{
"id": "nexus-sen-1-0007-1245788",
"citation": "Res. 23612-2024 Sala Constitucional",
"section": "nexus_decisions",
"doc_type": "constitutional_decision",
"title_es": "Constitucionalidad del Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca de la OMC",
"title_en": "Constitutionality of the WTO Fisheries Subsidies Agreement",
"summary_es": "La Sala Constitucional evacuó la consulta legislativa preceptiva sobre el proyecto de ley de aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca. La Sala verificó que el procedimiento legislativo cumplió con las disposiciones constitucionales y reglamentarias, sin vicios sustanciales de trámite ni de fondo. En cuanto al fondo, el Tribunal determinó que el acuerdo es compatible con el artículo 50 constitucional, pues busca eliminar las subvenciones que contribuyen a la pesca ilegal, no declarada y no reglamentada (INDNR) y a la sobrepesca, promoviendo la sostenibilidad de los recursos marinos y la salud de los océanos. Se analizó que la subvención al combustible para el sector pesquero en Costa Rica (artículo 45 de la Ley 7384) no constituye una subvención específica según el Acuerdo SMC, por lo que no estaría prohibida. La Sala señaló la necesidad de corregir aspectos formales en el texto del proyecto, conforme al artículo 152 del Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa, antes del segundo debate. Concluyó que el acuerdo no contiene vicios sustanciales y se enmarca en los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible y la protección del medio ambiente, reafirmando la sustentabilidad de las poblaciones marinas.",
"summary_en": "The Constitutional Chamber heard the mandatory legislative consultation on the bill to approve the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies. The Chamber verified that the legislative procedure complied with constitutional and regulatory provisions, finding no substantial procedural or substantive defects. On the merits, the Court determined that the agreement is compatible with Article 50 of the Constitution, as it seeks to eliminate subsidies contributing to illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing and overfishing, thereby promoting the sustainability of marine resources and the health of the oceans. It analyzed that the fuel subsidy for the fishing sector in Costa Rica (Article 45 of Law 7384) does not constitute a specific subsidy under the SCM Agreement, and thus would not be prohibited. The Chamber noted the need to correct formal aspects in the bill's text, pursuant to Article 152 of the Legislative Assembly Regulations, before the second debate. It concluded that the agreement contains no substantial defects and falls within the sustainable development goals and environmental protection, reaffirming the sustainability of marine populations.",
"court_or_agency": "Sala Constitucional",
"date": "20/08/2024",
"year": "2024",
"topic_ids": [
"_off-topic"
],
"primary_topic_id": "_off-topic",
"es_concept_hints": [
"Consulta Legislativa",
"Sala Constitucional",
"subvención a la pesca",
"INDNR (pesca ilegal, no declarada, no reglamentada)",
"sobrepesca",
"OMC",
"INCOPESCA",
"Acuerdo SMC"
],
"article_citations": [
{
"law": "Aprueba Protocolo de enmienda del acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se",
"article": "all",
"doc_id": "norm-102875",
"source": "metadata"
},
{
"law": "Tratados Internacionales 10520",
"article": "all",
"doc_id": "norm-102875",
"source": "metadata"
},
{
"law": "Protocolo de enmienda del acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la",
"article": "all",
"doc_id": "norm-102876",
"source": "metadata"
},
{
"law": "Tratados Internacionales 10520-A",
"article": "all",
"doc_id": "norm-102876",
"source": "metadata"
}
],
"keywords_es": [
"Consulta Legislativa",
"Sala Constitucional",
"Subvenciones a la Pesca",
"OMC",
"pesca ilegal no declarada y no reglamentada (INDNR)",
"sobrepesca",
"sostenibilidad marina",
"Artículo 50 Constitución Política",
"Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior",
"INCOPESCA",
"Acuerdo SMC",
"subvención específica",
"Comité de Subvenciones a la Pesca",
"ODS 14.6",
"Organismos Regionales de Ordenación Pesquera (OROP)",
"Acuerdos Regionales de Ordenación Pesquera (AROP)"
],
"keywords_en": [
"Legislative Consultation",
"Constitutional Chamber",
"Fisheries Subsidies",
"WTO",
"illegal unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU)",
"overfishing",
"marine sustainability",
"Article 50 Constitution",
"Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade",
"INCOPESCA",
"SCM Agreement",
"specific subsidy",
"Fisheries Subsidies Committee",
"SDG 14.6",
"Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs)",
"Regional Fisheries Management Agreements (RFMAs)"
],
"excerpt_es": "Se evacua la consulta formulada en el sentido de que el proyecto de ley \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca”, tramitado bajo el expediente legislativo N° 24.030, no contiene vicios sustanciales de procedimiento legislativo ni de fondo. Deberá considerarse -oportunamente- la corrección de las cuestiones formales señaladas al final del considerando V, y antes del Segundo Debate, de conformidad con el artículo 152, del Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa.",
"excerpt_en": "The consultation is resolved in the sense that the bill \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on June 17, 2022, and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\", processed under legislative file No. 24.030, does not contain substantial defects in the legislative procedure or on the merits. The correction of formal issues noted at the end of recital V must be considered in due course and before the Second Debate, pursuant to Article 152 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly.",
"outcome": {
"label_en": "Dismissed ruling",
"label_es": "Sentencia desestimatoria",
"summary_en": "The Chamber ruled that the bill does not contain substantial procedural or substantive defects and is compatible with the Constitution.",
"summary_es": "Se dictaminó que el proyecto de ley no contiene vicios sustanciales de procedimiento ni de fondo, y es compatible con la Constitución."
},
"pull_quotes": [
{
"context": "Considerando VI-A",
"quote_en": "The bill... is compatible with Article 50 of the Political Constitution, insofar as it seeks to insert the country into the concert of Nations, in a commercial agreement aimed at taking control over illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing and overfishing.",
"quote_es": "El proyecto de ley... es compatible con el artículo 50, de la Constitución Política, en el tanto procura insertar al país en el concierto de las Naciones, en un acuerdo comercial y para tomar control sobre la pesca ilegal, no declarada y no reglamentada (INDNR) y la sobrepesca."
},
{
"context": "Considerando VI-B (citando informe de Servicios Técnicos)",
"quote_en": "In the opinion of this advisory, the benefit contained in Article 45 of the INCOPESCA Law, the so-called 'fuel subsidy for the fishing sector' IS NOT A SPECIFIC SUBSIDY, and therefore it does not apply or is outside the scope or coverage of the Agreement now submitted for approval.",
"quote_es": "En criterio de esta asesoría, el beneficio contenido en el artículo 45 de la Ley de INCOPESCA, la denominada 'subvención al combustible del sector pesquero' NO ES UN SUBVENCIÓN ESPECÍFICA, y por tanto no le aplica o está fuera del alcance o ámbito de cobertura del Acuerdo ahora sometido a aprobación."
},
{
"context": "Considerando IV",
"quote_en": "… no procedural defect whatsoever is observed regarding the handling of the mentioned agreement.",
"quote_es": "… no se observa vicio alguno en lo tocante a la tramitación del mencionado acuerdo."
}
],
"cites": [],
"cited_by": [],
"references": {
"internal": [],
"external": []
},
"source_url": "https://nexuspj.poder-judicial.go.cr/document/sen-1-0007-1245788",
"tier": 2,
"is_environmental": false,
"_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": [],
"sentencias_relacionadas": [],
"temas_y_subtemas": [],
"cascade_only": false,
"amendment_count": 0,
"body_es_text": "Revisión del Documento\n\n\n\nExp: 24-019586-0007-CO \n\nRes. Nº 2024023612\n\n \n\nSALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, a las nueve horas cincuenta minutos del veinte de agosto de dos mil veinticuatro .\n\n \n\nConsulta legislativa preceptiva de constitucionalidad formulada por el Directorio de la Asamblea Legislativa, sobre el proyecto de ley \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca”, expediente legislativo N° 24.030.\n\nResultando:\n\n 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 9:50 horas del 18 de julio de 2024, con una copia certificada del expediente legislativo. La Presidencia de la Sala tuvo por presentada la consulta mediante resolución de las 13:17 horas del mismo día. El término para evacuarla vence el día 18 de agosto del año en curso.\n\n 2.- En el procedimiento se cumplió con las formalidades establecidas en la ley.\n\n Redacta el Magistrado Salazar Alvarado; y,\n\nConsiderando:\n\n I.- De previo. Lo primero que procede, a los efectos de evacuar la consulta, es verificar los trámites seguidos en este caso, en concordancia con lo que señala el artículo 98, de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, al disponer que la consulta deberá hacerse después de aprobado el proyecto en primer debate y antes de la aprobación definitiva y que, al evacuarla, la Sala dictaminará sobre cualesquiera aspectos o motivos que estime relevantes desde el punto de vista constitucional, pero vinculante sólo en lo que se refiere a los trámites. Para los efectos anteriores y por la importancia del asunto de que se trata, en el siguiente considerando se hará una síntesis cronológica del proyecto de ley.\n\n II.- La tramitación del expediente número en la Asamblea Legislativa. El proyecto de \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca”, que se tramita en el expediente legislativo N° 24.030, ha seguido el siguiente orden cronológico: \n\n a) El proyecto, que es de iniciativa del Poder Ejecutivo, fue presentado a la Secretaría del Directorio de la Asamblea Legislativa, a las 10:26 horas del 9 de noviembre de 2023 (folios 1 y siguientes del expediente legislativo).\n\n b) El Presidente de la Asamblea Legislativa ordenó, el día 9 de noviembre de 2023, asignar el mencionado proyecto a la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior; asimismo, se traslada el 13 de noviembre al Departamento de Gestión Documental y Archivo, para la publicación y trámite, y al Departamento de Servicios Parlamentarios (folio 1 y 21).\n\n c) El Poder Ejecutivo, mediante Decreto Ejecutivo N° 44249-MP, amplía la convocatoria a sesiones extraordinarias en la que incluye el proyecto de ley que nos ocupa (folio 22 a 25).\n\n d) El 20 de noviembre de 2023, en cumplimiento del artículo 117, del Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa, el Departamento de Gestión Documental y Archivo, remitió para la publicación en el Diario Oficial La Gaceta, el expediente N° 24.030, que es \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca” (folio 27).\n\n e) El 23 de noviembre de 2023, en cumplimiento del artículo 118, del Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa, el Departamento de Gestión Documental y Archivo, remitió al Departamento de Estudios, Referencia y Servicios Técnicos, el proyecto de ley de \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca” (folio 28).\n\n f) Por Sesión Ordinaria N° 15 del 6 de diciembre de 2023, de la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior, dentro de la cual conoció y conformó a la subcomisión para que rindiera su informe a la Comisión; asimismo, se acordó consultar al Ministerio de Comercio Exterior, al Instituto Costarricense de Pesca y Acuicultura, Cátedra de la OMC-CR de la Universidad Nacional, Fundación MarViva Costa Rica, Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía, Escuela de Biología Marina de la Universidad Nacional, y al Centro de Investigación en Ciencias del Mar y Limnología (CIMAR/UCR) (folios 52 a 58).\n\n g) Que rinden informe favorable el Instituto Costarricense de Pesca y Acuicultura (INCOPESCA), el Ministerio de Comercio Exterior, la Cátedra OMC Costa Rica Universidad Nacional, la Escuela de Relaciones Internacionales, y el Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía (folios 75 a 88).\n\n h) Por Sesión Ordinaria N° 18 del 17 de enero de 2024, la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior, conoce y aprueba la moción para traer al Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Costarricense de Pesca y Acuicultura (INCOPESCA) (folios 89 a 99).\n\n i) Mediante Sesión Ordinaria N° 19 del 24 de enero de 2024, la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior, recibe a Heiner Méndez Barrientos, Presidente Ejecutivo del Instituto Costarricense de Pesca y Acuicultura (INCOPESCA), y a Manuel Tovar Rivera, Ministro de Comercio Exterior, en el cual piden la aprobación del proyecto de ley (folios 100 a 127).\n\n j) Mediante oficio AL-DEST-IJU-025-2024 del 30 de enero de 2024, el Departamento de Servicios Técnicos, rinde su informe jurídico al expediente N° 24.030, que es proyecto de ley de \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca” (folio 129 al 144).\n\n k) Mediante Sesión Ordinaria N° 21 del 14 de febrero de 2024, la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior, conoce y aprueba el informe de Sub-Comisión; de igual manera ese mismo día es votado afirmativamente por el fondo y la redacción del dictamen es encargado al diputado Manuel Morales Díaz (169 al 219).\n\n l) El 5 de marzo de 2024, la Secretaría del Directorio de la Asamblea Legislativa recibe de la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior, el expediente legislativo N° 24.030, conteniendo el Dictamen Unánime Afirmativo al proyecto de ley de \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca” (folios 220 y 221).\n\n m) El Poder Ejecutivo mediante Decreto Ejecutivo N° 44524-MP, amplía la convocatoria a sesiones extraordinarias en la que incluye el proyecto de ley que nos ocupa (222 al 224).\n\n n) Mediante acuerdo del Consejo Universitario de Sesión N° 6808, artículo 7, del 4 de junio de 2024, la Universidad de Costa Rica emite su criterio afirmativo para que se apruebe el proyecto de ley \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca” (folios 227 al 229). \n\n o) Mediante Sesión Ordinaria N° 23 del 17 de junio de 2024, se presentó y aprobó en el Plenario Legislativo una moción de orden de conformidad con el artículo 39 bis, para incluir entre otros expedientes legislativos, el N° 24.030 que nos ocupa, y levantar la sesión antes de la hora reglamentaria. Posteriormente, se inicia la discusión en el trámite de primer debate del proyecto de ley de \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca”, al cual se presentaron mociones de fondo del artículo 137, del Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa, las cuales fueron pasadas a la Comisión Dictaminadora (folios 249 al 260).\n\n p) Mediante Sesión N° 02 del 19 de junio de 2024, de la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior, conoció de las mociones de fondo del artículo 137, en cuya oportunidad rechaza dos mociones y aprueba la moción 137-1 para establecer una norma de implementación a los artículos 4, y 5, del Convenio, obligaciones que estarían bajo la atención de INCOPESCA (folios 262 al 282).\n\n q) Mediante Sesión N° 28 del 25 de junio de 2024, el Plenario Legislativo conoció y aprobó moción del artículo 29 bis, del Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa, para incluir entre otros expedientes el 24.030 que nos ocupa. Asimismo, se continuó con la discusión en primer debate del referido expediente, que es proyecto de ley de \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca” con el primer informe de Comisión, del artículo 137, del Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa. Los diputados y diputadas no hicieron uso de las mociones de reiteración, razón por la cual se inicia la discusión por el fondo, y se sometió a votación, quedando aprobado el proyecto de ley con treinta y nueve votos a favor y ninguno en contra (folios 286 al 292). \n\n r) La Comisión Permanente Especial de Redacción recibe el 26 de junio de 2024, el expediente legislativo N° 24.030, que es proyecto de ley de \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca” (folio 296 al 312).\n\n s) La Comisión Permanente Especial de Redacción, remite a la Secretaría del Directorio, la redacción final del expediente legislativo N° 24.030, que es proyecto de ley de \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca” (folio 313).\n\n III.