Constitutionality of the Agreement on the Establishment of the Global Green Growth InstituteConstitucionalidad del Acuerdo para el Establecimiento del Global Green Growth Institute

*140031320007CO* Res. No. 2014004944 CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at fourteen hours and thirty minutes on April ninth, two thousand fourteen.

Mandatory legislative consultation on constitutionality submitted by the Directorate of the Legislative Assembly, regarding the bill for the "Approval of the Agreement on the Establishment of the Global Green Growth Institute," legislative file number 18.588.

Considering:

I.- PURPOSE AND ADMISSIBILITY OF THE CONSULTATION. This mandatory consultation on constitutionality is submitted by the Directorate of the Legislative Assembly in compliance with the provisions of Article 10, subsection b), of the Political Constitution and Article 96, subsection a), of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction, in relation to the bill entitled "Approval of the Agreement on the Establishment of the Global Green Growth Institute," processed under legislative file number 18.588, as it concerns the legislative approval of an international agreement. Given that the aforementioned bill was approved in the first debate in Plenary Session No. 130, of February 25, 2014, its review proceeds in accordance with the provisions of Article 98, paragraph 1, of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction.

II.- REGARDING THE LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURE IN THE SPECIFIC CASE. In accordance with the provisions of Article 98 of the law governing this Jurisdiction, this Court reviewed the legislative procedure for processing the bill of law for the "Approval of the Agreement on the Establishment of the Global Green Growth Institute," and did not identify any substantial or significant defect that could invalidate the bill due to a breach of essential principles, such as democratic principles, participation, political representation, respect for minorities, or publicity and transparency. In this regard, the agreement under consultation was signed by the Minister of Environment, Energy, and Telecommunications, Mr. René Castro Salazar, on behalf of the Executive Branch, in accordance with the Full Powers conferred upon him for this purpose by the President of the Republic, Mrs. Laura Chinchilla Miranda, with the countersignature of the Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship, Mr. Carlos Alberto Roverssi Rojas, as recorded in the instrument granted on June 5, 2012 (see pages 26 and 29 of the copy of the legislative file). This is consistent with the provisions of Article 140, subsection 10, of the Political Constitution, which establishes that the signing of international agreements is an attribution of the Executive Branch, understood as a collegiate body composed of the President of the Republic and the respective line Minister. The foregoing is reinforced by the endorsement given to the treaty by the President of the Republic through the various stages of the legislative procedure, as will be discussed. Indeed, the bill was presented to the legislative stream by the Executive Branch in exercise of its power of initiative, provided for in Article 140, subsection 5), of the Political Constitution (see pages 1-13 of the copy of the legislative file). Likewise, it is accredited that, through Executive Decree No. 37.411-MP of November 29, 2012 (see pages 36-41 of the copy of the legislative file), the Executive Branch called extraordinary sessions so that the Legislative Assembly could consider, among others, legislative file No. 18.588. Similarly, by Executive Decree No. 37.837-MP of July 31, 2013 (see pages 569-574 of the legislative file), the Executive Branch again called extraordinary sessions to consider, among others, the bill under consultation, a call that was extended by Executive Decree No. 38.177-MP of February 17, 2014, to consider that same bill (see pages 635 and 636 of the copy of the legislative file). In all of this, no defect is observed in relation to the signing of the Agreement. Regarding the procedure itself, it was accredited that the bill was published in Supplement No. 187 of the Official Gazette La Gaceta No. 226 of November 22, 2012 (see page 35 of the copy of the legislative file, as well as the Website address http://www.imprentanacional.go.cr/pub/2012/11/22/ALCA187_22_11_2012.pdf). Subsequently, the text of the bill was referred to the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade, where, in Session No. 6 of that Special Permanent Commission, held on August 6, 2013, order motion number 1-6, presented by several deputies to remove from the bill's text of the Agreement's approval the certifications and copies sent by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Worship, as well as the signatures and seals of the official translator because they do not belong to the Agreement under study, was discussed and approved by all the deputies present. This motion was approved unanimously, and immediately thereafter, the bill was submitted for discussion. Ultimately, it was approved in the Commission by a majority of five votes in favor, out of six deputies present, and the respective unanimous affirmative report was rendered (see pages 583-628 of the copy of the legislative file). The constitutional power of the Legislative Assembly consists solely and exclusively of approving or rejecting a Treaty or Agreement already signed, through the issuance of a formal law, and it is therefore unable to vary its text. Thus, the procedure given by the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade to the bill in question is consistent with the Law of the Constitution.

III.- Furthermore, the aforementioned bill was sent for consultation to the following institutions and organizations: Ministry of Environment and Energy, Ministry of National Planning and Economic Policy, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Worship, Ministry of Finance, APREFLOFAS, Costa Rican Neotropical Foundation, INBIO, and EARTH, by virtue of the Commission's approval, by all deputies present, of Motion No. 2-27 from several deputies to send legislative file No. 18.588 for consultation to those institutions and organizations, as recorded in the Minutes of Ordinary Session No. 27 of the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade, held on January 24, 2013 (see page 47 of the copy of the legislative file). Similarly, in Ordinary Session No. 28 of the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade, held on January 31, 2013, Motion No. 1-28 from several deputies was approved, and it was ordered to send file 18.588 for consultation also to the following institutions and entities: all municipalities and District Municipal Councils, the University of Costa Rica (UCR), the National University (UNA), the Costa Rica Institute of Technology (ITCR), the State Distance University (UNED), the National Technical University, the National Council of Rectors (CONARE), CONESUP, the Ministry of Health, the Costa Rican Coalition of Development Initiatives, the National Horticultural Corporation, the National Banana Corporation, the Costa Rican Petroleum Refinery S.A. (RECOPE), all professional associations, the Costa Rican Union of Chambers and Associations of the Business Sector (UCCAEP), the Chamber of Exporters of Costa Rica (CADEXCO), the Chamber of Industries of Costa Rica (CICR), the Chamber of Agriculture and Agroindustry (CNAA), the Chamber of Commerce of Costa Rica, the Chamber of Food Industry, CRECEX, the Livestock Corporation (CORFOGA), the National Chamber of Poultry Farmers, and the National Chamber of Pork Producers (see pages 87-89 of the copy of the legislative file). Although not all the institutions, organizations, and entities consulted provided their opinion to the Commission, those that did raised no objection regarding constitutionality against the bill in question, and those that made any observation did so only concerning the timeliness and advisability of approving the Agreement in view of the commitments and possible expenditures it implies for Costa Rica, as well as regarding the scope of some points of the bill, but without attributing any conflict with the Law of the Constitution to the content of the Agreement. Therefore, for the purposes of this consultation, the observations made on the bill are irrelevant as they lack constitutional implications. Additionally, no infringement of the rights and powers of the legislators is observed, since the bill was considered by the Legislative Plenary as appropriate, given it concerns an international agreement and, therefore, could not be delegated to a Legislative Commission with Full Powers, according to Article 124, paragraph 3, of the Political Constitution, in relation to Article 121, subsection 4), ibidem. On the other hand, the bill under consultation was called by the Executive Branch for consideration in extraordinary sessions, as previously recounted, respecting the provisions of Article 118 of the Political Constitution, and for its approval in the first debate, it obtained a majority vote of thirty-five deputies and six votes against, as recorded in the Minutes of Plenary Session No. 130, held on February 25, 2014 (see pages 638-642 of the copy of the legislative file). Consequently, this Constitutional Court does not find that any substantial or significant defect occurred in the approval procedure for the bill entitled "Approval of the Agreement on the Establishment of the Global Green Growth Institute" that would invalidate it.

IV.- REGARDING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE BILL. Before making some observations concerning the substance of the bill under consultation, it must be kept in mind that, according to the provisions of Article 101 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction, the opinion of this Chamber shall only be binding insofar as it establishes the existence of unconstitutional procedures in the bill consulted. Furthermore, regarding the content of the various articles, reference will only be made to those that present some doubt about their constitutionality or that require some clarification or interpretation consistent with the Political Constitution and other domestic legislation. Articles not expressly cited are to be understood as being, in principle, consistent with the Law of the Constitution.

V.- ON THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE TREATY UNDER CONSULTATION. On June 20, 2012, the agreement under study was signed, in the English language, in the City of Rio de Janeiro, with the purpose — as stated in the statement of motives and the text of the Agreement itself — of promoting green growth targeting key aspects of economic performance and environmental sustainability, as well as creating and enhancing the economic, environmental, and social conditions of developing and emerging countries through partnerships between developed and developing countries and the public and private sectors (Article 2 of the Agreement under consultation). All of this does not contravene our Fundamental Norm but, on the contrary, is in accordance with it (Article 50 of the Political Constitution). Likewise, having analyzed the content of the articles comprising the treaty under consultation, this Constitutional Court considers that, in general terms, it is substantially in conformity with the precepts, values, and fundamental principles of the Law of the Constitution.

