EXPEDIENTE N° 25-036844-0007-CO
Telephones: 2549-1500 / 800-SALA-4TA (800-7252-482).
\n\nFax: 2220-4607 / 2220-4844. Email: www.poder-judicial.go.cr/salaconstitucional. Address: (Sabana Sur, Calle Morenos, 100 mts. Sur de la iglesia del Perpetuo Socorro).\n\n“(…) On this matter, it is worth noting that this Chamber, through judgment no. 2026008044, at 9:25 a.m. on March 6, 2026, heard and resolved a matter substantially similar to the present one, referring to four other points in the canton of San Ramón, on which occasion the amparo appeal filed against the respondent authorities was partially granted, based on the considerations transcribed below:\n\n“(…) VI.- On the Responsibility of Local Governments. Article 169 of the Political Constitution establishes the duty of the country's municipalities to look after the interests of the inhabitants of their jurisdiction; hence, in repeated pronouncements, this Court has indicated that such corporations are under the obligation to eliminate any type of threat that puts at risk the rights to health and to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the people living in their canton (see Judgment No. 2008-11739 at 12:12 p.m. on July 25, 2008, reiterated in No. 2020-014753, at 9:15 a.m. on August 7, 2020).\n\nAlthough the technical regulation of the telecommunications sector corresponds to specialized bodies of the Executive Branch and sectoral regulatory entities, the truth is that municipalities, pursuant to Articles 169 and 170 of the Political Constitution and the municipal autonomous regime, hold competence in matters of territorial planning, management of public space, and safeguarding of local interest. In turn, in accordance with the Municipal Code, municipalities are responsible for urban planning and the protection of the environmental surroundings in their jurisdiction.\n\nIn the present case, the Mayoress acknowledges that, on September 18, 2025, the appellants filed a complaint regarding the situation raised herein, and as a result of the inspection carried out, it was verified that there is a \"serious problem of visual pollution (contaminación visual)\" and a \"disorderly accumulation of cables and equipment\" that negatively impacts the urban space, for which reason the creation of an institutional commission and engagement with ARESEP and ICE to address the situation comprehensively was recommended. Thus, on October 31, 2025, the Mayor's Office sent the complainants a response to each of the concerns raised in their complaint and explained that the Municipality is not responsible for granting cable installation authorizations to telecommunications service provider companies; rather, this corresponds to the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, which is responsible for granting the corresponding permits, as well as agreements with public and private institutions, which is why they were urged to file the complaint with the competent public institutions.\n\nAlthough, within a prudential timeframe and prior to the filing of this appeal, the Mayoress resolved the complaint filed and notified the petitioners of its result, thereby not harming the right to prompt and complete justice, the truth is that the mere creation of a commission or the acknowledgment of the problem is insufficient if it does not translate into concrete material actions of oversight and planning that cease the violation of public space.\n\nMunicipal autonomy is not reduced to formal tax or administrative powers, but rather entails a correlative duty of effective protection of the cantonal environment. In this sense, even though the respondent Municipality is not the competent body to directly impose the removal or reorganization of cabling on telecommunications operators, it does have the obligation to:\n\na) Oversee the use of cantonal public space.\n\nb) Coordinate with the competent national entities.\n\nc) Issue urban regulations within its scope of competence.\n\nd) Adopt reasonable administrative measures to prevent risks and mitigate visual pollution (contaminación visual).\n\nThus, absolute inactivity or the omission of inter-institutional management in the face of a notorious and prolonged situation of structural disorder in the cabling constitutes an indirect violation of the right to a healthy environment and the duty of protection incumbent upon all public authorities.\n\nThe reported problem demonstrates that the actions taken in the exercise of the power of control or surveillance deployed in protection of health and the environment by the Municipality of San Ramón within the framework of its competencies have been clearly insufficient, thereby incurring liability for omission in the exercise of those powers, which, in turn, harms the constitutional right of citizens to receive efficient and effective public services.\n\nBy virtue of the foregoing, the respondent Municipality is responsible for the damage to the fundamental rights of the protected persons, due to the omission in promptly and effectively ensuring the health of the population and the environment.\n\nConsequently, regarding the Municipality of San Ramón, the appeal is granted, and it is warned that, henceforth, it must actively exercise its competencies in matters of protection of the urban landscape, citizen security, and management of public space, under warning of incurring liability for omission. Therefore, the proper course is to order it to effectively put into operation the institutional commission mentioned in official communication MSR-AM-GM-DDU-SMA-197-2025, and it must define a permanent work schedule to prevent the problem of infrastructure saturation from recurring in other sectors of the canton through coordination work with the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad.\n\nVII. - On the Duty of Oversight of SUTEL and ICE. As governing entities and administrators of passive infrastructure, including posts and networks, SUTEL and ICE have the obligation to guarantee that private operators comply with the technical installation standards.\n\nArticles 77 of the Law of the Regulatory Authority for Public Services and 77 of the Regulation to the General Telecommunications Law indicate that SUTEL is responsible for guaranteeing the right to joint or shared use of infrastructure, channeling, ducts, posts, towers, stations, and other installations required for the installation and operation of public telecommunications networks, as well as for the provision of services available to the public and the collocation (coubicación) of equipment.\n\nFor its part, ICE, in this case, as the owner of the infrastructure supporting public telecommunications networks, is under the obligation to grant rights of way, shared use, and colocation of equipment, apply current regulations and the guidelines issued by the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones. Likewise, it is its duty to guarantee and provide the necessary maintenance to its scarce resource to ensure proper operation and the continuity of shared use (Article 08 of the Regulation on the Shared Use of Infrastructure for Public Telecommunications Networks, GCO-NRE-REG-00469-2016).