{
  "id": "nexus-ext-1-0005-329221",
  "citation": "",
  "section": "nexus_decisions",
  "doc_type": "court_decision",
  "title_es": "Denegatoria de plus salarial por riesgo policial a guardaparques",
  "title_en": "Denial of police-risk salary bonus to park rangers",
  "summary_es": "El Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda deniega un plus salarial por riesgo policial a un oficial de seguridad del SINAC que desempeña funciones de guardaparques. La sentencia interpreta que, a pesar de que la Ley Forestal (Art. 54), la Ley del Servicio de Parques Nacionales (Art. 9) y la Ley de Conservación de Vida Silvestre (Art. 16) confieren a los guardaparques carácter de autoridad policial, dicha investidura se limita a labores de denuncia y colaboración con las autoridades competentes, sin equipararse a las funciones de la Fuerza Pública. El tribunal reconoce que el funcionario corre riesgos similares a los de un policía, pero concluye que esa circunstancia no basta para otorgarle el plus salarial, pues la naturaleza de sus funciones es distinta. Adicionalmente, se declara inatendible un recurso procesal del actor por no haberse opuesto oportunamente a la declaratoria del proceso como de puro derecho (Art. 587.1 del Código de Trabajo). Se resuelve sin especial condena en costas.",
  "summary_en": "The Administrative and Civil Treasury Court denies a police-risk salary bonus to a SINAC security officer working as a park ranger. The ruling interprets that, although the Forestry Law (Art. 54), the National Parks Service Law (Art. 9), and the Wildlife Conservation Law (Art. 16) grant park rangers the status of police authority, this authority is limited to reporting and collaborating with the competent authorities, without equating to the functions of the Public Force. The court acknowledges that the officer faces risks similar to those of a police officer, but concludes that this circumstance is insufficient to grant the salary bonus, given the different nature of his duties. Additionally, a procedural appeal by the plaintiff is dismissed for failing to timely oppose the declaration of the case as a pure legal matter (Art. 587.1 of the Labor Code). The case is resolved without special costs order.",
  "court_or_agency": "",
  "date": "",
  "year": "",
  "topic_ids": [
    "wildlife-law-7317",
    "_off-topic"
  ],
  "primary_topic_id": null,
  "es_concept_hints": [
    "plus salarial",
    "riesgo policial",
    "guardaparques",
    "SINAC",
    "autoridad policial",
    "proceso de puro derecho",
    "Fuerza Pública"
  ],
  "concept_anchors": [
    {
      "article": "Art. 54",
      "law": "Ley Forestal"
    },
    {
      "article": "Art. 9",
      "law": "Ley del Servicio de Parques Nacionales"
    },
    {
      "article": "Art. 16",
      "law": "Ley de Conservación de Vida Silvestre"
    },
    {
      "article": "Art. 587",
      "law": "Código de Trabajo"
    }
  ],
  "keywords_es": [
    "plus salarial",
    "riesgo policial",
    "guardaparques",
    "SINAC",
    "autoridad policial",
    "Ley Forestal",
    "Ley del Servicio de Parques Nacionales",
    "Ley de Conservación de Vida Silvestre",
    "Fuerza Pública",
    "proceso de puro derecho",
    "Código de Trabajo",
    "costas"
  ],
  "keywords_en": [
    "salary bonus",
    "police risk",
    "park rangers",
    "SINAC",
    "police authority",
    "Forestry Law",
    "National Parks Service Law",
    "Wildlife Conservation Law",
    "Public Force",
    "pure legal process",
    "Labor Code",
    "costs"
  ],
  "excerpt_es": "Es cierto que en los numerales 54 de la Ley Forestal, 1996, 9 de la Ley del Servicio de Parques Nacionales y 16 de la Ley de Conservación de Vida Silvestre, se dispone que las personas funcionarias que fungen como guardaparques tienen carácter de autoridad policial; sin embargo, dichas normas establecen con claridad que esa autoridad se limita a denunciar y reportar ante las autoridades competentes las respectivas infracciones, o sea que sus obligaciones son de mera colaboración y, por ende, distintas a los servidores y las servidoras de la Fuerza Pública. No hay duda de que “el promovente corre peligro como los y las policías”, mas, “esa circunstancia no es suficiente para concluir que ostenta esa investidura”.",
  "excerpt_en": "It is true that in articles 54 of the Forestry Law, 1996, 9 of the National Parks Service Law, and 16 of the Wildlife Conservation Law, it is provided that officials serving as park rangers have the status of police authority; however, said norms clearly establish that such authority is limited to reporting and notifying the competent authorities of the respective infractions, meaning their obligations are merely of collaboration and, therefore, different from those of the Public Force servants. There is no doubt that “the plaintiff faces danger like police officers”, yet “that circumstance is not sufficient to conclude that he holds such investiture”.",
  "outcome": {
    "label_en": "Denied",
    "label_es": "Denegado",
    "summary_en": "The police-risk salary bonus is denied to a SINAC park ranger, on the grounds that his police authority limited to reporting does not equate him to the Public Force, and his procedural appeal is dismissed.",
    "summary_es": "Se deniega el plus salarial por riesgo policial a un guardaparques del SINAC, al estimar que su autoridad policial limitada a denunciar no lo equipara a la Fuerza Pública, y se declara inatendible su recurso procesal."
