Municipality of Puntarenas must coordinate solution to high-tide flooding in Barrio El CarmenMunicipalidad de Puntarenas debe coordinar solución a inundaciones por mareas altas en Barrio El Carmen

Res. No. 2010015777 CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at nine hours and four minutes on the twenty-fourth of September, two thousand ten.

Recurso de amparo filed by Geovanny Salas Campos, of legal age, bearer of identity card 6-172-331, against the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes.

Resultando:

1.- By written brief received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at sixteen hours thirty-five minutes on the twenty-eighth of February, two thousand ten, the petitioner files a recurso de amparo against the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes and states that currently there is the problem that every time there are high tides in the Barrio El Carmen sector next to the "Tourist Pier" ("Muelle Turístico") in Puntarenas, the estuary overflows, causing flooding in the houses surrounding the place and losses of their belongings. He adds that the respondent authorities do not seek a solution such as building a stone retaining wall with cement like the one on Puntarenas Beach, which would prevent the water from spreading to the houses.

2.- María Luisa Avila Agüero, Minister of Health, reports under oath (folio 9), that in response to the recurso, an inspection was carried out at the site, as recorded in inspection report number 039-F-2010 from nine hours and thirty minutes on the seventh of April, two thousand ten, that at the time of the visit, drainage pipes from the sewer directed toward the estuary were observed. That during the visit it was determined that there is no complaint whatsoever filed by the petitioner in that Region related to this situation, consequently they had no knowledge of the problem. However, because this problem must be addressed jointly by the Ministry of Health, the Instituto de Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados and the Local Government, a memorandum has already been sent to the Cantonal Head of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados and to the Municipal Mayor, granting them a period of 8 days to report on the actions they take, aimed at definitively solving the problem in question, which is why she requests this Court to exempt the Ministry of Health from all liability. She requests that the recurso filed be dismissed.

3.- Francisco Jiménez Reyes reports, in his capacity as Minister of Obras Públicas y Transportes, (folio 27), that in accordance with the provisions of Law 4071, which dates from the month of January, 1968, the city of Puntarenas was declared an urban zone, taking into account the zone particularly generating the aforementioned problem, and it was left under the exclusive competence and responsibility of the Municipality of Puntarenas. For this reason, this Ministry is prevented from carrying out initiatives, actions, or works in the Puntarenas zone and within it, in the zone where the flooding occurs. He indicates that this is a problem regarding which this Ministry has no direct relationship, nor obligation or responsibility. It must be addressed and defined by the Municipalidad de Puntarenas. He requests that the recurso be dismissed with respect to this Ministry.

4.- Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado reports under oath, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, (folio 30 and 36), that according to information provided by Eng. Oscar Brenes Quirós, Director of the Unidad Técnica de Gestión Vial of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, through memorandum UTGV-0415-2010 dated June 30, 2010, there is a problem at the site resulting from a series of factors that are beyond the scope of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, given the effect produced by the melting of the polar ice caps as an effect of global warming, which generates a rise in the water levels of the oceans and this condition results in, at least twice a year when maximum tides occur, the dwellings located in the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city suffering flooding problems. In addition to the above, he indicates that the stormwater and sanitary evacuation system of the city of Puntarenas discharges into the sector of the Estero de Puntarenas, which is why when the tide is high and it rains, an obstruction effect of the water discharge is generated, in turn causing flooding in the mentioned zone; a situation that is reversed when the tide begins to go down, as it allows the waters to flow out to the indicated sites. That it is not true that this municipality does not address the problem because on June 14 of the current year, before this amparo was notified to them, an inspection was made of the problem site jointly with the Departmento de Obras Pluviales of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes and as part of the solution the authorities of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes will work on a gabion wall (muro de gaviones), lined with concrete to stop the tide flow toward the dwellings located in El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of Puntarenas. He requests that the recurso filed be dismissed.

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

Magistrate Salazar Cambronero writes; and,

Considerando:

I.- Proven facts. Of importance for the decision in this matter, the following facts are deemed duly demonstrated: a) through memorandum UTGV-0415-2010 dated June 30, 2010, signed by Eng. Oscar Brenes Quirós, Director of the Unidad Técnica de Gestión Vial of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, there is a problem at the site resulting from a series of factors that are beyond the scope of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, given the effect produced by the melting of the polar ice caps as an effect of global warming, which generates a rise in the water levels of the oceans and this condition results in, at least twice a year when maximum tides occur, the dwellings located in the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city suffering flooding problems, (report at folio 36 and folio 40); b) on June 14 of the current year, an inspection was made of the problem site jointly with the Departmento de Obras Pluviales of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes and as part of the solution the authorities of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes will work on a gabion wall (muro de gaviones), lined with concrete to stop the tide flow toward the dwellings located in El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of Puntarenas, (report at folio 37).

II.- On the merits. Given the relevance it has for the analysis of the specific case, it is necessary to note that the problems generated by the sewer system of the city of Puntarenas have already been analyzed by this Court in judgments numbers 2008-010662, at sixteen hours and forty-eight minutes on the twenty-sixth of June, two thousand eight, 2008-013311 at thirteen hours and fourteen minutes on the twenty-ninth of August, two thousand eight, 2008-13638 at eleven hours and thirty-eight minutes on the fifth of September, two thousand eight, 2009-13161 at ten hours and forty-seven minutes on the twenty-first of August, two thousand nine, 2009-16065 at twelve hours and fifty-three minutes on the sixteenth of October, two thousand nine, and 2010-004595, at ten hours and eleven minutes on the fifth of March, two thousand ten. On the issue in question, in this last ruling, it was indicated with respect to what is relevant:

“V.- On the merits: In the report rendered by the Mayoress and by the President of the Municipal Council of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, the respondents confirm the existence of the problem reported by the petitioner, and it is that indeed there is an overflow of stormwater that is not contained by the public sewer system. However, by way of discharge, they cite that regarding the obstruction of the sewer system, the city council has made several efforts to resolve the reported problem, for which reason its cleaning was carried out and even a rebar-cleaning machine was acquired to clean and unclog any obstruction that existed in them. In relation to the evacuation of stormwater, it is said that this city council is studying possible alternatives to solve said problem. Based on the foregoing, in the opinion of this Chamber, the steps carried out by the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, although they have been taken, have not been sufficient to solve the problems that afflict the residents of Barrio El Carmen, since the stormwater problem continues to occur and continues to invade the sidewalks and premises located along the edge of said sewer. In this vein, this municipal corporation has failed in its duty of protecting the local interests entrusted to it, as it is not verified in the case file that they have used all the powers that the legal system confers upon it to broadly ensure the preservation of local interests and services, in accordance with the provisions of Article 169 of the Political Constitution and the development of said norm established by the Municipal Code. This Court considers that it is clear that despite the fact that the respondent municipality has prior knowledge of the problems afflicting the residents of Barrio El Carmen in Puntarenas, they have not yet adopted the sufficient measures required to definitively solve the problem. As for the stormwater outflow, the report states that this council has cleaned the sewers of solid waste, that it even bought a rebar-cleaning machine, and that it is studying possible alternatives to solve this problem in the future with foreign donations, which reflects that the work carried out to date has not been sufficient, and the Stormwater Sewer System (Sistema de Alcantarillado Pluvial) continues to present serious problems, which affects the interests and rights of the petitioner, since it is evident, as confirmed by the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, that the stormwater sewer system collapses during the rainy season, being unable to retain all the waters (folio 86). Regarding the obstruction of the sewer system, this Court is not clear if the "rebar-cleaning machine" has even been used, since the city council verifies its purchase but not its use, and in the photos it attaches, only some men are seen collecting solid waste from some culverts and manholes, which does not guarantee that there are no obstructions along the Stormwater Sewer System. Nor is it evident from the case file whether the cleaning carried out by the Municipality was performed on the stormwater or sanitary sewer system, nor that apart from this, coordination actions have been carried out with other State institutions responsible for addressing these types of problems, except for the steps taken before the Ministry of Health, or the inspection carried out by the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, which indicates that the Sanitary Sewer Network is in perfect condition and that it is the stormwater sewer network that is collapsed (See folio 86), and that even though the Municipality supposedly cleaned the sewers of solid waste, such actions do not seem to have produced any positive result, since the overflow of stormwater continues to occur, flooding the sidewalks and the premises located next to them. Thus, despite the fact that the municipality has known of the water problem questioned here for months, it has still not been able to resolve the problem.” IV.- From the reading of the transcribed precedent, it follows that in the city of Puntarenas there is a problem in the stormwater sewer system, which generates flooding and water stagnation. In view of the foregoing, it is deemed appropriate to analyze the actions of each of the respondent institutions, in order to determine whether or not they have incurred in violations of the provisions of constitutional numeral 50.

V.- On the actions of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas. Even though in her report, the Municipal Mayoress of Puntarenas argues that in order to address the problem described by the petitioner, the respondent Corporation has carried out cleaning and repair work on the sewers and culverts (tragantes), in order to mitigate the effects of the mentioned situation, from the report rendered by the Ministry of Health, it follows that as of December fourth, two thousand nine, - the date on which an inspection was carried out -, said authority had not performed work on streets 9, 11, and 13 of Puntarenas, since the culverts (tragantes) were found full of solid waste and some even with stagnant water. In this sense, it is worth indicating that although the Chamber verifies that the respondents have taken various steps to provide a definitive solution to the problem analyzed in this case file, the truth is that the situation not only persists, but is aggravated by the lack of action by the respondent Municipality, in failing to carry out the cleaning work that would reduce the negative effects that may be generated for the population. Likewise, it must be indicated that already in previous judgments, this Court has made it clear that the respondent authorities are obliged to establish coordination channels and mutual commitments in order to solve the problem with the stormwater sewer system of the city of Puntarenas, hence the failure to comply with what was ordered leads to nothing other than aggravating the situation, to the clear detriment of the rights to health and to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the inhabitants of the place.

