Public Transportation Council (Consejo de Transporte Público) to the effect that it is not the competence of her represented entity to regulate, control, or monitor compliance with Law 7600 by the ambulances belonging to the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) is not valid nor acceptable. From this perspective then, if the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation (MOPT) delegated to the Public Transportation Council (Consejo de Transporte Público) matters relating to technical review and it must control in the vehicles compliance with what concerns the adaptations established in Law 7600, as in the specific case of ambulances, and that control and verification is not being carried out currently, then it becomes necessary to grant the appeal because it is evident that a limitation and discrimination is occurring to the detriment of persons with disabilities by not requiring that ambulances be adjusted to Law 7600 and thereby facilitating persons with disabilities to access by their own means the ambulances when they require being transported to medical or hospital centers where they require receiving medical attention or treatment, the foregoing just as is currently required of the taxi vehicle fleet and the bus fleet.

IX.- Let it be remembered that this Chamber in judgment number 2005-005895 of fourteen hours forty-seven minutes of May eighteenth, two thousand five, when evaluating the compliance with the provisions of Law 7600 in the country's bus fleet, expressly indicated that:

"It is inferred then, that the determination of the aspects that must be considered in the technical vehicle review is the absolute competence and responsibility of the governing authorities of public transportation and not an attribution of the developer, who is obliged to proceed in accordance with what is predetermined in the regulation established for that purpose. In this sense, as it is undeniably accredited that the Public Transportation Council (Consejo de Transporte Público) has not provided the technical measures conducive to adapting remunerated transportation of persons in the bus modality to what Law No. 7600 provides and the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation (MOPT) approved the Manual of Technical Vehicle Review without contemplating what is enacted in that law and its regulation, the Chamber verifies the accused violation of the fundamental rights of the amparo petitioner. Precisely, by reason of the foregoing, this Constitutional Chamber rules out that Riteve SyC, the Ministry of the Presidency, and the Legislative Assembly have violated any fundamental right of Rojas Villalobos with regard to compliance with the provisions of Law No. 7600." In consequence, as has been indicated, in this case it is also the competence of the Public Transportation Council (Consejo de Transporte Público) to verify that the ambulances of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) comply with the provisions of Law 7600, and therefore, the appropriate action is to grant the amparo also on this point. In consequence, the Public Transportation Council (Consejo de Transporte Público) is ordered to immediately provide the technical measures that are necessary to control and verify that the ambulance vehicles of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social) are adapted to the provisions of the Equal Opportunities Law for Persons with Disabilities (Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad), which is Law No. 7600 of May twenty-ninth, nineteen hundred and ninety-six.

X.- Conclusion.

In virtue of the foregoing considerations, the Chamber is of the opinion that the reported acts are indeed violating the rights of the petitioner and other persons with disabilities, and therefore the amparo must be granted, with the consequences indicated in the preceding considerandos." Within this line of reasoning, the breach of the public interest enshrined in the law implies a flagrant violation of the fundamental rights of that social group." (see in that regard judgment number 2005-05895 of fourteen hours forty-seven minutes of the eighteenth of May of two thousand five).

**IV.-** In light of the foregoing, it is evident then that there exists a series of provisions in force in the Costa Rican legal system that prohibit all types of discrimination against persons on the basis of their disability, which must be respected by both subjects of public law and private law, as the effective protection of the rights of these persons proves to be one of the means by which this population group can have a life as independent and normal as possible, in order that their integration into society is full and effective. It is clear that among these rights is the guarantee for persons with disabilities to be able to lead an independent life both in their private sphere and in everything related to their development in society, which necessarily implies the obligation of the State to ensure that this group can access all the services and facilities that exist in a society, under equal conditions as any other person. As can be deduced from the legal framework cited supra, it is evident that there exists in Costa Rica an entire normative foundation that justifies the change from the traditional paradigm that has been managed in relation to persons with disabilities. The State must adopt measures to progressively eliminate discrimination and provide persons with disabilities with the support services and technical aids required to guarantee them the exercise of their rights and duties. In that sense, the Chamber considers that the matter under study offers an important factual substrate to favor that paradigm shift, as it signifies, for this Court, the opportunity to warn society of the need to begin to incorporate persons with disabilities under equal conditions in relation to the rest of individuals and in each and every one of the activities that make up the social conglomerate. Recall that by virtue of the principle of diversity, persons with disabilities are not limited only to moving along the streets in wheelchairs, but it must be taken into account that there exist other types of disability that also require the attention of the State and, therefore, urban furniture, access to buildings, and their transport to hospital centers, among other things of daily life, must guarantee the entire population with disabilities free access, under conditions of equality and without discrimination. The State cannot limit the measures to progressively eliminate discrimination only to access ramps or elevators or clear sidewalks, but must go further, and precisely this amparo appeal provides the opportunity to take into account that another form of eliminating that discrimination and fostering the full insertion of persons with disabilities into society is precisely through the possibility provided to them of being transported to hospital and health centers under adequate conditions, that respect their dignity but, above all, that guarantee their freedom of movement to those places under conditions of safety and comfort, which is favored and fostered, without any doubt, by their transport in ambulances that have the minimum mechanisms to attend to a person with a disability. From any point of view, admitting the contrary translates into a violation of the equality of opportunities that these persons have as part of society and would mean denying this population the possibility of inserting themselves into society in a natural manner, of carrying out their activities adequately, but, above all, their right to enjoy independence.

**V.- On the specific case.** Based on the previous normative framework, it is now appropriate to analyze the situation raised by the appellant regarding two specific points: first, regarding the omission on the part of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social to enable ambulance vehicles that are equipped in accordance with the provisions of Ley 7600 to allow the transport of persons with disabilities to be carried out under adequate conditions; and second, regarding the omission of the Consejo de Transporte Público to adopt the necessary measures to verify that the ambulance vehicles that transport persons with disabilities are adapted to the requirements established in Ley number 7600 and its regulations. Regarding the first aspect, Ley 7600 is very clear in establishing in several of its norms the need for the means of transport in which persons with disabilities are transported to be adapted, and among them, without any doubt, are ambulance vehicles, which is obvious because precisely the purpose of an ambulance is the transfer of sick patients or persons with disabilities to different medical and hospital centers. In this sense, it is appropriate to cite two norms of Ley 7600 that are considered pertinent to the specific case:

