← Environmental Law Center← Centro de Derecho Ambiental
Res. 02035-2014 Sala Constitucional · Sala Constitucional · 18/02/2014
OutcomeResultado
The Chamber denies the contempt motion after verifying that the Municipality of Cartago has taken efficient measures to prevent pollution, such as inspections and coordination with health authorities.La Sala declara sin lugar la gestión de desacato al comprobar que la Municipalidad de Cartago ha tomado medidas eficientes para evitar la contaminación, como inspecciones y coordinación con autoridades sanitarias.
SummaryResumen
The Constitutional Chamber hears a contempt motion filed against the Municipality of Cartago for alleged non-compliance with judgment No. 2012-10107, which protected the right to a healthy environment against water pollution from sewage. The Chamber examines the report from the Mayor and Vice Mayor, detailing measures taken: on-site inspection on August 16, 2012, coordination meetings with the Health Area throughout 2012 and January 2013, and a joint action plan to detect and correct illegal wastewater discharges into the stormwater system, the main source of pollution. It is noted that the health authority set aside a prior order and committed to conducting house-by-house fluorescence tests and issuing corrective orders. The Municipality conditioned creek channeling works on the prior cessation of illegal discharges. The Chamber finds that the authorities have taken efficient measures to prevent pollution and dismisses the contempt motion.La Sala Constitucional conoce una gestión de desacato presentada por un recurrente contra la Municipalidad de Cartago por supuesto incumplimiento de lo ordenado en la sentencia No. 2012-10107, que protegía el derecho a un ambiente sano frente a contaminación por aguas residuales. La Sala analiza el informe rendido por el Alcalde y Vicealcalde, quienes detallan las medidas adoptadas: inspección in situ el 16 de agosto de 2012, reuniones de coordinación con el Área Rectora de Salud durante 2012 y enero de 2013, y un plan de acción conjunto para detectar y corregir descargas ilegales de aguas residuales al sistema pluvial, principal fuente de contaminación. Se constata que la autoridad sanitaria dejó sin efecto una orden previa y se comprometió a realizar pruebas de fluorescencia casa por casa y emitir órdenes correctivas. La Municipalidad condicionó obras de canalización en la quebrada a que primero cesen las descargas ilegales. La Sala concluye que las autoridades recurridas han tomado medidas eficientes para evitar la contaminación, por lo que declara sin lugar la gestión de desobediencia.
Key excerptExtracto clave
SOLE.- In this matter, the petitioner contends that the respondent authority has failed to comply with what was ordered by this Chamber through Judgment No. 2012-10107 at 2:30 p.m. on July 31, 2012. Nevertheless, this Court does not find that the interested party is correct, since from the facts in the record, as well as from the report provided by the Municipal Mayor and Vice Mayor of the Municipality of Cartago—which are given under oath with timely warning of the consequences, including criminal ones, provided in Article 44 of the Constitutional Jurisdiction Law—it is clear that the respondents have taken efficient measures to prevent the pollution alleged by the petitioner. Evidence of this, as indicated in the interlocutory judgment, is the on-site inspection carried out on August 16, 2012, and the meetings held in November and December 2012 with health authorities to achieve proper channeling of sewage and black water from polluters in the area. Therefore, it is appropriate to dismiss the contempt motion filed by the petitioner.ÚNICO.- En el presente asunto, el recurrente aduce que la autoridad recurrida ha incumplido lo ordenado por esta Sala mediante la Sentencia No. 2012-10107 de las 14:30 hrs. del 31 de julio del 2012. No obstante lo anterior, este Tribunal no estima que lleve razón el interesado, toda vez que, de los hechos que constan en autos, así como del informe rendido por el Alcalde Municipal y el Vicealcalde, ambos de la Municipalidad de Cartago – los cuales son dados bajo fe de juramento con oportuno apercibimiento de las consecuencias, incluso penales, previstas en el artículo 44 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional-, se desprende con claridad que los recurridos han tomando medidas eficientes a fin de evitar la contaminación acusada por el recurrente, muestra de ello, tal y como se indicó en la sentencia interlocutoria, es la inspección in situ realizada el 16 de agosto del 2012 y las reuniones efectuadas en los meses de noviembre y diciembre del 2012 con las autoridades sanitarias para lograr una adecuada canalización de las aguas servidas y negras por parte de los contaminantes de la zona. Así las cosas lo procedente es desestimar la gestión de desacato instaurada por el recurrente.