\n\nPrecisely, the Regulation on the Shared Use of Infrastructure for the Support of Public Telecommunications Networks, in Article 13, also establishes that:\n\n“Article 13. On the efficient use of network elements in the telecommunications infrastructure by the infrastructure owners.\n\nWhen the owners of the infrastructure that supports public telecommunications networks become aware of underutilization or non-efficient use of the network elements in the space assigned to an operator and/or provider of telecommunications services, they must notify them to carry out the uninstallation and removal of these types of network elements, unless there is a valid justification for keeping them in the infrastructure. For this, a maximum period of 2 months must be granted.\n\nSUTEL, ex officio or at the request of a party, shall have the power to request the operator and/or telecommunications provider to remove these idle elements, not used, or that do not have a duly planned use.”\n\nThus, according to the foregoing, once a request for intervention is received, or ex officio, SUTEL is competent to require operators and/or providers of telecommunications services to remove those elements that are in an idle condition, that are not being used, or whose existence does not respond to a duly supported technical plan. This normative attribution is of special relevance in the management and planning of infrastructure, as it seeks to prevent saturation, inefficient use, or the permanence of installations lacking operational justification.\n\nIn the case under study, it was verified that on September 17, 2025, the appellant party filed a complaint before the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones (SUTEL) regarding the chaotic accumulation of cabling and visual pollution (contaminación visual) in the central area of San Ramón, and within a prudential timeframe, the complaint was forwarded to ICE and it was requested to coordinate with the owners of telecommunications networks that use the passive infrastructure (posts) to adopt the necessary verification and correction measures and report on actions taken.\n\nBy virtue of this, once SUTEL became aware of the actions taken by ICE and the operators and/or providers offering telecommunications services, on October 17, 2025, it proceeded to inform the complainants of the actions taken. Thus, in this sense, the right to prompt and complete justice was not harmed, since the matter was resolved within a reasonable timeframe and before the filing of the present appeal. Therefore, regarding this point, the appeal is dismissed.\n\nOn the other hand, it is not considered that SUTEL has harmed the right to health and the environment of the protected persons, since, as the sectoral regulatory entity, its role is to regulate the legal, technical, and economic conditions under which said infrastructure can be used in a shared manner by operators and/or providers of telecommunications services available to the public. Note that it was from the complaint filed by the appellants that it became aware of the problem, and to provide a solution, it requested ICE, as the owner of the posts in that locality, to coordinate with the owners of telecommunications networks that use the passive infrastructure the adoption of necessary verification and correction measures, and it also requested said body to arrange practices in surveillance and auditing to guarantee the planning and adequate management of telecommunications networks. For compliance with this, it required ICE to report on the actions taken, and on October 6, 2025, it was informed that, as of that date, the removal of disused networks had already been executed by 50%, and that operators had been granted a two-month period to complete the corrective actions. Ultimately, constitutional review cannot become a mechanism to attribute automatic responsibility for every materially dysfunctional situation, when no arbitrary inactivity or deliberate neglect on the part of the regulatory entity is proven. Thus, SUTEL issued the necessary acts to provide a solution to the problem raised by the appellants.\n\nIt is warned that, without prejudice to criminal or civil liability, it will be SUTEL's responsibility to intervene in the event the parties do not reach an agreement on the shared use of the scarce resource or if a conflict exists, and to proceed to sanction the administrative infractions incurred by operators or providers, and also those who exploit telecommunications networks or provide telecommunications services illegitimately (Article 65 of the General Telecommunications Law, No. 8642, and 55 of the Regulation on the Shared Use of Infrastructure for Public Telecommunications Networks).\n\nNotwithstanding the foregoing, this Chamber deems it pertinent to remind SUTEL of its permanent duty of oversight and supervision of compliance with technical obligations by operators, especially when these affect the urban environment and may have environmental repercussions.\n\nA corollary of the foregoing, it is not proven, in the specific case, that the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones has incurred in an arbitrary or illegitimate action or omission that violates the fundamental right to a healthy environment, and the proper course is to dismiss the appeal against this administrative body.\n\nTake note. Despite the fact that the present amparo appeal must be dismissed regarding SUTEL, follow-up must be given to the administrative procedures initiated that are the subject of this amparo, within the framework of its legal competencies, to verify compliance with the technical obligations of the operating companies and to adopt, where appropriate, the corresponding measures.\n\nVIII.- In relation to the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE). Regarding this entity, like the previous ones, it received the complaint from the administered parties and proceeded to execute the corresponding administrative acts, verifying that there were disused connections; double network (coaxial and fiber); double post installations; poorly detailed reserve coils; lack of optimization of space on posts, and it proceeded to notify the operators; Liberty, Telecable, Tigo, Claro, and Ufinet so that they would carry out the relocation work of the disused networks, which was reiterated on several occasions, and it granted each operator a period of two months to guarantee compliance with the conditions stipulated in the corresponding service contracts. This period expired on December 13, 2025, that is, after the date of filing of the present appeal. It is warned that, by November 2025, some of the operators had already executed the ordered actions, and during the week of December 15 to 19, 2025, an inspection by personnel from the Shared Infrastructure Use Area was scheduled to verify the current state of the reported post installations; however, the Chamber is unaware of the result thereof.