"ARTICULO 29.- Obligations of the State. When a person insured by the State presents a disability as a consequence of an illness or injury, the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social will provide them with medical care and rehabilitation, as well as the technical aids or support services required…." "ARTICULO 35.- Adapted means of transport. Public institutions that provide rehabilitation services must have means of transport adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities." Thus, it is evident then that there does exist an obligation on the part of the State, specifically in the specific case of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, to guarantee persons with disabilities the technical aids or required support services, among which, without any doubt, they must have adapted means of transport for that group as provided in numeral 35 cited supra, according to which, public institutions that provide rehabilitation services must have means of transport adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities. Making a broad interpretation of these norms from the perspective of persons with disabilities, it is deduced then that an institution such as the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, which is in charge of providing health services in the country, and not only rehabilitation services, must have within its fleet means of transport such as ambulances, adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities. This has logic if one starts from the assumption that a person with a disability, depending on the degree of their condition, is not in equal conditions as any other person who could well access an ambulance vehicle by their own means, and for that reason, it is necessary, as has been protected regarding the public transport service in the taxi and bus modality, that this consideration also exists in the case of ambulances and, therefore, that the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, like any other public or private institution in charge of transporting the sick, has ambulances that are adapted to allow persons with disabilities to access them and be transported with the greatest possible comfort and safety. From this perspective, the appellant is correct when they affirm that a person with a disability who cannot enter by their own means an ambulance that is not adapted can suffer injuries or mistreatment when a third party tries to help them get in, whether by pulling or lifting them, in addition to also suffering a psychological impairment from having to be exposed to another person helping them when this would not be necessary if the ambulance were equipped for them to access it by their own means or with the least possible help. To refute the foregoing, it is not valid to think that the ambulance service is an assisted service and that therefore the adaptation of the units to Ley 7600 is not required, as such assistance would only be provided eventually in emergency situations where the person requiring transport is in a grave state of health or unconscious and therefore requires being moved on a stretcher, which is not the case raised by the appellant. In this sense, as a Constitutional Court guarantor of the rights of individuals, and with special attention to those of persons with disabilities, the situation denounced by the appellant is fully valid, as it concerns the case of this group of society that needs to be transported to receive medical attention and, due to their disability, requires a means of transport that adapts to their particular situation, and once again, what has been said supra is reiterated in the sense that it is not just about the ambulance being adapted for the transport of a person with a disability who moves in a wheelchair, as persons with disabilities are not limited only to moving along the streets in wheelchairs, but it must be taken into account that there exist other types of disability that also require the attention of the State and, therefore, their transport to hospital centers, among other things of daily life, must guarantee free access, under conditions of equality and without discrimination, just as the principle of diversity in this matter establishes.

**VI.-** Thus, the Chamber considers that there exists an obligation of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social to provide the population with disabilities with ambulance vehicles that are adapted to their needs. Such a circumstance is partially recognized in the report rendered under oath to this Chamber when it is affirmed that, as part of the institutional policy regarding the improvement of mobile equipment, there is the project to acquire units that are adapted to Ley 7600, but at the same time it is affirmed that, currently, there are only two units for the entire country that have a ramp to carry out transfers of patients who go to scheduled appointments at the Centro Nacional de Rehabilitación. Without a doubt, this panorama is quite disheartening because, although it is true that Ley 7600 does not indicate that all ambulance vehicles in the country must be adapted, it is also true that it does require public institutions like the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social to have means of transport adapted to the needs of persons with disabilities, and it is evident that two ambulances for the entire country are not covering in any way the need that this group has throughout the length and breadth of the national territory. For these reasons, it is necessary to order the Executive President of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social to proceed immediately to adopt the measures that are necessary so that, in attention to the provisions of Ley 7600, and to the percentages of persons with disabilities managed in each of the medical and hospital care centers under the charge of that institution, the necessary quantity of ambulance vehicles is acquired to guarantee an adequate transfer of the persons with disabilities who require being mobilized to the different hospitals and clinics of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social. For these reasons, regarding this point, the amparo must be granted, as is indeed ordered, with the consequences indicated.

**VII.-** On the other hand, it is now appropriate to analyze the other claim that arises from the brief filing the appeal, according to which, the Consejo de Transporte Público has not taken the necessary measures so that the vehicles of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social adapt to the requirements established in Ley number 7600 and its regulations, as that authority refuses to supervise that those transport units are conditioned to provide the transport service for persons with disabilities. On this matter, this Court has been informed under oath by the President of the Consejo de Transporte Público that her represented entity lacks jurisdiction to regulate, control, or monitor compliance with Ley 7600 by the ambulances belonging to the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social. However, in light of the regulations in force on the matter, the President of that Council is not correct in making such an assertion. Indeed, observe that according to the Law for the Creation of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes number 4786, article 2, subsection a) and its reforms, it is the jurisdiction of that Ministry to regulate, control, and monitor traffic and transport on public roads. For its part, article 19 of the Ley de Tránsito por Vías Públicas Terrestres No. 7331 establishes that it corresponds to the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes to verify that vehicles circulating on national highways meet the mechanical, safety, polluting emissions conditions, and others determined by the Law, which it shall do through the partial or total vehicle technical inspection (revisión técnica vehicular). In turn, article 7 of the Ley Reguladora del Servicio Público de Transporte Remunerado de Personas en Vehículos en la Modalidad de Taxi No. 7969 provides that it corresponds to the Consejo de Transporte Público to coordinate and verify the correct application of public transport policies, their planning, and the technical inspection, and it being that in resolution number 28 of fourteen hours of February eighth of two thousand two, the Minister of Obras Públicas y Transportes, based on the provisions of article 89 of the Ley General de la Administración Pública, delegated in favor of that Consejo de Transporte Público all technical, operational, fiscal, administrative, and other aspects of any nature that are necessary for the due execution of the comprehensive technical inspection (revisión técnica integral) of the country's vehicle fleet, that Council being then responsible for the due observance of the legal system regarding this matter. It must be remembered that the comprehensive vehicle technical inspection has been created to verify, control, and inspect those elements that affect the vehicle's safety, its polluting emissions, and compliance with the established technical regulations so that it can circulate in suitable conditions (see in that sense the Reglamento para la Revisión Técnica Integral de Vehículos Automotores que Circulen por las Vías Públicas, Decreto Ejecutivo No. 30184-MOPT of February sixth of two thousand two) and has as its primary object guaranteeing the minimum safety conditions of vehicles based on their design and manufacturing criteria; in addition to verifying that they comply with the technical regulations that affect them and that they maintain a level of polluting emissions that does not exceed the maximum limits established in the regulations in force (see in that sense the Manual de Procedimientos para la Revisión técnica de Vehículos Automotores en las Estaciones de RTV approved by the Consejo de Transporte Público in ordinary session 48-2002 of July second of two thousand two).