Pull quotesCitas destacadas
"los recurridos han tomando medidas eficientes a fin de evitar la contaminación acusada por el recurrente, muestra de ello, tal y como se indicó en la sentencia interlocutoria, es la inspección in situ realizada el 16 de agosto del 2012 y las reuniones efectuadas en los meses de noviembre y diciembre del 2012 con las autoridades sanitarias para lograr una adecuada canalización de las aguas servidas y negras por parte de los contaminantes de la zona."
"the respondents have taken efficient measures to prevent the pollution alleged by the petitioner; evidence of this, as indicated in the interlocutory judgment, is the on-site inspection carried out on August 16, 2012, and the meetings held in November and December 2012 with health authorities to achieve proper channeling of sewage and black water from polluters in the area."
Considerando Único
"los recurridos han tomando medidas eficientes a fin de evitar la contaminación acusada por el recurrente, muestra de ello, tal y como se indicó en la sentencia interlocutoria, es la inspección in situ realizada el 16 de agosto del 2012 y las reuniones efectuadas en los meses de noviembre y diciembre del 2012 con las autoridades sanitarias para lograr una adecuada canalización de las aguas servidas y negras por parte de los contaminantes de la zona."
Considerando Único
"Así las cosas lo procedente es desestimar la gestión de desacato instaurada por el recurrente."
"Therefore, it is appropriate to dismiss the contempt motion filed by the petitioner."
Considerando Único
"Así las cosas lo procedente es desestimar la gestión de desacato instaurada por el recurrente."
Considerando Único
Full documentDocumento completo
Constitutional Chamber Case File: 12-007676-0007-CO Type of Matter: Amparo action Ruling with protected data, in accordance with current regulations CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at fourteen hours and thirty minutes on February eighteenth, two thousand fourteen. Contempt proceeding filed by [NAME 01], of legal age, bearer of identity card number [VALUE 01], against the Municipality of Cartago. Whereas: 1.- By a brief filed with the Secretariat of this Chamber at 11:18 hrs. on October 28, 2013, the petitioner alleged disobedience to the order issued by the Constitutional Court in Ruling No. 2012-10107 of 14:30 hrs. on July 31, 2012, since neither the Municipal Mayor nor the Coordinator of the Cartago Health Area have taken effective measures to prevent the continuation of the alleged contamination. 2.- By resolution of 08:53 hrs. on October 31, 2013, this proceeding was referred for response, and a report was requested from Carlos Alberto Halaí Fauaz, in his capacity as Second Deputy Mayor of the Municipality of Cartago, serving as Mayor, and from Rolando Alberto Rodríguez Brenes, in his capacity as Mayor of the Municipality of Cartago (see electronic record). 3.- Rolando Alberto Rodríguez Brenes and Carlos Alberto Halaí Fauaz, the former as Municipal Mayor and the latter as Deputy Mayor, both of the Municipality of Cartago, report under oath (see electronic record) that: a) On August 16, 2012, the Head of the Operations Area and the Works Coordinator of the Municipality coordinated and conducted a site visit jointly with the Director of the Cartago Health Area, with the aim of initiating support work, given that, as stated, it is the Health Area, in its capacity as Health Authority, that must lead this process with the support of the Municipality of Cartago; b) The Health Area, in response to a motion for revocation with subsidiary appeal filed by the local government, set aside the health order issued and stated: “… having been verified through the petitioner's pleading that the [NAME 02] subdivision (urbanización) was approved on May 4, 2004, and that the stormwater drainage was approved by means of a ditch, stormwater pipe, and the drainage trench.
Additionally, septic tanks and drainage fields were approved for wastewater. The undersigned considers it highly beneficial for Ministry of Health personnel to consult the approved plans and assess the site according to that approval. The joint assessment with the Municipality will be more beneficial…”; c) During the months of November and December, coordination meetings continued with the Ministry of Health, as the health authority itself has stated, and in the meeting held on January 15, 2013, which was attended by the Director of the Cartago Health Area and other health officials, the following was established: “Agreements: As this involves a combination of situations that aggravate the initial one, it is agreed to intervene in each of them as part of a comprehensive solution. The Ministry of Health undertakes to carry out a series of fluorescence tests at the site, house by house, with the aim of detecting the illegal wastewater discharges of all types that residents are currently discharging into the stormwater system, generating one of the main sources of contamination in the sector.