VI.- On the actions of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados. In his report rendered under oath, the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados argues that addressing the problem afflicting the petitioner is the exclusive competence of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, in view of what is indicated by Title IV of the Municipal Code, since said authority is the body that collects the respective amounts for maintenance and proper functioning of the stormwater network. Regarding the above, it must be stated that although the respondent Head is correct in pointing out the Municipality's responsibility in addressing the cited problem, the truth is that the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is also obliged to address the mentioned problem, since, in accordance with the provisions of Article 2, subsections a), d), and g) of the Constitutive Law of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, Law 2726 of April fourteenth, nineteen sixty-one, the following corresponds to said institution:

• a)To direct and supervise everything concerning providing the inhabitants of the republic with a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste, and of stormwater in urban areas; (...)
• d)To advise the other State bodies and coordinate public and private activities in all matters related to the establishment of water supply and sewer systems and control of the contamination of water resources, its consultation being mandatory in all cases, and compliance with its recommendations inexcusable; (...)
• g)To directly administer and operate the water supply and sewer systems throughout the country, which shall be taken on taking into account convenience and availability of resources. The systems that are currently administered and operated by municipal corporations may continue to be under their charge, as long as they provide efficient service. (...) The institution is empowered to agree with local bodies on the administration of such services or to administer them through administrative boards of mixed integration between the Institute and the respective communities, provided that this is agreed upon for the better provision of services and in accordance with the respective regulations. For the same reasons and with the same characteristics, regional administrative boards involving several municipalities may also be created; VII.- As deduced from the reading of the cited norms, the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados has a residual obligation in the management of sewer systems that are under the administration of the municipalities, since it must intervene when said corporations do not effectively provide said service, in view of its obligation to guarantee the inhabitants of the country a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste, and of stormwater in urban areas, as indicated in subsection a) of Article 2 of Law 2726. By virtue of the foregoing, the argument of the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is unacceptable, since said authority cannot shirk the duties that have been legally granted to it, especially considering that we are in the presence of a situation that implies a violation of the provisions of Articles 21 and 50 of the Constitution. In this sense, although the Court verifies that the respondent Institute has provided recommendations to the respondent Municipality regarding the management of the stormwater sewer system problem in the city of Puntarenas, the truth is that this is insufficient, because the institution must also directly intervene in the solution of said problem, since its action cannot be limited to indirect intervention in addressing the facts mentioned by the petitioner. Therefore, the recurso must also be granted with respect to said authority, as is hereby done.

VIII.- On the actions of the Ministry of Health. The Chamber considers that the Ministry of Health has not incurred any omission that violates the fundamental rights of the petitioner, since it is deemed demonstrated that it has taken actions within the scope of its competences to provide a solution to the problem described in the filing brief, hence the recurso must be dismissed with respect to this authority.

IX.- Thus, by virtue of the foregoing, it is appropriate to grant the recurso filed with respect to the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados and the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, making the respondents aware that Article 71 of the Law of the Constitutional Jurisdiction (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional) establishes imprisonment from three months to two years or a fine of twenty to sixty days, for those persons who fail to comply with what is ordered by this Chamber, hence the respondents are warned that they must proceed to resolve the problem analyzed in this matter, because otherwise, pieces may be sent to the Public Prosecutor's Office for the crime of disobedience…(judgment 2010-004595)” III.- On the specific case.- Now, with regard to the specific claim presented by the petitioner, being the flooding caused by high tides in the Barrio El Carmen sector next to the "Tourist Pier" ("Muelle Turístico") in Puntarenas, because the estuary overflows, a clear and evident omission by the municipal authorities is also found, as will be explained below. From the account of proven facts, it has been duly demonstrated that the municipal authorities of Puntarenas are aware of the flooding problems resulting from high tides suffered by the dwellings located in the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city. Both the authorities of the Ministry of Health and those of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes exempt themselves from liability and transfer the solution of the problem to other authorities. In this regard, this Chamber considers that it is not its role to determine which authority is competent to act, nor within what scopes it must be done, and therefore it does not proceed to assess the action that these institutions should have, or the responsibility of each of these entities, but given the serious threat to fundamental rights that has been brought to light in this amparo, it considers it essential that action be taken and orders be issued so that immediate steps are taken to seek solutions or to adopt decisions that should have been taken previously but have been lagging over time. Therefore, as in accordance with Article 169 of the Constitution, municipalities are called upon to administer local interests and services in each canton, this Court will only focus on analyzing the municipal action, as the governing body for seeking the solution or for seeking among the different public instances the necessary coordination to solve the problem. In this sense, it cannot be forgotten that coordination among public agencies is indisputably necessary, in order to guarantee the protection of the environment and therefore, the public health of the population. On various occasions, constitutional jurisprudence has indicated that environmental protection is a task that corresponds to everyone equally, while there is an obligation for the State – as a whole – to take the necessary measures to protect the environment, which necessarily implies the involvement of all State entities, bodies, and institutions as well as private parties that, for one reason or another, have to intervene. The Chamber has referred to this principle of coordination of public agencies, specifically in judgment number 5445-99, at fourteen hours thirty minutes on the fourteenth of July, nineteen ninety-nine, in which, with respect to what is relevant, it stated:

"In such a way that coordination is the ordering of relations among these diverse independent activities, which takes charge of that concurrence in a same object or entity, to make it useful for a global public plan, without suppressing the reciprocal independence of the acting subjects. Since there is no hierarchical relationship of the decentralized institutions, nor of the State itself in relation to the municipalities, it is not possible to impose certain conducts on them, with which the essential inter-institutional «concert» arises, in the strict sense, insofar as the autonomous and independent centers of action agree on that preventive and global scheme, in which each one plays a role with a view to a mission entrusted to the others. Thus, the relations of the municipalities with the other public entities can only be carried out on a level of equality, resulting in agreed forms of coordination, with the exclusion of any imperative form to the detriment of their autonomy, which would allow subjecting the corporate entities to a coordination scheme without their will or against it; but which does admit the necessary subordination of these entities to the State and in the interest of the latter (through the «administrative supervision» of the State, and specifically, in the legality control function that falls to it, with general oversight powers over the entire sector).” Based on the foregoing, there is no doubt that any omission in the duty of collaboration and coordination among public institutions could endanger the protection of the environment and public health. Without a doubt, in the specific case, because the reported problems are complex, multifactorial situations, involving several sectors of society and the State, the solution that can be provided for each of the cases and its success will necessarily depend on the coordination and reciprocal collaboration that can occur among the different responsible institutions, and therefore, it is imperative that the respondent Municipality assumes the required coordination among the respondents.

IV.- Following the same line of thought as the previous considerando, the arguments expressed under oath by the respondent Mayor, with which it is intended to justify the omissions that have been occurring to address the situation in that area of the country, are not considered valid. On the contrary, the Chamber is of the opinion that there has been negligence on the part of the Administration that is violating the fundamental rights of the petitioner and the residents of the place, which merits immediate intervention by the state apparatus to correct it. In addition to the above, the Chamber considers that the respondent Municipalidad has tolerated and allowed the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the population of Barrio El Carmen in Puntarenas to be violated. In this sense, the respondent Municipality cannot evade its duty to ensure the local interests of its canton and despite the fact that such municipal obligation is quite clear, this Court is struck by the statement made by the Mayor of the respondent Municipality to the effect that it is not true that attention has not been given to the described problem, if on the fourteenth of June of the current year, authorities of that municipality carried out an inspection visit to the site. With such statements, it is clear that this local government has not assumed the reported situation with full responsibility, because it is clear that making a visit, on an issue such as the one before us, definitively does not mean that action is being taken, or measures are being adopted to solve the problem. Furthermore, it is important to indicate to the municipal authorities that if they consider that many of the actions that must be adopted should be carried out by other institutions, this does not exempt them from liability, because doing so would allow them to disregard the problems. From the report rendered by its representative, the Chamber concludes that the municipal corporation has incurred a clear omission and negligence on the part of the municipal authorities that has caused the continued, repeated deterioration of the environment, health, and safety of the inhabitants of the place. In view of all the foregoing, the Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas must be ordered to adopt measures within the scope of his competences, so that in a coordinated manner with other State institutions, and within a maximum period of six months counted from the notification of this judgment, a solution to the problems reported by the petitioner can be achieved.

Por tanto:

The recurso is declared with merit.

It is ordered that Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, or whoever exercises the office in his place, immediately carry out the necessary coordination with the pertinent authorities to adopt the necessary measures within the scope of their powers, so that within a maximum period of six months from the notification of this judgment, a solution may be achieved to the problems denounced by the petitioner at the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city. Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, or whoever exercises the office in his place, is warned that failure to comply with the said order will result in 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 whomever receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in an amparo proceeding, and does not comply with it or does not have it enforced, provided that the crime is not more severely punished. The Municipality of Puntarenas is ordered to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts that serve as the basis for this declaration, which shall be liquidated in the execution of the judgment of the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. Let this resolution be personally notified to Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, or to whoever exercises the office in his place.

Gilbert Armijo S.

Acting President Ernesto Jinesta L. Fernando Cruz C.

Fernando Castillo V. Roxana Salazar C.

Víctor Ardón A. José Paulino Hernández arg/800 In light of the foregoing, it is deemed appropriate to analyze the actions of each of the respondent institutions, in order to determine whether they have incurred in violations of the provisions of constitutional article 50.

V.- Regarding the actions of the Municipality of Puntarenas. Although in her report, the Municipal Mayor of Puntarenas argues that in order to address the problem described by the petitioner, the respondent Corporation has carried out cleaning and repair work on the sewers and drains, with the aim of mitigating the effects of the aforementioned situation, based on the report issued by the Ministry of Health, it is clear that as of December 4, 2009, —the date on which an inspection was carried out—, said authority had not performed work on streets 9, 11, and 13 of Puntarenas, since the drains were full of solid waste and some even had stagnant water. In that regard, it should be noted that although this Chamber verifies that the respondents have undertaken various efforts to provide a definitive solution to the problem analyzed in this case file, the truth is that the situation not only persists but is aggravated by the lack of action by the respondent Municipality, by failing to carry out the cleaning work that would reduce the negative effects that may be generated for the population. Likewise, it must be stated that in previous rulings, this Court has made it clear that the respondent authorities are obligated to establish coordination channels and mutual commitments in order to resolve the problem with the stormwater drainage system of the city of Puntarenas; hence, the failure to comply with what was ordered can only further aggravate the situation, to the clear detriment of the rights to health and to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment for the inhabitants of the area.

VI.- Regarding the actions of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers. In its report rendered under oath, the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers argues that addressing the problem afflicting the petitioner is the exclusive competence of the Municipality of Puntarenas, in accordance with the provisions of Title IV of the Municipal Code, since said authority is the body that collects the respective amounts for the maintenance and proper functioning of the stormwater network. Regarding the foregoing, it must be stated that although the respondent Head is correct in pointing out the responsibility of the Municipality in addressing the cited problem, the truth is that the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers is also obligated to provide attention to the aforementioned problem, because, in accordance with the provisions of Article 2, subsections a), d), and g) of the Constitutive Law of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, law 2726 of April 14, 1961, it is the responsibility of said institution:

• a)To direct and oversee everything related to providing the inhabitants of the republic with a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black waters and liquid industrial waste, and of stormwater in urban areas; (…)
• d)To advise other State agencies and coordinate public and private activities in all matters relating to the establishment of aqueducts and sewers and the control of contamination of water resources, its consultation being mandatory in all cases, and compliance with its recommendations being inexcusable; (…)
• g)To directly administer and operate the aqueduct and sewer systems throughout the country, which shall be gradually taken over taking into account convenience and availability of resources. The systems that are currently administered and operated by municipal corporations may continue to be managed by them, as long as they provide an efficient service. (…) The institution is empowered to agree with local bodies on the administration of such services or to administer them through administrative boards of mixed integration between the Institute and the respective communities, whenever it is convenient for the better provision of services and in accordance with the respective regulations. For the same reasons and with the same characteristics, regional administrative boards may also be created involving several municipalities.