- El procedimiento en el caso concreto. De conformidad con lo establecido en el artículo 98, de la Ley que rige esta Jurisdicción, este Tribunal analizó la tramitación del proyecto de ley \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca”, expediente legislativo N° 24.030. En efecto, el proyecto de ley fue conocido por el Plenario Legislativo como correspondía, por tratarse de un Convenio Internacional que no podía ser delegado en una Comisión Legislativa con Potestad Legislativa Plena, según lo establece el artículo 124, párrafo 3, de la Constitución Política, en relación con el 121, párrafo 4, ibídem. En cumplimiento del principio de publicidad, el proyecto de ley fue publicado en el Alcance N° 230 a La Gaceta N° 217 del 22 de noviembre de 2023 (https://www.imprentanacional.go.cr/pub/2023/11/22/ALCA230_22_11_2023.pdf). El proyecto de ley fue asignado por la Presidencia del Directorio de la Asamblea Legislativa a la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior, como en efecto correspondía por el contenido del Convenio Internacional. En dicha cámara, de conformidad con su tramitación, se acordó consultar el proyecto de ley al Ministerio de Comercio Exterior, al Instituto Costarricense de Pesca y Acuicultura, Cátedra de la OMC-CR de la Universidad Nacional, Fundación MarViva Costa Rica, Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía, Escuela de Biología Marina de la Universidad Nacional, y Centro de Investigación en Ciencias del Mar y Limnología (CIMAR/UCR). Además, de conformidad con el artículo 122, del Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa, se aportó el informe jurídico preparado por el Departamento de Estudios, Referencias y Servicios Técnicos mediante el oficio AL-DEST-IJU-025-2024 del 30 de enero de 2024, fue votado y dictaminado afirmativamente por unanimidad de la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior en su Sesión Ordinaria N° 21 del 14 de febrero de 2024. Finalmente, en Sesión Ordinaria N° 28 del 25 de junio pasado, el proyecto de ley fue votado en el Plenario Legislativo con la aprobación de treinta y nueve votos a favor y cero en contra. \n\nIV.- A partir de lo anterior, es posible inferir que la aprobación del proyecto de ley en consulta ha respetado todas las disposiciones procedimentales que la Constitución Política (artículos 7, 121, inciso 4), 124, 140, inciso 5), y 10), y el Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa (artículos 85, inciso c) y d), 113, 117, 118, 119, 122, 129, 132, 134 y 144). En este sentido, el proyecto de ley fue presentado para su tramitación legislativa por parte del Poder Ejecutivo, en ejercicio de su derecho de iniciativa, previsto en el artículo 140, inciso 5), de la Constitución Política, con el fin de precisar y mejorar los esfuerzos conjuntos de la Organización Mundial del Comercio (OMC), en el tema de las subvenciones a la pesca irregular, todo ello dentro de los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible (ODS) 14.6, para eliminar aquellas subvenciones que contribuyen a la pesca ilegal, no declarada y no reglamentada (INDNR) y la sobrepesca, y con tal fin de acordar condiciones para que se pudiera conservar mejor los recursos marinos que estarían en estado crítico por su explotación descontrolada. Así, se busca ratificar e insertar al país en un tratado internacional de la Organización Mundial del Comercio, del cual Costa Rica ya es parte -con un objetivo comercial y medioambiental- en cuanto busca permitir la sostenibilidad de los recursos pesqueros y la salud de los océanos. Nótese, sobre el particular, que de la lectura del artículo 140, inciso 10), de la Constitución Política, se desprende que la firma de los Tratados Internacionales es una atribución del Poder Ejecutivo. Consecuente con lo anterior, el Poder Ejecutivo ha presentado proyecto de ley de \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca”, bajo el expediente legislativo N° 24.030, para obtener los beneficios derivados del trabajo conjunto de los países cuando unen sus esfuerzos para tomar control sobre la sobrepesca y la forma en que los subsidios pueden aumentar capacidades más allá de la sostenibilidad, pues en la exposición de motivos se estima que: “De acuerdo con últimos datos de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura (FAO), el porcentaje de poblaciones de peces explotadas a niveles biológicamente sostenibles pasó de un 90% en 1974 a un 64.6% en 2019 (se omite cita). La aplicación satisfactoria del Acuerdo por parte de todos los miembros de la OMC contribuirá a garantizar los medios de subsistencia de los 260 millones (cita omitida) de personas que dependen directa o indirectamente de la pesca marina y, por tanto, constituirá una triple victoria para el comercio, el desarrollo y el medio ambiente”. Finalmente, el instrumento internacional que es sometido a la aprobación de la Asamblea Legislativa fue negociado por nuestro país dentro de la Organización Mundial del Comercio, en forma coordinada por el Ministerio de Comercio Exterior, y participación del Instituto Costarricense de Pesca y Acuicultura, y el Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería, de conformidad con el artículo 7.2, c), de la Convención de Viena sobre el Derecho de los Tratados, no requieren plenos poderes quienes estarían acreditados por los Estados ante una conferencia u organización internacional. En este sentido, el artículo 2, inciso d), de la Ley de Creación del Ministerio de Comercio Exterior (Ley N° 7638 del 30 de octubre de 1996), establece que el Ministerio de Comercio Exterior representa al país en la Organización Mundial de Comercio “y en los demás foros comerciales internacionales donde se discutan tratados, convenios y, en general, temas de comercio e inversión”. Adicionalmente, es evidente la intención de buscar la aprobación de este instrumento jurídico, toda vez que es impulsado por el Poder Ejecutivo, así consta con la respectivas rubricas del Presidente de la República Rodrigo Chaves Robles, e Indiana Trejos Gallo, Ministra a.i. de Comercio Exterior. De ahí es que, con claridad meridiana, se evidencia que el proyecto de ley es impulsado por la voluntad del Poder Ejecutivo, quien sometió a consideración de la Asamblea Legislativa el proyecto de ley para la aprobación al convenio multilateral. En conclusión, el Acuerdo es susceptible de ser aprobado por la Asamblea Legislativa; y, bajo tal orden de consideraciones, no se observa vicio alguno en lo tocante a la tramitación del mencionado acuerdo.\n\n V.- Sobre el articulado del Protocolo de enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el cual se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca.\n\n En general, se debe decir que se trata de un tratado como lo indica su título de enmienda que se incorporará como un anexo más al Acuerdo sobre la OMC, el que “será enmendado insertando en el Anexo 1A del Acuerdo sobre la OMC, después del Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones y Medidas Compensatorias, el Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca que figura en el Anexo al presente Protocolo”. Entre otras cosas más, dispone que no se pueden hacer reservas; que está abierto a la aceptación de sus miembros; establece las reglas usuales para que entre en vigor; el nombramiento del Director General de la Organización Mundial de Comercio como la autoridad depositaria; y posterior registro, de conformidad con el artículo 102, de la Carta de las Naciones Unidas. De seguido, inicia el Anexo -que en realidad es el cuerpo del Tratado compuesto de doce artículos- para regular las consecuencias que se derivan de las subvenciones a la pesca ilegal, no declarada y no reglamentada (INDNR) y la sobrepesca. \n\n El proyecto de ley que se tramita ante la Asamblea Legislativa consiste en dos artículos, el primero daría por aprobado el texto del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech, por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca. El artículo segundo, contiene una norma de implementación. Asimismo, se observa que la Comisión Permanente Especial de Redacción, conserva en su informe final la información certificada del texto del mencionado Protocolo, incluido la certificación del Director de la Dirección de Asesoría Legal del Ministerio de Comercio Exterior (temas sobre el cual se abordará oportunamente). \n\n En cuanto al Tratado, su contenido es el siguiente:\n\n El artículo 1, se refiere al alcance del acuerdo, para regular las subvenciones establecidas en el artículo 1.1, del Acuerdo de la Organización Mundial del Comercio sobre Subvenciones y Medidas Compensatorias (acuerdo SMC), entendidas de conformidad con el artículo 2, de ese cuerpo normativo. Cabe, mencionar que delimita el objeto del tratado a la pesca marina salvaje y actividades relacionadas al mar (excluye acuicultura y pesca continental), pero sí incluye a actividades de procesamiento a bordo de la pesca y transbordo de capturas. Se trata de subvenciones de pesca otorgadas, independientemente de si se trata de la nacionalidad de la flota de pesca o registro de la nave o nacionalidad de sus receptores. \n\n El artículo 2, se refiere a las definiciones de algunos de los términos claves del tratado, como “peces”, “pescado”, “pesca”, “actividades relacionadas con la pesca”, “buque”, y “operador”. \n\n El artículo 3, establece una parte sustantiva del Tratado, en tanto fija jurídicamente lo que constituyen las subvenciones que contribuyen a la pesca ilegal, no declarada y no reglamentada, descrito en el párrafo tercero del Plan de Acción Internacional para Prevenir, Desalentar y Eliminar la Pesca Ilegal, No Declarada y No Reglamentada, adoptada por la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura (FAO) en 2001 (así consta en nota al pie de página del Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones). La principal regulación es el acuerdo de que buques que han sido identificados en esta actividad no se beneficien de los subsidios otorgados por los Estados miembros, ya sea aquellos que realizan la actividad de pesca o quienes tienen como propósito el abasto de insumos en el mar. Existe la obligación de legislar en el numeral 3.7, de manera que debe haber en vigor leyes, reglamentos y/o procedimientos administrativos que eviten el otorgamiento de subvenciones a la pesca ilegal, no declarada y no reglamentada, incluso para las que estarían vigentes al momento de la entrada en vigor del acuerdo. \n\n El artículo 4, se refiere a las reglas aplicables a las poblaciones sobreexplotadas. El propósito es establecer una veda o moratoria a la pesca de especies en peligro que así haya sido definido por el Estado ribereño u otra organización OROP/AROP (Organismos Regionales de Ordenación Pesquera/Acuerdos Regionales de Ordenación Pesquera) en la zona y respecto de especies bajo su competencia. No excluye la posibilidad de otorgar subvenciones para coadyuvar en la recuperación de los niveles biológicamente sostenibles. \n\n El artículo 5, se refiere a las reglas aplicables a otras formas de subsidios, cuando se refiere a pesquerías no reguladas, especialmente para prevenir que los subsidios en la pesquería en alta mar o actividades relacionadas a la pesquería en alta mar. Los Estados miembros deberán observar especial cuidado y ejercerán la debida moderación al otorgar subvenciones a buques que no enarbolen el pabellón del Miembro, de igual manera, para la pesca o actividades relacionadas a la pesquería en alta mar de poblaciones marinas no evaluadas. \n\n Los artículo 6 y 7, se refieren a la implementación de una regla para “Países menos adelantados” (PMA), en el que las decisiones que se tomen para esos casos deberán observarse con la debida moderación, así como las situaciones concretas del PMA. El segundo numeral, estará dirigido a países en desarrollo, incluyendo a los PMA, para establecer formas de ayuda que permita implementar las medidas disciplinarias acordadas y un fondo voluntario que ayude a esos fines. La participación se dará entre la FAO y el Fondo Internacional de Desarrollo Agrícola, incluyendo las contribuciones de carácter voluntario de los miembros de la OMC. \n\n El artículo 8, establece dentro de las obligaciones establecidas por la OMC, de dar información sobre los subsidios que el Estado miembro entrega, para cada tipo o clase de actividad pesquera. También, en la medida de lo posible deberá informar sobre: a) estado de poblaciones de peces de pesquería; b) medidas de conservación y ordenación tomadas para las poblaciones de peces; c) la identificación de los buques de pesca subsidiados; d) la capacidad de la flota pesquera subvencionada; y e) los datos de las capturas. Países con menores rango de captura, los PMA y los países en vías de desarrollo, podrán ofrecer la información cada cuatro años, y no dos años, como está establecido en la regla general. En cuanto a las exigencias de transparencia, se incluye la necesidad de informar al año de entrada en vigencia del Tratado, de lo siguiente: a) la lista de buques encontrados en pesca ilegal, no declarada y no reglamentada, y la determinación tomada en cada caso por el Estado miembro; b) la lista de las medidas de implementación con ocasión al Tratado; c) el régimen jurídico detallado aplicable a las pesquerías, y d) las OROP/AROP de las que sea parte el Estado miembro. \n\n El artículo 9, constituye el Comité de Subvenciones a la Pesca que estará compuesto por representantes de cada uno de los Miembros. En él, se establece el mecanismo de la supervisión y monitoreo de los compromisos contenidos en los artículos 3 y 8, del Acuerdo, entre otros objetivos. La evaluación del Tratado se hará en cinco años de entrado en vigencia, y se podrá hacer las proposiciones de enmienda al Tratado luego de la experiencia ganada durante la implementación, que deberán ser conocidos por el Consejo del Comercio de Mercancías de la OMC. \n\nEn lo relacionado con el artículo 10, para la solución de diferencias se utilizarán las reglas de consulta y solución de diferencias preexistentes bajo los artículos XXII y XXIII del GATT de 1994, desarrolladas y aplicadas por el Entendimiento sobre Solución de Diferencias (ESD). Asimismo, para las consultas y solución de diferencias contenidas en los artículos 3, 4, y 5, del Acuerdo, se utilizarán el artículo 4, del Acuerdo de la Organización Mundial del Comercio sobre Subvenciones y Medidas Compensatorias (acuerdo SMC). \n\nDe conformidad con el artículo 11, se permite una aplicación de emergencia para la atención de casos de desastres (no relacionadas a crisis económica o financieras), donde se permite otorgar una subvención para un desastre determinado, una zona geográfica determinada y un tiempo determinada. De igual manera, en las contrataciones, recomendaciones y laudos, no perjudicarán los derechos derivados de la jurisdicción, y obligaciones de los miembros de acuerdo al derecho internacional, incluido el derecho del mar; delimita que en los procesos de solución de conflictos, no tendrá implicaciones sobre cualesquiera reivindicaciones territoriales o delimitaciones de las fronteras marítimas que se hagan valer. \n\n El numeral 12, se refiere a la terminación del Tratado si no se ha logrado avanzar en otras direcciones y disciplinas que no tuvieron consenso al momento de su negociación, que también contribuyen a la sobrecapacidad y sobrepesca, de modo que, cuatro años a partir de que entre en vigor el Tratado, se esperaría que se hayan completado otras áreas de interés por alcanzar en las regulaciones, caso contrario se dará por terminado, salvo otra determinación por el Consejo General. \n\nEl Tratado contiene, en los artículos 3.8, y 4.4, la posibilidad de aplicar un período de dos años para eximir a los países en desarrollo o países menos desarrollados de algunas de las restricciones en el periodo de transición, y para el numeral 8.1. (a) y (b), un período de 4 años para cumplir con las exigencias de transparencia. Nada de esto es aplicable a Costa Rica.\n\nEn el artículo 2°, del proyecto de Ley, se establece la norma de ejecución, por el que la Asamblea Legislativa determina al Instituto Costarricense de Pesca y Acuicultura (INCOPESCA), de conformidad con su ley, como la institución de ejecución de los compromisos de los artículos 4, y 5, del Acuerdo, así como otras facultades establecidas a sus miembros.