**VIII.-** Thus, it is evident then that if the vehicle technical inspection has been created to control that vehicles circulating on public roads are in optimal conditions and comply with the requirements demanded by Law, among them Ley 7600 which forms part of the Costa Rican legal system, and if it corresponds to the Consejo de Transporte Público to regulate and control matters relating to the vehicle technical inspection so that vehicles circulating on the roads of the national territory comply with the established regulations, then it is evident that if one of the aspects to control in vehicles that transport persons with disabilities is precisely that they are adjusted to the provisions of Ley 7600, the affirmation made by the President of the Consejo de Transporte Público, in the sense that it is not the jurisdiction of her represented entity to regulate, control, or monitor compliance with Ley 7600 by the ambulances belonging to the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, is not valid nor acceptable. From this perspective then, if the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes delegated to the Consejo de Transporte Público matters relating to the technical inspection, and this Council must control in vehicles compliance with matters concerning the adaptations established in Ley 7600, as in the specific case of ambulances, and this control and verification is not currently being carried out, then it is imperative to declare the appeal granted because it is evident that a limitation and discrimination to the detriment of persons with disabilities is occurring by not requiring ambulances to be adjusted to Ley 7600, and thereby facilitating persons with disabilities to access ambulances by their own means when they need to be transported to medical or hospital centers where they need to receive medical care or treatment, the foregoing just as is currently required of the taxi vehicle fleet and the bus fleet.

**IX.-** Recall that this Chamber, in judgment number 2005-005895 of fourteen hours forty-seven minutes of the eighteenth of May of two thousand five, when assessing compliance with the provisions of Ley 7600 in the country's bus fleet, expressly indicated that:

"It is inferred, then, that the determination of the aspects to be considered in the vehicle technical inspection is the absolute jurisdiction and responsibility of the governing authorities of public transport, and not an attribution of the developer, who is obligated to proceed in accordance with what is predetermined in the regulation established for that purpose. In this sense, as it is unquestionably accredited that the Consejo de Transporte Público has not arranged the conducive technical measures to adapt the remunerated transport of persons in the bus modality to the provisions of Ley Nº 7600 and the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes approved the Manual de Revisión Técnica de Vehículos without contemplating what is stipulated in that law and its regulations, the Chamber verifies the accused violation of the fundamental rights of the protected party. Precisely, for the reasons stated, this Constitutional Court dismisses that Riteve SyC, the Ministry of the Presidency, and the Legislative Assembly have violated any fundamental right of Rojas Villalobos with respect to compliance with the provisions of Ley Nº 7600".

Consequently, as indicated, in this case it is also the jurisdiction of the Consejo de Transporte Público to verify that the ambulances of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social comply with the provisions of Ley 7600, and therefore, it is appropriate to grant the amparo also regarding this point. Consequently, the Consejo de Transporte Público is ordered to immediately arrange the technical measures that are necessary to control and verify that the ambulance vehicles of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social are adapted to the provisions of the Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad, which is Ley No.7600 of the twenty-ninth of May of nineteen ninety-six.

**X.- Conclusion.** By virtue of the foregoing considerations, the Chamber is of the opinion that with the denounced facts, the rights of the appellant and other persons with disabilities are indeed being violated, and therefore, it is imperative to declare the appeal granted with the consequences indicated in the previous considerandos.- **Por tanto:** It is declared with merit the appeal. It is ordered that Eduardo Doryan Garrón, in his capacity as Executive President of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, or whoever occupies that position in his stead, immediately adopt the necessary measures so that, in attention to the provisions of Ley 7600 de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad and to the percentages of persons with disabilities managed in each of the medical and hospital care centers under the charge of that institution, the necessary quantity of ambulance vehicles is acquired or adapted to guarantee an adequate transfer of the persons with disabilities who require being mobilized to the different hospitals and clinics of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social. On the other hand, it is ordered that Viviana Martín Salazar, in her capacity as President of the Consejo de Transporte Público, or whoever exercises that position in her stead, immediately arrange the necessary technical measures to control and verify that the ambulance vehicles of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social are adapted to the provisions of Ley 7600 de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad. The State and the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social are condemned 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 the judgment of the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. Eduardo Doryan Garrón, in his capacity as Executive President of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, and Viviana Martín Salazar, in her capacity as President of the Consejo de Transporte Público, or whoever exercises those positions in their stead, are warned that failure to comply with said order will incur the crime of disobedience and that, in accordance with article 71 of the Law of this 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 complied with or enforced, issued in an amparo appeal, and does not comply with it or does not cause it to be complied with, provided that the crime is not more severely punished. This resolution shall be notified to Eduardo Doryan Garrón, in his capacity as Executive President of the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, and to Viviana Martín Salazar, in her capacity as President of the Consejo de Transporte Público, or to whoever exercises those positions in their stead, in person.- **Teresita Rodríguez A.** **Presidenta a.i.** **Rosa María Abdelnour G. Horacio González Q.** **Marta María Vinocour F. Roxana Salazar C.** Jorge Araya G. Alexander Godínez V.

</body> </html>

* 080019290007CO * * 080019290007CO * Res. Nº 2008010118 SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, a las diecinueve horas y veintidós minutos del diecisiete de junio del dos mil ocho.

Recurso de amparo interpuesto por Carlos Roy Campos Azofeifa, mayor, portador de la cédula de identidad 1-410-694, vecina de Esparza de Puntarenas; contra la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social y el Consejo de Transporte Público.

Resultando:

1.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala a las diecisiete horas cinco minutos del veintiuno de enero del dos mil ocho, la recurrente interpone recurso de amparo contra la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social y el Consejo de Transporte Público y manifiesta que es una persona con discapacidad, razón por la que se moviliza en una silla de ruedas. Refiere que debe asistir a citas y procesos de rehabilitación en los hospitales de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social; oportunidades en que, por su discapacidad, se le traslada en ambulancia. Señala que esas ambulancias no tienen las adaptaciones apropiadas para el transporte de personas con discapacidad, razón por la deben ser “alzados o jalados” para ingresar a esos automotores, estimando que de esa forma se le está dando un trato denigrante, exponiéndole además a sufrir un accidente. Indica que el Consejo de Transporte Público no ha tomando la medidas necesarias para que los vehículos de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social se adapten a los requisitos establecidos en la Ley número 7600 y su reglamento, pues esa autoridad se niega a fiscalizar que esas unidades de transporte se encuentren acondicionadas para brindar el servicio de transporte para personas con discapacidad. Agrega que en el lugar en que reside - Urbanización Los Cedros de Esparza- no hay unidades de transporte público adaptadas a las necesidades de las personas con discapacidad, situación adicional que le impide trasladarse a los centros de salud. Estima lesionados sus derechos fundamentales y por ello pide que se declare con lugar el recurso.