VI.- DESCRIPTION OF THE AGREEMENT'S REGULATIONS. The rules contained in the Agreement under study — which total 28 articles — are typical of agreements of this nature. Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the Agreement regulate matters related to the establishment and objectives of the Institute, definitions of the various types of members that can belong to the Institute, the activities the Institute shall carry out to achieve its objectives, and matters related to the Institute's membership. Articles 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 refer to the various internal organs that make up the Institute. Article 11 establishes English as the language used by the Institute, Article 12 relates to finances, Article 13 to disclosure, and Articles 14 and 15 to the legal personality and legal capacity of the Institute and matters concerning the enjoyment of immunities and privileges specific to International Law. Article 16 establishes the possibility of establishing cooperative relations with other organizations, and Articles 17, 18, and 19 establish the transitional provisions, matters related to the deposit of the Agreement, and matters related to its signature, respectively. The topics of ratification, acceptance, and approval are regulated in Article 20; accession in Article 21; entry into force in Article 22; reservations in numeral 23; and amendments in Article 24. Article 25 refers to withdrawals, Article 26 to interpretations, Article 27 to consultations, and finally, Article 28 to the termination of the Agreement. In none of these does this Chamber find any regulation contrary to the Law of the Constitution. However, although it presents no problem of constitutionality, the Chamber considers it appropriate to make some commentary regarding Article 3 of the Agreement, which contains the various possible types of members of the "Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI)." The interest in analyzing this rule is because it establishes three different possible types of Institute members, and depending on which one Costa Rica belongs to, the country must make expenditures. Several consulted institutions or organizations objected to this, due to the austerity policies in effect in the country. The eventual financial commitment the country would assume upon approval of the Agreement depends on the class of membership through which the Costa Rican State becomes part of the Institute, an aspect that the deputies of the Legislative Assembly must be clear about when definitively approving the Agreement. Although this does not imply any defect of constitutionality, this Chamber, in Advisory Opinion No. 2000-04527, of 14:45 hours on May 31, 2000, regarding the pecuniary obligations acquired by the State upon signing an instrument of this nature, stated:

"IX.- On the pecuniary obligations that the State acquires. Article XII of the Agreement whose approval is consulted, establishes that each delegation's own expenses shall be assumed by the respective State. Likewise, it determines that each member shall pay a contribution intended to finance the Organization's expenses, in accordance with a progressive table prepared by it. In this regard, it must be said that the establishment of the aforementioned expenditures is perfectly valid under the Law of the Constitution, since a treaty is a suitable mechanism for acquiring such duties. However, it is important to clarify that the approval of this Agreement does not exempt the Costa Rican State from its duty to authorize the expenses that its participation in the World Customs Organization entails, through the respective Budget Law, as provided by Article 176 of the Political Constitution. In summary, concerning this point, no defect of unconstitutionality is discovered." Thus, should the Costa Rican State acquire any financial commitment, it must authorize the expenses that its membership status in the "Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI)" implies, through the corresponding Budget Law, in accordance with the provisions of Article 176 of the Political Constitution, without those financial commitments suffering, in any way, from defects of unconstitutionality.

VII.- ON THE LEGAL PERSONALITY AND LEGAL CAPACITY OF THE INSTITUTE AND THE IMMUNITIES AND PRIVILEGES GRANTED TO IT IN THE AGREEMENT. Article 14 of the Agreement under consultation grants the Institute legal personality and capacity to contract, acquire and dispose of movable and immovable property, and to sue and defend itself in legal proceedings. Likewise, Article 15 establishes that the Institute may enjoy privileges and immunities both in the Member State where it is headquartered and in other Member States, when this is necessary for its proper functioning within the territory of those States. Those privileges and immunities shall be those customary for international organizations of the same type as the Institute and shall be specified in a separate agreement that may be concluded between the Member States or between the Institute and a particular Member State. The granting of legal personality and legal capacity to this type of international organization, as well as the granting of privileges and immunities, has already been examined by this Chamber, without finding any objection of unconstitutionality, since all of this is common and proper to be granted to this class of organization, according to Public International Law and Diplomatic Law. In this regard, this Court, in the aforementioned advisory opinion, expressed:

"VIII.- On the regime of immunities and exemptions and the legal personality of the Council. The Agreement establishes, in its annex, that both the Council (now Organization) and its delegates, officials, and ad hoc experts enjoy a series of facilities for the performance of their functions, such as criminal immunity, exemption from customs inspection, protection of their property and domicile against acts of authority, etc. Likewise, it confers legal personality on the Organization. Regarding a case similar to the one being analyzed, this Chamber stated in judgment number 7292-98, of sixteen hours and nine minutes on October thirteenth, nineteen ninety-eight, regarding the advantages that can be validly granted to the representatives of organizations of this type:

"REGARDING THE CREATION OF THE SUBREGIONAL OFFICE: It is perfectly valid for the Costa Rican State to sign agreements with international organizations, in light of Article 140, subsection 10), Article 121, subsection 4), and Article 7 of the Political Constitution. In fact, the functions that the Office shall perform, of a scientific nature in the field of meteorology, aimed at fostering international cooperation in this area, in no way contravene the text or spirit of the Fundamental Law. The fact that legal personality is granted to the Subregional Office through the agreement, given the requirement of its ratification, fully respects the constitutional precepts on the matter.

REGARDING THE GRANTING OF EXEMPTIONS: The Agreement establishes a series of tax and customs exemptions granted to the World Meteorological Organization (Articles 13, 14, 15, and 16), as well as to the representatives of the Organization's member countries (Article 17) and to its officials who are not Costa Rican nationals or residents in the country (Article 22). Similarly, monetary restrictions are eliminated for the Organization, the representatives of the member countries, and the officials of the Subregional Office. The aforementioned exemptions do not contradict the constitutional text. The Costa Rican State accepted limiting its scope of action in tax matters concerning the Organization, the representatives of its Member States, and its officials who are not Costa Rican nationals or residents in Costa Rica. Taxes can be created by law, and their application can be exempted by law or by an act of higher legal force than the law, which is what occurs in the present case. The stated tax exemptions are not applicable to Costa Rican nationals or residents, which is perfectly valid under the constitutional text. The exemption from specific monetary policy restrictions is entirely reasonable, given that, by their nature, these organizations and their officials require broad facility in buying and selling foreign currency expeditiously, so imposing the same monetary limitations of common law upon them could render their participation ineffectual. Nor do the proposed exemptions in any way transgress the rules instituted by the Protocol of Accession of Costa Rica to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) [sic]. This agreement establishes a series of restrictions on the protectionist policy of States in commercial and customs matters, allowing exceptions in the case of countries that, due to their low level of economic development, require a certain amount of protection so that their national production is not harmed. The agreed exemptions are part of a voluntary act of the State of Costa Rica, which is accepting to dispose of its right of tariff protection in favor of the Organization, its representatives, and officials, which in no way harms free trade, but rather tends towards the tariff reduction of certain goods in specific cases.

REGARDING THE GRANTING OF IMMUNITIES: The Agreement provides a series of partial and full jurisdictional immunities to the Organization, its officials, and the representatives of the Member States (Articles 9, 18, 19, and 22 of the Agreement's text). These exceptions are inherent to the regime of officials of diplomatic missions and other specialized agencies of the United Nations headquartered in the country. They do not violate National Sovereignty or the punitive power of the state; they do not, therefore, contradict the rules of the current Constitution." In this case, we are in a situation similar to the one cited above. The facilities recognized by the Costa Rican State through its accession to the Agreement are common to those granted to other international organizations and diplomatic missions stationed in the country, and the fact that they are authorized by the Legislative Assembly in the legitimate exercise of its discretionary powers as an agent of the sovereign people gives them the necessary validity. The Chamber does not find any defect of unconstitutionality regarding this point." What was stated on that occasion is fully applicable to the Agreement under consultation, so this Chamber does not find that the granting of legal personality and legal capacity to the Institute (Article 14 of the Agreement), as well as conferring upon it the privileges and immunities referred to in numeral 15 of the Agreement, incurs any reason for unconstitutionality.

VIII.- ON THE POSSIBILITY OF AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT. Article 24 of the Agreement provides:

"Article 24. AMENDMENTS. Any Party to this Agreement may propose an amendment to this Agreement by submitting such proposal to the Director-General of the Secretariat. The Director-General shall communicate a proposed amendment to all Members of the GGGI at least ninety days before its consideration by the Assembly." An initial reading might give the impression that this creates some exceptional procedure for the approval — by the Costa Rican State — of modifications to International Agreements outside the bounds of the Political Constitution. Upon examining similar provisions, this Constitutional Court has concluded that this type of rule must be interpreted to mean that Costa Rica has not renounced its competence for the legislative approval of treaties, according to the rules of Article 121, subsection 4), of the Constitution, with the sole exception of protocols of lesser rank, the only case in which parliamentary approval is exempted (see advisory opinion No. 2000-04527 of 14:45 hours on May 31, 2000). In this regard, this Court considered the following:

"(...) The following article, namely Article nineteen, which regulates matters related to amendments, must be analyzed carefully, for the reasons set forth below. The cited article provides three ways to amend the Agreement: by unanimous acceptance, after examination within the Organization, and by a conference, which shall enter into force automatically twelve months after the date of their acceptance or approval, as the case may be. However, it must be clarified that this can in no way be interpreted as exempting any substantial modification to a Treaty from the requirement of undergoing the legislative approval procedure by constitutional mandate, as this would be valid only for protocols of lesser rank. This thesis was developed by this Court in ruling number 9565-2006 of sixteen hours eight minutes on July fifth, two thousand six, in which, in the pertinent part, it stated:

'Regarding these two clauses, the Chamber must rule on the procedure for adopting amendments, in relation to the constitutional rules that regulate the competence of the Executive and Legislative Branches regarding the creation and approval of norms of Public International Law. Thus, it is valid under the Law of the Constitution for modifications to the content of the Agreement and its annexes to be approved by the Conference of the Parties, which may decide by consensus (absence of votes against) or even by simple majority on said modifications. Although these are not mere developments of the Agreement, which could be implemented through protocols of lesser rank, since Articles 21 and 22 provide for modifications to the content of the treaty (and what is the same, its annexes), paragraph 4 of numeral 21 clearly determines that any amendment agreed upon by the Conference of the Parties, to be effective in a State or organization, must first be ratified, accepted, or approved. In accordance with the provisions of Article 7 in relation to numeral 121, subsection 4), all of the Political Constitution, the approval of international treaties is the exclusive competence of the Legislative Assembly; therefore, in the particular case of Costa Rica, the referred amendments shall be binding only if they are the subject of approval by the Assembly.' From the foregoing, it is clear that amendments of a substantial nature must be submitted for consideration by the Legislative Assembly, pursuant to numeral 7 of the Political Constitution, but not so for amendments or modifications of a minor order (Article 140, subsection 10, of the Magna Carta). Thus, it shall be the competence of the Assembly to determine in each specific case whether the amendment is substantial or minor, in order to decide whether or not it must undergo the respective procedure before Parliament." (Advisory opinion No. 2008-018208 of 18:16 hrs. on December 10, 2008).