\n\n Finalmente, debe señalarse que luego del mencionado artículo 2°, del Proyecto de aprobación de la Ley, se continúa con la lectura de la certificación del Director General de la Organización Mundial de Comercio, quien de acuerdo al Tratado, es la persona asignada en calidad de depositaria del instrumento, y le fue asignada la responsabilidad de remitir la copia autenticada de este instrumento a los Estados miembro, entre otras cosas. En consecución de lo anterior, se hace constar la Certificación de la Directora General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, con teléfonos y correos electrónicos, así como la correspondencia de John Adank, Director de la División de Asuntos Jurídicos de la Organización Mundial del Comercio, para dejar testimonio y confirmación de la autenticidad del mencionado documento. Finalmente, la certificación del Director de la Dirección de Asesoría Legal del Ministerio de Comercio Exterior, expedidas a las 11:00 horas del día 20 de octubre de 2023. Todo esto es, evidentemente, materia ajena al cuerpo jurídico del Tratado. Es, por lo tanto, necesario mencionar que ello fue señalado por Servicios Técnicos de la Asamblea Legislativa en el informe AL-DEST-IJU-025-2024 del 30 de enero de 2024, a lo cual, coincide la Sala. Si bien, esa información resulta pertinente para la tramitación de la iniciativa del Poder Ejecutivo al iniciar el trámite de la aprobación legislativa, es información accesoria que no forma parte del Acuerdo ni del Protocolo, por tanto carece de efectos jurídicos para las partes del Tratado. En tal sentido, no requiere constar en el documento de aprobación y ratificación a nivel doméstico. No es necesario que las certificaciones enunciadas consten ni se publique como parte de la aprobación legislativa, por ser información auxiliar a ese cometido. De esta forma, es pertinente hacer este señalamiento para que oportunamente se pueda proceder al amparo del artículo 152, del Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa, para la corrección de cuestiones formales dentro de los proyectos de Ley y antes del Segundo Debate.\n\n VI.- Observaciones en cuanto al fondo del proyecto. \n\nSe debe señalar lo siguiente: \n\nA.- El acuerdo es compatible con el artículo 50, Constitucional. El proyecto de ley de \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca”, tramitado bajo el expediente legislativo N° 24.030, es compatible con el artículo 50, de la Constitución Política, en el tanto procura insertar al país en el concierto de las Naciones, en un acuerdo comercial y para tomar control sobre la pesca ilegal, no declarada y no reglamentada (INDNR) y la sobrepesca. De la lectura del contenido del tratado se evidencia que no tiene cláusulas que otorgan ni comprometen la integridad territorial y la organización política del país. Por el contrario, las disposiciones se encuentran orientadas formalmente a evitar que las subvenciones que otorguen los Estados miembros, puedan servir para perjudicar el medioambiente, además de establecer en el instrumento internacional una política común para las Naciones en vía de desarrollo y “Países menos adelantados” (PMA), con normas más laxas para ellos, pero que aseguren la seguridad alimentaria mundial mediante la sostenibilidad -basada en la ciencia- de poblaciones para la pesca marina. De igual manera, es importante mencionar que tiene el potencial para formar un foro de discusión para determinar nuevas formas de subsidios que deberán regularse en un futuro si tuviera implicaciones en la sostenibilidad de la pesca. \n\n B.- La obligación de legislar y la subvención no está prohibida por el Tratado. Respecto de las obligaciones de implementar legislación, en el Sesión Ordinaria N° 19, del 24 de enero de 2024, el Presidente Ejecutivo de INCOPESCA manifestó que la normativa que exige el tratado ya estaría instalada en Costa Rica. Es decir, no se ocupa acciones normativas por el momento, dado que: “… nosotros no damos ningún tipo de subvención a actividades de pesca ilegal o usuarios que no estén dentro del concepto del ordenamiento jurídico vigente. ¿Qué quiere decir con esto? Básicamente, que nuestro país va más allá en muchas de estas situaciones, porque nosotros más bien cumplimos en exceso las regulaciones que tienen que ver con la formalización de nuestras flotas pesqueras, en todo sentido. Nuestras flotas están sometidas a constantes controles de fiscalización, de ordenación, respecto a áreas de pesca protegidas, áreas marinas de pesca responsable, disposición sobre tallas mínimas de primera madurez sexual, y todo esto precisamente es lo que trata de proteger y apoyar este Convenio Marrakech (sic). Debemos ser claros de que pedimos el apoyo para la aprobación de este proyecto, en el sentido de que no hay una afectación directa al sector pesquero, […] somos conscientes que la pesca se va a ver favorecida en el sentido que más bien nos va a ayudar, y nos va a dar insumos para seguir combatiendo el problema de pesca ilegal no reportada y no reglamentada” (folio 106). Tiene relevancia que en esa sesión se informó que el 100% de la flota es nacional, con la única excepción para barcos de red de cerco, en la Zona Económica Exclusiva por mandato de ley para la pesca de atún (folio 116). Adicionalmente, las subvenciones se otorgan a embarcaciones nacionales por las vedas que se imponen (para salvaguardar poblaciones), de modo que la constatación de la violación a ellas, implica el retiro de la misma como medida cautelar (folio 108 y 109). \n\n Resulta relevante indicar que este Tratado, al insertarse en los Anexos de la OMC, que nuestro país ratificó mediante Ley N° 7475, aceptó como obligación internacional que ciertas subvenciones estarían reguladas por el Tratado. Así, para su determinación se remite a los artículos 1, y 2, del Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones y Medidas Compensatorias (Acuerdo SMC). Como bien lo explica Servicios Técnicos en su informe: \n\n“El Acuerdo SMC define las subvenciones en el artículo 1, y las define como contribuciones financieras del gobierno o un organismo público, cuando haya transferencia o donación de fondos, y cuando no se recaude ingresos públicos, como en el caso de incentivos fiscales.\n\nPor su parte nuestra legislación otorga un beneficio fiscal con respecto a la gasolina del sector pesquero, según el artículo 45 de la Ley de Creación del INCOPESCA (Ley Nº 7384) que transcribimos: \n\nARTICULO 45 - El sector pesquero adquirirá de RECOPE el combustible (gasolina y diésel), para la actividad de pesca no deportiva a un precio competitivo con el precio internacional, basado en el costo promedio de importación del mes anterior y considerando el costo C.I.F. refinería, así como los costos de distribución por oleoducto y distribución en planteles, de tal forma que el precio sea F.O.B. Plantel.\n\nEse precio será fijado por el Servicio Nacional de Electricidad; al cual deberá solicitarlo previamente RECOPE, según lo dispuesto en la Ley No. 6588 del 30 de julio de 1981, o el Instituto.\n\nEl Instituto se encargará de la administración y el control del uso eficiente del combustible, destinado a la actividad pesquera no deportiva”.\n\nEse “precio competitivo en el mercado internacional”, se traduce en la práctica a que solo se calculan los costos (todos los costos), pero se excluyen el pago del impuesto único a los combustibles, lo cual tiene un peso significativo en el precio final del combustible, razón por la cual, efectivamente se abarata o disminuye considerablemente. \n\nEste beneficio fiscal, en sentido estricto sería una “subvención” en los términos del artículo 1 del Acuerdo SMC.\n\nPero lo que dispone este Artículo 1 de “Alcance” del Acuerdo es que aplica solo respecto a “subvenciones específicas”, tal como las define el artículo 2 del Acuerdo SMC.\n\nResta ver, si la exoneración del combustible para el sector pesquero contenida en la ley de INCOPESCA puede tenerse como una “subvención específica”.\n\nTranscribimos el artículo 2 del Acuerdo SMC por su importancia para fijar el ámbito de cobertura del Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca: \n\nArtículo 2\n\nEspecificidad\n\n2.1.- Para determinar si una subvención, tal como se define en el párrafo 1 del artículo 1, es específica para una empresa o rama de producción o un grupo de empresas o ramas de producción (denominados en el presente Acuerdo \"determinadas empresas\") dentro de la jurisdicción de la autoridad otorgante, se aplicarán los principios siguientes:\n\na) Cuando la autoridad otorgante, o la legislación en virtud de la cual actúe la autoridad otorgante, limite explícitamente el acceso a la subvención a determinadas empresas, tal subvención se considerará específica.\n\nb) Cuando la autoridad otorgante, o la legislación en virtud de la cual actúe la autoridad otorgante, establezca criterios o condiciones objetivos (2) que rijan el derecho a obtener la subvención y su cuantía, se considerará que no existe especificidad, siempre que el derecho sea automático y que se respeten estrictamente tales criterios o condiciones. Los criterios o condiciones deberán estar claramente estipulados en una ley, reglamento u otro documento oficial de modo que se puedan verificar.\n\n(2) La expresión \"criterios o condiciones objetivos\" aquí utilizada significa criterios o condiciones que sean imparciales, que no favorezcan a determinadas empresas con respecto a otras y que sean de carácter económico y de aplicación horizontal; cabe citar como ejemplos el número de empleados y el tamaño de la empresa.\n\n(…) \n\nComparemos esta definición, con el beneficio que otorga nuestra legislación:\n\nEl artículo 45 antes citado establece el beneficio de “adquirir el combustible a un precio competitivo” para “todo el sector pesquero”, con la única excepción de la pesca deportiva.\n\nNo se otorga a determinadas empresas con exclusión de otras, sino que se utilizan criterios o condiciones objetivas para excluir un tipo de pesca: la deportiva.\n\nEn criterio de esta asesoría, el beneficio contenido en el artículo 45 de la Ley de INCOPESCA, la denominada “subvención al combustible del sector pesquero” NO ES UN SUBVENCIÓN ESPECÍFICA, y por tanto no le aplica o está fuera del alcance o ámbito de cobertura del Acuerdo ahora sometido a aprobación. \n\nSiendo que el alcance del Acuerdo no aplica con respecto a Costa Rica en cuanto a su legislación nacional vigente, entendemos que la oportunidad o mérito de su aprobación no es entonces un asunto de derecho interno, sino más bien de prestigio y colaboración en ámbito internacional respecto a medidas con respecto a países que poseen grandes flotas pesqueras y que utilizan las subvenciones como un medio de distorsionar el comercio de exportación, pero que a la postre, viene a producir un indebido agotamiento del recurso y atentan entonces en términos de una sostenibilidad global de los mares y la riqueza marina” (los destacados y subrayados son del original.\n\n En consecuencia, la subvención que se otorga en el país no es del tipo que estaría prohibida por el “Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca”, de manera que no sería necesario ninguna otra acción legislativa. \n\n C.- Reafirma la sustentabilidad sobre las poblaciones marinas. Otro aspecto que debe traerse a colación es el aspecto de la sobreexplotación en cuanto establece la imposibilidad de seguir subvencionando la pesca o actividades relacionadas con poblaciones cuyas evaluaciones indiquen agotamientos. Esto puede suceder por acciones y medidas tomadas por el propio Estado ribereño, o por una OROP/AROP (Organismos Regionales de Ordenación Pesquera/Acuerdos Regionales de Ordenación Pesquera), lo cual, en el caso costarricense se produce por las reglas de ordenación pesquera, vedas, entre otras medidas enunciadas anteriormente. Pero además, se enlaza en función de los organismos multilaterales a las que forma parte Costa Rica, con competencia sobre algunas especies marinas, y sin perjuicio de mencionar, que en todos estos casos debe hacerse “sobre la base de los mejores datos científicos de que dispongan” (artículo 4.2). En el caso de las OROP se menciona en el expediente legislativo (folio 126), la pertenencia del país a dos muy importantes, como es la Comisión Interamericana de Atún Tropical (CIAT) para el Pacífico, y la Comisión Internacional para la Conservación del Atún del Atlántico (CICAA). Y respecto a las AROP, se refiere a los acuerdos que, según el Ministro de Comercio Exterior, Manuel Tovar Rivera, informó a la Comisión Permanente Especial de Relaciones Internacionales y Comercio Exterior, que: “… las AROP, son Acuerdos Regionales de Ordenación Pesquera, estos son los acuerdos, y voy a poner el ejemplo, que se toman a nivel del Sistema de Integración Centroamericana, que son normas comunitarias y obligatorias para todos los países en el cual Costa Rica lidera precisamente en la elaboración de esas normas. Estos acuerdos de ordenación pesquera regional, tienen que ver con el sistema de Integración y Costa Rica ha sido vanguardista en ese tema también, por ejemplo, el tema de protección de tiburones del que tanto se habla, lo logramos llevar a aplicación a nivel centroamericano por iniciativa de Costa Rica dentro de un AROP” (folio 126). \n\n D.- Mecanismos de solución de controversias y la revisión del Tratado. Finalmente, como lo indica el Departamento de Servicios Técnicos de la Asamblea Legislativa, para la solución de diferencias, el Tratado remite a las normas usuales de la OMC para el establecimiento, agotamiento de consultas previas y luego el arbitraje (panel), todo ello aceptado en previos acuerdos internacionales en la materia comercial (artículo 10). Adicionalmente, se debe tomar nota que sobre los hallazgos, es decir, en los términos de tratado “cualesquiera constataciones, recomendaciones y laudos referentes” carecen de consecuencias jurídicas en cuanto a “reivindicaciones territoriales o la delimitación de las fronteras marítimas” (artículo 11.2), ni se estará obligado a ello. Adicionalmente, ninguna disposición se podrá interpretar para perjudicar la jurisdicción, derechos y obligaciones del Estado miembro conforme al Derecho Internacional, incluido el derecho del mar. Finalmente, si luego de la revisión de los términos del acuerdo se concluye en la necesidad de futuras enmiendas al tratado (artículo 9), dichos hallazgos y conclusiones deberán cumplir con las formalidades de aprobación legislativa de conformidad con el artículos 121, inciso 4), de la Constitución Política, de previo a su vigencia en el país.\n\n VII.- Conclusión. En razón de todo lo anterior, se evacua la consulta preceptiva de constitucionalidad, y se concluye que no existen vicios sustanciales de procedimiento legislativo ni de fondo. No obstante lo anterior, deberá considerar el artículo 152, del Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa, para la corrección de las cuestiones formales señaladas en el considerando V, antes del Segundo Debate.\n\n VIII.- Nota de la magistrada Garro Vargas\n\nDeseo consignar esta nota para manifestar que concurro con la mayoría bajo el entendido de que el Parlamento, de forma soberana, decidió incluir una norma que no afecta en nada el contenido de protocolo de enmienda al que Costa Rica pretende dar su adhesión. Sin embargo, y pese que tengo presente que no es la primera vez que en la misma ley de aprobación de un tratado se incluye una noma para su implementación, conviene recordar la distinta naturaleza del acto por el cual la Asamblea Legislativa aprueba o imprueba un tratado de aquel o aquellos por los cuales implementa el tratado ya ratificado. A su vez, distinta la naturaleza de una cláusula interpretativa, que bien puede incluirse en el momento de la aprobación y que será expresada en el instrumento de ratificación, respecto de una norma de implementación.\n\nEn el caso concreto, la previa y correspondiente consulta al Instituto Costarricense de Pesca y Acuicultura, parece hacer inocua la inclusión del artículo 2, esto es, que en la ley de aprobación se disponga una norma de ejecución designando a la autoridad nacional competente para llevar a cabo las labores propias de la implementación del acuerdo internacional. No obstante, ese proceder no parece ser el más cercano a lo dispuesto por la propia Constitución. Además, en otro tipo de materias podría revelar las dificultades que entraña.\n\nIX.- DOCUMENTACIÓN APORTADA AL EXPEDIENTE. Se previene a las partes que de haber aportado algún documento en papel, así como objetos o pruebas contenidas en algún dispositivo adicional de carácter electrónico, informático, magnético, óptico, telemático o producido por nuevas tecnologías, estos deberán ser retirados del despacho en un plazo máximo de treinta días hábiles contados a partir de la notificación de esta sentencia. De lo contrario, será destruido todo aquel material que no sea retirado dentro de este plazo, según lo dispuesto en el \"Reglamento sobre Expediente Electrónico ante el Poder Judicial\", aprobado por la Corte Plena en Sesión N° 27-11 del 22 de agosto del 2011, artículo XXVI y publicado en el Boletín Judicial N° 19 del 26 de enero del 2012, así como en el acuerdo aprobado por el Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial, en la Sesión N° 43-12 celebrada el 3 de mayo del 2012, artículo LXXXI.\n\nPor tanto:\n\nSe evacua la consulta formulada en el sentido de que el proyecto de ley \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca”, tramitado bajo el expediente legislativo N° 24.030, no contiene vicios sustanciales de procedimiento legislativo ni de fondo. Deberá considerarse -oportunamente- la corrección de las cuestiones formales señaladas al final del considerando V, y antes del Segundo Debate, de conformidad con el artículo 152, del Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa. La magistrada Garro Vargas consigna nota. Comuníquese al Directorio Legislativo.-\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\nFernando Castillo V.\n\nPresidente\n\n \n\nPaul Rueda L.\n\n \n\nLuis Fdo. Salazar A.\n\nJorge Araya G.\n\n \n\nAnamari Garro V.\n\nIngrid Hess H.\n\n \n\nAlexandra Alvarado P.\n\n \n\n \n\nDocumento Firmado Digitalmente\n\n-- Código verificador --\n\n\n\n 47KWHRTMZODI61 \n\n24-19586-0007-CO\n\n1",