  },
  "pull_quotes": [
    {
      "context": "Considerando",
      "quote_en": "It is true that in articles 54 of the Forestry Law, 1996, 9 of the National Parks Service Law, and 16 of the Wildlife Conservation Law, it is provided that officials serving as park rangers have the status of police authority; however, said norms clearly establish that such authority is limited to reporting and notifying the competent authorities of the respective infractions, meaning their obligations are merely of collaboration and, therefore, different from those of the Public Force servants.",
      "quote_es": "Es cierto que en los numerales 54 de la Ley Forestal, 1996, 9 de la Ley del Servicio de Parques Nacionales y 16 de la Ley de Conservación de Vida Silvestre, se dispone que las personas funcionarias que fungen como guardaparques tienen carácter de autoridad policial; sin embargo, dichas normas establecen con claridad que esa autoridad se limita a denunciar y reportar ante las autoridades competentes las respectivas infracciones, o sea que sus obligaciones son de mera colaboración y, por ende, distintas a los servidores y las servidoras de la Fuerza Pública."
    },
    {
      "context": "Considerando",
      "quote_en": "There is no doubt that “the plaintiff faces danger like police officers”, yet “that circumstance is not sufficient to conclude that he holds such investiture”.",
      "quote_es": "No hay duda de que “el promovente corre peligro como los y las policías”, mas, “esa circunstancia no es suficiente para concluir que ostenta esa investidura”."
    }
  ],
  "cites": [],
  "cited_by": [],
  "references": {
    "internal": [],
    "external": []
  },
  "source_url": "",
  "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-12648",
      "norm_num": "7317",
      "norm_name": "Ley de Conservación de la Vida Silvestre",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "30/10/1992"
    },
    {
      "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": "SE DENIEGA PLUS SALARIAL POR RIESGO POLICIAL A GUARDAPARQUES. Oficial de seguridad del Sistema\nNacional de Áreas de Conservación (SINAC). “Es cierto que en los numerales 54 de la Ley Forestal,\n1996, 9 de la Ley del Servicio de Parques Nacionales y 16 de la Ley de Conservación de Vida\nSilvestre, se dispone que las personas funcionarias que fungen como guardaparques tienen carácter de\nautoridad policial; sin embargo, dichas normas establecen con claridad que esa autoridad se limita a\ndenunciar y reportar ante las autoridades competentes las respectivas infracciones, o sea que sus\nobligaciones son de mera colaboración y, por ende, distintas a los servidores y las servidoras de la\nFuerza Pública.” No hay duda de que “el promovente corre peligro como los y las policías”, mas, “esa\ncircunstancia no es suficiente para concluir que ostenta esa investidura”. INATENDIBLE RECURSO POR\nRAZONES PROCESALES. No se “alegó la oposición a la declaratoria del proceso de puro derecho en el\nmomento procesal oportuno” (artículo 587 inciso 1° del Código de Trabajo). SIN ESPECIAL CONDENA EN\nCOSTAS. [3002-22]",
  "body_en_text": "POLICE-RISK SALARY SUPPLEMENT DENIED TO PARK RANGERS. Security officer of the National System of Conservation Areas (Sistema Nacional de Áreas de Conservación, SINAC). “It is true that in paragraphs 54 of the Ley Forestal, 1996, 9 of the Ley del Servicio de Parques Nacionales, and 16 of the Ley de Conservación de Vida Silvestre, it is provided that public employees who act as park rangers have the character of police authority; however, those provisions clearly establish that such authority is limited to reporting and filing complaints before the competent authorities regarding the respective infractions, meaning that their duties are merely of collaboration and, therefore, different from those of the members of the Public Force (Fuerza Pública).” There is no doubt that “the petitioner faces danger like police officers do,” but “that circumstance is not sufficient to conclude that they hold that status.” APPEAL DISMISSED FOR PROCEDURAL REASONS. “Opposition to the declaration of the purely legal proceeding was not raised at the appropriate procedural moment” (article 587, subsection 1, of the Labor Code). NO SPECIAL AWARD OF COSTS. [3002-22]"
}