In accordance with the foregoing, Article 24 of the Agreement would not be unconstitutional if it is interpreted to mean that, if a substantial reform to the Agreement on the Establishment of the Global Green Growth Institute is involved, such amendment must be incorporated into our legal system through the legislative approval mechanism provided for in Article 121, subsection 4), of the Political Constitution. However, if amendments or modifications of a minor order are involved, they may be approved through the procedure provided for in Article 140, subsection 10), second paragraph, of the Political Constitution, which establishes that "Protocols derived from said public treaties or international agreements that do not require legislative approval shall enter into force once promulgated by the Executive Branch." In accordance with the jurisprudential line of this Constitutional Court, it shall correspond, in each case, to the Legislative Assembly to decide whether the amendment is substantial or minor, in order to determine whether or not it must undergo the respective procedure before that parliamentary body (see in this same sense advisory opinion No. 2013-007731 of 09:05 hours on June 7, 2013).

IX.- Conclusion.

In light of the foregoing, the consultation is resolved to the effect that the legislative bill consulted contains no essential procedural defects or provisions that would invalidate it.

Por tanto:

The consultation is resolved to the effect that the legislative bill for the “Aprobación del Acuerdo sobre el establecimiento del Global Green Growth Institute” (legislative file No. 18.588) contains no essential procedural defects or unconstitutional provisions. Article 24 of the Agreement would not be unconstitutional if it is interpreted that substantial amendments to the Agreement on the establishment of the Global Green Growth Institute must be incorporated into our legal system through the mechanism of legislative approval provided for in Article 121, subsection 4, of the Political Constitution.- Fernando Cruz C.

Presidente a.i Fernando Castillo V.

Nancy Hernández L.

Luis Fdo. Salazar A.

Jorge Araya G.

Anamari Garro V.

Ricardo Madrigal J.

Documento Firmado Digitalmente -- Código verificador -- *NDCQ5VJG2GG61* In this regard, this Court, in the advisory opinion already cited, stated:

**VIII.- On the regime of immunities and exemptions and the legal personality of the Council.** The Convention establishes, in its annex, that the Council (now Organization) as well as its delegates, officials, and ad hoc experts enjoy a series of facilities for the performance of their duties, such as criminal immunity, customs inspection exemption, protection of their property and domicile against acts of authority, etc. Likewise, it confers legal personality on the Organization. Regarding a case similar to the one under analysis, this Chamber stated in judgment number 7292-98, at sixteen hours and nine minutes on October thirteenth, nineteen ninety-eight, determined, with respect to the advantages that can be validly granted to representatives of organizations of this type:

"ON THE CREATION OF THE SUBREGIONAL OFFICE: The fact that the Costa Rican State signs agreements with international organizations, in light of Articles 140(10), 121(4), and 7 of the Political Constitution, is perfectly valid. In fact, the functions that the Office will carry out, of a scientific nature in the field of meteorology, with the aim of fostering international cooperation in this matter, in no way contravene the text or the spirit of the Fundamental Law. The fact that legal personality is granted to the Subregional Office through the agreement, given the requirement of its ratification, fully respects the constitutional precepts on the matter.

ON THE GRANTING OF EXONERATIONS: The Convention establishes a series of tax and customs exonerations granted to the World Meteorological Organization (Articles 13, 14, 15, and 16), as well as to the representatives of the member countries of the Organization (Article 17) and to its officials who are not Costa Rican nationals or residents in the country (Article 22). In the same manner, monetary restrictions are eliminated for the Organization, the representatives of the member countries, and the officials of the Subregional Office. The foregoing exonerations do not contradict the constitutional text. The Costa Rican State agreed to limit its scope of action in tax matters in relation to the Organization, the representatives of its Member States, and its officials who are not Costa Rican nationals or residents in Costa Rica. Taxes can be created by law, and their application can be excepted by law or by an act with superior efficacy to the Law, which occurs in the present case. Said tax exonerations are not applicable to nationals or residents of Costa Rica, which is perfectly valid in light of the constitutional text. The exoneration from monetary policy restrictions is fully reasonable, since, by their nature, these organizations and their officials require broad facility in the buying and selling of foreign currency expeditiously, so imposing upon them the same monetary limitations of common law could render their participation null and void. The proposed exonerations also do not transgress in any way the rules instituted by the Protocol of Accession of Costa Rica to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Said agreement establishes a series of restrictions on the protectionist policy of States in commercial and customs matters, allowing the exception in cases of countries that, due to their low level of economic development, require a certain protection so that their national production is not harmed. The agreed exonerations are part of a voluntary act of the State of Costa Rica, which is agreeing to dispose of its right to tariff protection in favor of the Organization, its representatives, and officials, which in no way harms free trade, but rather tends toward the tariff reduction of certain goods in specific cases.

ON THE CONCESSION OF IMMUNITIES: The Agreement provides for a series of partial and full jurisdictional immunities for the Organization, its officials, and the representatives of the Member States (Articles 9, 18, 19, and 22 of the text of the Convention). These exceptions are characteristic of the regime for officials of diplomatic missions and other specialized agencies of the United Nations headquartered in the country. They do not violate National Sovereignty or the state's punitive power; they do not, therefore, contradict the rules of the current Constitution." We are, in this instance, in a situation similar to the one cited above. The facilities recognized by the Costa Rican State through its adherence to the Convention are common to those given to other international organizations and diplomatic missions based in the country, and the fact of being authorized by the Legislative Assembly in the legitimate exercise of its discretionary powers as an agent of the sovereign people gives them the necessary validity. The Chamber does not find, regarding this point, any vice of unconstitutionality.

What was said on that occasion is fully applicable in the case of the Agreement under consultation, so this Chamber does not find that the granting of legal status (personería) and legal capacity to the Institute (Article 14 of the Agreement), as well as conferring upon it the privileges and immunities referred to in numeral 15 of the Agreement, incurs any grounds of unconstitutionality.

**VIII.- ON THE POSSIBILITY OF AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT.** Article 24 of the Agreement provides:

"***Article 24. AMENDMENTS.** Any Party to this Agreement may propose an amendment to this Agreement by submitting such proposal to the Director-General of the Secretariat. The Director-General shall communicate a proposed amendment to all Members of GGGI at least ninety days before its consideration by the Assembly.*" A first reading might give the impression that this is creating some exceptional procedure for the approval—by the Costa Rican State—of modifications to International Agreements outside the Political Constitution. Upon examining similar provisions, this Constitutional Court has concluded that this type of norm must be interpreted in the sense that Costa Rica has not renounced its competence for the legislative approval of treaties, according to the rules of Article 121(4) of the Constitution, with the sole exception of lower-ranking protocols, the only case in which parliamentary approval is exempted (see advisory opinion No. 2000-04527 at 14:45 hours on May 31, 2000). In this regard, this Court considered the following:

"(...) The following article, being article nineteen, which regulates matters relating to amendments, must be analyzed carefully, for the reasons that will be set forth below. The cited article provides for three ways to amend the Convention: by unanimous acceptance, after examination within the Organization, and by a conference, which will enter into force automatically twelve months after the date of its acceptance or approval, as the case may be. However, it should be clarified that this can in no way be interpreted as an exemption from the requirement that any substantial modification to a Treaty be subject to the legislative approval procedure by constitutional mandate, since this would be valid only for lower-ranking Protocols. This thesis was developed by this Court in judgment number 9565-2006 at sixteen hours and eight minutes on July fifth, two thousand six, in which it stated, in what is relevant:

'Regarding these two clauses, the Chamber must rule on the procedure for the adoption of amendments, in relation to the constitutional norms that regulate the competence of the Executive and Legislative Branches regarding the creation and approval of Public International Law norms. Thus, it is valid in light of the Law of the Constitution that the modifications to the content of the Convention and its annexes be approved by the Conference of the Parties, which may decide by consensus (absence of votes against) or even by simple majority, regarding the referred modifications. Although these are not simple developments of the Convention, which can be implemented through lower-ranking protocols, since Articles 21 and 22 provide for modifications to the content of the treaty (and by the same token, its annexes), paragraph 4 of numeral 21 clearly determines that any amendment agreed upon by the Conference of the Parties, to be effective in a State or organization, must first be ratified, accepted, or approved. In accordance with the provisions of Article 7 in relation to numeral 121(4), all of the Political Constitution, the approval of international treaties is the exclusive competence of the Legislative Assembly, so, in the particular case of Costa Rica, the referred amendments will be binding only if they are subject to approval by the Assembly.' From the foregoing outline, it is clear that amendments of a substantial nature must be submitted to the knowledge of the Legislative Assembly, in accordance with numeral 7 of the Political Constitution, unlike amendments or modifications of a minor nature (Article 140(10) of the Magna Carta). As such, it will be the competence of the Assembly to delimit in each specific case whether the amendment is substantial or minor, in order to determine whether or not it should be subject to the respective procedure before Parliament." (Advisory opinion No. 2008-018208 at 18:16 hrs. on December 10, 2008).