\n\nEven though the telecommunications operating companies are the owners of the installed cabling, the truth is that the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, in its capacity as owner and administrator of the post installations, holds a legal position of guarantor regarding the adequate and safe use of that infrastructure. In such a capacity, it cannot disregard the deterioration of public space derived from the negligent use of the posts under its administration, as this would imply tolerating practices contrary to urban planning norms and technical regulations on electrical safety and telecommunications.\n\nIn the sub lite case, an administrative omission in the exercise of the police, control, and supervision powers corresponding to ICE over its own infrastructure is verified, which has generated an affectation of the fundamental right to a healthy and balanced environment, as well as a certain threat to the health and physical integrity of the appellants and the community.\n\nThe disorderly accumulation of cabling, the so-called “tangling” of lines, and the permanence of disused overhead lines constitute a form of visual pollution (contaminación visual) that degrades the urban landscape and impairs the right of inhabitants to a safe and aesthetically harmonious environment.\n\nIn this sense, the passivity of the respondent entity does not constitute a mere aesthetic deficiency, but an omission with constitutional relevance, insofar as it compromises the health and physical safety of people as well as the regularity in the management of public domain. Inaction in the face of the technical non-compliance of the operators makes the administrator of the post installations co-responsible for the harm caused to health and the environment, since the administration of public infrastructure cannot be exercised outside the principles of legality, effectiveness, and protection of the general interest.\n\nIt is evident, then, that the lack of effective oversight has produced a harm to the right to the environment and a latent threat to the health and integrity of persons, given the risk of collapses or electrical accidents. Consequently, ICE's omission in the exercise of its control powers transgresses the constitutional mandates of administrative efficiency and environmental protection.\n\nOn the other hand, there is no record that, on the date of filing of the present appeal, the authorities of the corresponding branch office have communicated the concrete result of the actions undertaken to the appellants, which also entails a harm to the right to prompt and complete justice. This right is not satisfied with the mere issuance of concrete acts; rather, it demands a substantive and effective response that addresses the problem raised in a real and timely manner.\n\nIn the specific case, administrative inoperancy is noted, since, despite approximately two months having elapsed since the complaints were filed and there being express acknowledgment of the poor state of the lines by the authorities, as of the date of filing of this appeal, the urban landscape of San Ramón has not undergone substantial changes, keeping the administered parties in a situation of risk and uncertainty. The persistence of the problem reveals that oversight has been negligent or ineffective. Public institutions cannot limit their action to mere correspondence transfers; they are obliged to guarantee the effective removal of cabling that is disused or installed in contravention of the applicable technical regulation.\n\nIX.- Conclusion. It is evident that both the Municipality of San Ramón and the ICE Branch in the canton of San Ramón have failed in their duty of inter-institutional coordination to resolve a fully identified problem of visual pollution (contaminación visual). The lack of execution and the persistence of technical disorder at the four reported points justify the intervention of this Chamber to order the restoration of visual balance and the safety of the central area of San Ramón (…)\n\nPor tanto:\n\nThe appeal is granted. It is ordered that [Name 008] and [Name 009], in their respective capacities as Mayoress and Head of the Municipal Environmental Services Unit, both of the Municipality of San Ramón, or whoever holds those positions, must, within a period of FIFTEEN BUSINESS DAYS from the notification of this judgment, effectively put into operation the institutional commission mentioned in official communication MSR-AM-GM-DDU-SMA-197-2025, and must define a permanent work schedule to prevent the problem of saturation of telecommunications cables in the infrastructure from recurring in other sectors of the canton. Furthermore, they must jointly and effectively coordinate with the INSTITUTO COSTARRICENSE DE ELECTRICIDAD, within their respective spheres of competence, so that within a period of ONE MONTH, counted from the notification of this resolution, the process of cleaning, organizing, and removing all telecommunications cabling that is in disuse, irregularly installed, or that generates chaotic accumulation is completed at the four specific points reported by the appellants. In turn, it is ordered that Alex Rodríguez Cambronero, in his capacity as Coordinator of the Integrated Agency of San Ramón of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, or whoever holds that position, take the necessary administrative and technical actions so that: a) Within a period of SIX MONTHS, counted from the notification of this judgment, he coordinates with the telecommunications operators the total organization and removal of disused cabling in the affected area; b) He executes, together with the telecommunications operators, a plan for organizing and tensioning the remaining cables to eliminate the negative visual impact and guarantee safety; c) He establishes a permanent oversight protocol to prevent the situation of visual chaos from recurring in the future; and d) He resolves and notifies the resolution of the complaint filed by the appellant party on September 17, 2025. The foregoing, under the warning that, based on the provisions of Article 71 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction, imprisonment of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, shall be imposed on anyone who receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in an amparo appeal, and does not comply with it or enforce it, provided the offense is not more severely penalized. The Municipality of San Ramón and the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad are ordered to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts serving as the basis for this declaration, which shall be liquidated in the execution of the judgment in the contentious-administrative proceeding. Regarding the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones, the appeal is dismissed, although it must take note of what is indicated in the final paragraph of Considerando VII of this judgment. Judge Castillo Víquez files a note. Judge Salazar Alvarado partially dissents and dismisses the appeal regarding the alleged violation of the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, since this point of the appeal should be resolved through the ordinary legal channels (…)\".