2.- Informa bajo juramento Eduardo Doryan Garrón en su calidad de Presidente Ejecutivo de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social (folio 7), que en el recurso de amparo planteado no se indica en qué hospital, clínica, o sucursal de su representada, presuntamente, se le violentaron al recurrente sus derechos fundamentales. Solicita que se prevenga al recurrente indicar la autoridad que incurrió en la supuesta violación de sus derechos ya que se desconoce dónde se llevó a cabo el presunto agravio, lo cual en su criterio, debió haberse solicitado antes de notificársele. Manifiesta que en caso de que el recurrente amplíe su recurso y se les otorgue la audiencia respectiva, rendirá los informes correspondientes. Finaliza solicitando que se declare sin lugar el recurso.

3.- Informa bajo juramento Viviana Martín Salazar en su condición de Presidenta de la Junta Directiva del Consejo de Transporte Público (folio 11) que ese Consejo fue creado mediante Ley número 7969 que señala que es un órgano de desconcentración máxima del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes, que regula y controla en todo el territorio nacional el transporte remunerado de personas tanto en la modalidad de taxi como de autobuses y servicios especiales, según se complementa con la Ley 3503. Señala que las unidades de servicios de emergencia, conformadas por las ambulancias de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, no se encuentran reguladas de forma laguna por el Consejo de Transporte Público por lo que es ilógica la interposición de este amparo contra su representada. Agrega que en cuanto al alegato del recurrente según el cual en la Urbanización Los Cedros de Esparza no hay unidades de transporte público adaptadas a las necesidades de las personas con discapacidad, no puede hacer ninguna manifestación ya que no se ofrecen mayores detalles de la ubicación de esa comunidad con el fin de corroborar cuáles personas físicas o jurídicas prestan el servicio público por ese lugar. Comunica que de conformidad con el transitorio VIII a la Ley 7600, se establece un cronograma de cumplimiento por parte de los operadores de transporte público con el fin de que se adapten con los dispositivos que señala esa Ley y su reglamento (incluídas las rampas o plataformas) en el cien por ciento de las unidades que brindan servicio público. Añade que para enero del dos mil ocho, todas las personas físicas o jurídicas que presten el servicio de transporte remunerado de personas en ruta regular, deben contar con el 15% de su flota totalmente adaptada de conformidad con los requerimientos que se establecen en esas normas legales. Indica que no puede referirse específicamente a este caso porque no se indica cuáles empresas o personas físicas prestan el servicio de transporte remunerado de personas en la comunidad en la cual reside el recurrente.

4.- En resolución de Magistrado Instructor de las trece horas cuarenta y seis minutos del siete de abril del dos mil ocho, se solicitó prueba para mejor resolver a la Presidenta del Consejo de Transporte Público del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes y se le solicitó informe al Presidente Ejecutivo de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social y al Presidente de la Asociación Cruz Roja Costarricense para que se refirieran a los hechos alegados en este amparo (folio 15).

5.- Informa bajo juramento Eduardo Doryan Garrón en su condición de apoderado generalísimo sin límite de suma como Presidente Ejecutivo de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social (folio 16) que el Jefe del Área de Servicios Generales de su representada se refirió a los hechos investigados en este amparo en el oficio 17983 del ocho de abril en el que se indica que las administraciones anteriores no le dieron el apoyo necesario al plan de cambio de flotilla y por ello, desde que inició la presente administración, se han venido cambiando los vehículos tipo ambulancia para de esa forma fortalecer a nivel nacional, lo que es el traslado de pacientes en general, pero aún faltan más unidades por adquirir. Indica que en ese informe se señala que en lo tocante a las ambulancias para el traslado de pacientes discapacitados, este asunto se ha enfocado por el momento al hospital especializado al efecto, sea el Centro Nacional de Rehabilitación, el cual tiene dos ambulancias con rampa para realizar este tipo de traslados de los pacientes que van a citas programadas. Señala que cada ambulancia tiene un costo actual de diecisiete millones quinientos setenta y cinco mil colones que para su representada, como institución brindadora de servicios, resulta bastante cuantioso ubicar una ambulancia de este tipo en cada centro asistencial ante lo cual se toman medidas para fortalecer la flotilla existente. Agrega que el Área de Servicios Generales informó que hasta el momento lo que se ha realizado es la sustitución de ambulancias modelos mil novecientos ochenta y seis y en ningún momento, ningún centro asistencial ha indicado que es necesario en alguna comunidad, la adquisición de una ambulancia especializada, siendo que se ha precisado el cambio de flotilla para atender a la población en general y brindar un buen servicio. Aduce que su representada ha gestionado la modernización de su flotilla de ambulancias en forma congruente con las posibilidades financieras de la institución y aunque la Sala Constitucional haya señalado que la menor o mayor capacidad financiera de la Caja no constituye un elemento que le exonere de su deber de cumplir con las obligaciones dadas por el constituyente, en materia de administración de los servicios de salud, es lo cierto que esa obligación debe ser desarrollada de acuerdo con la realidad del país y los recursos deben ser distribuidos de acuerdo con las necesidades de cada sector de la población. Argumenta que aunque la Ley 7600 hace referencia a la igualdad de oportunidades, en la práctica lo que debe darse es el “trato equitativo” para las personas con discapacidad de manera que tenga las mismas posibilidades de acceso que el resto de la población según su propio padecimiento. Considera necesario que la Sala analice este amparo desde la óptica de la equidad dado que sólo desde esa perspectiva se puede comprender la estrecha relación que existe entre la obligación del Estado de garantizar la protección de la salud de las personas y la gestión de los recursos públicos destinados a cumplir con dicha obligación, dado que un análisis diferente podría implicar alejar el ideal de protección de la salud como derecho humano del aspecto práctico que enfrenta todo sistema de salud pública; realidad de la cual no escapa la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, ello con el propósito de garantizar la sostenibilidad del sistema. Indica que, en resumen, la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social cuenta con unidades debidamente equipadas para el traslado de pacientes conforme lo regulado en la Ley 7600, las que están ubicadas en el centro hospitalario especializado y cumplen con su función en cuanto al traslado de pacientes. Agrega que aunado a ello, se están realizando gestiones como parte de la política institucional en cuanto a la mejora de los equipos móviles para adquirir unidades con estas características, las que serían distribuidas según lo que indiquen los estudios de demanda en el territorio nacional, garantizando con ello el acceso a los servicios de salud en forma equitativa. Finaliza solicitando que se declare sin lugar el recurso.