In accordance with the foregoing, Article 24 of the Agreement would not be unconstitutional, if it is interpreted in the sense that, if it concerns a substantial reform to the Agreement on the Establishment of the Global Green Growth Institute, such amendment must be incorporated into our legal system through the mechanism of legislative approval provided for in Article 121(4) of the Political Constitution. However, if it concerns amendments or modifications of a minor nature, these may be approved through the procedure provided for in Article 140(10), second paragraph, of the Political Constitution, which provides that "*The protocols derived from said public treaties or international conventions that do not require legislative approval shall enter into force once promulgated by the Executive Branch*." In accordance with the jurisprudential line of this Constitutional Court, it will correspond, in each case, to the Legislative Assembly to decide if the amendment is substantial or minor, in order to determine whether or not it should be subject to the respective procedure before that parliamentary body (see in this same sense advisory opinion No. 2013-007731 at 09:05 hours on June 7, 2013).

**IX.- Conclusion.** By virtue of the foregoing, the consultation is answered in the sense that the draft law under consultation does not contain essential procedural defects or provisions that invalidate it.

**Por tanto:** The consultation is answered in the sense that the draft law on "*Aprobación del Acuerdo sobre el establecimiento del Global Green Growth Institute*" (expediente legislativo No. 18.588) does not contain essential procedural defects or unconstitutional provisions. Article 24 of the Agreement would not be unconstitutional if it is interpreted that substantial reforms to the Agreement on the establishment of the Global Green Growth Institute must be incorporated into our legal system through the mechanism of legislative approval provided for in Article 121(4) of the Political Constitution.-

Salazar A.</p> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center">Jorge Araya G.</p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 6;"> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center"><img id="_x0000_i1030" src="../../Users/vgranados/AppData/Local/Temp/HTM3DAD_6.JPG" alt="graphic" width="200" height="65" border="0" /></p> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center"><img id="_x0000_i1031" src="../../Users/vgranados/AppData/Local/Temp/HTM3DAD_7.JPG" alt="graphic" width="200" height="65" border="0" /></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 7; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;"> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center">Anamari Garro V.</p> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center">Ricardo Madrigal J.</p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 8.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Digitally Signed Document</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 8.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-ansi-language: EN;">-- Verification code --</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%; font-family: 'WASP 39 L'; mso-ansi-language: EN;">*NDCQ5VJG2GG61*</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%; font-family: Tahoma; mso-ansi-language: EN;">&nbsp; NDCQ5VJG2GG61</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;" align="right"><strong><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 8.0pt; color: #010101; mso-ansi-language: EN;">EXPEDIENTE N&deg; </span></strong><strong><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 8.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN;">14-003132-0007-CO </span></strong></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">&nbsp;</span></p> <div style="border: none; border-top: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .75pt; padding: 0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm;"> <div style="margin-top: 1.0pt;"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 8.0pt; color: #010101; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Telephones: 2295-3696/2295-3697/2295-3698/2295-3700. Fax: 2295-3712. Email: www.poder-judicial.go.cr/salaconstitucional. Supreme Court of Justice Building, San José, Catedral District, González Lahmann neighborhood, streets 19 and 21, avenues 8 and 6</span></p> </div> </div> </div> All of which does not contravene our Fundamental Norm, but, on the contrary, is consistent with it (article 50 of the Political Constitution). Likewise, having analyzed the content of the articles that make up the treaty under review, this Constitutional Court finds that, in general terms, it is substantially consistent with the precepts, values, and fundamental principles of the Law of the Constitution.

**VI.- DESCRIPTION OF THE AGREEMENT'S REGULATIONS.** The rules contained in the Agreement under study—which comprise a total of 28 articles—are typical of Agreements of this nature. Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the Agreement regulate matters relating to the establishment and objectives of the Institute, definitions of the various types of members that may belong to the Institute, the activities the Institute is to carry out to achieve its objectives, and matters relating to Institute membership. Articles 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 refer to the various internal bodies that make up the Institute. Article 11 establishes English as the language to be used by the Institute, 12 relates to finances, 13 to disclosure, and 14 and 15 to the legal status (personería) and legal capacity of the Institute and matters relating to the enjoyment of immunities and privileges inherent in International Law. Article 16 establishes the possibility of establishing cooperative relationships with other organizations, and articles 17, 18, and 19 establish the transitional provisions, matters concerning the depository of the Agreement, and matters pertaining to its signature, respectively. The subjects of ratification, acceptance, and approval are regulated in article 20; accession in article 21; entry into force in article 22; reservations in numeral 23; and amendments in 24. Article 25 refers to withdrawals, 26 to interpretations, 27 to consultations, and, finally, 28 to the termination of the Agreement. In none of these does this Chamber find any regulation that is contrary to the Law of the Constitution. However, although it presents no constitutional problem whatsoever, the Chamber considers it appropriate to make some comment in relation to article 3 of the Agreement, which contains the various types of possible members of the “Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI).” The interest in analyzing this rule is because it establishes three different types of possible members of the Institute and, depending on which of these Costa Rica belongs to, the country will have to make expenditures, which some of the consulted institutions or entities objected to, due to the current austerity policies in the country. The potential financial commitment that the country would assume with the approval of the Agreement depends on the class of member in which the Costa Rican State becomes a part of the Institute, an aspect that the deputies of the Legislative Assembly must be clear about when definitively approving the Agreement. Although this does not imply any constitutional defect, this Chamber, in Advisory Opinion No. 2000-04527, of 2:45 p.m. on May 31, 2000, regarding the pecuniary obligations acquired by the State upon signing an instrument of this nature, stated:

“**IX.- On the pecuniary obligations that the State acquires.** Article XII of the Convention whose approval is consulted provides that the expenses of each delegation shall be borne by the respective State. It also determines that each member must pay a contribution intended to finance the expenses of the Organization, in accordance with a progressive table prepared by it. In this regard, it must be said that the establishment of the foregoing expenditures is perfectly valid in light of the Law of the Constitution, since the treaty is an ideal mechanism for the acquisition of such duties. However, it is important to clarify that the approval of this Convention does not exempt the Costa Rican State from its duty to authorize the expenses that its participation in the World Customs Organization entails, through the respective Budget Law, as provided in article 176 of the Political Constitution. In summary, on this point, no defect of unconstitutionality is found.” Thus, in the event that the Costa Rican State acquires any financial commitment, it must authorize the expenses that its status as a member of the “Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI)” imply, through the corresponding Budget Law, in accordance with the provisions of article 176 of the Political Constitution, without those financial commitments suffering, in any way, from defects of unconstitutionality.

**VII.- ON THE LEGAL STATUS (PERSONERÍA) AND LEGAL CAPACITY OF THE INSTITUTE AND THE IMMUNITIES AND PRIVILEGES GRANTED TO IT IN THE AGREEMENT.** Article 14 of the Agreement under review grants the Institute legal status (personería legal) and capacity to contract, acquire, and dispose of movable and immovable property and to sue and defend itself in legal proceedings. Likewise, article 15 provides that the Institute may enjoy privileges and immunities both in the Member State in which it has its headquarters and in other Member States, when necessary for its proper functioning in the territory of those States. Those privileges and immunities shall be those customary for international organizations of the same type as the Institute and shall be specified in a separate agreement that may be carried out between the Member States or between the Institute and a particular Member State. The granting of legal personality (personería jurídica) and legal capacity for this type of international organization, as well as the granting of privileges and immunities, has already been examined by this Chamber, without finding any objection of unconstitutionality therein, since all of this is common and proper to be granted to this class of organization, according to Public International Law and Diplomatic Law. In this regard, this Court, in the aforementioned advisory opinion, stated:

“**VIII.- On the regime of immunities and exemptions and the legal personality (personalidad jurídica) of the Council.** The Convention establishes, in its annex, that both the Council (now Organization) and its delegates, officials, and ad hoc experts enjoy a series of facilities for the performance of their functions, such as criminal immunity, exemption from customs inspection, protection of their property and their domicile against acts of authority, etc. Likewise, it confers legal personality (personalidad jurídica) on the Organization. In a case similar to the one under analysis, this Chamber stated in ruling number 7292-98, at sixteen hours and nine minutes on October thirteenth, nineteen ninety-eight, determined, regarding the advantages that can be validly granted to representatives of organizations of this type:

"ON THE CREATION OF THE SUBREGIONAL OFFICE: That the Costa Rican State signs agreements with international organizations, in light of articles 140 subsection 10), 121 subsection 4), and 7 of the Political Constitution, is perfectly valid. In fact, the functions that the Office will carry out, of a scientific nature in the field of meteorology, with the aim of fostering international cooperation in this matter, in no way contravene the text or the spirit of the Fundamental Law. The fact that legal personality (personalidad jurídica) is granted to the Subregional Office through the agreement, given the requirement of its ratification, fully respects the constitutional precepts on the matter.

ON THE GRANTING OF EXEMPTIONS: The Convention establishes a series of tax and customs exemptions granted to the World Meteorological Organization (articles 13, 14, 15, and 16), as well as to the representatives of the member countries of the Organization (article 17) and to its officials who are not Costa Rican nationals or residents in the country (article 22). In the same way, monetary restrictions are eliminated for the Organization, the representatives of the member countries, and the officials of the Subregional Office. The foregoing exemptions do not contradict the constitutional text. The Costa Rican State accepted limiting its scope of action in tax matters in relation to the Organization, the representatives of its Member States, and its officials who are not Costa Rican nationals or residents in Costa Rica. Taxes can be created by law, and their application can be excepted by law or by an act of higher efficacy than the Law, which is what occurs in the present case. Said tax exemptions are not applicable to nationals or residents of Costa Rica, which is perfectly valid in light of the constitutional text. The exemption from restrictions inherent in monetary policy is fully reasonable, since, by their nature, these organizations and their officials require broad facility in the purchase and sale of foreign currency in an expeditious manner, so imposing the same monetary limitations of common law on them could render their participation nugatory. Nor do the proposed exemptions in any way transgress the rules instituted by the Protocol of Accession of Costa Rica to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Said agreement establishes a series of restrictions on the protectionist policy of States in commercial and customs matters, allowing the exception in cases of countries that, due to their low level of economic development, require a certain protection so that their domestic production is not harmed. The agreed exemptions are part of a voluntary act of the State of Costa Rica, which is accepting to dispose of its right of tariff protection in favor of the Organization, its representatives, and officials, which in no way harms free trade, as it rather tends toward the tariff reduction of certain goods in specific cases.