\n\nIn this regard, it is clarified that this amparo appeal denounces the excess of cabling on posts located at: \"a) Avenida 0, 24 meters east of Club de Amigos, in front of Departamentos Washington, b) Avenida 05, 200 meters north and 25 east of the front of the Parroquia de San Ramón, next to Librería Católica de San Ramón, in front of Boutique Mova, and c) Avenida 5, 25 meters from ASEMBIS, in front of PRO PLAN Concentrados, next to D´Feria Centro de Carnes\". Likewise, the cited precedent questions the cabling placed on the electrical posts located at: \"four points in the city, on Avenida Segunda de San Ramón, over sidewalks and in front of various commercial premises (Pizza Grace, Librería Eureka, The Corner Pub, and Sala de Juegos Mora)\". Moreover, as in the cited precedent, the Municipality of San Ramón mentions official communication MSR-AM GM-DDU-SMA-197-2025, dated October 1, 2025, which states that it carried out an inspection at the indicated place and issued that document with conclusions and recommendations (the formation of the institutional commission is recommended).\n\nOn the other hand, in the present matter, the petitioners allege a lack of attention to several complaints regarding this issue filed with the Municipalidad de San Ramón, the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones, and the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad.\n\nThat is to say, it is established as proven that these are complaints about visual pollution in common areas of said canton, which is why this Court relies on that precedent for the resolution of this new amparo action.\n\nVI.- From the comprehensive review of the case file, the reports rendered under oath—with the consequences provided for in Article 44 of the Law of this Jurisdiction—and the body of evidence submitted, this Court deems it proven that the petitioners reported, on September 9, 17, and 18, 2025, a persistent situation of visual pollution, structural disorder, and accumulation of disused electrical and telecommunications cabling, particularly in various urban sectors of the canton of San Ramón de Alajuela, which generated a negative impact on the urban landscape and risks to public safety.\n\nAs inferred from the proven facts, said complaints were filed with the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE), the Municipalidad de San Ramón, and the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones (SUTEL), and each of these entities carried out actions within their respective scope of competence. However, the constitutional analysis requires determining whether such actions were timely, sufficient, and effective in guaranteeing the fundamental rights invoked.\n\nWith regard to the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, it is on record that, in its capacity as owner and administrator of the passive infrastructure (postería), it received the respective complaints and, after they were also forwarded by SUTEL, executed various administrative steps, such as field inspections, notifications, and warnings to the telecommunications operators using that infrastructure—Liberty, Telecable, Tigo, Claro, Ufinet, and Kölbi—granting them deadlines for the relocation of networks, the removal of disused cable runs, and the correction of multiple detected irregularities, including idle service drops, duplicate networks, duplicate postering, poorly arranged reserve loops, and unfinished works.\n\nHowever, it was also demonstrated that, as of the date this amparo action was filed, relevant irregularities persisted in the reported areas, and neither the complete removal of disused wiring nor the comprehensive correction of the problem had been proven, despite the existence of such anomalies having been expressly acknowledged. Likewise, there is no record that ICE clearly and timely communicated the concrete results of the steps taken to the petitioners, which negatively impacted their right to prompt and complete justice.\n\nAs this Chamber has repeatedly held, even when the operating companies are the owners of the installed networks, ICE, as the administrator of the postering, holds a legal position as a guarantor regarding the adequate, safe, and orderly use of said infrastructure. Consequently, it cannot disassociate itself from the negative effects that the negligent use of the poles generates on public space, as this compromises the constitutional right to a healthy and balanced environment, as well as the health and physical integrity of individuals. The omission or ineffective oversight in the exercise of its control and supervision powers therefore constitutes a violation with constitutional relevance.\n\nRegarding the Municipalidad de San Ramón, it is proven that it received the complaint about visual pollution and that, through a technical inspection, expressly acknowledged the veracity of the reported facts, concluding that a serious problem of visual pollution existed due to the disorder of cables and equipment on urban postering. However, it is also noted that an excessive period—exceeding two months—elapsed without a formal response being provided to the complainants, which was only issued as a result of the processing of this amparo.\n\nAdditionally, although the municipality stated its intention to form an institutional commission and coordinate with other competent entities, there is no record that such measures were effectively implemented or translated into concrete, verifiable actions of oversight, organization, or mitigation of the reported problem. As this Court has indicated, municipal autonomy entails not only formal powers but also an active duty to protect the urban environment and cantonal public space. Consequently, even if it is not responsible for directly compelling operators to remove the wiring, it is obligated to oversee, coordinate inter-institutionally, and adopt reasonable measures to prevent environmental and urban risks. Inactivity or merely declaratory management is insufficient and constitutes an omission harmful to fundamental rights.\n\nFinally, with respect to the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones (SUTEL), it was proven that said entity received multiple complaints of a similar nature and, within a reasonable timeframe, proceeded to forward them to ICE as the owner of the passive infrastructure, issued clear directives for the verification and correction of the indicated irregularities, and requested detailed reports on the actions executed. Likewise, prior to the filing of this amparo action, SUTEL communicated the steps taken and the reports rendered by ICE to the complainants, without any omissive, arbitrary, or illegitimate conduct by the regulatory body being evident.\n\nIt must be recalled that SUTEL's function is limited to the regulation, supervision, and oversight of the technical and legal conditions of shared infrastructure use, and it is not responsible for the direct material execution of cable removal. Within that framework, this Court considers that SUTEL acted within its scope of competence and did not violate the fundamental rights of the petitioners, without prejudice to its permanent duty of continuous supervision and potential sanctioning power in the event of future non-compliance (see, in a similar vein, judgment No. 2026014326 of 9:20 a.m. on April 24, 2026).