VII.- As can be deduced from reading the cited norms, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers has a residual obligation in the management of sewer systems that are under the administration of municipalities, since it must intervene when such corporations do not effectively provide said service, in consideration of its obligation to guarantee the inhabitants of the country a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black waters and liquid industrial waste and stormwater in urban areas, as indicated by subsection a) of Article 2 of Law 2726. By virtue of the foregoing, the argument of the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers is not admissible, as said authority cannot shirk the duties that have been legally assigned to it, especially considering that we are in the presence of a situation that implies a violation of the provisions of Articles 21 and 50 of the Constitution. In this regard, although the Court verifies that the respondent Institute has provided recommendations to the respondent Municipality regarding the management of the stormwater drainage problem in the city of Puntarenas, the truth is that this is insufficient, because the institution must also intervene directly in the solution of said problem, since its action cannot be limited to an indirect intervention in addressing the facts mentioned by the petitioner. For the foregoing reasons, the petition must also be granted against said authority, as it is hereby done.

VIII.- Regarding the actions of the Ministry of Health. This Chamber considers that the Ministry of Health has not incurred in any omission that violates the fundamental rights of the petitioner, as it has been demonstrated that it has taken actions within the scope of its competencies to provide a solution to the problem described in the petition, hence the petition must be dismissed against this authority.

IX.- Thus, based on the foregoing, the appropriate course is to grant the petition against the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers and the Municipality of Puntarenas, making the respondents aware that Article 71 of the Law of the Constitutional Jurisdiction establishes imprisonment of three months to two years or a fine of twenty to sixty days, for those persons who fail to comply with what is ordered by this Chamber; hence, the respondents are warned that they must proceed to resolve the problem analyzed in the present matter, as otherwise, certified copies of the records may be sent to the Public Prosecutor's Office for the crime of disobedience…(ruling 2010-004595)” III.- Regarding the specific case.- Having said that, regarding the specific claim presented by the petitioner, namely the floods caused by high tides in the sector of Barrio El Carmen next to the "Muelle Turístico" (Tourism Pier) in Puntarenas, because the estuary overflows, there is also a clear and evident omission by the municipal authorities, as will be explained below. From the list of proven facts, it has been duly demonstrated that the municipal authorities of Puntarenas are aware of the flooding problems caused by high tides suffered by the homes located in the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city. Both the authorities of the Ministry of Health and those of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport disclaim responsibility and transfer the solution of the problem to other authorities. In this regard, this Chamber considers that it is not its role to determine who is the competent authority to act, or within what scopes it should be done, and therefore it does not evaluate the actions that these institutions should have taken, or the responsibility of each of those entities, but in the face of the grave threat to fundamental rights that has been exposed in this amparo, it considers it essential that action be taken and orders be issued to proceed immediately to seek solutions or to adopt the decisions that should have been made previously but have been lagging over time. Therefore, as in accordance with Article 169 of the Constitution, municipalities are called to administer the local interests and services in each canton, this Court will only focus on analyzing the municipal action, as the governing body for seeking the solution or the necessary coordination among the various public entities to solve the problem. In that sense, it cannot be forgotten that coordination among public agencies is indisputably necessary, in order to guarantee the protection of the environment and thus, the public health of the population. On various occasions, constitutional jurisprudence has indicated that the protection of the environment is a task that corresponds to everyone equally, while there is an obligation for the State –as a whole– to take the measures necessary to protect the environment, which necessarily implies the involvement of all State entities, bodies, and institutions as well as private parties that, for one reason or another, must intervene. This Chamber has referred to this principle of coordination among public agencies, specifically in ruling number 5445-99, of fourteen hours thirty minutes of July fourteen, nineteen ninety-nine in which, for what is relevant, it stated:

"Thus, coordination is the ordering of the relationships among these diverse independent activities, which takes charge of that concurrence on a same object or entity, to make it useful for a global public plan, without suppressing the reciprocal independence of the acting subjects. Since there is no hierarchical relationship between decentralized institutions, nor of the State itself in relation to municipalities, it is not possible to impose certain behaviors upon them, hence the essential inter-institutional 'concert' arises, in the strict sense, as the autonomous and independent centers of action agree on that preventive and global scheme, in which each one plays a role with a view to a mission entrusted to the others. Thus, the relationships of municipalities with other public entities can only be carried out on a level of equality, resulting in agreed forms of coordination, excluding any imperative form to the detriment of their autonomy, which would allow the corporate entities to be subjected to a coordination scheme without their consent or against it; but which does admit the necessary subordination of these entities to the State and in the interest thereof (through the 'administrative supervision' of the State, and specifically, in the function of legality control that corresponds to it, with powers of general oversight over the entire sector).” Based on the foregoing, there is no doubt that any omission of the duty of collaboration and coordination among public institutions could endanger the protection of the environment and public health. Without a doubt, in this specific case, since the reported problems are complex, multifactorial situations that involve various sectors of society and the State, the solution that can be provided for each of the cases and its success will necessarily depend on the reciprocal coordination and collaboration that can occur among the different responsible institutions, and therefore, it is imperative that the respondent Municipality assume the required coordination among the respondents.

IV.- Following the same line of thought as the preceding recital, the arguments presented under oath by the respondent Mayor, with which he intends to justify the omissions that have been occurring in addressing the situation in that area of the country, are not considered valid. On the contrary, this Chamber is of the opinion that there has been negligence on the part of the Administration that is harming the fundamental rights of the petitioner and the neighbors of the place, which warrants an immediate intervention by the state apparatus to correct it. Added to the foregoing, this Chamber considers that the respondent Municipality has tolerated and allowed the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the population of Barrio El Carmen in Puntarenas to be harmed. In that sense, the respondent Municipality cannot evade its duty to watch over the local interests of its canton, and despite such municipal obligation being quite clear, this Court is struck by the statement made by the Mayor of the respondent Municipality to the effect that it is not true that attention has not been provided to the described problem, because on June 14th of the current year, authorities of that municipality conducted an inspection visit at the site. With such statements, it is clear that this local government has not assumed the denounced situation with full responsibility, because it is obvious that making a visit, in a matter such as the one before us, definitively does not mean that action is being taken, or measures are being adopted to solve the problem. Furthermore, it is important to indicate to the municipal authorities that if they consider that many of the actions that must be adopted must be carried out by other institutions, this does not exempt them from responsibility, because doing so would be to allow them to disregard the problems. From the report rendered by its representative, this Chamber concludes that the municipal corporation has incurred in a clear omission and negligence on the part of the municipal authorities that has caused the repeated, ongoing deterioration of the environment, health, and safety of the inhabitants of the place. In consideration of all the foregoing, the Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas must be ordered to adopt measures within the scope of his competencies, so that in a coordinated manner with other State institutions, and within the maximum period of six months counted from the notification of this ruling, a solution to the problems denounced by the petitioner can be achieved.

Therefore:

The petition is granted. Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, or whoever holds the position in his stead, is ordered to immediately carry out the necessary coordination with the pertinent authorities, to adopt the necessary measures within the scope of his competencies, so that within the maximum period of six months counted from the notification of this ruling, a solution to the problems denounced by the petitioner in the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city can be achieved. Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his condition as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, or whoever holds the position in his stead, is warned that if he fails to comply with the ordered measure, he will incur the crime of disobedience and that, in accordance with Article 71 of the Law of this jurisdiction, a prison term of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, will be imposed on anyone who receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in an amparo proceeding, and fails to comply with it or enforce it, provided the crime is not more severely punished. The Municipality of Puntarenas is ordered to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts that serve as the basis for this declaration, which shall be liquidated in the execution of the judgment of contentious-administrative proceedings. This decision shall be personally notified to Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, or to whoever holds the position in his stead.

Gilbert Armijo S.

Acting Presiding Judge Ernesto Jinesta L. Fernando Cruz C.

Fernando Castillo V. Roxana Salazar C.

**II.- On the merits.** Given the relevance for the analysis of the specific case, it is necessary to note that the problems generated by the sewer system of the city of Puntarenas have already been analyzed by this Court in judgments numbers 2008-010662, at sixteen hours and forty-eight minutes of June twenty-sixth, two thousand eight, 2008-013311 at thirteen hours and fourteen minutes of August twenty-ninth, two thousand eight, 2008-13638 at eleven hours and thirty-eight minutes of September fifth, two thousand eight, 2009-13161 at ten hours and forty-seven minutes of August twenty-first, two thousand nine, 2009-16065 at twelve hours and fifty-three minutes of October sixteenth, two thousand nine, and 2010-004595, at ten hours and eleven minutes of March fifth, two thousand ten. On the matter in question, in this last pronouncement, it was indicated as relevant:

**“V.- On the merits:** In the report rendered by the Mayor and by the President of the Municipal Council of the Municipality of Puntarenas, the respondents confirm the existence of the problem reported by the petitioner, which is that there is indeed an overflow of stormwater that is not contained by the public sewer system. However, by way of discharge, they state that regarding the obstruction of the sewer system, the municipal corporation has made several efforts to resolve the reported problem, for which reason it proceeded to clean it and even acquired a rod-unclogging machine to clean and unclog any obstruction that existed in them. Regarding stormwater drainage, it is said that the municipal corporation is studying possible alternatives to solve said problem. Based on the foregoing, in the opinion of this Chamber, the steps taken by the Municipality of Puntarenas, while they have occurred, have not been sufficient to solve the problems afflicting the residents of Barrio El Carmen, since the stormwater problem continues to occur and continues to invade the sidewalks and premises located along the edge of said sewer system. In this regard, this municipal corporation has failed in its duty of guardianship of the local interests that have been entrusted to it, since it is not verified in the case file that they have used all the powers that the legal system confers on them to broadly ensure the preservation of local interests and services, in accordance with the provisions of Article 169 of the Political Constitution and the development that the Municipal Code makes of said norm. This Court considers it is clear that despite the respondent municipality having previously been aware of the problems afflicting the residents of Barrio El Carmen in Puntarenas, they have still not adopted the sufficient measures required to definitively solve the problem. Regarding stormwater drainage, the report states that the municipal corporation has cleaned solid waste from the sewers, that it even bought a rod-unclogging machine, and that it is studying possible alternatives to solve said problem in the future with foreign donations, which reflects that the work done so far has not been sufficient, and the Stormwater Sewer System continues to present serious problems, which affects the interests and rights of the petitioner, since it is evident, as confirmed by the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, that the stormwater sewer system collapses during the rainy season, unable to retain all the water (folio 86). Regarding the obstruction of the sewer system, it is not clear to this Court whether the 'rod-unclogging machine' has even been used, since the municipal corporation verifies its purchase but not its use, and in the photos attached, only some men can be seen collecting solid waste from some storm drains and manholes, which does not guarantee that there are no obstructions along the Stormwater Sewer System. Nor can it be deduced from the case file whether the cleaning carried out by the Municipality was done in the stormwater or sanitary sewer system, nor that apart from this, coordination actions have been carried out with other State institutions responsible for addressing this type of problem, except for the efforts before the Ministry of Health, or the inspection carried out by the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, which indicates that the Sanitary Sewer network is perfectly fine and that it is the stormwater sewer network that is collapsed (See folio 86), and that despite the Municipality supposedly cleaning the sewers of solid waste, such actions do not appear to have yielded any positive results, since the overflow of stormwater continues, flooding the sidewalks and the premises located alongside them. Thus, even though the municipality has known about the water problem questioned here for months, it has still not been able to solve the problem.” **IV.-** From reading the transcribed precedent, it can be deduced that in the city of Puntarenas there is a problem with the stormwater sewer system, which generates flooding and water stagnation. In light of the foregoing, it is deemed appropriate to analyze the actions of each of the respondent institutions, in order to determine whether or not they have violated the provisions of constitutional numeral 50.