6.- Informa bajo juramento Viviana Martín Salazar en su condición de Presidenta de la Junta Directiva del Consejo de Transporte Público (folio 30) que ese Consejo fue creado mediante Ley 7969 que es Ley Reguladora del Servicio Público de Transporte Remunerado de Personas en Vehículos en la Modalidad de Taxi, como órgano de desconcentración máxima adscrito al Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes con atribuciones de coordinar la aplicación correcta de las políticas de transporte público, su planeamiento, la revisión técnica, el otorgamiento y la administración de las concesiones, así como la regulación de los permisos que legalmente procedan en la modalidad de taxi y autobús en todo el territorio nacional. Manifiesta que de conformidad con lo dicho, la competencia de ese Consejo de Transporte Público se circunscribe al servicio público del transporte remunerado de personas en taxi, buseta, microbús y autobús y más recientemente vía dictamen de la Procuraduría General de la República, el transporte de carga. Señala que por esa razón, su representado no tiene ninguna competencia asignada por ley para regular, controlar o vigilar el cumplimiento de la Ley 7600 por parte de las ambulancias pertenecientes a la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social y a la Cruz Roja Costarricense.

7.- Según constancia de folio 33, el Presidente de la Asociación Cruz Roja Costarricense no rindió el informe solicitado a pesar de que fue debidamente notificado como consta en folio 27.

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

Redacta el Magistrado Araya García; y,

Considerando:

I.- Hechos probados. De importancia para la decisión de este asunto, se estiman como debidamente demostrados los siguientes hechos: a) que el Consejo de Transporte Público no está realizando ningún control en cuanto al cumplimiento de la Ley 7600 por parte de las ambulancias pertenecientes a la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social (ver manifestaciones rendidas bajo juramento de folio 31; b) que el Centro Nacional de Rehabilitación de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social tiene dos ambulancias con rampa para realizar el traslado de pacientes que van a citas programadas (ver manifestaciones rendidas bajo juramento de folio 17).

II.- Objeto del recurso. Alega el recurrente que es una persona con discapacidad que debe asistir a citas de rehabilitación en los hospitales de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social para lo cual se le traslada en ambulancia. Sin embargo, indica que esos vehículos no tienen las adaptaciones apropiadas para el transporte de personas con discapacidad y el Consejo de Transporte Público no ha tomado la medidas necesarias para que los vehículos de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social se adapten a los requisitos establecidos en la Ley número 7600 y su reglamento, además de que esa autoridad se niega a fiscalizar que tales unidades de transporte se encuentren acondicionadas para brindar el servicio de transporte para personas con discapacidad. Considera que esta situación lesiona sus derechos y los de las personas con discapacidad del país por lo que pide que se declare con lugar el recurso.

III.- Marco normativo de los derechos de las personas con discapacidad. En primer término, es importante señalar que la Constitución Política y la Convención Americana Sobre Derechos Humanos (instrumento internacional con fuerza superior a la ley por disposición del artículo 7 constitucional) consagran el principio de igualdad de las personas y la prohibición de hacer distinciones contrarias a su dignidad –artículos 33 y 24 respectivamente-. Adicionalmente, los derechos de las personas con discapacidad están reconocidos en otros instrumentos internacionales como la "Convención Americana para la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra las Personas con Discapacidad", aprobada por la Asamblea Legislativa por Ley número 7948 del veintidós de noviembre de mil novecientos noventa y nueve y la "Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad", número 7600, publicada en La Gaceta del veintinueve de mayo de mil novecientos noventa y seis. La citada Convención define en su artículo 1° la discriminación, de la siguiente manera:

"El término discriminación contra las personas con discapacidad, significa toda distinción, exclusión o restricción basada en una discapacidad, antecedente de discapacidad, consecuencia de discapacidad presente o pasada, que tenga el efecto o el propósito de impedir o anular el reconocimiento, goce o ejercicio por parte de las personas con discapacidad, de sus derechos humanos y libertades fundamentales." Asimismo, se consagra la obligación de los Estados que la suscribieron, entre ellos Costa Rica, a adoptar:

"las medidas para eliminar progresivamente la discriminación y promover la integración por parte de las autoridades gubernamentales y/o entidades privadas en la prestación o suministro de bienes, servicios, instalaciones, programas, actividades, tales como el empleo, el transporte, las comunicaciones, la vivienda, la recreación, la educación, el deporte, el acceso a la justicia y los servicios policiales y las actividades políticas y de administración." Por su parte, de importancia para la resolución del presente asunto resulta conveniente señalar lo dispuesto en la Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad número 7600, la cual establece en términos generales la obligación que tienen las instituciones, tanto públicas como privadas, de proveer todo el apoyo técnico que sea necesario para las personas con discapacidad a fin de garantizar sus derechos:

“Artículo 5.- Ayudas técnicas y servicios de apoyo.- Las instituciones públicas y las privadas de servicio público deberán proveer, a las personas con discapacidad, los servicios de apoyo y las ayudas técnicas requeridos para garantizar el ejercicio de sus derechos y deberes.” En relación con lo anterior, es indispensable recordar que este Tribunal Constitucional ha reconocido en reiteradas oportunidades que “la Ley Nº 7600 pretende como objetivo fundamental lograr las condiciones necesarias para que las personas que padecen cualquier tipo de discapacidad, alcancen su plena participación E INVERSIÓN socio- económica. En este sentido, el sistema de actualización y promoción de las condiciones necesarias que la ley establece, supone una garantía de su derecho a la plena igualdad, además, de un intento de inserción en la vida socio-económica del país. Precisamente, por su fundamento es que el disfrute de iguales oportunidades de acceso y participación en idénticas circunstancias deja de ser para los discapacitados una simple aspiración y se convierte en un derecho fundamental. Para garantizar el ejercicio de sus derechos y deberes, la Ley y su Reglamento imponen a las Administraciones Públicas y a los sujetos de derecho privado que brindan servicios públicos proveer a los discapacitados los servicios de apoyo y las ayudas técnicas que requieren para hacer realidad ese propósito. Dentro de este orden de ideas, el incumplimiento del interés público que la ley consagra, implica una violación flagrante de los derechos fundamentales de ese grupo social.” (ver en ese sentido sentencia número 2005-05895 de las catorce horas cuarenta y siete minutos del dieciocho de mayo del dos mil cinco).