Following these tests and in order to correct the situation, the Ministry of Health will proceed to issue the corresponding orders so that each person makes the corrections to the problem within a determined period, thereby proposing solutions for wastewater management. The Municipality of Cartago undertakes to manage the possible execution of channeling works in the ravine (quebrada), in order to ensure the integrity of the residents. These actions will begin once it is verified that there are no illegal wastewater discharges into the ravine (quebrada) which may increase the flow and contamination, conditions that could again jeopardize the integrity of those affected”; d) The existence of greywater (aguas servidas) (which is different from stormwater and must be treated from a health perspective) prevents the Municipality from being able to implement a final solution in this specific case, since carrying out any type of work, without the health authority first obtaining the proper channeling of greywater and black water (aguas servidas y negras) by the polluters in the zone, would affect the stormwater that the channel of the [NAME 02] Subdivision (Urbanización) must receive, given that according to health and environmental regulations, stormwater and wastewater may not be mixed or converge at the same point, since the method of treating, disposing of, and conveying them is subject to the provisions of section 286 et seq. of the General Health Law (Ley General de Salud), particularly section 295, which, in summary, prescribe their independent channeling, disposal, and treatment, and above all, given what has already been said about the fact that those waters may not be mixed for public health reasons.
It requests that the contempt proceeding be dismissed. 4.- In the processing of the matter, the prescriptions of law have been observed. Drafted by Magistrate Cruz Castro; and, Considering: SOLE.- In the present matter, the petitioner alleges that the respondent authority has failed to comply with the order issued by this Chamber through Judgment No. 2012-10107 of 14:30 hrs. on July 31, 2012. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Court does not consider the interested party's reasoning to be correct, since, from the facts contained in the record, as well as from the report rendered by the Municipal Mayor and the Deputy Mayor, both of the Municipality of Cartago – which are given under oath with due warning of the consequences, including criminal ones, provided for in Article 44 of the Law on Constitutional Jurisdiction (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional) – it is clearly evident that the respondents have been taking effective measures to prevent the contamination alleged by the petitioner.
As proof of this, as indicated in the interlocutory ruling, are the on-site inspection carried out on August 16, 2012, and the meetings held in November and December 2012 with the health authorities to achieve proper channeling of the greywater and black water (aguas servidas y negras) by the polluters in the zone. Thus, the appropriate course is to dismiss the contempt proceeding brought by the petitioner. Therefore: The petition is dismissed.
Gilbert Armijo S. President Fernando Cruz C.
Fernando Castillo V.
Paul Rueda L.
Nancy Hernández L.
Luis Fdo. Salazar A.
Anamari Garro V.
Sentencia con datos protegidos, de conformidad con la normativa vigente SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, a las catorce horas treinta minutos del dieciocho de febrero de dos mil catorce.
Gestión de desacato presentada por [NOMBRE 01], mayor, portador de la cédula de identidad número [VALOR 01], contra la Municipalidad de Cartago.
Resultando:
Redacta el Magistrado Cruz Castro; y,
Considerando:
ÚNICO.- En el presente asunto, el recurrente aduce que la autoridad recurrida ha incumplido lo ordenado por esta Sala mediante la Sentencia No. 2012-10107 de las 14:30 hrs. del 31 de julio del 2012. No obstante lo anterior, este Tribunal no estima que lleve razón el interesado, toda vez que, de los hechos que constan en autos, así como del informe rendido por el Alcalde Municipal y el Vicealcalde, ambos de la Municipalidad de Cartago – los cuales son dados bajo fe de juramento con oportuno apercibimiento de las consecuencias, incluso penales, previstas en el artículo 44 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional-, se desprende con claridad que los recurridos han tomando medidas eficientes a fin de evitar la contaminación acusada por el recurrente, muestra de ello, tal y como se indicó en la sentencia interlocutoria, es la inspección in situ realizada el 16 de agosto del 2012 y las reuniones efectuadas en los meses de noviembre y diciembre del 2012 con las autoridades sanitarias para lograr una adecuada canalización de las aguas servidas y negras por parte de los contaminantes de la zona. Así las cosas lo procedente es desestimar la gestión de desacato instaurada por el recurrente.
Por tanto:
No ha lugar a la gestión formulada.
Gilbert Armijo S.
Fernando Cruz C.
Fernando Castillo V.
Paul Rueda L.
Nancy Hernández L.
Luis Fdo. Salazar A.
Anamari Garro V.
Document not found. Documento no encontrado.