"body_en_text": "Review of the Document\n\n\n\nExp: 24-019586-0007-CO\n\nRes. Nº 2024023612\n\n \n\nCONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at nine hours fifty minutes on the twentieth of August, two thousand twenty-four.\n\n \n\nMandatory legislative consultation on constitutionality submitted by the Directorate of the Legislative Assembly, regarding the bill \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\", legislative file N° 24.030.\n\nWhereas:\n\n 1.- The consultation, which is submitted in compliance with the provisions of subsection a) of Article 96 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional), was received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at 9:50 a.m. on July 18, 2024, with a certified copy of the legislative file. The Presidency of the Chamber deemed the consultation as submitted by resolution at 1:17 p.m. on the same day. The deadline to resolve it expires on August 18 of the current year.\n\n 2.- In the proceeding, the formalities established by law were followed.\n\n Drafter: Justice Salazar Alvarado; and,\n\nConsidering:\n\n I.- Preliminary matter. The first step, for the purpose of resolving the consultation, is to verify the procedures followed in this case, in accordance with the provisions of Article 98 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction, which states that the consultation must be made after the bill is approved in the first debate and before its final approval, and that, when resolving it, the Chamber shall rule on any aspects or grounds it deems relevant from a constitutional point of view, but it shall be binding only with regard to the procedures. For the above purposes and given the importance of the matter at hand, a chronological summary of the bill will be provided in the following considering clause.\n\n II.- The processing of file number in the Legislative Assembly. The bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\", processed under legislative file N° 24.030, has followed the following chronological order:\n\n a) The bill, which is an initiative of the Executive Branch, was submitted to the Secretariat of the Directorate of the Legislative Assembly at 10:26 a.m. on November 9, 2023 (folios 1 and following of the legislative file).\n\n b) The President of the Legislative Assembly ordered, on November 9, 2023, the assignment of the aforementioned bill to the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade; likewise, it is transferred on November 13 to the Department of Document Management and Archives, for publication and processing, and to the Department of Parliamentary Services (folio 1 and 21).\n\n c) The Executive Branch, through Executive Decree No. 44249-MP, expanded the call for extraordinary sessions to include the bill in question (folios 22 to 25).\n\n d) On November 20, 2023, in compliance with Article 117 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly (Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa), the Department of Document Management and Archives sent file N° 24.030, which is the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\", for publication in the Official Gazette La Gaceta (folio 27).\n\n e) On November 23, 2023, in compliance with Article 118 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly, the Department of Document Management and Archives sent the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\" to the Department of Studies, Reference, and Technical Services (folio 28).\n\n f) During Ordinary Session No. 15 of December 6, 2023, of the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade, the Commission heard it and formed a subcommittee to submit its report to the Commission; it was also agreed to consult the Ministry of Foreign Trade, the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture (Instituto Costarricense de Pesca y Acuicultura), the WTO-CR Chair of the National University, Fundación MarViva Costa Rica, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the School of Marine Biology of the National University, and the Center for Research in Marine Sciences and Limnology (CIMAR/UCR) (folios 52 to 58).\n\n g) A favorable report was issued by the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture (INCOPESCA), the Ministry of Foreign Trade, the WTO Costa Rica Chair of the National University, the School of International Relations, and the Ministry of Environment and Energy (folios 75 to 88).\n\n h) During Ordinary Session No. 18 of January 17, 2024, the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade heard and approved the motion to bring in the Executive President of the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture (INCOPESCA) (folios 89 to 99).\n\n i) During Ordinary Session No. 19 of January 24, 2024, the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade received Heiner Méndez Barrientos, Executive President of the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture (INCOPESCA), and Manuel Tovar Rivera, Minister of Foreign Trade, who requested the approval of the bill (folios 100 to 127).\n\n j) Through official communication AL-DEST-IJU-025-2024 of January 30, 2024, the Department of Technical Services issued its legal report on file N° 24.030, which is the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\" (folio 129 to 144).\n\n k) During Ordinary Session No. 21 of February 14, 2024, the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade heard and approved the Sub-Commission's report; likewise, that same day it was voted affirmatively on the merits, and the drafting of the opinion (dictamen) was entrusted to Deputy Manuel Morales Díaz (169 to 219).\n\n l) On March 5, 2024, the Secretariat of the Directorate of the Legislative Assembly received from the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade the legislative file N° 24.030, containing the Unanimous Affirmative Opinion (Dictamen Unánime Afirmativo) on the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\" (folios 220 and 221).\n\n m) The Executive Branch, through Executive Decree No. 44524-MP, expanded the call for extraordinary sessions to include the bill in question (222 to 224).\n\n n) Through the University Council agreement of Session No. 6808, Article 7, of June 4, 2024, the University of Costa Rica issued its affirmative opinion for the approval of the bill \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\" (folios 227 to 229).\n\n o) During Ordinary Session No. 23 of June 17, 2024, a motion of order was presented and approved in the Legislative Plenary, in accordance with Article 39 bis, to include, among other legislative files, N° 24.030, which is before us, and to adjourn the session before the regulatory time. Subsequently, the discussion began in the first debate process of the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\", to which substantive motions under Article 137 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly were presented, which were forwarded to the Reporting Commission (folios 249 to 260).\n\n p) During Session No. 02 of June 19, 2024, of the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade, it heard the substantive motions under Article 137, at which time it rejected two motions and approved motion 137-1 to establish an implementing rule for Articles 4 and 5 of the Agreement, obligations that would be under the purview of INCOPESCA (folios 262 to 282).\n\n q) During Session No. 28 of June 25, 2024, the Legislative Plenary heard and approved a motion under Article 29 bis of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly, to include, among other files, the 24.030 file before us. Likewise, the discussion in the first debate continued of the referenced file, which is the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\" with the first Commission report under Article 137 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly. The deputies did not make use of the motions for reiteration, for which reason the discussion on the merits began, and it was put to a vote, resulting in the approval of the bill with thirty-nine votes in favor and none against (folios 286 to 292).\n\n r) The Special Permanent Drafting Committee received on June 26, 2024, the legislative file N° 24.030, which is the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\" (folio 296 to 312).\n\n s) The Special Permanent Drafting Committee sent to the Secretariat of the Directorate the final draft of legislative file N° 24.030, which is the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\" (folio 313).\n\n III.- The procedure in the specific case. In accordance with the provisions of Article 98 of the Law that governs this Jurisdiction, this Court analyzed the processing of the bill \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\", legislative file N° 24.030. Indeed, the bill was heard by the Legislative Plenary as appropriate, as it concerns an International Agreement that could not be delegated to a Legislative Commission with Full Legislative Power, as established by Article 124, paragraph 3, of the Political Constitution, in relation to Article 121, paragraph 4, ibidem. In compliance with the principle of publicity, the bill was published in Supplement N° 230 to La Gaceta N° 217 of November 22, 2023 (https://www.imprentanacional.go.cr/pub/2023/11/22/ALCA230_22_11_2023.pdf). The bill was assigned by the Presidency of the Directorate of the Legislative Assembly to the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade, as was indeed appropriate given the content of the International Agreement. In that chamber, in accordance with its processing, it was agreed to consult the bill with the Ministry of Foreign Trade, the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture, the WTO-CR Chair of the National University, Fundación MarViva Costa Rica, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the School of Marine Biology of the National University, and the Center for Research in Marine Sciences and Limnology (CIMAR/UCR). Furthermore, in accordance with Article 122 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly, the legal report prepared by the Department of Studies, References, and Technical Services through official communication AL-DEST-IJU-025-2024 of January 30, 2024, was provided. It was voted on and issued as a unanimous affirmative opinion (dictamen) by the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade in its Ordinary Session No. 21 of February 14, 2024. Finally, in Ordinary Session No. 28 of June 25 past, the bill was voted on in the Legislative Plenary with the approval of thirty-nine votes in favor and zero against.\n\nIV.- From the above, it is possible to infer that the approval of the bill under consultation has respected all the procedural provisions of the Political Constitution (Articles 7, 121, subsection 4), 124, 140, subsections 5) and 10), and the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly (Articles 85, subsections c) and d), 113, 117, 118, 119, 122, 129, 132, 134 and 144). In this regard, the bill was presented for legislative processing by the Executive Branch, in exercise of its right of initiative, provided for in Article 140, subsection 5) of the Political Constitution, with the aim of specifying and improving the joint efforts of the World Trade Organization (WTO) on the issue of subsidies for illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, all within the framework of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14.6, to eliminate those subsidies that contribute to IUU fishing and overfishing, and for the purpose of agreeing on conditions to better conserve marine resources that are in critical condition due to their uncontrolled exploitation. Thus, it seeks to ratify and insert the country into an international treaty of the World Trade Organization, of which Costa Rica is already a member -with a commercial and environmental objective- as it seeks to enable the sustainability of fishery resources and the health of the oceans. It should be noted, in this regard, that from a reading of Article 140, subsection 10) of the Political Constitution, it is clear that the signing of International Treaties is an attribution of the Executive Branch. Consistent with the above, the Executive Branch has presented the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\", under legislative file N° 24.030, to obtain the benefits derived from the joint work of countries when they unite their efforts to take control of overfishing and the way in which subsidies can increase capacities beyond sustainability, as the preamble (exposición de motivos) states: \"According to the latest data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the percentage of fish stocks exploited at biologically sustainable levels decreased from 90% in 1974 to 64.6% in 2019 (citation omitted). The successful implementation of the Agreement by all WTO members will help secure the livelihoods of the 260 million (citation omitted) people who depend directly or indirectly on marine fisheries and will therefore represent a triple win for trade, development, and the environment.\" Finally, the international instrument that is submitted for the approval of the Legislative Assembly was negotiated by our country within the World Trade Organization, coordinated by the Ministry of Foreign Trade, with the participation of the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture, and the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock. In accordance with Article 7.2(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, those who are accredited by States to an international conference or organization do not require full powers. In this regard, Article 2, subsection d) of the Law Creating the Ministry of Foreign Trade (Law No. 7638 of October 30, 1996), establishes that the Ministry of Foreign Trade represents the country in the World Trade Organization \"and in other international trade forums where treaties, agreements, and, in general, trade and investment issues are discussed.\" Additionally, the intention to seek approval of this legal instrument is evident, as it is promoted by the Executive Branch, as confirmed by the respective signatures of the President of the Republic, Rodrigo Chaves Robles, and Indiana Trejos Gallo, Acting Minister of Foreign Trade. Hence, it is clearly evident that the bill is driven by the will of the Executive Branch, which submitted the bill for the approval of the multilateral agreement for the consideration of the Legislative Assembly. In conclusion, the Agreement is susceptible to being approved by the Legislative Assembly; and, under such considerations, no defect whatsoever is observed regarding the processing of the aforementioned agreement.\n\n V.- Regarding the articles of the Protocol amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies.\n\n In general, it must be said that it is a treaty, as its title indicates, an amendment that will be incorporated as an additional annex to the WTO Agreement, which \"shall be amended by inserting into Annex 1A of the WTO Agreement, after the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies as set out in the Annex to this Protocol.\" Among other things, it provides that no reservations may be made; that it is open for acceptance by its members; it establishes the usual rules for its entry into force; the appointment of the Director-General of the World Trade Organization as the depositary authority; and subsequent registration, in accordance with Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations. Following this, the Annex begins—which is actually the body of the Treaty composed of twelve articles—to regulate the consequences arising from subsidies for illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing and overfishing.