\n\nVII.- Conclusion. By virtue of the foregoing, the appropriate course of action is to grant the amparo action partially with merit solely against the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad and the Municipalidad de San Ramón for the points indicated. With respect to the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones, the action is dismissed. However, as indicated in the cited precedent, that authority is reminded that it must follow up on the administrative proceedings initiated that are the subject of this amparo, within the framework of its legal powers, in order to verify compliance by the operating companies with their technical obligations and, where appropriate, adopt the corresponding measures. (…)”\n\nSan José, at nine twenty in the morning on April thirtieth, two thousand twenty-six.\n\nAmparo action (Recurso de amparo) filed by [Nombre 001], [Valor 001], [Nombre 002], [Valor 002], [Nombre 003], [Valor 003], [Nombre 004], [Valor 004], against the MUNICIPALITY OF SAN RAMÓN, the COSTA RICAN ELECTRICITY INSTITUTE (ICE), AND THE SUPERINTENDENCE OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS (SUTEL).\n\nWhereas:\n\n1.- By a document received via the Chamber's Online Management system on November 25, 2025, the claimants filed an amparo action against the Municipality of San Ramón. They state that they are residents of San Ramón and Grecia. They indicate that on September 9, 2025, they reported to the Mayor's Office of San Ramón the visual pollution (contaminación visual) and impact on the urban landscape in three specific points of San Ramón, caused by poles with disorganized cabling from telecommunications companies. They detail that the locations are as follows: 1- Avenida 0, 24 meters east of the Club de Amigos, in front of the Departamentos Washington, 2- Avenida 05, 200 meters north and 25 east from the front of the Parroquia de San Ramón, beside the Librería Católica de San Ramón, in front of Boutique Mova, and 3.- Avenida 5, 25 meters from ASEMBIS, in front of PRO PLAN Concentrados, next to D´Feria Centro de Carnes. They note that this situation has persisted for more than two months, generating risks for the safety of the inhabitants of San Ramón, as they are exposed to short circuits, detachments, and fires, affecting their quality of life. They argue that the respondent municipality has allowed this condition without implementing an ordering plan (plan de ordenamiento) or requiring adequate maintenance, which constitutes an omission that violates the constitutional rights of the area's inhabitants. They claim that the cable companies in the three indicated sectors receive no treatment whatsoever, meaning there is an abuse by the cable companies that leave cables in rolls hanging on the specified poles, owned by ICE, without giving them the proper destination or removal, since the state in which they are found is absolutely irregular, disorganized, chaotic, and risky for passersby, which violates the right to health and the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, as well as the right to a non-polluted landscape, since these infrastructures generate visual pollution and aggravate the impact on the urban landscape, constituting a clear omission of the duty of maintenance and respect for public tidiness. They explain that, in their complaint, they requested that the respondent Mayor's Office manage what was pertinent with ICE and SUTEL so that immediate measures would be adopted for the removal and ordering of unused or poorly maintained cabling, since the situation generates a major impact on urban visual pollution, as well as concrete risks to the physical integrity of individuals, as hanging, damaged, or exposed cables increase the possibility of accidents. They note that on October 31, 2025, by official letter no. MSR-AM-1117-2025, the respondent municipality replied as follows: \"This Mayor's Office is going to proceed to appoint a Commission that will be in charge of forwarding these complaints to the Institutions in charge of the telecommunications infrastructure of the Canton of San Ramón; however, we cannot commit to providing specific dates for the resolution of the reported problem, because, as has been indicated in this Official Letter, matters related to cabling on telecommunications towers are not within our competence. Nevertheless, we commit to forwarding your complaint so that the corresponding Public Institution addresses the details herein and gives it due follow-up.\" They claim that the cited response demonstrates omissive conduct by the respondent authority, since it affirms that only measures for forwarding the complaints presented on this issue will be taken, despite the fact that, as a local authority, it should be able to initiate action and demand, even directly, immediate measures for the removal and ordering of unused or poorly maintained cabling. They add that the formation of a commission, far from constituting a material and effective response to the reported problem, only reveals an expectation of eventual management, without adopting concrete, immediate, or proportional measures to the seriousness of the facts raised. They indicate that, as of the date the action was filed, no improvement is evident in any of the three points reported, with the exact same conditions of disorder, saturation, and deterioration of the cabling persisting, which causes visual pollution and risk to public road users. Furthermore, they argue that on September 9, 2025, they reported the situation set forth here to the San Ramón Local Office of the Costa Rican Electricity Institute (ICE); however, they have not received a response, nor have actions been taken to solve the reported problem. They argue that sending official letter no. 263-776-2025 does not exempt ICE from responsibility, demonstrating negligence by omission and institutional co-responsibility in the perpetuation of visual pollution and cabling disorder, given that the photographs presented show no significant change in the quantity of cables from the cable companies nor any greater order in them. Lastly, they note that on September 17, 2025, the referred problem was reported to the Superintendence of Telecommunications (SUTEL). However, despite multiple official letters (no. 08900-SUTEL-DGM-2025 of September 19, 2025, no. 09521-SUTEL-DGM-2025 of October 8, 2025, no. 09853-SUTEL-DGM-2025 of October 16, 2025) and communications regarding inspections and regulatory measures, the unused cabling was not removed nor was the disorder corrected, which demonstrates a lack of control, follow-up, and sanctions by SUTEL. They report that the actions taken have been insufficient, delayed, or merely formal, perpetuating the visual pollution and risk to the community. They consider their fundamental rights to be harmed. They request this Chamber's intervention.\n\n2.