ON THE CONCESSION OF IMMUNITIES: The Agreement provides for a series of partial immunities and immunities from full jurisdiction for the Organization, its officials, and the representatives of the Member States (articles 9, 18, 19, and 22 of the text of the Convention). These exceptions are typical of the regime of officials of diplomatic missions and other specialized agencies of the United Nations headquartered in the country. They do not violate National Sovereignty or the state's punitive power; therefore, they do not contradict the rules of the current Constitution." We are, in this case, in a situation similar to the one cited above. The facilities recognized by the Costa Rican State through its accession to the Convention are common to those given to other international organizations and diplomatic missions based in the country, and the fact of being authorized by the Legislative Assembly in the legitimate exercise of its discretionary powers as an agent of the sovereign people gives them the necessary validity. The Chamber finds no defect of unconstitutionality regarding this point.” What was said on that occasion is fully applicable in the case of the Agreement under review, so this Chamber finds that no grounds for unconstitutionality are incurred in the granting of legal status (personería) and legal capacity to the Institute (article 14 of the Agreement), nor in conferring upon it the privileges and immunities referred to in numeral 15 of the Agreement.

**VIII.- ON THE POSSIBILITY OF AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENT.** Article 24 of the Agreement provides:

“**Article 24. AMENDMENTS.** Any Party to this Agreement may propose an amendment to this Agreement by submitting such proposal to the Director-General of the Secretariat. The Director-General shall communicate a proposed amendment to all Members of GGGI at least ninety days before its consideration by the Assembly.” A first reading might give the impression that this creates some exceptional procedure for the approval—by the Costa Rican State—of modifications to International Agreements outside the framework of the Political Constitution. When examining similar provisions, this Constitutional Court has concluded that this type of rule must be interpreted in the sense that Costa Rica has not renounced its competence for the legislative approval of treaties, according to the rules of article 121, subsection 4), of the Constitution, with the sole exception of minor protocols, the only case in which parliamentary approval is exempted (see Advisory Opinion No. 2000-04527 of 2:45 p.m. on May 31, 2000). In this regard, this Court considered the following:

"(...) The following article, that is, nineteen, which regulates matters relating to amendments, must be analyzed carefully, for the reasons that will be set forth below. The cited article provides three ways to amend the Convention: by unanimous acceptance, after examination within the Organization, and by a conference, which shall enter into force automatically twelve months after the date of their acceptance or approval, as the case may be. However, it should be clarified that this can in no way be interpreted as an exemption from the requirement that any substantial modification to a Treaty must be submitted to the legislative approval procedure by constitutional mandate, as this would only be valid for minor Protocols. This thesis was developed by this Court in ruling number 9565-2006 at sixteen hours eight minutes on July fifth, two thousand six, in which, as relevant, it stated:

'Regarding these two clauses, the Chamber must rule on the procedure for the adoption of amendments, in relation to the constitutional rules that regulate the competence of the Executive and Legislative Branches regarding the creation and approval of rules of Public International Law. Thus, it is valid in light of the Law of the Constitution that modifications to the content of the Convention and its annexes be approved by the Conference of the Parties, which may decide by consensus (absence of votes against) or even by simple majority, regarding the referred modifications. Although these are not simple developments of the Convention, which can be implemented through lower-ranking protocols, since Articles 21 and 22 provide for modifications to the content of the treaty (and what is the same, its annexes), paragraph 4 of numeral 21 clearly determines that any amendment agreed upon by the Conference of the Parties, to be effective in a State or organization, must first be ratified, accepted, or approved. In accordance with the provisions of article 7 in relation to numeral 121 subsection 4), all of the Political Constitution, the approval of international treaties is the exclusive competence of the Legislative Assembly, so, in the particular case of Costa Rica, the referred amendments shall be binding only if they are subject to approval by the Assembly.'" "From what has been outlined above, it is clear that substantial amendments must be submitted to the knowledge of the Legislative Assembly, in accordance with the tenor of numeral 7 of the Political Constitution, but not amendments or modifications of a minor nature (article 140 subsection 10 of the Magna Carta). Thus, it will be the competence of the Assembly to determine in each specific case whether the amendment is substantial or minor, in order to decide whether or not it must be submitted to the respective procedure before Parliament." (Advisory Opinion No. 2008-018208 of 6:16 p.m. on December 10, 2008).

In accordance with the foregoing, article 24 of the Agreement would not be unconstitutional if interpreted in the sense that, if it involves a substantial reform to the Agreement on the Establishment of the Global Green Growth Institute, said amendment must be incorporated into our legal system through the legislative approval mechanism provided for in article 121, subsection 4), of the Political Constitution. However, if it involves amendments or modifications of a minor nature, these may be approved through the procedure provided for in article 140, subsection 10), second paragraph, of the Political Constitution, which provides that “Protocols derived from such public treaties or international agreements that do not require legislative approval shall enter into force once promulgated by the Executive Branch.” In accordance with the jurisprudential line of this Constitutional Court, it shall be for the Legislative Assembly to decide, in each case, whether the amendment is substantial or minor, in order to determine whether or not it must be subjected to the respective procedure before that parliamentary body (see, in this same vein, advisory opinion No. 2013-007731 of 09:05 hours on June 7, 2013).</span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.85pt; line-height: 150%;"><strong><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%; color: #010101; mso-ansi-language: EN;">IX.- Conclusion.</span></strong><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%; color: #010101; mso-ansi-language: EN;"> By virtue of the foregoing, the consultation is answered to the effect that the bill under consultation does not contain essential procedural defects or provisions that would invalidate it.</span></p> </div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center"><strong><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%; color: #010101; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Por tanto:</span></strong></p> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%; color: #010101; mso-ansi-language: EN;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The consultation is answered to the effect that the bill for “<em>Approval of the Agreement on the Establishment of the Global Green Growth Institute”</em> (expediente legislativo No. 18.588) contains no essential procedural defects or unconstitutional provisions. Article 24 of the Agreement would not be unconstitutional if it is interpreted that substantial amendments to the Agreement on the Establishment of the Global Green Growth Institute must be incorporated into our legal system through the mechanism of legislative approval provided for in Article 121, clause 4, of the Political Constitution</span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-ansi-language: EN;">.-</span></p> </div> <table class="MsoNormalTable" style="width: 468.0pt; border-collapse: collapse; mso-padding-alt: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" border="0" width="624" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><colgroup><col width="208" /><col width="208" /><col width="208" /></colgroup> <tbody> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 0; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes;"> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-left: none; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center"><img id="_x0000_i1025" src="../../Users/vgranados/AppData/Local/Temp/HTM3DAD_1.PNG" alt="graphic" width="202" height="86" border="0" /></p> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-left: none; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 1;"> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center">Fernando Cruz C.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center">Presidente a.i</p> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 2;"> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center"><img id="_x0000_i1026" src="../../Users/vgranados/AppData/Local/Temp/HTM3DAD_2.JPG" alt="graphic" width="200" height="65" border="0" /></p> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center"><img id="_x0000_i1027" src="../../Users/vgranados/AppData/Local/Temp/HTM3DAD_3.JPG" alt="graphic" width="200" height="65" border="0" /></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 3;"> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center">Fernando Castillo V.</p> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center">Nancy Hernández L.</p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 4;"> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center"><img id="_x0000_i1028" src="../../Users/vgranados/AppData/Local/Temp/HTM3DAD_4.JPG" alt="graphic" width="200" height="65" border="0" /></p> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center"><img id="_x0000_i1029" src="../../Users/vgranados/AppData/Local/Temp/HTM3DAD_5.PNG" alt="graphic" width="202" height="86" border="0" /></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 5;"> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center">Luis Fdo. Salazar A.</p> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center">Jorge Araya G.</p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 6;"> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center"><img id="_x0000_i1030" src="../../Users/vgranados/AppData/Local/Temp/HTM3DAD_6.JPG" alt="graphic" width="200" height="65" border="0" /></p> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center"><img id="_x0000_i1031" src="../../Users/vgranados/AppData/Local/Temp/HTM3DAD_7.JPG" alt="graphic" width="200" height="65" border="0" /></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 7; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;"> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-top: none; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center">Anamari Garro V.</p> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> </td> <td style="width: 150.0pt; border-top: none; border-left: none; border-bottom: solid #010101 1.0pt; border-right: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #010101 .25pt; padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;" valign="top" width="200"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center; line-height: 150%;" align="center">Ricardo Madrigal J.</p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">&nbsp;</span></p> </div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 8.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Digitally Signed Document</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 8.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-ansi-language: EN;">-- Verification Code --</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%; font-family: 'WASP 39 L'; mso-ansi-language: EN;">*NDCQ5VJG2GG61*</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 14.0pt; line-height: 150%; font-family: Tahoma; mso-ansi-language: EN;">&nbsp; NDCQ5VJG2GG61</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: right;" align="right"><strong><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 8.0pt; color: #010101; mso-ansi-language: EN;">EXPEDIENTE N° </span></strong><strong><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 8.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN;">14-003132-0007-CO </span></strong></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">&nbsp;</span></p> <div style="border: none; border-top: solid #010101 1.0pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #010101 .75pt; padding: 0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm;"> <div style="margin-top: 1.0pt;"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 8.0pt; color: #010101; mso-ansi-language: EN;">Telephones: 2295-3696/2295-3697/2295-3698/2295-3700. Fax: 2295-3712. Email address: www.poder-judicial.go.cr/salaconstitucional. Edificio Corte Suprema de Justicia, San José, Distrito Catedral, Barrio González Lahmann, streets 19 and 21, avenues 8 and 6</span></p> </div> </div> </div>

*140031320007CO* vgranados vgranados 2 0 2015-04-06T19:31:00Z 2015-04-06T19:31:00Z 2 4760 26180 Poder-Judicial 218 61 30879 11.9999 21 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 *140031320007CO* Res. Nº 2014004944 SALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, a las catorce horas treinta minutos del nueve de abril de dos mil catorce.