\n\n The bill being processed before the Legislative Assembly consists of two articles; the first would approve the text of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies. The second article contains an implementing rule. Likewise, it is observed that the Special Permanent Drafting Committee preserves in its final report the certified information of the text of the mentioned Protocol, including the certification of the Director of the Legal Advisory Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Trade (issues that will be addressed in due course).\n\n As for the Treaty, its content is as follows:\n\n Article 1 refers to the scope of the agreement, to regulate subsidies as defined in Article 1.1 of the World Trade Organization Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement), as understood in accordance with Article 2 of that normative body. It is worth mentioning that it limits the object of the treaty to wild marine capture and sea-related activities (it excludes aquaculture and inland fisheries), but it does include on-board processing activities and transshipment of catches. It concerns fishing subsidies granted, regardless of the nationality of the fishing fleet or the vessel's registration or the nationality of its recipients.\n\n Article 2 refers to the definitions of some of the key terms of the treaty, such as \"fish\", \"fished\", \"fishing\", \"fishing-related activities\", \"vessel\", and \"operator\".\n\n Article 3 establishes a substantive part of the Treaty, as it legally defines what constitutes subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, described in the third paragraph of the International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, adopted by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in 2001 (as noted in a footnote to the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies). The main regulation is the agreement that vessels that have been identified as engaging in this activity shall not benefit from subsidies granted by Member States, whether those carrying out the fishing activity or those whose purpose is the supply of inputs at sea. There is an obligation to legislate in paragraph 3.7, such that laws, regulations, and/or administrative procedures must be in force to prevent the granting of subsidies to IUU fishing, even for those that would be in effect at the time of the agreement's entry into force.\n\n Article 4 refers to the rules applicable to overexploited stocks. The purpose is to establish a ban (veda) or moratorium on fishing for species in danger as defined by the coastal State or another RFMO/RFMA (Regional Fisheries Management Organizations/Regional Fisheries Management Arrangements) in the zone and with respect to species under their competence. It does not exclude the possibility of granting subsidies to help restore biologically sustainable levels.\n\n Article 5 refers to the rules applicable to other forms of subsidies, when it concerns unregulated fisheries, especially to prevent subsidies in high seas fishing or high seas fishing-related activities. Member States must exercise special care and due restraint when granting subsidies to vessels not flying the Member's flag, and likewise for fishing or fishing-related activities on high seas stocks that have not been assessed.\n\n Articles 6 and 7 refer to the implementation of a rule for \"Least-Developed Countries\" (LDCs), whereby decisions taken for those cases must be observed with due restraint, as well as the specific situations of the LDC. The second article will be directed at developing countries, including LDCs, to establish forms of assistance to enable the implementation of the agreed disciplinary measures and a voluntary fund to help those ends. Participation will be between the FAO and the International Fund for Agricultural Development, including voluntary contributions from WTO members.\n\n Article 8 establishes, within the obligations set by the WTO, the provision of information on the subsidies that the Member State grants, for each type or class of fishing activity. Also, to the extent possible, it must inform about: a) the status of the fished stocks; b) conservation and management measures taken for fish stocks; c) the identification of subsidized fishing vessels; d) the capacity of the subsidized fishing fleet; and e) catch data. Countries with a lower catch range, LDCs, and developing countries may provide the information every four years, and not every two years, as established in the general rule. Regarding transparency requirements, the need to inform at one year from the entry into force of the Treaty of the following is included: a) the list of vessels found undertaking IUU fishing, and the determination made in each case by the Member State; b) the list of implementation measures on the occasion of the Treaty; c) the detailed legal regime applicable to the fisheries, and d) the RFMOs/RFMAs of which the Member State is a party.\n\n Article 9 constitutes the Committee on Fisheries Subsidies, which shall be composed of representatives of each of the Members. Therein, the mechanism for the supervision and monitoring of the commitments contained in Articles 3 and 8 of the Agreement is established, among other objectives. The evaluation of the Treaty shall be done five years after its entry into force, and proposals to amend the Treaty may be made after the experience gained during implementation, which must be heard by the Council for Trade in Goods of the WTO.\n\nRegarding Article 10, the pre-existing consultation and dispute settlement rules under Articles XXII and XXIII of GATT 1994, as elaborated and applied by the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU), shall be used for dispute settlement. Likewise, for the consultations and dispute settlement contained in Articles 3, 4, and 5 of the Agreement, Article 4 of the World Trade Organization Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement) shall be used.\n\nIn accordance with Article 11, an emergency application is permitted for addressing disaster situations (not related to economic or financial crises), where a subsidy may be granted for a specific disaster, a specific geographical area, and a specific time period. Similarly, the findings, recommendations, and awards shall not prejudice the rights derived from the jurisdiction and obligations of members under international law, including the law of the sea; it stipulates that dispute settlement proceedings shall have no implications regarding any territorial claims or delimitations of maritime boundaries that are asserted.\n\n Article 12 refers to the termination of the Treaty if progress has not been achieved in other directions and disciplines that lacked consensus at the time of its negotiation, which also contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, such that, four years after the Treaty enters into force, it is expected that other areas of interest to be achieved in the regulations will have been completed; otherwise, it shall be terminated, unless otherwise decided by the General Council.\n\nThe Treaty contains, in Articles 3.8 and 4.4, the possibility of applying a two-year period to exempt developing countries or least-developed countries from some of the restrictions during the transition period, and for paragraphs 8.1(a) and (b), a 4-year period to comply with transparency requirements. None of this is applicable to Costa Rica.\n\nArticle 2 of the bill establishes the implementing rule, by which the Legislative Assembly designates the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture (INCOPESCA), in accordance with its law, as the implementing institution for the commitments of Articles 4 and 5 of the Agreement, as well as other powers established for its members.\n\n Finally, it should be noted that after the aforementioned Article 2 of the Bill approving the Law, the text continues with the certification of the Director-General of the World Trade Organization, who, according to the Treaty, is the person designated as depositary of the instrument, and was assigned the responsibility of sending the certified copy of this instrument to the Member States, among other things. In pursuit of the above, the Certification of Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala is recorded, with telephone numbers and email addresses, as well as the correspondence from John Adank, Director of the Legal Affairs Division of the World Trade Organization, to provide testimony and confirmation of the authenticity of the mentioned document. Finally, the certification of the Director of the Legal Advisory Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Trade, issued at 11:00 a.m. on October 20, 2023. All of this is, evidently, matter extraneous to the legal body of the Treaty. It is, therefore, necessary to mention that this was pointed out by the Technical Services of the Legislative Assembly in report AL-DEST-IJU-025-2024 of January 30, 2024, with which the Chamber concurs. Although this information is pertinent for the processing of the Executive Branch's initiative when initiating the legislative approval process, it is ancillary information that does not form part of the Agreement or the Protocol, and therefore lacks legal effects for the parties to the Treaty. In this sense, it does not need to be included in the approval and ratification document at the domestic level. It is not necessary for the stated certifications to be included or published as part of the legislative approval, as they are auxiliary information for that purpose.\n\nIn this way, it is pertinent to make this observation so that, in due course, recourse may be had to article 152 of the Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa for the correction of formal matters within the bills and before the Second Debate.\n\nVI.- Observations regarding the substance of the bill.\n\nThe following must be noted:\n\nA.- The agreement is compatible with Article 50 of the Constitution. The bill for the “Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies,” processed under legislative file N° 24.030, is compatible with Article 50 of the Constitución Política, insofar as it seeks to insert the country into the concert of Nations, in a commercial agreement and to take control over illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing and overfishing. A reading of the content of the treaty shows that it does not contain clauses that grant or compromise the territorial integrity and political organization of the country. On the contrary, the provisions are formally oriented toward preventing the subsidies granted by Member States from being used to harm the environment, in addition to establishing in the international instrument a common policy for developing Nations and “Least Developed Countries” (LDCs), with more lenient rules for them, but which ensure global food security through the science-based sustainability of marine fishing stocks. Likewise, it is important to mention that it has the potential to form a discussion forum to determine new forms of subsidies that should be regulated in the future if they have implications for the sustainability of fisheries.\n\nB.- The obligation to legislate and the subsidy is not prohibited by the Treaty. Regarding the obligations to implement legislation, in Ordinary Session N° 19 of 24 January 2024, the Executive President of INCOPESCA stated that the regulations required by the treaty are already in place in Costa Rica. That is, no regulatory actions are required at this time, given that: “… we do not grant any type of subsidy to illegal fishing activities or users that do not fall within the concept of the current legal system. What does this mean? Basically, that our country goes further in many of these situations, because we rather comply in excess with the regulations related to the formalization of our fishing fleets, in every sense. Our fleets are subject to constant enforcement and management controls regarding protected fishing areas, responsible marine fishing areas, provisions on minimum sizes at first sexual maturity, and all of this is precisely what this Convenio Marrakech (sic) seeks to protect and support. We must be clear that we request support for the approval of this bill, in the sense that there is no direct impact on the fishing sector, […] we are aware that fishing will be favored in the sense that it will rather help us, and it will give us inputs to continue combating the problem of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing” (folio 106). It is relevant that in that session, it was reported that 100% of the fleet is national, with the sole exception of purse seine vessels in the Exclusive Economic Zone by legal mandate for tuna fishing (folio 116). Additionally, subsidies are granted to national vessels for the closures imposed (to safeguard stocks), so that the verification of a violation thereof implies the withdrawal of the subsidy as a precautionary measure (folios 108 and 109).\n\nIt is important to note that this Treaty, by being inserted into the Annexes of the WTO, which our country ratified through Ley N° 7475, accepted as an international obligation that certain subsidies would be regulated by the Treaty. Thus, for its determination, reference is made to Articles 1 and 2 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement). As the Technical Services well explain in their report:\n\n“The SCM Agreement defines subsidies in Article 1, and defines them as financial contributions by a government or public body, when there is a transfer or donation of funds, and when public revenues are not collected, as in the case of fiscal incentives.\n\nFor its part, our legislation grants a tax benefit regarding gasoline for the fishing sector, according to Article 45 of the Law Creating INCOPESCA (Ley Nº 7384), which we transcribe:\n\nARTICLE 45 - The fishing sector shall acquire fuel (gasoline and diesel) from RECOPE for non-sport fishing activity at a competitive price compared to the international price, based on the average import cost of the previous month and considering the C.I.F. refinery cost, as well as the costs of distribution by pipeline and distribution in depots, such that the price is F.O.B. Depot.\n\nThat price shall be set by the Servicio Nacional de Electricidad; which RECOPE must previously request, as provided in Ley No. 6588 of 30 July 1981, or the Institute.\n\nThe Institute shall be responsible for the administration and control of the efficient use of fuel destined for non-sport fishing activity.”\n\nThat “competitive price in the international market” translates, in practice, into only calculating the costs (all costs), but excluding the payment of the single fuel tax, which has a significant weight in the final price of the fuel, which is why it is effectively cheapened or considerably reduced.\n\nThis tax benefit, in the strict sense, would be a “subsidy” under the terms of Article 1 of the SCM Agreement.\n\nBut what Article 1 of “Scope” of the Agreement provides is that it applies only with respect to “specific subsidies,” as defined by Article 2 of the SCM Agreement.\n\nIt remains to be seen whether the fuel exemption for the fishing sector contained in the INCOPESCA law can be considered a “specific subsidy.”\n\nWe transcribe Article 2 of the SCM Agreement due to its importance for establishing the scope of coverage of the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies:\n\nArticle 2\n\nSpecificity\n\n2.1.- In order to determine whether a subsidy, as defined in paragraph 1 of Article 1, is specific to an enterprise or industry or group of enterprises or industries (referred to in this Agreement as \"certain enterprises\") within the jurisdiction of the granting authority, the following principles shall apply:\n\na) When the granting authority, or the legislation pursuant to which the granting authority operates, explicitly limits access to a subsidy to certain enterprises, such subsidy shall be considered specific.\n\nb) When the granting authority, or the legislation pursuant to which the granting authority operates, establishes objective criteria or conditions (2) governing the right to obtain the subsidy and its amount, specificity shall be considered not to exist, provided that the right is automatic and that such criteria or conditions are strictly respected. The criteria or conditions must be clearly stipulated in a law, regulation or other official document so as to be verifiable.\n\n(2) The expression \"objective criteria or conditions\" used herein means criteria or conditions that are impartial, that do not favor certain enterprises over others and that are economic in nature and horizontal in application; examples include the number of employees and the size of the enterprise.