- By resolution of 12:24 p.m. on December 16, 2025, the amparo action is admitted for processing, and a report is requested from the mayor and the head of the Municipal Environmental Services Unit, both of the Municipality of San Ramón, from the coordinator of the Integrated Agency of San Ramón of the Costa Rican Electricity Institute, and from the head of the General Directorate of Markets of the Superintendence of Telecommunications, regarding the facts alleged by the claimants.\n\n3.- By a document received through the Court's Online Filing System on December 19, 2025, Deryhan Muñoz Barquero and Juan Gabriel García Rodríguez, in their respective capacities as director and head of the Markets Directorate, both of the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones, report under oath that: “(…) from the review of this Superintendency's documentary records, it was confirmed that the following complaint was received: a) NI-12454-2025: On September 17, 2025, through a document filed with this Superintendency, with entry number NI-12454-2025, individuals identifying themselves as [Name 001], ID 0208020572, [Name 002], ID 0402640509, [Name 003], ID 0119340010, [Name 004], ID 0207840911; filed an “Environmental complaint for visual and aesthetic urban landscape contamination generated by electrical and telecommunications wiring in the San Ramón area,” establishing that on the public road, in three specific sectors of the downtown San Ramón de Alajuela region, an existing problem has been evidenced regarding the state of the electrical wiring, telecommunications wiring, and cable companies' installations, which present an accumulation, disorder, deterioration, entanglement, and exposure of cables in an evident state of tangle, saturation, and imminent danger to passersby, severely affecting the urban landscape and the aesthetic harmony of the environment through the generated visual contamination. On September 19, 2025, the General Directorate of Markets, via official communication 08900-SUTEL-DGM-2025, as a result of what was indicated in the complaint reflected in NI-12454-2025, forwarded the complaint together with the evidence developed therein to ICE. Additionally, the missive requested the following: ‘(…) For the acts reported in document NI-12454-2025, through this means we request that you coordinate with the owners of telecommunications networks that use the passive infrastructure (poles) in the San Ramón canton, the region indicated in this official communication, in order to adopt the necessary verification and corrective measures in accordance with applicable regulations. Said actions must include, at a minimum: 1. Verify in situ the installation practices described in the complaint document and accredited in the images provided, in particular: a) Verification of the correct disposal of reserve coils, in accordance with the applicable standard for such purpose, b) Identification of duplicate poles that have not been removed, and c) Idle telecommunications networks not removed. 2. Coordinate with network owners the necessary corrective actions to remedy the detected incidents and prevent the recurrence of poor installation practices. 3. Remit to this Superintendency a detailed report containing: a) Results of the verifications carried out. b) List of detected acts or omissions and their precise location. c) Agreed corrective measures and execution deadline. d) Documentary and photographic evidence supporting the actions taken. 4. Address the claim made by the complainant, informing this Superintendency of the steps taken for its resolution. (…)’ On October 7, 2025, via official communication 263-776-2025-2025 (NI-13364-2025), which is attached, ICE responded to what was requested in official communication 08900-SUTEL-DGM-2025. The following is highlighted from this report: ‘2. Coordinate with network owners the necessary corrective actions to remedy the detected incidents and prevent the recurrence of poor installation practices. On October 2, 2025, Notice I was sent to all Operators with a presence in the location, so that they would appear in the San Ramón area to identify their networks and begin the corresponding dismantling and relocation work. Likewise, via official communications 9183-955-2025, 9183-956-2025, 9183-957-2025, 9183-960-2025, 9183-961-2025, and 9183-962-2025, the operators identified in the area subject to the complaint were warned. In said communication, compliance with the conditions established in the current service contracts was urged. 3. Remit to this Superintendency a detailed report containing: a) Results of the verifications carried out. b) List of detected acts or omissions and their precise location. c) Agreed corrective measures and execution deadline. d) Documentary and photographic evidence supporting the actions taken. Regarding what was requested in this point, the requirements were addressed in subsections No. 1 and No. 2 of this official communication according to the following detail: a) Results of the verifications carried out The non-compliances indicated in the complaint were verified \"in situ,\" so the respective notifications to the Operators were proceeded with. b) List of detected acts or omissions and their precise location. The identified non-compliances are summarized as: -Lack of network relocation. -Removal of elements and networks in disuse. The georeferenced location of each of the non-compliances is detailed in the photographs provided in point No. 1 of this official communication. c) Agreed corrective measures and execution deadline. In the notifications sent to each of the Operators present in the complaint Sector, in accordance with current regulations, an execution period of 2 months from receipt of the notification was established, for which the Infrastructure Shared Use Area of the Telecommunications Management will carry out the corresponding follow-up aimed at ensuring compliance with the conditions established in the corresponding service contract. d) Documentary and photographic evidence supporting the actions taken.\n\nAttached to this official letter as annexes are the formal communications sent to each of the Operators identified in the Sector subject to the complaint, the photographs evidencing said non-compliance were provided in point No. 2. (...) Now, given that there were several complaints of the same nature and common areas where the raised problem converges, the General Directorate of Markets, through official letter 09853-SUTEL-DGM-2025 of October 16, 2025, notified the different means of notification raised in each of the complaints, the tasks executed, as well as each of the reports developed by ICE in its capacity as owner or administrator of the infrastructure (poles) that houses telecommunications services. The following stands out from this official letter: “In the exercise of the functions attributed in articles 43 and 44 of the Reglamento Interno de Organización y Funcionales de la Autoridad Reguladora de los Servicios Públicos y su Órgano desconcentrado, the owner of the electrical pole supporting the public telecommunications networks, in this case