**V.- Regarding the actions of the Municipality of Puntarenas.** Although in her report, the Municipal Mayor of Puntarenas argues that in order to address the problem described by the petitioner, the respondent Corporation has carried out cleaning and repair work on the sewers and storm drains, in order to mitigate the effects of the aforementioned situation, it is evident from the report rendered by the Ministry of Health, that as of December fourth, two thousand nine—the date on which an inspection was carried out—said authority had not performed work on 9th, 11th, and 13th Streets in Puntarenas, since the storm drains were full of solid waste and some even had stagnant water. In that sense, it should be noted that although the Chamber verifies that the respondents have made various efforts to provide a definitive solution to the problem analyzed in this case file, the truth is that the situation not only persists but is aggravated by the lack of action on the part of the respondent Municipality, in failing to perform the cleaning tasks that would reduce the negative effects that may be generated for the population. Likewise, it should be noted that in previous judgments, this Court has made it clear that the respondent authorities are obliged to establish coordination channels and mutual commitments in order to solve the problem with the stormwater sewer system of the city of Puntarenas, hence the failure to comply with what was ordered leads to nothing other than aggravating the situation, to the clear detriment of the rights to health and to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the inhabitants of the place.

**VI.- Regarding the actions of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers.** In his report rendered under oath, the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers argues that addressing the problem afflicting the petitioner is the exclusive competence of the Municipality of Puntarenas, in accordance with the provisions of Title IV of the Municipal Code, since said authority is the body that collects the respective amounts for the maintenance and proper functioning of the stormwater network.

Regarding the above, it must be noted that while the respondent Chief is correct in pointing out the responsibility of the Municipality in addressing the cited problem, the fact is that the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is also obligated to provide attention to the mentioned issue, since, in accordance with the provisions of Article 2, subsections a), d), and g) of the Constitutive Law of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, Law 2726 of April fourteenth, nineteen sixty-one, it is incumbent upon said institution to:

• a)Direct and oversee everything concerning the provision to the inhabitants of the republic of a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste and of stormwater (aguas pluviales) in urban areas; (...)
• d)Advise other State bodies and coordinate public and private activities in all matters related to the establishment of aqueducts and sewer systems (alcantarillados) and the control of water resource contamination, its consultation being mandatory in all cases, and compliance with its recommendations being inexcusable; (...)
• g)Directly administer and operate the aqueduct and sewer systems nationwide, which shall be gradually assumed taking into account convenience and availability of resources. Systems that are currently administered and operated by municipal corporations may remain under their charge, as long as they provide an efficient service. (...) The institution is empowered to agree with local bodies on the administration of such services or to administer them through administrative boards of mixed integration between the Institute and the respective communities, whenever this is conducive to the better provision of services and in accordance with the respective regulations. For the same reasons and with the same characteristics, regional administrative boards involving several municipalities may also be created; VII.- As can be deduced from a reading of the cited regulations, the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados has a residual obligation in the management of sewer systems that are under the administration of municipalities, as it must intervene when said corporations do not effectively provide said service, in accordance with its obligation to guarantee the country's inhabitants a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste and of stormwater in urban areas, as indicated in subsection a) of Article 2 of Law 2726. By virtue of the foregoing, the argument of the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is not acceptable, as said authority cannot evade the duties legally conferred upon it, especially considering that we are faced with a situation that implies an injury to the provisions of Articles 21 and 50 of the Constitution. In that sense, although the Court verifies that the respondent Institute has provided recommendations to the respondent Municipality regarding the management of the stormwater sewer (alcantarillado pluvial) problem in the city of Puntarenas, the fact is that this is insufficient, because the institution must also intervene directly in the solution of said problematic, since its action cannot be limited to indirect intervention in addressing the facts mentioned by the petitioner. Therefore, the appeal must also be granted with respect to said authority, as is hereby done.

VIII.- Regarding the actions of the Ministerio de Salud. The Chamber considers that the Ministerio de Salud has not incurred in any omission that injures the fundamental rights of the petitioner, as it has been demonstrated that it has carried out actions within the scope of its competencies to provide a solution to the problematic described in the petition, hence the appeal must be dismissed with respect to this authority.

IX.- Thus, by reason of the foregoing, it is appropriate to grant the filed appeal with respect to the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados and the Municipality of Puntarenas, cautioning the respondents that Article 71 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional establishes imprisonment of three months to two years or a fine of twenty to sixty days, for those persons who fail to comply with what is ordered by this Chamber, hence the warning is given to the respondents that they must proceed to resolve the problematic analyzed in this matter, as otherwise pieces may be certified to the Public Prosecutor's Office for the crime of disobedience…(judgment 2010-004595)” III.- Regarding the specific case.- Now then, regarding the specific claim presented by the petitioner, i.e., the floods caused by high tides in the sector of Barrio El Carmen, next to the "Tourist Pier" in Puntarenas, because the estuary overflows, there is also a clear and evident omission on the part of the municipal authorities, as will be set forth below. From the recital of proven facts, it has been duly demonstrated that the municipal authorities of Puntarenas are aware of the flood problems resulting from high tides suffered by the dwellings located in the site known as El Crematorio in the Barrio El Carmen of that city. Both the authorities of the Ministerio de Salud and those of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes exempt themselves from responsibility and shift the solution of the problem to other authorities. In this regard, this Chamber considers that it does not correspond to it to determine who the competent authority to act is, nor within what spheres this must be done, and therefore it does not assess the action that these institutions should have taken, or the responsibility of each of those entities, but in the face of the serious threat to fundamental rights that has been evidenced in this amparo, it considers it essential to act and to issue the orders to proceed immediately to seek solutions or to adopt decisions that should have been dictated previously but have been lagging over time. So, as in accordance with Article 169 of the Constitution, municipalities are called upon to administer the local interests and services in each canton, this Court shall only focus on analyzing the municipal action, as the governing body for seeking the solution or for seeking among the different public instances the necessary coordination to solve the problem. In that sense, it must not be forgotten that coordination among public dependencies is indisputably necessary, in order to guarantee the protection of the environment and, therefore, the public health of the population. On various occasions, constitutional jurisprudence has indicated that the protection of the environment is a task that corresponds to all equally, while there exists an obligation for the State –as a whole– to take the necessary measures to protect the environment, which necessarily implies the involvement of all entities, bodies, and institutions of the State as well as private parties that, for one reason or another, must intervene. The Chamber has referred to this principle of coordination of public dependencies, specifically in judgment number 5445-99, at fourteen hours thirty minutes on July fourteenth, nineteen ninety-nine, in which, for what is of interest, it stated:

"So that coordination is the ordering of relations between these various independent activities, which addresses this concurrence on a single object or entity, to make it useful to an overall public plan, without suppressing the reciprocal independence of the acting subjects. As there is no hierarchical relationship between decentralized institutions, nor between the State itself in relation to municipalities, it is not possible to impose certain conducts on them, hence the essential inter-institutional 'concert' arises, in the strict sense, insofar as the autonomous and independent centers of action agree upon that preventive and global scheme, in which each one fulfills a role in view of a mission entrusted to the others. Thus, the relations of municipalities with other public entities can only be carried out on a level of equality, resulting in agreed forms of coordination, excluding any imperative form to the detriment of their autonomy, which would permit subjecting corporate entities to a coordination scheme without or against their will; but which does admit the necessary subordination of these entities to the State and in the interest of the latter (through the 'administrative tutelage' of the State, and specifically, in the function of legality control that corresponds to it, with general oversight powers over the entire sector).” Based on the foregoing, there is no doubt that any omission of the duty of collaboration and coordination between public institutions could endanger the protection of the environment and public health. Without a doubt, in the specific case, because the reported problems involve complex, multifactorial situations involving various sectors of society and the State, the solution that can be achieved for each of the cases and its success will necessarily depend on the reciprocal coordination and collaboration that may occur among the different responsible institutions and, therefore, it is imperative that the respondent Municipality assume the required coordination among the respondents.

IV.- Following the same line of thought as in the preceding recital, the arguments expressed under oath by the respondent Mayor, with which it is attempted to justify the omissions that have been occurring in addressing the situation in that area of the country, are not considered valid. On the contrary, the Chamber is of the opinion that there has been negligence on the part of the Administration that is injuring fundamental rights of the petitioner and the neighbors of the place, which merits an immediate intervention of the state apparatus to correct it. In addition to the above, the Chamber considers that the respondent Municipality has tolerated and permitted the violation of the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the population of Barrio El Carmen in Puntarenas. In that sense, the respondent Municipality cannot evade its duty to oversee the local interests of its canton, and even though such municipal obligation is quite clear, the assertion made by the Mayor of the respondent Municipality to the effect that it is not true that attention has not been provided to the described problematic, because on June fourteenth of the current year, authorities of that municipality conducted an inspection visit at the site, draws the attention of this Court. By such statements, it is clear that this local government has not assumed with full responsibility the denounced situation, because it is clear that making a visit, in an issue such as the one before us, definitively does not mean that one is acting, or adopting measures to solve the problem. Furthermore, it is important to indicate to the municipal authorities that if they consider that many of the actions that must be adopted should be carried out by other institutions, this does not exempt them from responsibility, as doing so would allow them to disengage themselves from the problems. From the report rendered by its representative, the Chamber concludes that the municipal corporation has incurred in a clear omission and negligence on the part of the municipal authorities that has caused the environment, health, and safety of the inhabitants of the place to continue deteriorating, repeatedly. In view of all that has been stated, it must be ordered that the Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas adopt measures within the scope of its competencies, so that, in a coordinated manner with other State institutions, and within a maximum period of six months counted from the notification of this judgment, a solution to the problems denounced by the petitioner may be achieved.” Nº 2010015777 CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at nine hours and four minutes on the twenty-fourth of September of two thousand ten.

Appeal for amparo filed by Geovanny Salas Campos, of legal age, bearer of identity card 6-172-331, against the Ministry of Public Works and Transport.