\n\n(…)\n\nLet us compare this definition with the benefit granted by our legislation:\n\nThe aforementioned Article 45 establishes the benefit of “acquiring fuel at a competitive price” for “the entire fishing sector,” with the sole exception of sport fishing.\n\nIt is not granted to certain enterprises to the exclusion of others, but rather objective criteria or conditions are used to exclude one type of fishing: sport fishing.\n\nIn the opinion of this advisory office, the benefit contained in Article 45 of the Law of INCOPESCA, the so-called “fuel subsidy for the fishing sector,” IS NOT A SPECIFIC SUBSIDY, and therefore the Agreement now submitted for approval does not apply to it or it falls outside its scope or coverage.\n\nGiven that the scope of the Agreement does not apply with respect to Costa Rica regarding its current national legislation, we understand that the timeliness or merit of its approval is not, then, a matter of domestic law, but rather a matter of prestige and collaboration in the international sphere regarding measures concerning countries that possess large fishing fleets and that use subsidies as a means of distorting export trade, but which ultimately produces an undue depletion of the resource and thus threatens the global sustainability of the seas and marine wealth” (the highlighting and underlining are from the original).\n\nConsequently, the subsidy granted in the country is not of the type that would be prohibited by the “Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies,” so no further legislative action would be necessary.\n\nC.- It reaffirms the sustainability of marine stocks. Another aspect that must be brought up is the aspect of overexploitation, as it establishes the impossibility of continuing to subsidize fishing or activities related to stocks whose assessments indicate depletion. This could occur due to actions and measures taken by the coastal State itself, or by an RFMO/RFMA (Regional Fisheries Management Organizations/Regional Fisheries Management Agreements), which, in the Costa Rican case, occurs through fishery management rules, closures, among other measures mentioned previously. But additionally, it is linked based on the multilateral bodies of which Costa Rica is a part, with competence over certain marine species, and without prejudice to mentioning that in all these cases it must be done “on the basis of the best scientific evidence available to them” (Article 4.2). In the case of RFMOs, the legislative file (folio 126) mentions the country's membership in two very important ones, namely the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (CIAT) for the Pacific, and the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (CICAA). And regarding RFMAs, it refers to the agreements that, according to the Minister of Foreign Trade, Manuel Tovar Rivera, informed the Permanent Special Committee on International Relations and Foreign Trade, that: “… the RFMAs are Regional Fisheries Management Agreements, these are the agreements, and I will give the example, that are adopted at the level of the Central American Integration System, which are community and mandatory rules for all countries, in which Costa Rica precisely leads in the elaboration of these rules. These regional fishery management agreements have to do with the Integration system, and Costa Rica has also been a pioneer in that subject, for example, the issue of shark protection that is so talked about, we managed to get it applied at the Central American level at the initiative of Costa Rica within an RFMA” (folio 126).\n\nD.- Dispute settlement mechanisms and the review of the Treaty. Finally, as indicated by the Department of Technical Services of the Asamblea Legislativa, for dispute settlement, the Treaty refers to the usual WTO rules for the establishment, exhaustion of prior consultations, and then arbitration (panel), all of which has been accepted in previous international agreements in commercial matters (Article 10). Additionally, it must be noted that the findings, that is, in the terms of the treaty “any findings, recommendations and awards concerning” them, have no legal consequences regarding “territorial claims or the delimitation of maritime boundaries” (Article 11.2), nor shall a party be obligated thereto. Additionally, no provision may be interpreted to prejudice the jurisdiction, rights and obligations of the Member State under International Law, including the law of the sea. Finally, if after the review of the terms of the agreement it is concluded that future amendments to the treaty are necessary (Article 9), such findings and conclusions must comply with the formalities of legislative approval in accordance with Article 121, subsection 4), of the Constitución Política, prior to their entry into force in the country.\n\nVII.- Conclusion. By reason of all the foregoing, the mandatory constitutional consultation is resolved, and it is concluded that there are no substantial defects of legislative procedure or substance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, article 152 of the Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa must be considered for the correction of the formal matters indicated in considerando V, before the Second Debate.\n\nVIII.- Note by Judge Garro Vargas\n\nI wish to record this note to state that I concur with the majority under the understanding that Parliament, in a sovereign manner, decided to include a rule that in no way affects the content of the amending protocol to which Costa Rica seeks to give its adhesion. However, and even though I am aware that it is not the first time that a rule for its implementation is included in the same law approving a treaty, it is worth remembering the distinct nature of the act by which the Asamblea Legislativa approves or rejects a treaty from that or those by which it implements the already ratified treaty. In turn, the nature of an interpretative clause, which may well be included at the time of approval and will be expressed in the instrument of ratification, is different from a rule of implementation.\n\nIn the specific case, the prior and corresponding consultation with the Instituto Costarricense de Pesca y Acuicultura seems to render the inclusion of Article 2 innocuous, that is, that in the approving law an implementing rule is provided designating the competent national authority to carry out the tasks of implementing the international agreement. However, this procedure does not seem to be the closest to what is provided by the Constitution itself. Moreover, in other types of matters, it could reveal the difficulties that it entails.\n\nIX.- DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED TO THE FILE. The parties are warned that if any paper document has been provided, as well as objects or evidence contained in any additional electronic, computer, magnetic, optical, telematic device or one produced by new technologies, these must be removed from the office within a maximum period of thirty business days counted from the notification of this judgment. Otherwise, any material not removed within this period will be destroyed, as provided in the \"Reglamento sobre Expediente Electrónico ante el Poder Judicial\", approved by the Corte Plena in Session N° 27-11 of 22 August 2011, article XXVI and published in Boletín Judicial N° 19 of 26 January 2012, as well as in the agreement approved by the Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial, in Session N° 43-12 held on 3 May 2012, article LXXXI.\n\nPor tanto:\n\nThe consultation is resolved in the sense that the bill \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\", processed under legislative file N° 24.030, contains no substantial defects of legislative procedure or substance. The correction of the formal matters indicated at the end of considerando V must be considered—in due course—and before the Second Debate, in accordance with article 152 of the Reglamento de la Asamblea Legislativa. Judge Garro Vargas records a note. Notify the Legislative Directory.-\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\nFernando Castillo V.\n\nPresidente\n\n \n\nPaul Rueda L.\n\n \n\nLuis Fdo. Salazar A.\n\nJorge Araya G.\n\n \n\nAnamari Garro V.\n\nIngrid Hess H.\n\n \n\nAlexandra Alvarado P.\n\n \n\n \n\nDocumento Firmado Digitalmente\n\n-- Código verificador --\n\n\n\n 47KWHRTMZODI61 \n\n24-19586-0007-CO\n\n1\n\nFor the foregoing purposes and given the importance of the matter at hand, a chronological summary of the bill shall be provided in the following recital (considerando).\n\n**II.- The processing of legislative file number in the Legislative Assembly.** The bill for the \"*Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies*\", processed under legislative file No. 24.030, has followed the chronological order below:\n\n**a)** The bill, which originates from the Executive Branch, was submitted to the Secretariat of the Directorate of the Legislative Assembly at 10:26 a.m. on November 9, 2023 (folios 1 and following of the legislative file).\n\n**b)** The President of the Legislative Assembly ordered, on November 9, 2023, that the aforementioned bill be assigned to the Permanent Special Committee on International Relations and Foreign Trade; likewise, on November 13, it was forwarded to the Department of Document Management and Archives for publication and processing, and to the Department of Parliamentary Services (folio 1 and 21).\n\n**c)** The Executive Branch, through Executive Decree No. 44249-MP, expanded the call for extraordinary sessions to include the bill in question (folios 22 to 25).\n\n**d)** On November 20, 2023, in compliance with Article 117 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly, the Department of Document Management and Archives submitted file No. 24.030, which is the \"*Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies*\", for publication in the Official Gazette La Gaceta (folio 27).\n\n**e)** On November 23, 2023, in compliance with Article 118 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly, the Department of Document Management and Archives submitted the bill for the \"*Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies*\" to the Department of Studies, Reference and Technical Services (folio 28).\n\n**f)** By Regular Session No. 15 of December 6, 2023, of the Permanent Special Committee on International Relations and Foreign Trade, during which it took cognizance of the bill and formed a subcommittee to render its report to the Committee; furthermore, it was agreed to consult the Ministry of Foreign Trade, the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture, the WTO-CR Chair of the National University, Fundación MarViva Costa Rica, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the School of Marine Biology of the National University, and the Center for Research in Marine Sciences and Limnology (CIMAR/UCR) (folios 52 to 58).\n\n**g)** A favorable report was issued by the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture (INCOPESCA), the Ministry of Foreign Trade, the WTO Costa Rica Chair of the National University, the School of International Relations, and the Ministry of Environment and Energy (folios 75 to 88).\n\n**h)** By Regular Session No. 18 of January 17, 2024, the Permanent Special Committee on International Relations and Foreign Trade took cognizance of and approved the motion to summon the Executive President of the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture (INCOPESCA) (folios 89 to 99).\n\n**i)** Through Regular Session No. 19 of January 24, 2024, the Permanent Special Committee on International Relations and Foreign Trade received Heiner Méndez Barrientos, Executive President of the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture (INCOPESCA), and Manuel Tovar Rivera, Minister of Foreign Trade, who requested the approval of the bill (folios 100 to 127).\n\n**j)** Through official communication AL-DEST-IJU-025-2024 of January 30, 2024, the Department of Technical Services issued its legal report (informe jurídico) on file No. 24.030, which is the bill for the \"*Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies*\" (folios 129 to 144).\n\n**k)** Through Regular Session No. 21 of February 14, 2024, the Permanent Special Committee on International Relations and Foreign Trade took cognizance of and approved the Subcommittee's report; likewise, on that same day, it was voted affirmatively on the merits, and the drafting of the report (dictamen) was entrusted to Deputy Manuel Morales Díaz (folios 169 to 219).\n\n**l)** On March 5, 2024, the Secretariat of the Directorate of the Legislative Assembly received from the Permanent Special Committee on International Relations and Foreign Trade legislative file No. 24.030, containing the Unanimous Affirmative Report (Dictamen Unánime Afirmativo) for the bill for the \"*Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies*\" (folios 220 and 221).\n\n**m)** The Executive Branch, through Executive Decree No. 44524-MP, expanded the call for extraordinary sessions to include the bill in question (folios 222 to 224).\n\n**n)** Through an agreement of the University Council of Session No. 6808, Article 7, of June 4, 2024, the University of Costa Rica issued its affirmative opinion for the approval of the bill \"*Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies*\" (folios 227 to 229).\n\no) Through Ordinary Session No. 23 of June 17, 2024, a motion of order was presented and approved in the Legislative Plenary in accordance with Article 39 bis, to include, among other legislative files, No. 24.030 which concerns us, and to adjourn the session before the regulatory time. Subsequently, the discussion in the first debate procedure of the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakech Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on June 17, 2022, and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\" (\"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca\") was initiated, to which substantive motions under Article 137 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly were presented, which were referred to the Reporting Committee (folios 249 to 260).\n\np) Through Session No. 02 of June 19, 2024, of the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade, it considered the substantive motions under Article 137, at which time it rejected two motions and approved motion 137-1 to establish an implementation rule for Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention, obligations that would be under the attention of INCOPESCA (folios 262 to 282).\n\nq) Through Session No. 28 of June 25, 2024, the Legislative Plenary considered and approved a motion under Article 29 bis of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly, to include, among other files, file 24.030 which concerns us. Likewise, the discussion in first debate of the referred file continued, which is the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakech Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on June 17, 2022, and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\" (\"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca\") with the first committee report, under Article 137 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly. The deputies did not make use of the motions for reiteration, for which reason the discussion on the merits was initiated, and it was submitted to a vote, the bill being approved with thirty-nine votes in favor and none against (folios 286 to 292).\n\nr) The Special Permanent Commission on Drafting received on June 26, 2024, legislative file No. 24.030, which is the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakech Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on June 17, 2022, and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\" (\"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca\") (folio 296 to 312).\n\ns) The Special Permanent Commission on Drafting remits to the Secretariat of the Directorate the final draft of legislative file No. 24.030, which is the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakech Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on June 17, 2022, and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\" (\"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca\") (folio 313).\n\nIII.