the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE), was sent official letters number 08900-SUTEL-DGM-2025, 09180-SUTEL-DGM-2025 and 09521-SUTELDGM-2025 dated September 19 and 25, 2025 and October 8, 2025 respectively, in which the respective transfer of attention to the complaint is made so that it would carry out the coordination with the telecommunications network operators that make use of the passive infrastructure in the indicated area, and indicate to this Directorate the corrective actions it would carry out to remedy the situation reported by the complainants in order to address the request. In follow-up to said official letter, ICE responded to what was requested by this Superintendency through official letters 263-776-2025 (NI-13364-2025) dated October 6, 2025 and 263-802-2025 (NI-13683-2025) dated October 13, 2025. In these missives, ICE indicates that the respective efforts were undertaken to address the complaint regarding the poor condition of the telecommunications networks in the previously indicated site, providing the photographic records of the inspection carried out and the coordination emails with the operators that use its passive infrastructure, which are highlighted below: LIBERTY, TELECABLE, MILLICOM, CLARO and UFINET, in order to remedy the denounced situation. Likewise, it reports on the actions carried out by ICE with the network operators installed in the reported area. According to what was indicated by ICE, the corrective actions consisted of relocating networks to a new pole and removing idle elements and networks; the tasks were carried out by the involved operators between September 25 and 29 of this year. ICE also indicates that there are still pending tasks to be carried out by some operators, for which reason these efforts continue to be followed up, and, in accordance with current regulations, the documents related to the actions carried out to date are attached. Thus, this Telecommunications Superintendency informs the residents of the community of San Ramón about the efforts made in addressing the complaints filed, in accordance with applicable regulations, regarding the condition of the telecommunications networks supported on the electrical pole owned by ICE.” In addition to the foregoing, and in order to follow up on addressing the complaints for contamination filed by residents of San Ramón, on December 15, 2025, Sutel sent official letter 11908-SUTEL-DGM-2025 to ICE and indicated the following: 1- Report whether the idle telecommunications network elements and other elements identified in official letters 263-776-2025 of October 6, 2025 and 263-802-2025 of October 13, 2025 have been removed and, if so, attach documentary or photographic evidence of compliance with each of the instructions generated to the telecommunications operators. 2- Detail the current surveillance and auditing practices that ICE, as owner of passive infrastructure for the support of telecommunications networks and as a fixed telecommunications network operator, carries out in compliance with resolution RCS-302-2022, in particular regarding 1) Requiring operators and telecommunications providers with networks installed on ICE poles that all their elements be identified, 2) Procedure for communication regarding the removal of idle or unplanned telecommunications networks. 3- Notify Sutel, at the email address gestiondocumental@sutel.go.cr, of the actions taken for the purpose of controlling and organizing the telecommunications networks installed on the passive infrastructure for the support of telecommunications networks (poles). In accordance with the legal competencies established for Sutel regarding access and shared use of infrastructure, it is considered that all complaints and requests were addressed within the framework of its responsibilities, which are established in Article 13 of the Reglamento de uso compartido de infraestructura para el soporte de redes públicas de telecomunicaciones. Therefore, the right of petition (derecho de petición) of each complainant was handled in a timely manner by Sutel, and what was requested in the amparo action has no basis at this time, since the actions and verification carried out by this Superintendency are clearly reflected; therefore, it is respectfully requested that this case be archived. ... Now, it is pertinent to reiterate that this Superintendency lacks the competence to grant authorizations regarding the use of infrastructure intended for the support of public telecommunications networks. In that sense, and with respect to the matter, its action is strictly limited by the provisions of Articles 60 and 77 of Law No. 7593, as well as by the Reglamento sobre el uso compartido de infraestructura para el soporte de redes públicas de telecomunicaciones. In accordance with said regulatory framework, it falls exclusively to the owners of the infrastructure to enter into shared-use agreements with telecommunications operators and service providers and to guarantee orderly, coherent administration in accordance with applicable legislation. Consequently, upon them rests an essential responsibility regarding the supervision and control of the adequate use of their installations, ensuring that utilization practices comply with established technical and legal standards. Now, in accordance with the provisions of Article 13 of the Reglamento sobre el uso compartido de infraestructura para el soporte de redes públicas de telecomunicaciones, the faculty of this Superintendency is unequivocally established to require operators and/or telecommunications service providers to remove those elements that are in an idle condition, that are not being used, or whose existence does not respond to duly supported technical planning. This regulatory attribution is of special relevance in the management and organization of the infrastructure, as it seeks to prevent saturation, inefficient use, or the permanence of installations lacking operational justification.\n\nIn the opinion of this Superintendency, said power has been exercised fully and in accordance with the legal system within the framework of the actions carried out to address the complaints indicated in the preceding sections. Consequently, the adopted measures reflect compliance with the institutional duty to ensure the rational, safe, and technically adequate use of the infrastructure intended for the support of public telecommunications networks. Finally, regarding the assertion that Sutel has failed in its duty of oversight, control, and protection of the environment and the urban landscape, since the appellants consider that to this day there has been no removal or integrated management of solid waste, which affects their quality of life and the right to live in an environment free from contamination; this is untrue, this Superintendency has carried out various proceedings before ICE, in accordance with the established procedures, in a coherent, well-founded manner and within the applicable legal framework. In addition to this, the proper attention to the complaint filed by the appellants is verified, as the follow-up with ICE and the response from said institute regarding the steps taken for the removal of the idle solid waste (residuos sólidos ociosos) pointed out by the appellants are recorded in the case file and offered as evidence; therefore, the appeal filed has no basis whatsoever (...).”