**Resultando:** **1.**- By document received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at sixteen hours thirty-five minutes on the twenty-eighth of February of two thousand ten, the appellant files an appeal for amparo against the Ministry of Public Works and Transport and states that currently there is a problem in that every time there are high tides in the sector of Barrio El Carmen alongside the "Muelle Turístico" in Puntarenas, the estuary overflows, causing flooding in the houses adjacent to the place and loss of their belongings. He adds that the respondent authorities do not seek a solution such as building a stone retaining wall with cement like the one on Playa de Puntarenas, which would prevent the water from spreading into the houses.

**2.**- María Luisa Avila Agüero, Minister of Health, reports under oath (folio 9), that in response to the appeal, an inspection was carried out at the site, as recorded in inspection report number 039-F-2010 at nine hours and thirty minutes on the seventh day of April of two thousand ten, that at the time of the visit, drainage pipes from the sewer directed toward the estuary were observed. That during the visit it was determined that there is no complaint filed by the appellant in that Region related to this situation, consequently they had no knowledge of the problem. However, given that this problem must be addressed jointly by the Ministry of Health, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, and the Local Government, a communication was already sent to the Cantonal Head of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers and to the Municipal Mayor, granting them a period of 8 days to report on the actions they take aimed at definitively solving the aforementioned problem, for which reason she requests that this Tribunal exempt the Ministry of Health from all responsibility. She requests that the appeal filed be dismissed.

**3.-** Francisco Jiménez Reyes, in his capacity as Minister of Public Works and Transport, reports (folio 27), that in accordance with the provisions of Law 4071, which dates from the month of January 1968, the city of Puntarenas was declared an urban zone, including the area that specifically generates the problem described above, and it was left under the exclusive competence and responsibility of the Municipality of Puntarenas. For this reason, that Ministry is prevented from carrying out initiatives, actions, or works in the area of Puntarenas and within it, in the area where the floods occur. He indicates that this is a problem regarding which that Ministry has no direct relationship, nor obligation or responsibility. Which must be addressed and defined by the Municipality of Puntarenas. He requests that the appeal be dismissed with respect to that Ministry.

**4.-** Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, reports under oath (folio 30 and 36), that according to the information provided by Eng. Oscar Brenes Quirós, Director of the Unidad Técnica de Gestión Vial of the Municipality of Puntarenas, through communication UTGV-0415-2010 dated June 30, 2010, there is a problem at the site that is due to a series of factors that are beyond the reach of the Municipality of Puntarenas, given the effect produced by the melting of the polar ice caps as a result of global warming, which generates an increase in the water level of the oceans, and this condition results in at least twice a year, when maximum tides occur, the homes located at the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city suffering flooding problems. In addition to the above, he indicates that the stormwater and sanitary drainage system of the city of Puntarenas discharges into the sector of the Estero de Puntarenas, which is why when the tide is high and it rains, an obstruction effect of the water discharge is generated, in turn causing floods in the mentioned area; a situation that reverses at the moment the tide begins to go out, as it allows the water to exit toward the indicated sites. That it is not true that this municipality does not provide attention to the problem because on June 14 of the current year, before this amparo was notified, an inspection was made of the problem site jointly with the Department of Stormwater Works of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport, and as part of the solution, the authorities of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport will work on a gabion wall, faced with concrete, to stop the flow of the tide toward the homes located in El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of Puntarenas. He requests that the appeal filed be dismissed.

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

Redacted by Magistrate Salazar Cambronero; and, **Considerando:** **I.- Proven facts.** Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly proven: **a)** through communication UTGV-0415-2010 dated June 30, 2010, signed by Eng. Oscar Brenes Quirós, Director of the Unidad Técnica de Gestión Vial of the Municipality of Puntarenas, there is a problem at the site that is due to a series of factors that are beyond the reach of the Municipality of Puntarenas, given the effect produced by the melting of the polar ice caps as a result of global warming, which generates an increase in the water level of the oceans, and this condition results in at least twice a year, when maximum tides occur, the homes located at the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city suffering flooding problems, (report at folio 36 and folio 40); **b)** on June 14 of the current year, an inspection was made of the problem site jointly with the Department of Stormwater Works of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport, and as part of the solution, the authorities of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport will work on a gabion wall, faced with concrete, to stop the flow of the tide toward the homes located in El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of Puntarenas, (report at folio 37).

**II.- On the merits.** Given the relevance it has for the analysis of the specific case, it is necessary to note that the problems generated by the sewer system of the city of Puntarenas have already been analyzed by this Tribunal in decisions numbers 2008-010662, at sixteen hours and forty-eight minutes on the twenty-sixth of June of two thousand eight, 2008-013311 at thirteen hours and fourteen minutes on the twenty-ninth of August of two thousand eight, 2008-13638 at eleven hours and thirty-eight minutes on the fifth of September of two thousand eight, 2009-13161 at ten hours and forty-seven minutes on the twenty-first of August of two thousand nine, 2009-16065 at twelve hours and fifty-three minutes on the sixteenth of October of two thousand nine, and 2010-004595, at ten hours and eleven minutes on the fifth of March of two thousand ten. On the subject in question, in this last pronouncement, it was stated, as relevant:

**“V.- On the merits:** In the report rendered by the Mayor and by the President of the Municipal Council of the Municipality of Puntarenas, the respondents confirm the existence of the problem denounced by the appellant, and it is that effectively there is an overflow of stormwater that is not contained by the public sewer system. However, by way of discharge, they cite that regarding the obstruction of the sewer, the local government has made several efforts to resolve the reported problem, for which reason it proceeded to clean it and even acquired a rod-cleaning machine to clean and unclog any obstruction that might exist in them. Regarding the evacuation of stormwater, it is said that that local government is studying possible alternatives to solve said problem. Based on the foregoing, in the opinion of this Chamber, the steps carried out by the Municipality of Puntarenas, although they have occurred, have not been sufficient to solve the problems that afflict the residents of Barrio El Carmen, since the stormwater problem continues occurring and continues invading the sidewalks and premises that are located at the edge of said sewer. In this context, this municipal corporation has failed in its function of protecting the local interests that have been entrusted to it, since it is not verified in the file that they have used all the powers that the legal system confers upon them to broadly ensure the preservation of local interests and services, in accordance with the provisions of Article 169 of the Political Constitution and the development that the Municipal Code makes of said norm. This Tribunal considers that it is clear that despite the respondent municipality having known previously of the problems that afflict the residents of Barrio El Carmen of Puntarenas, they have not yet adopted the sufficient measures required to definitively solve the problem. Regarding the discharge of stormwater, the report says that this local government has cleaned solid waste from the sewers, that it even bought a rod-cleaning machine, and that it is studying possible alternatives to solve said problem in the future with foreign donations, which reflects that the work carried out so far has not been sufficient, and the Stormwater Sewer System continues to present serious problems, which affects the interests and rights of the appellant, since it is evident, as confirmed by the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, that the stormwater sewer collapses in the rainy season, being unable to retain all the water (folio 86). Regarding the obstruction of the sewer, this Tribunal is not clear if the “rod-cleaning machine” has even been used, since it verifies the local government's purchase but not its use, and in the photos it attaches, only some men are seen collecting solid waste from some storm drains and manholes, which does not guarantee that there are no obstructions along the Stormwater Sewer System. It is also not extracted from the file whether the cleaning that was carried out by the Municipality was carried out on the stormwater or sanitary sewer, nor that apart from this, coordination actions have been carried out with the other State institutions responsible for addressing this type of problem, except for the steps taken with the Ministry of Health, or the inspection carried out by the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, which indicates that the Sanitary Sewer network is perfectly fine and that it is the stormwater sewer network that is collapsed (See folio 86), and that despite the fact that the Municipality supposedly cleaned the sewers of solid waste, such actions do not seem to have produced any positive result, since the overflow of stormwater continues to occur, flooding the sidewalks and the premises located next to them. Thus, despite the municipality knowing about the water problem questioned here for months ago, it has still not been able to solve the problem.” **IV.-** From the reading of the transcribed precedent, it is deduced that in the city of Puntarenas there is a problem with the stormwater sewer, which generates floods and water stagnation. In view of the foregoing, it is deemed appropriate to analyze the actions of each of the respondent institutions, in order to determine whether they have incurred or not in violations of the provisions of Article 50 of the Constitution.

**V.- On the action of the Municipality of Puntarenas.** Although in her report, the Municipal Mayor of Puntarenas argues that in order to address the problem described by the appellant, the respondent Corporation has carried out cleaning and repair work on the sewers and storm drains, in order to mitigate the effects of the mentioned situation, from the report rendered by the Ministry of Health, it is evident that as of December fourth, two thousand nine—date on which an inspection was carried out—said authority had not carried out work on streets 9, 11, and 13 of Puntarenas, since the storm drains were full of solid waste and some even with stagnant water. In that sense, it is worth noting that although the Chamber verifies that the respondents have carried out various steps in order to provide a definitive solution to the problem analyzed in this file, the truth is that the situation not only persists but is aggravated by the lack of action by the respondent Municipality, by not carrying out the cleaning work that would allow reducing the negative effects that may be generated for the population. Likewise, it must be noted that in previous rulings, this Tribunal has made it clear that the respondent authorities are obliged to establish channels of coordination and mutual commitments in order to solve the problem with the stormwater sewer of the city of Puntarenas, hence the failure to comply with what was ordered leads to nothing other than aggravating the situation, in clear detriment of the rights to health and to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the inhabitants of the place.

**VI.- On the action of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers.** In his report rendered under oath, the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers argues that addressing the problem that afflicts the appellant is the exclusive competence of the Municipality of Puntarenas, in accordance with the provisions of Title IV of the Municipal Code, since said authority is the body that collects the respective amounts for maintenance and proper functioning of the stormwater network. With respect to the foregoing, it must be noted that although the respondent Head is correct in pointing out the responsibility of the Municipality in addressing the cited problem, the truth is that the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers is also obliged to address the mentioned problem, since, in accordance with the provisions of Article 2, subsections a), d), and g) of the Constitutive Law of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, Law 2726 of the fourteenth of April of nineteen sixty-one, it is the responsibility of said institution:

• a)To direct and supervise everything concerning providing the inhabitants of the republic with a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste and stormwater in urban areas; (...)
• d)To advise the other State bodies and coordinate public and private activities in all matters related to the establishment of aqueducts and sewers and the control of contamination of water resources, its consultation being mandatory in all cases, and compliance with its recommendations inexcusable; (...)
• g)To directly administer and operate the aqueduct and sewer systems throughout the country, which shall be assumed gradually taking into account convenience and availability of resources. The systems that are currently administered and operated by municipal corporations may continue to be in charge of the latter, as long as they provide efficient service. (…) The institution is empowered to agree with local bodies on the administration of such services or to administer them through administrative boards of mixed integration between the Institute and the respective communities, whenever this is appropriate for the better provision of services and in accordance with the respective regulations. For the same reasons and with the same characteristics, regional administrative boards that involve several municipalities may also be created; **VII.-** As deduced from the reading of the cited norms, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers has a residual obligation in the management of sewer systems that are under the administration of municipalities, since it must intervene when said corporations do not effectively provide said service, in accordance with its obligation to guarantee the inhabitants of the country a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste and stormwater in urban areas, as indicated by subsection a) of Article 2 of Law 2726.