IV.- A la luz de lo expuesto, es evidente entonces que existen una serie de disposiciones vigentes en el ordenamiento jurídico costarricense, que prohíben todo tipo de discriminación contra las personas en razón de su discapacidad, las cuales deben ser respetadas tanto por sujetos de derecho público como de derecho privado pues la tutela efectiva de los derechos de esas personas resulta ser uno de los medios por los cuales este grupo de la población puede tener una vida lo más independiente y normal posible, en aras de que su integración a la sociedad sea plena y efectiva. Es claro que dentro de estos derechos se encuentra la garantía para las personas con discapacidad de que puedan llevar una vida independiente tanto en su ámbito privado como en todo aquello que tiene que ver con su desarrollo en la sociedad, lo cual implica necesariamente la obligación del Estado de que este colectivo pueda acceder a todos los servicios y facilidades que existan en una sociedad, en iguales condiciones que cualquier otra persona. Como se desprende del marco legal citado supra, es evidente que existe en Costa Rica todo un sustento normativo que justifica el cambio del paradigma tradicional que se ha venido manejando en relación con las personas con discapacidad. Debe el Estado adoptar medidas para eliminar progresivamente la discriminación y proveer a las personas con discapacidad los servicios de apoyo y ayudas técnicas requeridas para garantizarles el ejercicio de sus derechos y deberes. En ese sentido, considera la Sala que el asunto bajo estudio ofrece un importante sustrato fáctico para favorecer ese cambio de paradigma pues significa, para este Tribunal, la oportunidad de advertir a la sociedad la necesidad de empezar a incorporar a las personas con discapacidad en igualdad de condiciones en relación con el resto de los individuos y en todas y cada una de las actividades que conforman el conglomerado social. Recuérdese que en virtud del principio de diversidad, las personas con discapacidad no solo se limitan a transitar por las calles en sillas de ruedas, sino que debe tomarse en cuenta que existen otros tipos de discapacidad que también requieren la atención del Estado y por ello, el mobiliario urbano, el ingreso a los edificios y su traslado a centros hospitalarios, entre otras cosas de la vida cotidiana, deben garantizar a toda la población con discapacidad, el libre acceso, en condiciones de igualdad y sin discriminación. El Estado no puede limitar las medidas para eliminar progresivamente la discriminación solo a rampas de acceso o a ascensores o a aceras libres sino que debe ir más allá y justamente este recurso de amparo da la oportunidad para tomar en cuenta que otra de las formas de eliminar esa discriminación y de propiciar la inserción plena de las personas con discapacidad a la sociedad, es precisamente a través de la posibilidad que se les brinde de poder ser trasladados a centros hospitalarios y de salud en condiciones adecuadas, que respeten su dignidad pero sobre todo que garanticen su libertad de desplazamiento hacia esos sitios en condiciones de seguridad y comodidad, lo cual se favorece y se propicia, sin duda alguna, con su traslado en ambulancias que cuenten con los mecanismos mínimos para atender a una persona con discapacidad. Desde cualquier punto de vista, admitir lo contrario se traduce en una violación a la igualdad de oportunidades que tienen esas personas como parte de la sociedad y significaría negarle a esta población la posibilidad de insertarse en la sociedad de manera natural, de realizar sus actividades de forma adecuada pero sobre todo su derecho a gozar de independencia.

V.- Sobre el caso concreto. A partir del marco normativo anterior, procede ahora analizar la situación planteada por el recurrente respecto de dos puntos en concreto: en primer lugar, sobre la omisión por parte de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social de habilitar vehículos ambulancia que estén habilitados de conformidad con lo dispuesto por la Ley 7600 para permitir que el transporte de personas con discapacidad se realice en condiciones adecuadas; y por otro lado, en cuanto a la omisión del Consejo de Transporte Público de adoptar las medidas necesarias para verificar que los vehículos ambulancias que transportan personas con discapacidad, estén adaptados a los requisitos establecidos en la Ley número 7600 y su reglamento. En lo que al primer aspecto se refiere, la Ley 7600 es muy clara al establecer en varias de sus normas la necesidad de que los medios de transporte en que se transporte a personas con discapacidad, estén adaptados y entre ellos, sin duda alguna, se encuentran los vehículos ambulancias, lo cual es obvio porque precisamente la finalidad de una ambulancia es el traslado de pacientes enfermos o bien de personas con discapacidad, hacia los diferentes centros médicos y hospitalarios. En ese sentido conviene citar dos normas de la Ley 7600 que se consideran atinentes al caso concreto:

“ARTICULO 29.- Obligaciones del Estad. Cuando una persona asegurada por el Estado presente una discapacidad como consecuencia de una enfermedad o lesión, la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social le proporcionará atención médica y rehabilitación, así como las ayudas técnicas o los servicios de apoyo requeridos….” “ARTICULO 35.- Medios de transporte adaptados. Las instituciones públicas que brindan servicios de rehabilitación deberán contar con medios de transporte adaptados a las necesidades de las personas con discapacidad”.