- The procedure in the specific case. In accordance with the provisions of Article 98 of the Law governing this Jurisdiction, this Court analyzed the processing of the bill for the \"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakech Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on June 17, 2022, and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\" (\"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca\"), legislative file No. 24.030. Indeed, the bill was considered by the Legislative Plenary as was appropriate, as it is an International Convention that could not be delegated to a Legislative Commission with Full Legislative Power, as established by Article 124, paragraph 3, of the Political Constitution, in relation to Article 121, paragraph 4, ibid. In compliance with the principle of publicity, the bill was published in Supplement No. 230 to La Gaceta No. 217 of November 22, 2023 (https://www.imprentanacional.go.cr/pub/2023/11/22/ALCA230_22_11_2023.pdf). The bill was assigned by the Presidency of the Directorate of the Legislative Assembly to the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade, as was indeed appropriate given the content of the International Convention. In said chamber, in accordance with its processing, it was agreed to consult the bill with the Ministry of Foreign Trade, the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture, the WTO-CR Chair of the National University, MarViva Costa Rica Foundation, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the School of Marine Biology of the National University, and the Center for Research in Marine Sciences and Limnology (CIMAR/UCR). Furthermore, in accordance with Article 122 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly, the legal report prepared by the Department of Studies, References and Technical Services through official document AL-DEST-IJU-025-2024 of January 30, 2024, was provided; it was voted on and affirmatively reported unanimously by the Special Permanent Commission on International Relations and Foreign Trade in its Ordinary Session No. 21 of February 14, 2024. Finally, in Ordinary Session No. 28 of June 25 last, the bill was voted on in the Legislative Plenary with the approval of thirty-nine votes in favor and zero against.\n\nIV.- From the foregoing, it is possible to infer that the approval of the bill under consultation has respected all the procedural provisions established by the Political Constitution (Articles 7, 121, subsection 4), 124, 140, subsections 5), and 10)), and the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly (Articles 85, subsections c) and d), 113, 117, 118, 119, 122, 129, 132, 134 and 144).\n\nIn this regard, the bill was submitted for its legislative processing by the Executive Branch, in exercise of its right of initiative, provided for in Article 140, subsection 5), of the Political Constitution, with the aim of specifying and improving the joint efforts of the World Trade Organization (WTO) on the subject of subsidies for illegal fishing, all within the framework of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14.6, to eliminate those subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing and overfishing, and for such purpose of agreeing on conditions to better conserve marine resources that would be in a critical state due to their uncontrolled exploitation. Thus, the aim is to ratify and insert the country into an international treaty of the World Trade Organization, of which Costa Rica is already a part—with a commercial and environmental objective—insofar as it seeks to enable the sustainability of fishery resources and the health of the oceans.\n\nNote, in this regard, that a reading of Article 140, subsection 10), of the Political Constitution reveals that the signing of International Treaties is an attribution of the Executive Branch. Consistent with the foregoing, the Executive Branch has presented the bill of “Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies,” under legislative file No. 24.030, to obtain the benefits derived from the joint work of countries when they unite their efforts to take control of overfishing and the way in which subsidies can increase capacities beyond sustainability, since in the statement of motives it is estimated that: “According to the latest data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the percentage of fish stocks exploited at biologically sustainable levels went from 90% in 1974 to 64.6% in 2019 (citation omitted). The satisfactory application of the Agreement by all WTO members will contribute to guaranteeing the livelihoods of the 260 million (citation omitted) people who depend directly or indirectly on marine fisheries and, therefore, will constitute a triple victory for trade, development, and the environment.” Finally, the international instrument that is submitted for the approval of the Legislative Assembly was negotiated by our country within the World Trade Organization, coordinated by the Ministry of Foreign Trade, with the participation of the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture and the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, in accordance with Article 7.2, c), of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, full powers are not required for those who would be accredited by States before an international conference or organization. In this sense, Article 2, subsection d), of the Law Creating the Ministry of Foreign Trade (Law No. 7638 of October 30, 1996), establishes that the Ministry of Foreign Trade represents the country at the World Trade Organization “and in the other international commercial forums where treaties, conventions, and, in general, trade and investment issues are discussed.” Additionally, the intention to seek approval of this legal instrument is evident, since it is promoted by the Executive Branch, as evidenced by the respective signatures of the President of the Republic Rodrigo Chaves Robles, and Indiana Trejos Gallo, Acting Minister of Foreign Trade. Hence, it is clearly evident that the bill is driven by the will of the Executive Branch, who submitted the bill for the approval of the multilateral agreement to the consideration of the Legislative Assembly. In conclusion, the Agreement is susceptible to being approved by the Legislative Assembly; and, under such order of considerations, no defect is observed regarding the processing of the aforementioned agreement.\n\n**V.- On the articles of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization regarding the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies.**\n\nIn general, it must be said that it is a treaty, as its title indicates, an amendment that will be incorporated as one more annex to the Agreement on the WTO, which “shall be amended by inserting into Annex 1A of the Agreement on the WTO, after the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies that appears in the Annex to this Protocol.” Among other things, it provides that no reservations may be made; that it is open for acceptance by its members; it establishes the usual rules for its entry into force; the appointment of the Director-General of the World Trade Organization as the depositary authority; and subsequent registration, in accordance with Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations. Next, the Annex begins—which is actually the body of the Treaty composed of twelve articles—to regulate the consequences derived from subsidies for illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing and overfishing.\n\nThe bill being processed before the Legislative Assembly consists of two articles, the first would approve the text of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization regarding the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies. The second article contains an implementation rule. Likewise, it is observed that the Special Permanent Commission on Drafting retains in its final report the certified information of the text of the mentioned Protocol, including the certification of the Director of the Legal Advisory Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Trade (issues that will be addressed in due course).\n\nRegarding the Treaty, its content is as follows:\n\nArticle 1 refers to the scope of the agreement, to regulate subsidies established in Article 1.1 of the World Trade Organization Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement), understood in accordance with Article 2 of that normative body. It is worth mentioning that it delimits the object of the treaty to wild marine capture fishing and activities related to the sea (it excludes aquaculture and inland fisheries), but it does include on-board processing activities of the catch and transshipment of catches. These are fishing subsidies granted, regardless of the nationality of the fishing fleet or the registration of the vessel or the nationality of its recipients.\n\nArticle 2 refers to the definitions of some of the key terms of the treaty, such as “fish” (peces), “fishery products” (pescado), “fishing” (pesca), “fishing related activities” (actividades relacionadas con la pesca), “vessel” (buque), and “operator” (operador).\n\nArticle 3 establishes a substantive part of the Treaty, insofar as it legally defines what constitutes subsidies contributing to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, described in the third paragraph of the International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, adopted by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in 2001 (as stated in a footnote of the Agreement on Subsidies). The main regulation is the agreement that vessels that have been identified in this activity will not benefit from the subsidies granted by the member States, whether those carrying out the fishing activity or those whose purpose is the supply of inputs at sea. There is an obligation to legislate in paragraph 3.7, such that there must be laws, regulations and/or administrative procedures in force that prevent the granting of subsidies to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, including for those that would be in effect at the time of the agreement's entry into force.\n\nArticle 4 refers to the rules applicable to overexploited stocks (poblaciones sobreexplotadas). The purpose is to establish a closure or moratorium on the fishing of endangered species that has been so defined by the coastal State or another RFMO/RFMA (Regional Fisheries Management Organizations/Regional Fisheries Management Arrangements) (OROP/AROP) in the area and regarding species under its competence. It does not exclude the possibility of granting subsidies to assist in the recovery to biologically sustainable levels.\n\nArticle 5 refers to the rules applicable to other forms of subsidies, when referring to unregulated fisheries, especially to prevent subsidies in high-seas fishing or fishing related activities on the high seas. Member States shall take special care and exercise due restraint (debida moderación) when granting subsidies to vessels not flying the Member's flag, likewise, for fishing or fishing related activities on the high seas targeting unevaluated marine stocks.\n\nArticles 6 and 7 refer to the implementation of a rule for “Least-Developed Countries” (Países menos adelantados) (LDCs), in which decisions taken for those cases must be observed with due restraint, as well as the specific situations of the LDC. The second paragraph will be directed at developing countries, including LDCs, to establish forms of assistance enabling the implementation of the agreed disciplinary measures and a voluntary fund to assist with those purposes. Participation will occur between the FAO and the International Fund for Agricultural Development, including voluntary contributions from WTO members.\n\nArticle 8 establishes, within the obligations established by the WTO, the requirement to provide information on the subsidies that the member State grants, for each type or class of fishing activity. Also, to the extent possible, it must report on: a) the status of the fishery fish stocks; b) conservation measures and fisheries management (ordenación) taken for the fish stocks; c) the identification of the subsidized fishing vessels; d) the capacity of the subsidized fishing fleet; and e) the catch data. Countries with a smaller share of catch, LDCs, and developing countries may provide the information every four years, and not every two years, as established in the general rule. Regarding transparency requirements, the need to report, in the year of the Treaty's entry into force, the following is included: a) the list of vessels found in illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, and the determination made in each case by the member State; b) the list of implementing measures related to the Treaty; c) the detailed legal regime applicable to the fisheries, and d) the RFMOs/RFMAs of which the member State is a part.\n\nArticle 9 establishes the Committee on Fisheries Subsidies (Comité de Subvenciones a la Pesca), which shall be composed of representatives from each of the Members. Within it, the mechanism for the supervision and monitoring of the commitments contained in Articles 3 and 8 of the Agreement is established, among other objectives. The evaluation of the Treaty shall be carried out five years after its entry into force, and proposals for amendment to the Treaty may be made following the experience gained during implementation, which must be reviewed by the Council for Trade in Goods of the WTO.\n\nRegarding Article 10, for dispute settlement (solución de diferencias) the pre-existing consultation and dispute settlement rules under Articles XXII and XXIII of the GATT 1994, as elaborated and applied by the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) (Entendimiento sobre Solución de Diferencias, ESD), shall be used. Likewise, for the consultations and dispute settlement contained in Articles 3, 4, and 5 of the Agreement, Article 4 of the World Trade Organization Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement) (Acuerdo de la Organización Mundial del Comercio sobre Subvenciones y Medidas Compensatorias, acuerdo SMC) shall be used.\n\nIn accordance with Article 11, an emergency application is permitted for addressing cases of disasters (not related to economic or financial crises), where it is permitted to grant a subsidy for a specific disaster, a specific geographical area, and a specific time. Likewise, in contracts, recommendations, and awards, the rights deriving from jurisdiction, and obligations of members under international law, including the law of the sea, shall not be prejudiced; it delineates that in dispute settlement processes, there shall be no implications for any territorial claims or delimitations of maritime boundaries that are asserted.\n\nParagraph 12 refers to the termination of the Treaty if progress has not been made in other areas and disciplines that lacked consensus at the time of its negotiation, which also contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, such that, four years after the Treaty enters into force, other areas of interest to be achieved in the regulations should have been completed, otherwise it will be terminated, unless otherwise determined by the General Council.\n\nThe Treaty contains, in Articles 3.8 and 4.4, the possibility of applying a two-year period to exempt developing countries or least-developed countries from some of the restrictions during the transition period, and for paragraph 8.1. (a) and (b), a 4-year period to comply with transparency requirements. None of this is applicable to Costa Rica.\n\nArticle 2 of the draft Law establishes the implementing regulation, by which the Legislative Assembly designates the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture (INCOPESCA), in accordance with its law, as the institution responsible for implementing the commitments of Articles 4 and 5 of the Agreement, as well as other powers established for its members.\n\nFinally, it should be noted that after the aforementioned Article 2 of the draft Law of Approval, the text continues with the reading of the certification of the Director-General of the World Trade Organization, who according to the Treaty, is the person designated as depositary of the instrument, and was assigned the responsibility of sending the authenticated copy of this instrument to the Member States, among other things. As a consequence of the foregoing, the Certification of Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, with phone numbers and email addresses, is placed on record, as well as the correspondence of John Adank, Director of the Legal Affairs Division of the World Trade Organization, to provide testimony and confirmation of the authenticity of the aforementioned document. Finally, the certification of the Director of the Legal Advisory Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Trade, issued at 11:00 hours on October 20, 2023. All of this is, evidently, *matter extraneous to the legal body of the Treaty*. It is, therefore, necessary to mention that this was pointed out by the Technical Services of the Legislative Assembly in report AL-DEST-IJU-025-2024 of January 30, 2024, with which the Chamber concurs. Although this information is pertinent for the processing of the Executive Branch's initiative when commencing the legislative approval process, it is ancillary information that does not form part of the Agreement or the Protocol, and therefore lacks legal effects for the parties to the Treaty. In that sense, it does not need to appear in the approval and ratification document at the domestic level. It is not necessary for the stated certifications to appear or be published as part of the legislative approval, as they are auxiliary information for that purpose. Thus, it is pertinent to make this observation so that, in due course, action can be taken under the protection of Article 152 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly, for the correction of formal matters within draft Laws and before the Second Debate.