{
  "id": "nexus-ext-1-0005-299881",
  "citation": "Res. 00323-2021 Sala Segunda de la Corte",
  "section": "nexus_decisions",
  "doc_type": "court_decision",
  "title_es": "Disidencia sobre reconocimiento de riesgo policial a funcionario de parques nacionales",
  "title_en": "Dissent on recognition of police risk for national parks official",
  "summary_es": "La presente resolución consiste en el voto salvado de la Magistrada Varela Araya dentro del expediente 18-000744-0929-LA, tramitado ante la Sala Segunda de la Corte Suprema de Justicia. La disidente se aparta del criterio mayoritario que denegó el reconocimiento del riesgo policial al demandante. La magistrada argumenta que, aunque el accionante no ostenta formalmente la condición de policía ni pertenece a la fuerza pública, las funciones que desempeña de conformidad con la normativa aplicable — particularmente la Ley del Servicio de Parques Nacionales (artículo 9) y la Ley Forestal (artículo 54) — implican labores de vigilancia, control y protección de los recursos naturales que lo exponen a peligros similares a los enfrentados por cuerpos policiales, poniendo en riesgo su integridad física y su vida. El voto salvado se fundamenta en la naturaleza material de las tareas asignadas, por encima de la denominación formal del cargo, sosteniendo que corresponde otorgar la compensación salarial por riesgo policial al trabajador. No se transcribe el fallo de mayoría ni otros antecedentes procesales.",
  "summary_en": "This resolution is the dissenting opinion of Judge Varela Araya in case file 18-000744-0929-LA, heard before the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court. The dissenter disagrees with the majority decision that denied the plaintiff recognition of police risk pay. The judge argues that, although the plaintiff does not formally hold the status of a police officer or belong to the public force, the functions he performs under applicable regulations — particularly the National Parks Service Law (article 9) and the Forestry Law (article 54) — involve surveillance, control, and protection duties over natural resources, exposing him to dangers similar to those faced by police forces, thus endangering his physical integrity and life. The dissenting opinion is based on the material nature of the assigned tasks, above the formal job title, holding that the worker should be granted the police risk salary supplement. The majority ruling and other procedural background are not transcribed.",
  "court_or_agency": "Sala Segunda de la Corte",
  "date": "2021",
  "year": "2021",
  "topic_ids": [
    "_off-topic"
  ],
  "primary_topic_id": "_off-topic",
  "es_concept_hints": [
    "riesgo policial",
    "voto salvado",
    "Ley del Servicio de Parques Nacionales",
    "Art. 54 Ley Forestal",
    "Sala Segunda"
  ],
  "concept_anchors": [
    {
      "article": "Art. 9",
      "law": "Ley del Servicio de Parques Nacionales"
    },
    {
      "article": "Art. 54",
      "law": "Ley Forestal"
    },
    {
      "article": "Art. 91",
      "law": "Ley General de Policía"
    }
  ],
  "keywords_es": [
    "riesgo policial",
    "Sala Segunda",
    "voto salvado",
    "Ley del Servicio de Parques Nacionales",
    "Ley Forestal",
    "funcionario de parques",
    "compensación salarial",
    "integridad física",
    "labores policiales"
  ],
  "keywords_en": [
    "police risk",
    "Second Chamber",
    "dissenting opinion",
    "National Parks Service Law",
    "Forestry Law",
    "parks official",
    "salary supplement",
    "physical integrity",
    "police duties"
  ],
  "excerpt_es": "VOTO SALVADO DE LA MAGISTRADA VARELA ARAYA. Disiente del criterio de mayoría, pues, considera que, conforme con la normativa aplicable, el demandante lleva a cabo labores policiales, “aunque no es un policía ni forma parte de la fuerza pública”, las cuales ponen en riesgo su integridad física y hasta su vida.",
  "excerpt_en": "DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE VARELA ARAYA. She dissents from the majority opinion, as she considers that, under applicable regulations, the plaintiff performs police duties, “although he is not a police officer nor part of the public force,” which endanger his physical integrity and even his life.",
  "outcome": {
    "label_en": "Dissenting opinion",
    "label_es": "Voto salvado",
    "summary_en": "Judge Varela Araya dissents from the majority opinion and considers that the plaintiff is entitled to police risk pay, given the nature of his duties in national parks.",
    "summary_es": "La Magistrada Varela Araya disiente del criterio de mayoría y considera que al demandante le asiste el derecho al pago por riesgo policial, dada la naturaleza de sus funciones en parques nacionales."
  },
  "pull_quotes": [
    {
      "context": "Voto Salvado de la Magistrada Varela Araya",
      "quote_en": "She dissents from the majority opinion, as she considers that, under applicable regulations, the plaintiff performs police duties, “although he is not a police officer nor part of the public force,” which endanger his physical integrity and even his life.",
      "quote_es": "Disiente del criterio de mayoría, pues, considera que, conforme con la normativa aplicable, el demandante lleva a cabo labores policiales, “aunque no es un policía ni forma parte de la fuerza pública”, las cuales ponen en riesgo su integridad física y hasta su vida."
    }
  ],
  "cites": [],
  "cited_by": [],
  "references": {
    "internal": [],
    "external": []
  },
  "source_url": "https://nexuspj.poder-judicial.go.cr/document/ext-1-0005-299881",
  "tier": 2,
  "_editorial_citation_count": 0,
  "regulations_by_article": null,
  "amendments_by_article": null,
  "dictamen_by_article": null,
  "concordancias_by_article": null,
  "afectaciones_by_article": null,
  "resoluciones_by_article": null,
  "cited_by_votos": [],
  "cited_norms": [],
  "cited_norms_inverted": [
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-41661",
      "norm_num": "7575",
      "norm_name": "Ley Forestal",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "13/02/1996"
    },
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-66525",
      "norm_num": "7410",
      "norm_name": "Ley General de Policía",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "26/05/1994"
    },
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-8216",
      "norm_num": "6084",
      "norm_name": "Ley del Servicio de Parques Nacionales",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "24/08/1977"
    }
  ],
  "sentencias_relacionadas": [],
  "temas_y_subtemas": [],
  "cascade_only": false,
  "amendment_count": 0,
  "body_es_text": "VOTO\nSALVADO DE LA MAGISTRADA VARELA ARAYA. Disiente\ndel criterio de mayoría, pues, considera que, conforme con la normativa\naplicable, el demandante lleva a cabo labores policiales, “aunque no es un\npolicía ni forma parte de la fuerza pública”, las cuales ponen en riesgo su\nintegridad física y hasta su vida. [323-21]",
  "body_en_text": "DISSENTING VOTE OF JUDGE VARELA ARAYA. She dissents from the majority opinion, as she considers that, in accordance with the applicable regulations, the plaintiff performs police duties, “even though he is not a police officer nor a member of the public force,” which put his physical integrity and even his life at risk. [323-21]"
}