Así las cosas, es evidente entonces que sí existe de parte del Estado, específicamente en el caso concreto de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, una obligación de garantizar a las personas con discapacidad ayudas técnicas o servicios de apoyo requeridos, entre los cuales, sin duda alguna deben contar con medios de transporte adaptados para ese colectivo como lo dispone el numeral 35 citado supra según el cual, las instituciones públicas que brindan servicios de rehabilitación, deberán contar con medios de transporte adaptados a las necesidades de las personas con discapacidad. Haciéndose una interpretación amplia de estas normas desde la perspectiva de las personas con discapacidad, se deduce entonces que una institución como la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social que es la encargada de brindar los servicios de salud en el país y no solo los de rehabilitación, debe contar dentro de su flotilla con medios de transporte como son las ambulancias, adaptados a las necesidades de las personas con discapacidad. Ello tiene lógica si se parte del supuesto de que una persona con discapacidad, dependiendo del grado de padecimiento que tenga, no se encuentra en igualdad de condiciones que cualquier otra persona que bien podría acceder por sus propios medios a un vehículo ambulancia y por tal razón, es preciso, como se ha tutelado en cuanto al servicio de transporte público modalidad taxi y autobús, que también exista esa consideración en el caso de las ambulancias y por tanto, que en la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social como en cualquier otra institución pública o privada encargada de transportar enfermos, se cuente con ambulancias que estén adaptadas para permitir que personas con discapacidad puedan acceder a ellas y ser transportadas con la mayor comodidad y seguridad posibles. Desde esta perspectiva, lleva razón el recurrente cuando afirma que una persona con discapacidad que no puede ingresar por sus propios medios a una ambulancia que no esta adaptada, puede sufrir lesiones o maltratos cuando un tercero trata de ayudarle a subir ya sea jalándolo o alzándolo, además de que también se le ocasiona un menoscabo psicológico al tener que estar expuesto a que otra persona le ayude cuando ello no sería necesario si la ambulancia estuviera habilitada para que acceda a ella por sus propios medios o con la menor ayuda posible. Para desvirtuar lo anterior no es válido pensar que el servicio de ambulancia es un servicio asistido y que por ello no se requiere la adaptación de las unidades a la Ley 7600 pues tal asistencia solo se daría eventualmente en situaciones de emergencia en donde la persona que requiere ser transportada se encuentra en un grave estado de salud o inconsciente y por tanto requiere que la movilicen en camilla, lo cual no es el caso planteado por el recurrente. En ese sentido, como Tribunal Constitucional garante de los derechos de los individuos y con especial atención los de las personas con discapacidad, la situación que denuncia el recurrente es plenamente válida pues se trata del caso de este colectivo de la sociedad que requiere estarse trasladando para recibir atención médica y en razón de su discapacidad requiere contar con un medio de transporte que se adapte a su situación particular y nuevamente se retoma lo que se ha dicho supra en el sentido de que no se trata solo que la ambulancia esté adaptada para el transporte de una persona con discapacidad que se desplaza en silla de ruedas pues las personas con discapacidad no solo se limitan a transitar por las calles en sillas de ruedas, sino que debe tomarse en cuenta que existen otros tipos de discapacidad que también requieren la atención del Estado y por ello su traslado a centros hospitalarios, entre otras cosas de la vida cotidiana, deben garantizar el libre acceso, en condiciones de igualdad y sin discriminación, tal y como lo establece el principio de diversidad en esta materia.

VI.- Así las cosas, considera la Sala que existe una obligación de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social de proveer a la población con discapacidad, vehículos ambulancias que estén adaptados a sus necesidades. Tal circunstancia es reconocida parcialmente en el informe rendido bajo juramento a esta Sala cuando se afirma que como parte de la política institucional en cuanto a la mejora de los equipos móviles, está el proyecto de adquirir unidades que estén adaptadas a la Ley 7600, pero a la vez se afirma que, en la actualidad, únicamente se cuenta con dos unidades para todo el país que tienen rampa para realizar traslados de los pacientes que van a citas programadas en el Centro Nacional de Rehabilitación. Sin duda alguna este panorama es bastante desalentador porque si bien es cierto la Ley 7600 no indica que todos los vehículos ambulancias del país deben estar adaptados, también es lo cierto que sí exige a las instituciones públicas como la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, contar con medios de transporte adaptados a las necesidades de las personas con discapacidad y es evidente que dos ambulancias para todo el país, no están cubriendo en modo alguno la necesidad que tiene ese colectivo a lo largo y ancho del territorio nacional. Por tales razones, es preciso ordenar al Presidente Ejecutivo de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, que proceda de manera inmediata a adoptar las medidas que sean necesarias para que en atención a lo dispuesto en la Ley 7600, y a los porcentajes de personas con discapacidad que se maneja en cada uno de los centros de atención médica y hospitalaria a cargo de esa institución, se adquiera la cantidad de vehículos ambulancias que sean necesarios para garantizar un traslado adecuado de las personas con discapacidad que requieren ser movilizadas a los diferentes hospitales y clínicas de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social. Por tales razones, en cuanto a este extremo, el amparo debe ser estimado como en efecto se ordena, con las consecuencias indicadas.

VII.- Por otra parte, procede analizar ahora el otro reclamo que se deriva del memorial de interposición del recurso según el cual, el Consejo de Transporte Público no ha tomado la medidas necesarias para que los vehículos de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social se adapten a los requisitos establecidos en la Ley número 7600 y su reglamento, pues esa autoridad se niega a fiscalizar que esas unidades de transporte se encuentren acondicionadas para brindar el servicio de transporte para personas con discapacidad. Sobre el particular, bajo juramento se ha informado a este Tribunal por parte de la Presidenta del Consejo de Transporte Público que su representada no tiene competencia para regular, controlar o vigilar el cumplimiento de la Ley 7600 por parte de las ambulancias pertenecientes a la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social. Sin embargo, a la luz de la normativa vigente en la materia, no lleva razón la Presidenta de ese Consejo al hacer tal afirmación. Efectivamente, obsérvese que según la Ley de Creación del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes número 4786, artículo 2 inciso a) y sus reformas, es competencia de ese Ministerio la regulación, control y vigilancia del tránsito y el transporte por las vías públicas. Por su parte, el artículo 19 de la Ley de Tránsito por Vías Públicas Terrestres No. 7331 establece que le corresponde al Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes, comprobar que los vehículos que circulen por las carreteras nacionales reúnan las condiciones mecánicas, de seguridad, de emisiones contaminantes y otros que determine la Ley, lo cual hará mediante la revisión técnica de vehículos parcial o total. A su vez, el artículo 7 de la Ley Reguladora del Servicio Público de Transporte Remunerado de Personas en Vehículos en la Modalidad de Taxi No. 7969, dispone que corresponde al Consejo de Transporte Público coordinar y verificar la aplicación correcta de las políticas de transporte público, su planeamiento y la revisión técnica, siendo que en resolución número 28 de las catorce horas del ocho de febrero del dos mil dos, el Ministro de Obras Públicas y Transportes con fundamento en lo dispuesto en el artículo 89 de la Ley General de la Administración Pública, delegó a favor de ese Consejo de Transporte Público, todos los aspectos técnicos, operacionales, fiscales, administrativos y de otra índole que sean necesarios para el debido cumplimiento de la revisión técnica integral de la flota vehicular del país, siendo ese Consejo entonces el responsable por la debida observancia del ordenamiento jurídico en cuanto a esta materia se refiere. Debe recordarse que la revisión técnica integral de vehículos ha sido creada para verificar, controlar e inspeccionar aquéllos elementos que afecten a la seguridad del vehículo, sus emisiones contaminantes y el cumplimiento de la normativa técnica establecida para que pueda circular en condiciones idóneas (ver en ese sentido Reglamento para la Revisión Técnica Integral de Vehículos Automotores que Circulen por las Vías Públicas Decreto Ejecutivo No. 30184-MOPT de seis de febrero del dos mil dos) y tiene por objeto primordial garantizar las condiciones mínimas de seguridad de los vehículos basadas en los criterios de diseño y fabricación de éstos; además comprobar que cumplen con la normativa técnica que les afecta y que mantienen un nivel de emisiones contaminantes que no supere los límites máximos establecidos en la normativa vigente (ver en ese sentido Manual de Procedimientos para la Revisión técnica de Vehículos Automotores en las Estaciones de RTV aprobado por el Consejo de Transporte Público en sesión ordinaria 48-2002 de dos de julio del dos mil dos).