\n\n**VI.- Observations regarding the substance of the draft.**\n\nThe following must be noted:\n\n**A.- The agreement is compatible with Article 50 of the Constitution.** The draft law for the *\"Approval of the Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022 and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies\"*, processed under legislative file No. 24.030, is compatible with Article 50 of the Political Constitution, insofar as it seeks to insert the country into the concert of Nations, into a commercial agreement and to take control over illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing and overfishing. From the reading of the treaty's content, it is evident that it has no clauses that grant or compromise the territorial integrity and the political organization of the country. On the contrary, the provisions are formally oriented towards preventing the subsidies granted by Member States from being able to harm the environment, in addition to establishing in the international instrument a common policy for developing Nations and \"Least Developed Countries\" (LDCs), with more lax rules for them, but that ensure global food security through the science-based sustainability of marine fishing stocks. Likewise, it is important to mention that it has the potential to form a discussion forum to determine new forms of subsidies that should be regulated in the future if they had implications for fisheries sustainability.\n\n**B.- The obligation to legislate and the subsidy is not prohibited by the Treaty.** Regarding the obligations to implement legislation, in Ordinary Session No. 19 of January 24, 2024, the Executive President of INCOPESCA stated that the regulations required by the treaty would already be in place in Costa Rica. That is to say, no regulatory actions are needed at the moment, given that: “… *we do not grant any type of subsidy to illegal fishing activities or users who are not within the concept of the current legal system. What does this mean? Basically, that our country goes further in many of these situations, because rather, we comply in excess with the regulations that have to do with the formalization of our fishing fleets, in every sense.*\n\nOur fleets are constantly subjected to oversight controls, management controls, regarding protected fishing areas, marine areas of responsible fishing, provisions on minimum sizes at first sexual maturity, and it is precisely all of this that this Marrakech Convention (sic) seeks to protect and support. We must be clear that we request support for the approval of this project, in the sense that there is no direct impact on the fishing sector, […] we are aware that fishing will be favored in the sense that it will rather help us, and it will give us inputs to continue combating the problem of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing” (folio 106). It is relevant that in that session it was reported that 100% of the fleet is national, with the sole exception for purse-seine vessels, in the Exclusive Economic Zone by legal mandate for tuna fishing (folio 116). Additionally, subsidies are granted to national vessels for the closures that are imposed (to safeguard populations), so that the verification of a violation of them implies the withdrawal of the same as a precautionary measure (folios 108 and 109).\n\nIt is relevant to indicate that this Treaty, by being inserted into the Annexes of the WTO, which our country ratified through Law No. 7475, accepted as an international obligation that certain subsidies would be regulated by the Treaty. Thus, for their determination it refers to Articles 1 and 2 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement). As the Technical Services well explain in their report:\n\n“The SCM Agreement defines subsidies in Article 1, and defines them as financial contributions by a government or a public body, when there is a transfer or donation of funds, and when government revenue that is otherwise due is not collected, as in the case of tax incentives.\n\nFor its part, our legislation grants a fiscal benefit with respect to gasoline for the fishing sector, according to Article 45 of the Law Creating INCOPESCA (Law No. 7384), which we transcribe:\n\nARTICLE 45 – The fishing sector shall acquire from RECOPE fuel (gasoline and diesel), for non-sport fishing activity at a price competitive with the international price, based on the average import cost of the previous month and considering the C.I.F. refinery cost, as well as the costs of distribution by pipeline and distribution at plants, so that the price is F.O.B. Plant.\n\nThat price shall be set by the National Electricity Service; to which RECOPE must previously request it, according to the provisions of Law No. 6588 of July 30, 1981, or the Institute.\n\nThe Institute shall be in charge of the administration and control of the efficient use of fuel, destined for non-sport fishing activity”.\n\nThat “price competitive in the international market”, translates in practice to the fact that only the costs (all costs) are calculated, but the payment of the single fuel tax is excluded, which has a significant weight in the final price of the fuel, which is why it is effectively cheapened or considerably reduced.\n\nThis tax benefit, in the strict sense, would be a \"subsidy\" within the terms of Article 1 of the SCM Agreement.\n\nBut what Article 1 on \"Scope\" of the Agreement provides is that it applies only with respect to \"specific subsidies,\" as defined in Article 2 of the SCM Agreement.\n\nIt remains to be seen whether the fuel exemption for the fishing sector contained in the INCOPESCA law can be considered a \"specific subsidy.\"\n\nWe transcribe Article 2 of the SCM Agreement due to its importance for establishing the scope of coverage of the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies:\n\n**Article 2**\n\n**Specificity**\n\n2.1.- In order to determine whether a subsidy, as defined in paragraph 1 of Article 1, is specific to an enterprise or industry or group of enterprises or industries (referred to in this Agreement as \"certain enterprises\") within the jurisdiction of the granting authority, the following principles shall apply:\n\na) Where the granting authority, or the legislation pursuant to which the granting authority operates, explicitly limits access to a subsidy to certain enterprises, such subsidy shall be considered specific.\n\nb) Where the granting authority, or the legislation pursuant to which the granting authority operates, establishes objective criteria or conditions (2) governing the right to obtain the subsidy and its amount, specificity shall be considered not to exist, provided that the right is automatic and that such criteria or conditions are strictly adhered to. The criteria or conditions must be clearly stipulated in a law, regulation, or other official document so that they can be verified.\n\n(2) The expression \"objective criteria or conditions\" used here means criteria or conditions that are impartial, that do not favor certain enterprises over others, and that are economic in nature and horizontal in application; examples include the number of employees and the size of the enterprise.\n\n(…)\n\nLet us compare this definition with the benefit granted by our legislation:\n\nArticle 45 cited above establishes the benefit of \"acquiring fuel at a competitive price\" for \"the entire fishing sector,\" with the sole exception of sport fishing.\n\nIt is not granted to certain enterprises to the exclusion of others; rather, objective criteria or conditions are used to exclude one type of fishing: sport fishing.\n\nIn the opinion of this advisory body, the benefit contained in Article 45 of the INCOPESCA Law, the so-called \"fuel subsidy for the fishing sector,\" IS NOT A SPECIFIC SUBSIDY, and therefore it is not subject to or falls outside the scope or coverage of the Agreement now submitted for approval.\n\nGiven that the scope of the Agreement does not apply with respect to Costa Rica regarding its current national legislation, we understand that the timeliness or merit of its approval is therefore not a matter of domestic law, but rather one of prestige and collaboration in the international sphere regarding measures with respect to countries that possess large fishing fleets and that use subsidies as a means of distorting export trade, but which ultimately leads to an undue depletion of the resource and thus threatens the global sustainability of the seas and marine wealth\" (the bold text and underlining are from the original).\n\nConsequently, the subsidy granted in the country is not of the type that would be prohibited by the \"Protocol Amending the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, done at Geneva on 17 June 2022, and its Annex: Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies,\" such that no other legislative action would be necessary.\n\nC.- Reaffirms sustainability regarding marine populations. Another aspect that must be brought up is the issue of overexploitation, as it establishes the impossibility of continuing to subsidize fishing or activities related to populations whose assessments indicate depletion. This may occur through actions and measures taken by the coastal State itself, or by a RFMO/RFMA (Regional Fisheries Management Organizations/Regional Fisheries Management Agreements), which, in the Costa Rican case, occurs through fisheries management rules, closures (vedas), among other measures mentioned above. But furthermore, it is linked to the multilateral organizations of which Costa Rica is a member, with competence over some marine species, and without prejudice to mentioning that in all these cases it must be done “on the basis of the best scientific evidence available” (article 4.2). Regarding RFMOs, the legislative file (folio 126) mentions the country's membership in two very important ones, namely the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) for the Pacific, and the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). And regarding RFMAs, it refers to the agreements that, as the Minister of Foreign Trade, Manuel Tovar Rivera, informed the Permanent Special Committee on International Relations and Foreign Trade: “… RFMAs are Regional Fisheries Management Agreements, these are the agreements, and I will give the example, that are adopted at the level of the Central American Integration System, which are community norms and mandatory for all countries in which Costa Rica leads precisely in the elaboration of these norms. These regional fisheries management agreements have to do with the Integration system and Costa Rica has been a pioneer in that area as well, for example, the issue of shark protection that is so much talked about, we managed to have it applied at the Central American level at the initiative of Costa Rica within an RFMA” (folio 126).\n\nD.- Dispute settlement mechanisms and review of the Treaty. Finally, as indicated by the Department of Technical Services of the Legislative Assembly, for the settlement of differences, the Treaty refers to the usual WTO rules for establishment, exhaustion of prior consultations, and then arbitration (panel), all of which has been accepted in previous international agreements in commercial matters (article 10). Additionally, it should be noted that regarding the findings, that is, in the terms of the treaty “any findings, recommendations and awards concerning” lack legal consequences regarding “territorial claims or the delimitation of maritime boundaries” (article 11.2), nor shall one be obligated to it. Additionally, no provision may be interpreted to prejudice the jurisdiction, rights, and obligations of the member State under International Law, including the law of the sea. Finally, if after the review of the terms of the agreement it is concluded that future amendments to the treaty are necessary (article 9), said findings and conclusions must comply with the formalities of legislative approval in accordance with article 121, subsection 4), of the Political Constitution, prior to their entry into force in the country.\n\nVII.- Conclusion. By reason of all of the foregoing, the mandatory consultation of constitutionality is discharged, and it is concluded that there are no substantial defects of legislative procedure or of substance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, article 152 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly must be considered for the correction of the formal issues noted in recital V, before the Second Debate.\n\nVIII.- Note from Magistrate Garro Vargas\n\nI wish to record this note to state that I concur with the majority on the understanding that the Parliament, in a sovereign manner, decided to include a rule that in no way affects the content of the amendment protocol to which Costa Rica seeks to accede. However, and although I am mindful that this is not the first time that a rule for its implementation has been included in the same approval law of a treaty, it is worth recalling the distinct nature of the act by which the Legislative Assembly approves or disapproves a treaty from that or those by which it implements the already ratified treaty. In turn, the nature of an interpretative clause, which may well be included at the time of approval and will be expressed in the instrument of ratification, is distinct from an implementation rule.\n\nIn the specific case, the prior and corresponding consultation with the Costa Rican Institute of Fisheries and Aquaculture (Instituto Costarricense de Pesca y Acuicultura) seems to render the inclusion of article 2 innocuous, that is, that the approval law provides an execution rule designating the competent national authority to carry out the tasks of implementing the international agreement. However, this proceeding does not appear to be the closest to what is provided by the Constitution itself. Furthermore, in other types of matters, it could reveal the difficulties it entails.\n\nIX.- DOCUMENTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FILE. The parties are warned that if they have submitted any paper document, as well as objects or evidence contained in any additional electronic, computer, magnetic, optical, telematic device or produced by new technologies, these must be withdrawn from the office within a maximum period of thirty business days counted from the notification of this judgment.\n\nOtherwise, any material not removed within this period shall be destroyed, in accordance with the provisions of the \"Reglamento sobre Expediente Electrónico ante el Poder Judicial\", approved by the Full Court in Session No. 27-11 of August 22, 2011, article XXVI and published in Boletín Judicial No. 19 of January 26, 2012, as well as in the agreement approved by the Superior Council of the Judiciary, in Session No. 43-12 held on May 3, 2012, article LXXXI.\n\nPor tanto:\n\nThe consultation is hereby resolved in the sense that the legislative bill \"Aprobación del Protocolo de Enmienda del Acuerdo de Marrakech por el que se establece la Organización Mundial del Comercio, hecho en Ginebra el 17 de junio 2022 y su Anexo: Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones a la Pesca\", processed under legislative file No. 24.030, contains no substantial defects in legislative procedure or substance.\n\n- opportunely - consideration be given to correcting the formal issues noted at the end of Considerando V, and before the Second Debate, in accordance with Article 152 of the Regulations of the Legislative Assembly. Justice Garro Vargas notes a dissent. Communicate to the Legislative Directorate.-\n\n\n\n| | | |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| | | |\n\nFernando Castillo V.\nPresidente\n\n\n\n| | | |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| | | |\n\nPaul Rueda L.\n\n