In view of the foregoing, the argument of the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is not acceptable, since that authority cannot shirk the duties legally conferred upon it, especially considering that this is a situation that entails an injury to the provisions of constitutional articles 21 and 50. In this regard, although the Tribunal notes that the respondent Institute has provided recommendations to the respondent Municipalidad regarding the management of the storm sewer problem in the city of Puntarenas, the truth is that this is insufficient, since the institution must also intervene directly in solving said problem, as its action cannot be limited to indirect intervention in addressing the facts mentioned by the petitioner. Therefore, the recourse must also be granted with respect to said authority, as is hereby done.

VIII.- On the action of the Ministerio de Salud. La Sala considers that the Ministerio de Salud has not incurred in any omission that injures the fundamental rights of the petitioner, since it has been demonstrated that it has carried out actions within the scope of its powers to provide a solution to the problem described in the petition, hence the recourse must be dismissed with respect to this authority.

IX.- Thus, based on the foregoing, it is appropriate to grant the recourse filed with respect to the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados and the Municipalidad of Puntarenas, reminding the respondents that article 71 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional establishes imprisonment of three months to two years or a fine of twenty to sixty days, for those who fail to comply with what is ordered by this Sala, therefore the respondents are warned that they must proceed to resolve the problem analyzed in this matter, otherwise pieces may be certified to the Ministerio Público for the crime of disobedience…(sentencia 2010-004595)” III.- On the specific case.- With respect to the specific claim presented by the petitioner, namely the flooding caused by high tides in the area of Barrio El Carmen adjacent to the "Muelle Turístico" in Puntarenas, since the estuary overflows, a clear and evident omission by the municipal authorities is also found, as will be set forth below. From the statement of proven facts, it has been duly demonstrated that the existence of flooding problems resulting from high tides, affecting the dwellings located at the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city, is known to the municipal authorities of Puntarenas. Both the authorities of the Ministerio de Salud and those of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes exempt themselves from liability and transfer the solution of the problem to other authorities. In this regard, this Sala considers that it is not its place to determine which is the competent authority to act, or within what spheres action should be taken, and therefore it does not assess the action these institutions should have taken, or the responsibility of each of those entities, but given the serious threat to fundamental rights that has been evidenced in this amparo, it considers it essential that action be taken and orders issued so that an immediate proceeding is undertaken to seek the solutions or adopt the decisions that should have been made before but have been delayed over time. Therefore, as in accordance with constitutional article 169, municipalities are those called to administer local interests and services in each canton, this Tribunal will only focus on analyzing municipal action, as the governing body for seeking a solution or seeking among the various public instances the necessary coordination to solve the problem. In that sense, it cannot be forgotten that coordination between public agencies is indisputably necessary, in order to guarantee the protection of the environment and, therefore, the public health of the population. On various occasions, constitutional jurisprudence has indicated that environmental protection is a task that belongs to everyone equally, while there exists an obligation for the State –as a whole– to take the necessary measures to protect the environment, which necessarily implies the involvement of all state entities, organs, and institutions as well as individuals who, for one reason or another, must intervene. La Sala has referred to that principle of coordination of public agencies, specifically in judgment number 5445-99, of fourteen hours thirty minutes of July fourteenth, nineteen hundred ninety-nine, in which it stated, for pertinent purposes:

"Thus, coordination is the arrangement of the relations among these various independent activities, which addresses that concurrence in a single object or entity, to make it useful to a global public plan, without suppressing the reciprocal independence of the acting subjects. Since there is no hierarchical relationship of decentralized institutions, nor of the State itself in relation to municipalities, the imposition of certain behaviors on them is not possible, from which arises the essential inter-institutional ‘agreement’ (concierto), in the strict sense, as the autonomous and independent centers of action agree on that preventive and global scheme, in which each fulfills a role in view of a mission entrusted to the others. Thus, the relations of municipalities with other public entities can only be carried out on a plane of equality, resulting in agreed forms of coordination, excluding any imperative form to the detriment of their autonomy, which would allow subjecting corporate entities to a coordination scheme without their will or against it; but which does admit the necessary subordination of these entities to the State and in the interest of the latter (through the ‘administrative tutelage’ (tutela administrativa) of the State, and specifically, in the function of legality control that corresponds to it, with powers of general oversight over the entire sector).” Based on the above, there is no doubt that any omission in the duty of collaboration and coordination among public institutions could endanger the protection of the environment and public health. Without a doubt, in the specific case, since the denounced problems are complex, multifactorial situations involving various sectors of society and the State, the solution that can be provided for each case and its success will necessarily depend on the reciprocal coordination and collaboration that can occur among the different responsible institutions and, therefore, it is imperative that the respondent Municipalidad assumes the required coordination among the respondents.

IV.- Following the same line of thought as the preceding recital (Considerando), the arguments stated under oath by the respondent Mayor attempting to justify the omissions that have been occurring in addressing the situation in that area of the country are not considered valid. On the contrary, la Sala is of the opinion that there has been negligence on the part of the Administration that is injuring fundamental rights of the petitioner and the residents of the area, requiring immediate state intervention to correct it. In addition to the above, la Sala considers that the respondent Municipalidad has tolerated and allowed the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the population of Barrio El Carmen in Puntarenas to be injured. In that sense, the respondent Municipalidad cannot evade its duty to watch over the local interests of its canton and, despite the fact that this municipal obligation is quite clear, the assertion made by the Mayor of the respondent Municipalidad to the effect that it is not true that attention has not been provided to the problem described, given that on June fourteenth of the current year, authorities of that municipality conducted an inspection visit to the site, calls this Tribunal's attention. With such statements, it is clear that this local government has not assumed full responsibility for the denounced situation, because clearly a single visit, in a matter such as the one definitively at hand, does not mean that action is being taken or measures adopted to solve the problem. Furthermore, it is important to indicate to the municipal authorities that if they consider that many of the actions that must be adopted are to be carried out by other institutions, this does not exempt them from liability, as doing so would be allowing them to disengage from the problems. From the report rendered by its representative, la Sala concludes that the municipal corporation has incurred in a clear omission and negligence by the municipal authorities that has caused the environment, health, and safety of the inhabitants of the area to continue deteriorating, repeatedly. In consideration of all that has been said, it must be ordered that the Municipal Mayor of the Cantón Central de Puntarenas adopt measures within the scope of his powers, so that, in coordination with other State institutions, and within a maximum period of six months counted from the notification of this judgment, a solution to the problems denounced by the petitioner may be achieved.

Por tanto:

This recourse is granted. Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Cantón Central de Puntarenas, or whomever exercises the office in his stead, is ordered to immediately carry out the necessary coordination with the pertinent authorities, to adopt the necessary measures within the scope of his powers, so that, within a maximum period of six months counted from the notification of this judgment, a solution to the problems denounced by the petitioner at the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city may be achieved. Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Cantón Central de Puntarenas, or whomever exercises the office in his stead, is warned that failure to comply with said order will result in incurring the crime of disobedience and that, in accordance with article 71 of the Ley of this jurisdiction, imprisonment of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, will be imposed on anyone who receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in an amparo recourse, and does not comply with or enforce it, provided that the crime is not more severely punished. The Municipalidad of Puntarenas is ordered to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts serving as the basis for this declaration, which shall be liquidated in enforcement of judgment in contencioso administrativo proceedings. Let this resolution be notified personally to Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Cantón Central de Puntarenas, or whomever exercises the office in his stead.

Gilbert Armijo S.

Acting President (Presidente a.i.)

Ernesto Jinesta L. Fernando Cruz C.

Fernando Castillo V. Roxana Salazar C.

Víctor Ardón A. José Paulino Hernández arg/800

Res. Nº 2010015777 SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, a las nueve horas y cuatro minutos del veinticuatro de setiembre del dos mil diez.

Recurso de amparo interpuesto por Geovanny Salas Campos, mayor, portador de la cédula de identidad 6-172-331, contra el Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes.

Resultando:

1.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de la Sala a las dieciséis horas treinta y cinco minutos del veintiocho de febrero de dos mil diez, el recurrente interpone recurso de amparo contra el Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes y manifiesta que actualmente existe la problemática de que cada vez que hay mareas altas en el sector de Barrio El Carmen a un costado del "Muelle Turístico" en Puntarenas, el estero se sale, lo que provoca inundaciones en las casas aledañas al lugar y pérdidas de sus pertenencias. Añade que las autoridades recurridas no buscan una solución como construir un muro de contención de piedra con cemento como el que está en Playa de Puntarenas, lo cual evitaría que el agua se despliegue a las casas.

2.- Informa bajo juramento María Luisa Avila Agüero, Ministra de Salud (folio 9), que atención del recurso, se procedió a realizar inspección en el lugar, así consta en el acta de inspección número 039-F-2010 de las nueve horas con treinta minutos del día siete de abril del dos mil diez, que al momento de la visita se observan tuberías de desfogue de la alcantarilla dirigidas hacia el estero. Que durante la visita se determinó que no existe denuncia alguna presentada por el recurrente en esa Región, relacionada con esa situación, consecuentemente no tenían conocimiento del problema. No obstante, en razón de que ese problema debe ser atendido en forma conjunta por el Ministerio de Salud, el Instituto de Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados y el Gobierno Local, ya se les remitió un oficio al Jefe Cantonal de Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados y a la Alcadesa Municipal, concediéndoles un plazo de 8 días para que informen sobre las acciones que tomen, orientadas a solucionar el problema de marras en forma definitiva, motivo por el cual solicita a ese Tribunal eximir de toda responsabilidad al Ministerio de Salud. Solicita que se desestime el recurso planteado.

3.- Informa Francisco Jiménez Reyes, en su condición Ministro de Obras Públicas y Transportes, (folio 27), que conforme a las disposiciones de la Ley 4071, la cual data del mes de enero de 1968, se declaró como zona urbana la ciudad de Puntarenas, en cuenta la zona de particular generación de la problemática antes comentada y se dejó esa bajo exclusiva competencia y responsabilidad del Municipio de Puntarenas. Razón por la cual, ese Ministerio se ve impedido para llevar adelante iniciativas, acciones u obra en la zona de Puntarenas y dentro de ella, en la zona en que se dan inundaciones. Indica que se trata de una problemática en torno a la cual ese Ministerio no presenta relación directa, ni obligación o responsabilidad. La cual debe ser atendida y definida por la Municipalidad de Puntarenas. Solicita se desestime el recurso, en cuanto a ese Ministerio.