Consulta legislativa preceptiva de constitucionalidad formulada por el Directorio de la Asamblea Legislativa, sobre el proyecto de "Aprobación del Acuerdo sobre el Establecimiento del Global Green Growth Institute", expediente legislativo número 18.588.

Resultando:

1.- La consulta, que se formula en cumplimiento de lo que establece el inciso a), del artículo 96, de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, fue recibida en la Secretaría de la Sala a las 17:00 horas del 10 de marzo de 2014, con una copia certificada del expediente legislativo número 18.588. La Presidencia de la Sala tuvo por presentada la consulta mediante resolución de las 08:49 horas del 11 de marzo del 2014. El término para evacuarla vence el 11 de abril del año en curso.

2.- En el procedimiento se cumplió con las formalidades establecidas en la ley.

Redacta el Magistrado Salazar Alvarado; y,

Considerando:

I.- OBJETO Y ADMISIBILIDAD DE LA CONSULTA. Esta consulta preceptiva de constitucionalidad se formula por el Directorio de la Asamblea Legislativa en cumplimiento de lo dispuesto en el artículo 10, inciso b), de la Constitución Política y 96, inciso a), de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, en relación con el proyecto denominado "Aprobación del Acuerdo sobre el Establecimiento del Global Green Growth Institute", que se tramita en expediente legislativo número 18.588, por tratarse de la aprobación legislativa de un acuerdo internacional. Dado que el citado proyecto de ley fue aprobado en primer debate en la Sesión Plenaria N° 130, del 25 de febrero de 2014, procede su conocimiento de conformidad con lo dispuesto en el artículo 98, párrafo 1°, de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional.

II.- SOBRE EL PROCEDIMIENTO LEGISLATIVO EN EL CASO CONCRETO. De conformidad con lo establecido en el artículo 98, de la ley que rige esta Jurisdicción, este Tribunal revisó el procedimiento legislativo para la tramitación del proyecto de ley de “Aprobación del Acuerdo sobre el Establecimiento del Global Green Growth Institute”, y no advirtió que se haya producido algún vicio sustancial o de trascendencia, capaz de invalidar el proyecto por quebranto a principios esenciales, tales como, el democrático, de participación, de representación política, respeto de las minorías o de publicidad y transparencia. En este sentido, el acuerdo consultado fue suscrito por el Ministro de Ambiente, Energía y Telecomunicaciones, señor René Castro Salazar, en representación del Poder Ejecutivo, de conformidad con los Plenos Poderes que, para tal efecto, le confirió la Presidenta de la República, señora Laura Chinchilla Miranda, con el refrendo del Ministro a.i. de Relaciones Exteriores y Culto, señor Carlos Alberto Roverssi Rojas, según consta en instrumento otorgado el 05 de junio de 2012 (véanse folios 26 y 29 de la copia del expediente legislativo), lo cual es conforme con lo dispuesto en el artículo 140, inciso 10, de la Constitución Política, que dispone que la firma de los acuerdos internacionales es una atribución del Poder Ejecutivo, entendido como un órgano colegiado compuesto por el Presidente de la República y el respectivo Ministro del ramo. Lo anterior se refuerza con el aval que le da la Presidenta de la República al tratado a través de las diversas etapas del procedimiento legislativo, conforme se dirá. Efectivamente, el proyecto de ley fue presentado ante la corriente legislativa por parte del Poder Ejecutivo en ejercicio de su poder de iniciativa, previsto en el artículo 140, inciso 5), de la Constitución Política (véanse folios 1-13 de la copia del expediente legislativo). Asimismo, se acredita que, mediante Decreto Ejecutivo N° 37.411-MP del 29 de noviembre de 2012 (véase folios 36-41 de la copia del expediente legislativo), el Poder Ejecutivo convocó a sesiones extraordinarias a fin de que la Asamblea Legislativa conociera, entre otros, el expediente legislativo N° 18.588. Asimismo, por Decreto Ejecutivo N° 37.837-MP del 31 de julio de 2013 (véanse folios 569-574 del expediente legislativo) el Poder Ejecutivo convocó nuevamente a sesiones extraordinarias para conocer, entre otros, del proyecto de ley consultado, convocatoria que fue ampliada por Decreto Ejecutivo N° 38.177-MP de 17 de febrero de 2014 para conocer ese mismo proyecto de ley (véanse folios 635 y 636 de la copia del expediente legislativo). En todo ello, no se observa ningún vicio en relación con la suscripción del Acuerdo. En cuanto al trámite se refiere, se acreditó que el proyecto de ley fue publicado en el Alcance N° 187 del Diario Oficial La Gaceta N° 226 del 22 de noviembre de 2012 (véase folio 35 de la copia del expediente legislativo, así como la dirección del Sitio Web http://www.imprentanacional.go.cr/pub/2012/11/22/ALCA187_22_11_2012.pdf). Posteriormente, el texto del proyecto fue remitido ante la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior, donde, en Sesión N° 6 de esa Comisión Permanente Especial, celebrada el 06 de agosto de 2013, se discutió y aprobó -por la totalidad de los diputados presentes-, la moción de orden número 1-6 presentada por varios diputados y diputadas para que se eliminen del texto del proyecto de aprobación del Acuerdo, las certificaciones y copias remitidas por el Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores y Culto, así como las firmas y sellos de la traductora oficial por no pertenecer al Acuerdo en estudio. Dicha moción fue aprobada por unanimidad y, acto seguido, se sometió a discusión el proyecto, el cual, finalmente, fue aprobado en Comisión por mayoría de cinco votos a favor, de seis de los diputados y diputadas presentes y se rindió el respectivo dictamen unánime afirmativo (véanse folios 583-628 de la copia del expediente legislativo). La facultad constitucional de la Asamblea Legislativa consiste única y exclusivamente en aprobar o improbar un Tratado o Acuerdo ya suscrito, por medio de la emisión de una ley formal y, por ende, está imposibilitada para variar su texto, de modo que el trámite dado por la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior al proyecto de ley en cuestión está ajustado al Derecho de la Constitución.

III.- Además, el referido proyecto de ley fue consultado ante las siguientes instituciones y organizaciones: Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía, Ministerio de Planificación Nacional y Política Económica, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores y Culto, Ministerio de Hacienda, APREFLOFAS, Fundación Neotrópica Costarricense, INBIO y EARTH, en virtud de haberse aprobado en Comisión, por la totalidad de los diputados presentes, la Moción N° 2-27 de varias diputadas y diputados para que el expediente legislativo N° 18.588 fuera enviado en consulta a esas instituciones y organizaciones, según consta el Acta de la Sesión Ordinaria N° 27 de la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior, celebrada el 24 de enero de 2013 (véase folio 47 de la copia del expediente legislativo). Asimismo, en Sesión Ordinaria N° 28 de la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior, celebrada el 31 de enero de 2013, se aprobó la Moción N° 1-28 de varios diputadas y diputados y se dispuso consultar el expediente 18.588 también a las siguientes instituciones y entidades: todas las municipalidades y Concejos Municipales de Distrito, la Universidad de Costa Rica (UCR), la Universidad Nacional (UNA), el Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica (ITCR), la Universidad Estatal a Distancia (UNED), la Universidad Técnica Nacional, el Consejo Nacional de Rectores (CONARE), el CONESUP, el Ministerio de Salud, la Coalición Costarricense de Iniciativas de Desarrollo, la Corporación Hortícola Nacional, la Corporación Bananera Nacional, la Refinadora Costarricense de Petróleo S.A. (RECOPE), todos los colegios profesionales, la Unión Costarricense de Cámaras y Asociaciones del Sector Empresarial (UCCAEP), Cámara y Exportadores de Costa Rica (CADEXCO), Cámara de Industrias de Costa Rica (CICR), Cámara de Agricultura y Agroindustria (CNAA), Cámara de Comercio de Costa Rica, Cámara de Industria Alimentaria, CRECEX, Corporación Ganadera (CORFOGA), Cámara Nacional de Avicultores y Cámara Nacional de Porcicultores (véanse folios 87-89 de la copia del expediente legislativo). Si bien no todas las instituciones, organizaciones y entidades consultadas rindieron su criterio ante la Comisión, las que lo rindieron, no hicieron reparo alguno de constitucionalidad al proyecto de ley en cuestión y las que realizaron alguna observación, fue únicamente en torno a la oportunidad y conveniencia de aprobar el Acuerdo en vista de los compromisos y posibles erogaciones que ello implique para Costa Rica, así como sobre el alcance de algunos puntos del proyecto, pero sin atribuir al contenido del Convenio algún choque con el Derecho de la Constitución, por lo que, para los efectos de esta consulta, las observaciones hechas al proyecto carecen de relevancia al no tener alcances constitucionales. Adicionalmente, no se observa infracción a los derechos y potestades de los legisladores, pues el proyecto de ley fue conocido por el Plenario Legislativo como correspondía, por tratarse de un convenio internacional y, por lo tanto, no podía ser delegado en una Comisión Legislativa con Potestad Plena, según lo establece el artículo 124, párrafo 3, de la Constitución Política, en relación con el 121, inciso 4), ibídem. De otra parte, el proyecto de ley en consulta fue convocado por el Poder Ejecutivo para ser conocido en sesiones extraordinarias, según se relató anteriormente, respetándose lo dispuesto en el artículo 118, de la Constitución Política y contó, para su aprobación en primer debate, con el voto de mayoría de treinta y cinco diputados y diputadas y seis votos en contra, según consta en el Acta de la Sesión Plenaria N° 130 llevada a cabo el 25 de febrero de 2014 (véanse folios 638-642 de la copia del expediente legislativo). En consecuencia, este Tribunal Constitucional no advierte que en el trámite de aprobación del proyecto de ley denominado “Aprobación del Acuerdo sobre el Establecimiento del Global Green Growth Institute” se haya producido algún vicio sustancial o de trascendencia que lo invalide.