VIII.- Así las cosas, es evidente entonces que si la revisión técnica vehicular se ha creado para controlar que los vehículos que circulan por las vías terrestres, se encuentren en óptimas condiciones y cumplan con los requisitos exigidos por la Ley, entre ellas la 7600 que integra el ordenamiento jurídico costarricense, y si le corresponde al Consejo de Transporte Público regular y controlar lo relativo a la revisión técnica vehicular para que los vehículos que circulan por las vías del territorio nacional cumplan la normativa establecida, entonces es evidente que si uno de los aspectos a controlar en los vehículos que transportan personas con discapacidad es precisamente que estén ajustados a lo establecido en la Ley 7600, no es válida ni aceptable la afirmación que hace la Presidenta del Consejo de Transporte Público en el sentido de que no es competencia de su representado regular, controlar o vigilar el cumplimiento de la Ley 7600 por parte de las ambulancias pertenecientes a la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social. Desde esta perspectiva entonces, si el Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes delegó en el Consejo de Transporte Público lo relativo a revisión técnica y éste tiene que controlar en los vehículos el cumplimiento de lo concerniente a las adaptaciones establecidas en la Ley 7600, como en el caso concreto de las ambulancias y ese control y verificación no se está llevando a cabo en la actualidad, entonces se impone declarar con lugar el recurso porque es evidente que se está dando una limitación y discriminación en perjuicio de las personas con discapacidad al no exigirse a las ambulancias estar ajustadas a la Ley 7600 y con ello facilitar a las personas con discapacidad que accedan por sus propios medios a las ambulancias cuando requieren ser transportados a centros médicos u hospitalarios donde requieren recibir atención o tratamiento médico, lo anterior tal y como se exige en la actualidad a la flota de vehículos taxi y a la flotilla de autobuses.

IX.- Recuérdese que esta Sala en sentencia número 2005-005895 de las catorce horas cuarenta y siete minutos del dieciocho de mayo del dos mil cinco, al valorarse el cumplimiento de las disposiciones de la Ley 7600 en la flota de autobuses del país, indicó “Se infiere pues, que la determinación de los aspectos que se deben considerar en la revisión técnica vehicular es competencia y responsabilidad absoluta de las autoridades rectoras del transporte público y no una atribución del desarrollador, el cual se encuentra obligado a proceder conforme a lo predeterminado en el reglamento que al efecto se establezca. En este sentido, como se encuentra indubitablemente acreditado que el Consejo de Transporte Público no ha dispuesto las medidas técnicas conducentes para adaptar el transporte remunerado de personas modalidad autobús a lo que dispone la Ley Nº 7600 y el Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes aprobó el Manual de Revisión Técnica de Vehículos sin contemplar lo estatuido en esa ley y su reglamento, la Sala constata la acusada violación a los derechos fundamentales del amparado. Precisamente, en razón de lo expuesto, este Tribunal Constitucional descarta que la Riteve SyC, el Ministerio de la Presidencia, y la Asamblea Legislativa hayan vulnerado derecho fundamental alguno de Rojas Villalobos en lo que respecta al cumplimiento de las disposiciones de la Ley Nº 7600”.

En consecuencia, como se ha indicado, en este caso también es competencia del Consejo de Transporte Público la verificación de que las ambulancias de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social cumplan con lo dispuesto en la Ley 7600, y por tanto, lo procedente es estimar el amparo también en cuanto a este extremo. En consecuencia se ordena al Consejo de Transporte Público que disponga de manera inmediata las medidas técnicas que sean necesarias para controlar y verificar que los vehículos ambulancias de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social estén adaptados a lo dispuesto en la Ley de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad que es Ley No.7600 del veintinueve de mayo de mil novecientos noventa y seis.

X.- Conclusión. En mérito de las anteriores consideraciones, la Sala es del criterio de que con los hechos denunciados efectivamente se están vulnerando los derechos del recurrente y demás personas con discapacidad por lo que se impone declarar con lugar el recurso con las consecuencias indicadas en los considerandos anteriores.-

Por tanto:

Se declara con lugar el recurso. Se ordena a Eduardo Doryan Garrón en su condición de Presidente Ejecutivo de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social, o a quien en su lugar ocupe ese cargo, adoptar de manera inmediata las medidas que sean necesarias para que en atención a lo dispuesto en la Ley 7600 de Igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad y a los porcentajes de personas con discapacidad que se maneja en cada uno de los centros de atención médica y hospitalaria a cargo de esa institución, se adquiera o se adapte la cantidad de vehículos ambulancias que sean necesarios para garantizar un traslado adecuado de las personas con discapacidad que requieren ser movilizadas a los diferentes hospitales y clínicas de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social. Por otra parte, se ordena a Viviana Martín Salazar en su calidad de Presidenta del Consejo de Transporte Público o a quien en su lugar ejerza ese cargo, que disponga de manera inmediata las medidas técnicas que sean necesarias para controlar y verificar que los vehículos ambulancias de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social estén adaptados a lo dispuesto en la Ley 7600 de igualdad de Oportunidades para las Personas con Discapacidad. Se condena al Estado y a la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social 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 advierte a Eduardo Doryan Garrón en su condición de Presidente Ejecutivo de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social y a Viviana Martín Salazar en su calidad de Presidenta del Consejo de Transporte Público, o a quienes en su lugar ejerzan esos cargos, que de no acatar la orden dicha, incurrirán en el delito de desobediencia y que, de conformidad con el artículo 71 de la Ley de esta jurisdicción, se le 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. Notifíquese esta resolución a Eduardo Doryan Garrón en su condición de Presidente Ejecutivo de la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social y a Viviana Martín Salazar en su calidad de Presidenta del Consejo de Transporte Público, o a quienes en su lugar ejerzan esos cargos, en forma personal.- Teresita Rodríguez A.

Presidenta a.i.

Rosa María Abdelnour G. Horacio González Q.

Marta María Vinocour F. Roxana Salazar C.

Jorge Araya G. Alexander Godínez V.