4.- Informa bajo juramento Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, en su condición de Alcalde Municipal del Cantón Central de Puntarenas, (folio 30 y 36), que según lo informado por el Ing. Oscar Brenes Quirós, Director de la Unidad Técnica de Gestión Vial de la Municipalidad de Puntarenas, mediante oficio UTGV-0415-2010 de fecha 30 de junio del 2010, existe una problemática en el sitio que obedece a una serie de factores que se encuentran fuera del alcance de la Municipalidad de Puntarenas, dado que incide el efecto producido por el deshielo de los polos como efecto del calentamiento global, el cual genera un aumento en el nivel de las aguas de los océanos y esa condición da como resultado que al menos dos veces al año cuando se presentan mareas máximas, las viviendas localizadas en el sitio conocido como El Crematorio en el Barrio El Carmen de esa ciudad, sufran problemas de inundación. Aunado a lo anterior, indica que el sistema de evacuación pluvial y sanitario de la ciudad de Puntarenas, tienen su descarga en el sector del Estero de Puntarenas, razón por la cual cuando la marea está alta y llueve, se genera un efecto de obstrucción de la descarga de aguas, provocando a su vez inundaciones en la zona mencionada; situación que se revierte al momento en que la marea empieza a bajar, ya que permite la salida de las aguas hacia los sitios indicados. Que no es cierto que esa municipalidad no brinde atención a la problemática porque el 14 de junio del año en curso, antes de que se le notificara este amparo, se hizo una inspección al sitio del problema en conjunto con el Departamento de Obras Pluviales del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes y como parte de la solución las autoridades del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes trabajarán en un muro de gaviones, revestido con concreto que permita detener el flujo de la marea hacia las viviendas ubicadas en el Crematorio del barrio El Carmen de Puntarenas. Solicita se desestime el recurso planteado.

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

Redacta la Magistrada Salazar Cambronero; y,

Considerando:

I.- Hechos probados. De importancia para la decisión de este asunto, se estiman como debidamente demostrados los siguientes hechos: a) mediante oficio UTGV-0415-2010 de fecha 30 de junio del 2010, suscrito por el Ing. Oscar Brenes Quirós, Director de la Unidad Técnica de Gestión Vial de la Municipalidad de Puntarenas, existe una problemática en el sitio que obedece a una serie de factores que se encuentran fuera del alcance de la Municipalidad de Puntarenas, dado que incide el efecto producido por el deshielo de los polos como efecto del calentamiento global, el cual genera un aumento en el nivel de las aguas de los océanos y esa condición da como resultado que al menos dos veces al año cuando se presentan mareas máximas, las viviendas localizadas en el sitio conocido como El Crematorio en el Barrio El Carmen de esa ciudad, sufran problemas de inundación, (informe a folio 36 y folio 40); b) el 14 de junio del año en curso, se hizo una inspección al sitio del problema en conjunto con el Departamento de Obras Pluviales del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes y como parte de la solución las autoridades del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes trabajarán en un muro de gaviones, revestido con concreto que permita detener el flujo de la marea hacia las viviendas ubicadas en el Crematorio del barrio El Carmen de Puntarenas, (informe a folio 37).

II.- Sobre el fondo. Dada la relevancia que tiene para el análisis del caso concreto, es preciso acotar que los problemas generados por el alcantarillado de la ciudad de Puntarenas ya han sido analizados por este Tribunal en las sentencias números 2008-010662, de las dieciséis horas y cuarenta y ocho minutos del veintiséis de junio del dos mil ocho, 2008-013311 de las trece horas y catorce minutos del veintinueve de agosto del dos mil ocho, 2008-13638 de las once horas con treinta y ocho minutos del cinco de septiembre de dos mil ocho, 2009-13161 de las diez horas con cuarenta y siete minutos del veintiuno de agosto de dos mil nueve, 2009-16065 del doce horas y cincuenta y tres minutos del dieciséis de octubre del dos mil nueve y 2010-004595, de las diez horas y once minutos del cinco de marzo del dos mil diez. Sobre el tema en cuestión, en este último pronunciamiento, se indicó en lo que interesa:

“V.- Sobre el fondo: En el informe rendido por la Alcaldesa y por la Presidenta del Consejo Municipal de la Municipalidad de Puntarenas, los recurridos confirman la existencia del problema denunciado por el recurrente, y es que efectivamente existe un desbordamiento de las aguas pluviales que no son contenidas por el alcantarillado público. Sin embargo, a manera de descargo, citan que en cuanto a la obstrucción del alcantarillado, el ayuntamiento ha realizado varios esfuerzos para resolver el problema denunciado, por lo que se procedió a su limpieza y hasta se adquirió una máquina destaqueadora de varilla para limpiar y destapar cualquier obstrucción que existiera en los mismos. Con relación a la evacuación de aguas pluviales, se dice que ese ayuntamiento estudia posibles alternativas para solucionar dicho problema. Con base en lo expuesto, en opinión de esta Sala, las diligencias llevadas a cabo por parte de la Municipalidad de Puntarenas, si bien se han dado, no han sido suficientes para solucionar los problemas que aquejan a los vecinos del Barrio El Carmen, puesto que el problema de las aguas pluviales se sigue dando y sigue invadiendo las aceras y locales que se encuentran a la orilla de dicho alcantarillado. En esa tesitura esta corporación municipal ha faltado a la función de tutela de los intereses locales que le ha sido encomendados, pues no se constata en el expediente que hayan utilizado todos los poderes que el ordenamiento le confiere para velar en forma amplia por la preservación de los intereses y servicios locales, de conformidad con lo dispuesto en el artículo 169 de la Constitución Política y el desarrollo que de dicha norma hace el Código Municipal. Considera este Tribunal, que es claro que pese a que la municipalidad accionada conoce con anterioridad de los problemas que aquejan a los vecinos de Barrio El Carmen de Puntarenas, aún no han adoptado las medidas suficientes requeridas para solucionar en definitiva el problema. En cuanto al desfogue de las aguas pluviales, en el informe se dice que ese ayuntamiento ha limpiado de desechos sólidos las alcantarillas, que inclusive compró una máquina destaqueadora de varilla, y que estudia posibles alternativas para solucionar dicho problema a futuro con donaciones extranjeras, lo que refleja que el trabajo hasta ahora realizado no ha sido suficiente, y el Sistema de Alcantarillado Pluvial sigue presentando serios problemas, lo cual afecta los intereses y derechos del recurrente, ya que es evidente, tal y como lo confirmó el Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados que el alcantarillado pluvial colapsa en época de lluvias, no pudiendo retener la totalidad de las aguas (folio 86). En cuanto a la obstrucción del alcantarillado, no tiene este Tribunal claro si la “máquina destaqueadora de varilla” si quiera se ha usado, ya que verifica el ayuntamiento su compra pero no su uso, y en las fotos que adjunta sólo se aprecian unos hombres recogiendo desechos sólidos de algunos tragantes y cajas de registro, lo que no garantiza que a lo largo del Sistema de Alcantarillado pluvial no existan obstrucciones. Tampoco se extrae del llevó a cabo en el alcantarillado pluvial o sanitario, ni que a parte de esto se hayan llevado a cabo acciones de coordinación con las otras instituciones del Estado encargadas de atender este tipo de problemas, salvo las gestiones ante el Ministerio de Salud, o la inspección realizada por el Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, que indica que la red de Alcantarillado Sanitario está perfectamente y que es la red de alcantarillado pluvial la que está colapsada (Ver folio 86), y que pese a que supuestamente la Municipalidad limpió las alcantarillas de desechos sólidos, tales acciones no parece que hayan surtido ningún resultado positivo, ya que el desbordamiento de aguas pluviales se sigue dando inundando las aceras y los locales que se encuentran junto a las mismas. Así las cosas, pese a que el municipio conoce del problema de aguas que aquí se cuestiona desde meses atrás, aún no ha podido solventar el problema”.

IV.- De la lectura del precedente transcrito, se deduce que en la ciudad de Puntarenas existe un problema en el alcantarillado pluvial, el cual genera inundaciones y estancamiento de agua. En atención a lo anterior, se estima procedente analizar las actuaciones de cada una de las instituciones recurridas, con el fin de determinar si han incurrido o no en lesiones a lo dispuesto por el numeral 50 constitucional.

V.-Sobre la actuación de al Municipalidad de Puntarenas. Si bien en su informe, la Alcaldesa Municipal de Puntarenas aduce que con el fin de atender la problemática descrita por el recurrente, la Corporación accionada ha efectuado labores de limpieza y reparación de las alcantarillas y tragantes, con el fin de mitigar los efectos de la situación mencionada, a partir del informe rendido por el Ministerio de Salud, se desprende que al cuatro de diciembre de dos mil nueve, -fecha en que se llevó a cabo una inspección-, dicha autoridad no había efectuado trabajos en las calles 9, 11 y 13 de Puntarenas, ya que los tragantes se encontraban llenos de desechos sólidos y algunos incluso con agua estancada. En ese sentido, conviene indicar que si bien la Sala constata que los recurridos han efectuado diversas gestiones a efectos de brindar una solución definitiva al problema analizado en este expediente, lo cierto es que la situación no sólo se mantiene, sino que se agrava por la falta de acción de la Municipalidad accionada, al no realizar las labores de limpieza que permitan reducir los efectos negativos que puedan generarse para la población. Asimismo, debe indicarse que ya en anteriores sentencias, este Tribunal ha dejado claro que las autoridades accionadas se encuentran obligadas a establecer canales de coordinación y compromisos mutuos con el fin de solucionar la problemática con el alcantarillado pluvial de la ciudad de Puntarenas, de ahí que la falta de cumplimiento de lo ordenado no lleve a otra cosa más que agravar la situación, en claro perjuicio de los derechos a la salud y a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado de los habitantes del lugar.