IV.- EN CUANTO AL FONDO DEL PROYECTO. De previo a realizar algunas observaciones en cuanto al fondo del proyecto de ley consultado, debe tenerse presente que, de acuerdo con lo establecido en el artículo 101, de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, el dictamen de esta Sala sólo será vinculante en cuanto establezca la existencia de trámites inconstitucionales del proyecto consultado. Además, en cuanto al contenido de los diversos artículos, solo se hará referencia a aquellos que presenten alguna duda sobre su constitucionalidad o que requieran alguna aclaración o interpretación conforme con la Constitución Política y demás legislación interna. Los artículos no citados expresamente, han de entenderse conformes, en principio, con el Derecho de la Constitución.

V.- SOBRE LA CONSTITUCIONALIDAD DEL TRATADO CONSULTADO. El día 20 de junio de 2012, fue suscrito, en idioma inglés, en la Ciudad de Río de Janeiro, el acuerdo bajo estudio, con la finalidad -según se expone en la exposición de motivos y el propio texto del Acuerdo-, de promover el crecimiento verde apuntando a los aspectos claves de los resultados económicos y de sostenibilidad del medio ambiente, así como crear y mejorar las condiciones económicas, ambientales y sociales de los países en desarrollo y emergentes a través de asociaciones entre los países desarrollados y los países en desarrollo y los sectores públicos y privados (artículo 2 del Acuerdo consultado). Todo lo cual, no contraviene nuestra Norma Fundamental, sino que, por el contrario, es acorde con esta (artículo 50 de la Constitución Política). Asimismo, analizado el contenido del articulado que conforma el tratado consultado, este Tribunal Constitucional estima que, en términos generales, sustancialmente, es conforme con los preceptos, valores y principios fundamentales del Derecho de la Constitución.

VI.- DESCRIPCIÓN DE LA NORMATIVA DEL ACUERDO. Las normas contenidas en el Acuerdo bajo estudio -que conforman un total de 28 artículos- son las típicas de los Acuerdos de esta naturaleza. Los artículos 1, 2, 3, 4 y 5 del Acuerdo, regulan lo relativo al establecimiento y objetivos del Instituto, definiciones de los diversos tipos de miembros que pueden pertenecer al Instituto, las actividades que ha de realizar el Instituto para alcanzar sus objetivos y lo relativo a la membresía del Instituto. Los artículos 6, 7, 8, 9 y 10, se refieren a los distintos órganos internos que conforman el Instituto. En el artículo 11, se establece el idioma inglés como el que usará el Instituto, el 12 se relaciona con las finanzas, el 13 con la divulgación y el 14 y 15 con la personería y la capacidad legal del Instituto y lo relativo al disfrute de inmunidades y privilegios propios del Derecho Internacional. En el artículo 16, se establece la posibilidad de establecer relaciones de cooperación con otras organizaciones y los artículos 17, 18 y 19, establecen las disposiciones transitorias, lo respectivo al depósito del Acuerdo y lo correspondiente a su firma, respectivamente. Los temas de ratificación, aceptación y aprobación se regulan en el artículo 20; la adhesión en el artículo 21; la entrada en rigor en el artículo 22, las salvedades en el numeral 23 y las enmiendas en el 24. El artículo 25 se refiere a los retiros, el 26 a las interpretaciones, el 27 a las consultas y, finalmente, el 28 a la terminación del Acuerdo. En ninguno de ellos estima esta Sala que exista alguna regulación que sea contraria al Derecho de la Constitución. Sin embargo, aunque no presenta problema alguno de constitucionalidad, considera la Sala procedente hacer algún comentario en relación con el artículo 3 del Acuerdo que contiene los diversos tipos de miembros posibles del “Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI)”. El interés en analizar esta norma se debe a que en ella se establecen tres tipos diferentes de miembros posibles de Instituto y, dependiendo de a cuál de ellos pertenezca Costa Rica, deberá el país hacer erogaciones, lo cual algunos de las instituciones u organismos consultados objetaron, debido a las políticas de austeridad vigentes en el país. El eventual compromiso financiero que asumiría el país con la aprobación del Acuerdo, depende de la clase de miembro en que pase a formar parte del Instituto el Estado Costarricense, aspecto que deberán tener claro las diputadas y los diputados de la Asamblea Legislativa a la hora de aprobar en forma definitiva el Acuerdo. Si bien ello no implica vicio alguno de constitucionalidad, esta Sala, en la Opinión Consultiva Nº 2000-04527, de las 14:45 horas del 31 de mayo del 2000, sobre las obligaciones pecuniarias adquiridas por el Estado al firmar un instrumento de esta naturaleza, indicó:

“IX.- Sobre las obligaciones pecuniarias que el Estado adquiere. El artículo XII del Convenio cuya aprobación se consulta, dispone que los gastos propios de cada delegación serán asumidas por el Estado respectivo. Asimismo, determina que cada miembro deberá pagar una contribución destinada a financiar los gastos de la Organización, de conformidad con una tabla progresiva elaborada por ésta. Al respecto, debe decirse que el establecimiento de las anteriores erogaciones es perfectamente válida a la luz del Derecho de la Constitución, ya que es el tratado un mecanismo idóneo para la adquisición de tales deberes. No obstante, es importante aclarar que la aprobación de este Convenio no exime al Estado costarricense de su deber de autorizar los gastos que su participación en la Organización Mundial Aduanera conlleva, a través de la respectiva Ley de Presupuesto, según dispone el artículo 176 de la Constitución Política. En síntesis, en cuanto a este punto no se descubre ningún vicio de inconstitucionalidad".

Así, en el caso de que el Estado costarricense adquiera algún compromiso financiero, deberá autorizar los gastos que su condición de miembro del “Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI)” impliquen, por medio de la correspondiente Ley de Presupuesto, de conformidad con lo establecido en el artículo 176 de la Constitución Política, sin que esos compromisos financieros adolezcan, de algún modo, de vicios de inconstitucionalidad.

VII.- SOBRE LA PERSONERÍA Y CAPACIDAD LEGAL DEL INSTITUTO Y LAS INMUNIDADES Y PRIVILEGIOS QUE SE LE OTORGAN EN EL ACUERDO. El artículo 14 del Acuerdo en consulta otorga al Instituto personería legal y capacidad para contratar, adquirir y disponer de bienes muebles e inmuebles y de instituir y defenderse en procedimientos legales. Asimismo, en el artículo 15, se dispone que el Instituto podrá disfrutar de privilegios e inmunidades tanto en el Estado miembro en el que tenga su sede, como en otros Estados miembros, cuando ello sea necesario para su correcto funcionamiento en el territorio de esos Estados. Esos privilegios e inmunidades, serán las que se acostumbren para organizaciones internacionales del mismo tipo que el Instituto y se especificarán en un acuerdo separado que puede llevarse a cabo entre los Estados miembros o entre el Instituto y un Estado miembro particular. El otorgamiento de personería jurídica y capacidad legal para este tipo de organismos internacionales, así como el otorgamiento de privilegios e inmunidades, ya ha sido examinado por esta Sala, sin que se halle en ello reparo alguno de inconstitucionalidad, pues todo esto es común y propio que sea otorgado a esta clase de organismo, según el Derecho Internacional Público y el Derecho Diplomático. Al respecto, este Tribunal, en la opinión consultiva ya citada expresó:

“VIII.- Sobre el régimen de inmunidades y exenciones y la personalidad jurídica del Consejo. El Convenio establece, en su anexo, que tanto el Consejo (ahora Organización) como sus delegados, funcionarios y peritos ad hoc gozan de una serie de facilidades para el desempeño de sus funciones, tales como inmunidad penal, exención de registro aduanero, protección de sus bienes y de su domicilio contra actos de autoridad, etc. Igualmente, le confiere a la Organización personalidad jurídica. Sobre un caso similar al que se analiza, esta Sala dijo en sentencia número 7292-98, de las dieciséis horas con nueve minutos del trece de octubre de mil novecientos noventa y ocho determinó, respecto de las ventajas que pueden ser válidamente otorgadas a los representantes de organizaciones de este tipo:

"SOBRE LA CREACIÓN DE LA OFICINA SUBREGIONAL: El que el Estado costarricense suscriba convenios con organismos internacionales, a la luz de los artículos 140 inciso 10), 121 inciso 4) y 7 de la Constitución Política, es perfectamente válido. De hecho, las funciones que la Oficina realizará, de carácter científico en el campo de la meteorología, con el objeto de propiciar la cooperación internacional en esta materia, en nada contravienen el texto ni el espíritu de la Ley Fundamental. El hecho de que se le conceda personalidad jurídica a la Oficina Subregional mediante el convenio, dado el requisito de su ratificación, respeta íntegramente los preceptos constitucionales sobre la materia.