VI.-Sobre la actuación del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados. En su informe rendido bajo juramento, el Jefe de la Región Pacífico Central del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados aduce que la atención del problema que aqueja al recurrente es competencia exclusiva de la Municipalidad de Puntarenas, en atención a lo señalado por el Título IV del Código Municipal, pues dicha autoridad es el órgano que recauda los montos respectivos para mantenimiento y buen funcionamiento de la red pluvial. Con respecto a lo anterior, debe indicarse que si bien el Jefe recurrido lleva razón al señalar la responsabilidad de la Municipalidad en la atención del problema citado, lo cierto es que el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados también se encuentra obligado a brindar atención a la problemática mencionada, pues, de conformidad con lo dispuesto por el artículo 2 incisos a) d) y g) de la Ley Constitutiva del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, ley 2726 del catorce de abril de mil novecientos sesenta y uno, corresponde a dicha institución:

• a)Dirigir y vigilar todo lo concerniente para proveer a los habitantes de la república de un servicio de agua potable, recolección y evacuación de aguas negras y residuos industriales líquidos y de aguas pluviales en las áreas urbanas; (…)
• d)Asesorar a los demás organismos del Estado y coordinar las actividades públicas y privadas en todos los asuntos relativos al establecimiento de acueductos y alcantarillados y control de la contaminación de los recursos de agua, siendo obligatoria, en todo caso, su consulta, e inexcusable el cumplimiento de sus recomendaciones; (…)
• g)Administrar y operar directamente los sistemas de acueductos y alcantarillados en todo el país, los cuales se irán asumiendo tomando en cuenta la conveniencia y disponibilidad de recursos. Los sistemas que actualmente están administrados y operados por las corporaciones municipales podrán seguir a cargo de éstas, mientras suministren un servicio eficiente. (…) Queda facultada la institución para convenir con organismos locales, la administración de tales servicios o administrarlos a través de juntas administradoras de integración mixta entre el Instituto y las respectivas comunidades, siempre que así conviniere para la mejor prestación de los servicios y de acuerdo con los reglamentos respectivos. Por las mismas razones y con las mismas características, también podrán crearse juntas administradoras regionales que involucren a varias municipalidades; VII.- Tal y como se deduce de la lectura de las normas de cita, el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados tiene una obligación residual en el manejo de los sistemas de alcantarillado que se encuentren bajo la administración de las municipalidades, pues éste debe intervenir cuando dichas corporaciones no presten en forma efectiva dicho servicio, en atención a su obligación de garantizar a los habitantes del país un servicio de agua potable, recolección y evacuación de aguas negras y residuos industriales líquidos y de aguas pluviales en las áreas urbanas, tal y como señala el inciso a) del artículo 2 de la Ley 2726. En virtud de lo expuesto, no resulta de recibo el argumento del Jefe de la Región Pacífico Central del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, pues dicha autoridad no puede rehuir los deberes que le han sido otorgados legalmente, sobre todo si se toma en cuenta que se está ante la presencia de una situación que implica una lesión a lo dispuesto por los artículos 21 y 50 constitucionales. En ese sentido, si bien el Tribunal constata que el Instituto accionado ha brindado recomendaciones a la Municipalidad recurrida con respecto al manejo del problema del alcantarillado pluvial de la ciudad de Puntarenas, lo cierto es que ello resulta insuficiente, pues la institución también debe intervenir directamente en la solución de dicha problemática, ya que su actuación no puede limitarse a una intervención indirecta en la atención de los hechos mencionados por el recurrente. Por lo anterior, el recurso debe ser acogido también en cuanto a dicha autoridad, como en efecto se hace.

VIII.-Sobre la actuación del Ministerio de Salud. La Sala considera que el Ministerio de Salud no ha incurrido en omisión alguna que lesione los derechos fundamentales del recurrente, pues se tiene por demostrado que ha efectuado las acciones dentro del ámbito de sus competencias para brindar solución a la problemática descrita en el libelo de interposición, de ahí que el recuso debe ser desestimado en cuanto a esta autoridad.

IX.-Así, en razón de lo expuesto anteriormente, lo procedente es acoger el recurso interpuesto en cuanto al Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados y la Municipalidad de Puntarenas, haciendo ver a los recurridos que el artículo 71 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional establece prisión de tres meses a dos años o de veinte a sesenta días multa, para aquellas personas que incumplan con lo ordenado por esta Sala, de ahí que se les haga la advertencia a los accionados que deberán proceder a solventar la problemática analizada en el presente asunto, pues de lo contrario se podrá testimoniar piezas al Ministerio Público por el delito de desobediencia…(sentencia 2010-004595)” III.- Sobre el caso concreto.- Ahora bien en lo que corresponde al reclamo concreto que presenta el recurrente, sean las inundaciones provocadas por las mareas altas en el sector de Barrio El Carmen a un costado del "Muelle Turístico" en Puntarenas, pues el estero se sale, se encuentra también una clara y evidente omisión por parte de las autoridades municipales por lo que de seguido se que es del conocimiento de las autoridades municipales de Puntarenas los problemas de inundación producto de las mareas altas, que sufren las viviendas localizadas en el sitio conocido como El Crematorio en el Barrio El Carmen de esa ciudad. Tanto las autoridades del Ministerio de Salud, como las del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes se eximen de responsabilidad y trasladan la solución del problema a otras autoridades. Al respecto, esta Sala considera que no le corresponde determinar quien es la autoridad competente para actuar, ni dentro de qué ámbitos debe hacerse, y por ello no entra a valorar la actuación que debieran tener estas instituciones, o la responsabilidad de cada una de esas entidades, pero frente a la grave amenaza de derechos fundamentales que se ha puesto en evidencia en este amparo, considera indispensable que se actúe y se dicten las órdenes para que se proceda de manera inmediata a buscar las soluciones o a adoptar las decisiones que otrora debieron haberse dictado pero que se han ido rezagando en el tiempo. Entonces, como de conformidad con el artículo 169 constitucional, las municipales son las llamadas a administrar de los intereses y servicios locales en cada cantón, este Tribunal solamente se enfocará a analizar la actuación municipal, como el ente rector de buscar la solucionar o de buscar entre las distintas instancias públicas la coordinación necesaria para solucionar el problema. En ese sentido, no puede olvidarse que es indiscutiblemente necesaria la coordinación entre las dependencias públicas, en aras de garantizar la protección del medio ambiente y por ende, la salud pública de la población. En diversas oportunidades, la jurisprudencia constitucional ha indicado que la protección del ambiente es una tarea que corresponde a todos por igual, a la vez que existe una obligación para el Estado –como un todo- de tomar las medidas necesarias para proteger el medio, lo cual necesariamente implica el involucramiento de todos los entes, órganos e instituciones del Estado así como también de los particulares que por una u otra razón, tuvieren que intervenir. La Sala se ha referido a ese principio de coordinación de las dependencias públicas, específicamente en la sentencia número 5445-99, de las catorce horas treinta minutos del catorce de julio de mil novecientos noventa y nueve en la que, para lo que interesa, señaló:

"De manera que la coordinación es la ordenación de las relaciones entre estas diversas actividades independientes, que se hace cargo de esa concurrencia en un mismo objeto o entidad, para hacerla útil a un plan público global, sin suprimir la independencia recíproca de los sujetos agentes. Como no hay una relación de jerarquía de las instituciones descentralizadas, ni del Estado mismo en relación con las municipalidades, no es posible la imposición a éstas de determinadas conductas, con lo cual surge el imprescindible «concierto» interinstitucional, en sentido estricto, en cuanto los centros autónomos e independientes de acción se ponen de acuerdo sobre ese esquema preventivo y global, en el que cada uno cumple un papel con vista en una misión confiada a los otros. Así, las relaciones de las municipalidades con los otros entes públicos, sólo pueden llevarse a cabo en un plano de igualdad, que den como resultado formas pactadas de coordinación, con exclusión de cualquier forma imperativa en detrimento de su autonomía, que permita sujetar a los entes corporativos a un esquema de coordinación sin su voluntad o contra ella; pero que sí admite la necesaria subordinación de estos entes al Estado y en interés de éste (a través de la «tutela administrativa» del Estado, y específicamente, en la función de control la legalidad que a éste compete, con potestades de vigilancia general sobre todo el sector).” Partiendo de lo dicho, no cabe duda de que cualquier omisión al deber de colaboración y coordinación entre instituciones públicas, podría poner en peligro la protección del ambiente y de la salud pública. Sin duda alguna, en el caso concreto, por tratarse los problemas denunciados de situaciones complejas, multifactoriales, que involucra a varios sectores de la sociedad y del Estado, la solución que se logre dar para cada uno de los casos y el éxito de ésta, dependerá necesariamente de la coordinación y colaboración recíproca que se pueda dar entre las diferentes instituciones encargadas y por ende, se impone que sea la Municipalidad accionada quien asuma la coordinación requerida entre los accionados.

IV.- Siguiendo el mismo orden de ideas del considerando anterior, no se consideran válidas, las argumentaciones externadas bajo juramento por parte del Alcalde recurrido, con las cuales se pretende justificar las omisiones que se han venido dando para atender la situación en esa zona del país. Por el contrario, la Sala es del criterio de que se ha dado una negligencia por parte de la Administración que está lesionando derechos fundamentales del recurrente y de los vecinos del lugar, que amerita una inmediata intervención del aparato estatal para corregirla. Aunado a lo anterior, estima la Sala que la Municipalidad de accionada ha tolerado y permitido que se lesione el derecho al ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado de la población del Barrio El Carmen en Puntarenas. En ese sentido, la Municipalidad recurrida no puede evadir su deber de velar por los intereses locales de su cantón y a pesar de que tal obligación municipal es bastante clara, llama la atención de este Tribunal, la afirmación hecha por el Alcalde de la Municipalidad recurrida en el sentido de no es cierto, que no se haya brindado la atención a la problemática descrita, si el día catorce de junio del año en curso, autoridades de esa municipalidad realizaron una visita de inspección en el sitio. Con tales manifestaciones es claro que este gobierno local no ha asumido con toda responsabilidad la situación denunciada, porque es claro que hacer una visita, en un tema como el que nos ocupa definitivamente, no significa que se esté actuando, o adoptando medidas para solucionar el problema. Además resulta importante, indicarles a las autoridades municipales que si consideran que muchas de las acciones, que se deben ser adoptadas deben ser realizadas por otras instituciones, ello no los exime de responsabilidad, pues hacerlo sería permitirles desentenderse de los problemas. Del informe rendido por su representante, la Sala concluye que la corporación municipal ha incurrido en una clara omisión y negligencia por parte de las autoridades municipales que ha provocado se siga deteriorando, reiteradamente, el ambiente, la salud y la seguridad de los pobladores del lugar. En atención a todo lo dicho, se debe ordenar al Alcalde Municipal del Cantón Central de Puntarenas, adoptar medidas dentro del ámbito de sus competencias, para que de manera coordinada con otras instituciones del Estado, y dentro del plazo máximo de seis meses contado a partir de la notificación de esta sentencia, se logre dar solución a los problemas denunciados por el recurrente.

Por tanto:

Se declara con lugar el recurso. Se ordena a Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, en su condición de Alcalde Municipal del Cantón Central de Puntarenas, o a quien en su lugar ejerza el cargo, que inmediatamente realice las coordinaciones necesarias con las autoridades pertinentes, para adoptar las medidas necesarias dentro del ámbito de sus competencias, para que dentro del plazo máximo de seis meses contado a partir de la notificación de esta sentencia, se logre dar solución a los problemas denunciados por el recurrente en el sitio conocido como El Crematorio en el Barrio El Carmen de esa ciudad. Se advierte a Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, en su condición de Alcalde Municipal del Cantón Central de Puntarenas, o a quien en su lugar ejerza el cargo, que de no acatar la orden dicha, incurrirá 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. Se condena a la Municipalidad de Puntarenas 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. Notifíquese esta resolución a Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, en su condición de Alcalde Municipal del Cantón Central de Puntarenas, o a quien en su lugar ejerza el cargo, en forma personal.

Gilbert Armijo S.

Presidente a.i.

Ernesto Jinesta L. Fernando Cruz C.

Fernando Castillo V. Roxana Salazar C.

Víctor Ardón A. José Paulino Hernández arg/800