SOBRE EL OTORGAMIENTO DE EXONERACIONES: El Convenio establece una serie de exoneraciones fiscales y aduaneras otorgadas a la Organización Meteorológica Mundial (artículos 13, 14, 15 y 16), así como a los representantes de los países miembros de la Organización (artículo 17) y a sus funcionarios no costarricenses ni residentes en el país (artículo 22). De la misma forma, se eliminan restricciones de carácter monetario a la Organización, a los representantes de los países miembros y a los funcionarios de la Oficina Subregional. Las anteriores exenciones no contradicen el texto constitucional. El Estado costarricense aceptó limitar su espectro de actuación en materia tributaria en relación con la Organización, los representantes de los Estados miembros de la misma y sus funcionarios no costarricenses ni residentes en Costa Rica. Por ley se pueden crear tributos y por ley o por acto de eficacia superior a la Ley se puede exceptuar su aplicación, lo que en el presente caso ocurre. Las exenciones tributarias dichas no son aplicables a los nacionales ni a los residentes en Costa Rica, lo cual es perfectamente válido, a la luz del texto constitucional. La exención de las restricciones propias de política monetaria son plenamente razonables, toda vez que, por su naturaleza, estos organismos y sus funcionarios requieren de una amplia facilidad en la compra y venta de divisas en forma expedita, por lo que imponerle las mismas limitaciones monetarias del derecho común puede hacer nugatoria su participación. Tampoco las exoneraciones planteadas transgreden de forma alguna las reglas instituidas por el Protocolo de Adhesión de Costa Rica al Acuerdo General sobre Aranceles Aduaneros y Comercio (GATT). Dicho convenio establece una serie de restricciones a la política proteccionista de los Estados en materia comercial y aduanera, permitiendo la excepción en casos de países que, por su bajo nivel de desarrollo económico, requieran de una cierta protección para que su producción nacional no se vea lesionada. Las exenciones acordadas son parte de un acto voluntario del Estado de Costa Rica, el cual está aceptando disponer de su derecho de protección arancelaria en favor de la Organización, sus representantes y funcionarios, lo cual en nada lesiona el libre comercio, pues más bien tiende al desgravamiento de ciertas mercancías en casos concretos.

SOBRE LA CONCESIÓN DE INMUNIDADES: El Acuerdo prevé una serie de inmunidades parciales y de plena jurisdicción a la Organización, a sus funcionarios y a los representantes de los Estados miembros (artículos 9, 18, 19 y 22 del texto del Convenio). Estas excepciones son propias del régimen de los funcionarios de las misiones diplomáticas y de los otros organismos especializados de las Naciones Unidas con sede en el país. No quebrantan la Soberanía Nacional ni la potestad punitiva estatal, no contradicen, pues, las reglas de la Constitución vigente." Estamos en la especie en una situación similar a la antes citada. Las facilidades reconocidas por el Estado costarricense mediante su adhesión al Convenio son comunes a las dadas a otros organismos internacionales y misiones diplomáticas radicadas en el país, y el hecho de ser autorizadas por la Asamblea Legislativa en el legítimo ejercicio de sus potestades discrecionales como agente del pueblo soberano les da la validez necesaria. No descubre la Sala, respecto de este punto vicio de inconstitucionalidad alguno”.

Lo dicho en aquella ocasión, es de plena aplicación en el caso del Acuerdo consultado, de modo que esta Sala no encuentra que en el otorgamiento de personería y capacidad legal al Instituto (artículo 14 del Acuerdo), así como el conferirle los privilegios e inmunidades a que se refiere el numeral 15 del Acuerdo, se incurra en motivo alguno de inconstitucionalidad.

VIII.- SOBRE LA POSIBILIDAD DE ENMIENDAS AL ACUERDO. El artículo 24 del Acuerdo dispone:

“Artículo 24. ENMIENDAS. Cualquier Parte de este Acuerdo puede proponer una enmienda a este Acuerdo presentando tal propuesta al Director-General de la Secretaría. El Director-General comunicará una propuesta de enmienda a todos los Miembros de GGGI por lo menos noventa días antes de su consideración por la Asamblea.” Una primera lectura podría dar la impresión de que con ello se está creando algún procedimiento excepcional para la aprobación -por parte del Estado costarricense- de modificaciones a los Acuerdos Internacionales al margen de la Constitución Política. Al examinar disposiciones similares, este Tribunal Constitucional ha concluido que este tipo de normas deben ser interpretadas en el sentido de que Costa Rica no ha renunciado a su competencia para la aprobación legislativa de tratados, según las reglas del artículo 121, inciso 4), constitucional, con la única excepción de los protocolos de menor rango, único caso en que se exime de aprobación parlamentaria (véase opinión consultiva N° 2000-04527 de las 14:45 horas del 31 de mayo de 2000). Al respecto, este Tribunal consideró lo siguiente:

“(…) El siguiente artículo, sea el diecinueve, que regula lo relativo a las enmiendas debe ser analizado con detenimiento, por las razones que a continuación se expondrán. El citado artículo prevé tres maneras de enmendar el Convenio, por aceptación unánime, previo examen en el seno de la Organización y por una conferencia, las cuales entrarán en vigor de forma automática doce meses después de la fecha de su aceptación o su aprobación según sea el caso. Sin embargo, cabe aclarar que de manera alguna ello puede interpretarse como un eximente del requerimiento que posee toda modificación sustancial a un Tratado de someterse al procedimiento de aprobación legislativa por mandato constitucional, pues ello sería válido solamente para Protocolos de menor rango. Esta tesis, fue desarrollada por este Tribunal en la sentencia número 9565-2006 de las dieciséis horas ocho minutos del cinco de julio de dos mil seis, en la cual en lo que interesa señaló:

‘Sobre estas dos cláusulas, la Sala se debe pronunciar respecto del procedimiento para la adopción de las enmiendas, en relación con las normas constitucionales que regulan la competencia de los Poderes Ejecutivo y Legislativo respecto de la creación y aprobación de normas de Derecho Internacional Público. Así, resulta válido a la luz del Derecho de la Constitución que las modificaciones al contenido del Convenio y a sus anexos sean aprobados por la Conferencia de las Partes, la cual puede decidir por consenso (ausencia de votos en contra) o incluso por simple mayoría, acerca de las referidas modificaciones. Si bien no se trata de simples desarrollos del Convenio, los cuales pueden ser implementados por medio de protocolos de menor rango, ya que los artículos 21 y 22 prevén las modificaciones al contenido del tratado (y lo que es lo mismo, de sus anexos), el párrafo 4 del numeral 21 determina claramente que toda enmienda acordada por la Conferencia de las Partes, para ser eficaz en un Estado u organización, deberá primero ser ratificada, aceptada o aprobada. De conformidad con lo que dispone el artículo 7° en relación con el numeral 121 inciso 4), todos de la Constitución Política, la aprobación de los tratados internacionales es competencia exclusiva de la Asamblea Legislativa, por lo que, en el caso particular de Costa Rica, las referidas enmiendas serán obligatorias únicamente si son objeto de aprobación por parte de la Asamblea’.

De lo anteriormente esbozado, queda claro, que las enmiendas de carácter sustancial deben ser sometidas al conocimiento de la Asamblea Legislativa, ello al tenor del numeral 7 de la Constitución Política, no así enmiendas o modificaciones de orden menor (artículo 140 inciso 10 de la Carta Magna). Es así, como será competencia de la Asamblea el delimitar en cada caso concreto si la enmienda es sustancial o menor, a efecto de determinar si debe o no someterse al procedimiento respectivo ante el Parlamento". (Opinión consultiva N° 2008-018208 de las 18:16 hrs. de 10 de diciembre de 2008).

En concordancia con lo expuesto, el artículo 24 del Acuerdo, no resultaría inconstitucional, si se interpreta en el sentido de que, si se trata de una reforma sustancial al Acuerdo sobre el Establecimiento del Global Green Growth Institute, dicha enmienda ha de ser incorporada a nuestro ordenamiento jurídico, mediante el mecanismo de aprobación legislativa previsto en el artículo 121, inciso 4), de la Constitución Política. No obstante, si se trata de enmiendas o modificaciones de orden menor, éstas pueden ser aprobadas a través del procedimiento previsto en el artículo 140, inciso 10), párrafo segundo, de la Constitución Política, el cual dispone que “Los protocolos derivados de dichos tratados públicos o convenios internacionales que no requieran aprobación legislativa, entrarán en vigencia una vez promulgados por el Poder Ejecutivo”. De conformidad con la línea jurisprudencial de este Tribunal Constitucional, le corresponderá, en cada caso, a la Asamblea Legislativa decidir si la enmienda es sustancial o menor, a efecto de determinar si debe o no someterse al procedimiento respectivo ante ese órgano parlamentario (véase en este mismo sentido la opinión consultiva N° 2013-007731 de las 09:05 horas del 07 de junio de 2013).

IX.- Conclusión. En mérito de lo expuesto, se evacua la consulta en el sentido de que, el proyecto de ley consultado, no contiene vicios esenciales de procedimiento o disposiciones que lo invaliden.

Por tanto:

Se evacua la consulta en el sentido que el proyecto de ley de “Aprobación del Acuerdo sobre el establecimiento del Global Green Growth Institute” (expediente legislativo N° 18.588) no contiene vicios esenciales de procedimiento o disposiciones inconstitucionales. El artículo 24 del Acuerdo no resultaría inconstitucional si se interpreta que las reformas sustanciales al Acuerdo sobre el establecimiento del Global Green Growth Institute, deben ser incorporadas a nuestro ordenamiento jurídico mediante el mecanismo de aprobación legislativa previsto en el artículo 121, inciso 4, de la Constitución Política.- Fernando Cruz C.

Presidente a.i Fernando Castillo V.

Nancy Hernández L.

Luis Fdo. Salazar A.

Jorge Araya G.

Anamari Garro V.

Ricardo Madrigal J.

Documento Firmado Digitalmente -- Código verificador -- *NDCQ5VJG2GG61*