\n\n4.- By brief received via this Chamber’s email on January 5, 2025, Alex Rodríguez Cambronero, in his capacity as coordinator of the San Ramón Integrated Agency of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, reports under oath that: “(...) To that end, technical report number 9183-1168-2025 is provided, detailing each of the actions carried out by this Institute to address the requests raised by the appellants, and the duly certified internal administrative file related to the complaint on this case before the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones (SUTEL), which is kept by the Wholesale and International Business Development Process, Shared Infrastructure Use Area of the Telecommunications Management. It is relevant to mention that ICE has not violated any constitutional right of the amparo petitioners, no damage to the environment or to the health, life, or integrity of any person is verified or demonstrated, ICE has proactively addressed the requirements of the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones and has transferred to the telecommunications operators the necessary adjustments to comply with the regulations in force on the matter. However, it is important to remember that, pursuant to the provisions of articles 60 subsections a), j) and k); 73 subsections k) and m); 75 subsection a), sub-subsection ii); and 77 of the Ley de la Autoridad Reguladora de los Servicios Públicos No. 7593; as well as articles 11, 12, 13, 14 and 35 of the Reglamento sobre el Uso Compartido de Infraestructura para el Soporte de Redes Públicas de Telecomunicaciones (published in Alcance Digital No. 270 of Diario Oficial La Gaceta No. 214 of November 13, 2017), this matter falls under SUTEL’s purview. In this regard, it is up to ICE to provide access to its scarce infrastructure, such as poles and similar network support elements, to the various telecommunications operators in the area, in accordance with the rules and other regulations issued by SUTEL, an entity that also has the competence to hear and resolve this type of complaint. This being so, it is up to SUTEL, in its capacity as Telecommunications Regulator, to exercise its legal and regulatory powers to inspect the pole and network infrastructure, carry out technical site visits in the company of the respective operators, and adopt the regulatory decisions that may be appropriate, in accordance with technical standards, rules, and applicable regulatory principles. Consequently, no transgression of fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitución Política is configured, therefore there is no violation of articles 27 or 50 regarding the right of petition and the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. On the contrary, the matter is currently under SUTEL’s knowledge and, for such purposes, ICE has timely addressed and responded to the requests made by the Regulator. This being the case, ICE believes that this case should be heard through administrative channels or in ordinary jurisdiction, and not in constitutional court. Likewise, it is considered that the appellants have not demonstrated the existence of real, effective, and verifiable harm to the environment, nor any impact on the safety, integrity, or health of any person. On the contrary, the situation raised is due to a subjective assessment that need not necessarily be shared by third parties, nor does it disregard the reality that, in cities with high population density, it is natural for there to be a greater concentration of telecommunications infrastructure, as operators participating in a competitive market need to deploy such infrastructure to provide services to the largest possible number of users. Lastly, it is necessary to clarify that the implementation of a more ‘aesthetic’ solution does not correspond to ICE. Since the opening of the telecommunications market, the development of projects and/or underground cabling works must be assessed by the corresponding entities such as MICITT, SUTEL, and the corresponding Municipality. Otherwise, a burden would be imposed on ICE that could even constitute an anti-competitive disadvantage compared to other operators. In any case, and as previously indicated, the substantive matter raised in the appeal falls under the competence of SUTEL, before whom the respective complaints are being processed. ICE has complied with requiring the various operators to make the pertinent improvements and corrections, as well as with informing the Regulator about said efforts (...)”\n\n5.- By brief received through this Chamber’s Gestión en Línea on January 6, 2026, María [Nombre 007] and [Nombre 009], respectively mayoress and head of the Municipal Environmental Services Unit, both of the Municipalidad de San Ramón, report under oath that: “(...) Second: Regarding the fact denounced within this Amparo Appeal, we must point out that from the moment the complaint was filed with the Municipalidad de San Ramón, pertinent actions have been taken internally to collaborate in solving the problem presented on September 18, 2025.\n\nThe Environmental Municipal Services Unit went to the reported area and prepared Official Communication MSR-AM-GM-DDU-SMA-194-2025, in which it provides recommendations, and through Official Communication MSR-AM-1117-2025, this Municipal Mayor's Office proceeds to issue the response to the note submitted on August 31, 2025, stating the following: The undersigned, [Name 007], Costa Rican, bearer of [...], of legal age, married for the second time, attorney, resident of the central district of San Ramón, in my capacity as Municipal Mayor with the legal representation of the Municipality of San Ramón, legal entity identification number 3-014-042076, according to resolution 2156-E-11-2024 of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, issued at nine o'clock on March eighth, two thousand twenty-four, called \"Declaration of Election of Mayors and Deputy Mayors of the Municipalities of the Cantons of the province of Alajuela, for the period from the first of May, two thousand twenty-four, to the thirtieth of April, two thousand twenty-eight,\" published in Scope No. 61 of the Official Gazette La Gaceta No. 55 of March 22, 2024, through this Official Communication I proceed to respond to your complaint filed regarding the environmental pollution and visual pollution (contaminación visual) present in the Canton of San Ramón, filed on the seventeenth day of September of the year 2025, which is resolved as follows: First: That on the eleventh day of September of the year 2025, the environmental complaint for visual pollution in San Ramón was received by the Municipal Mayor's Office, in which the gentlemen and ladies: [Name 002], ID: 4-0264-0509; [Name 001], ID: [Value 005]; [Name 004], ID: [Value 006]; and [Name 003], ID: [Value 007], residents of the San Ramón and Grecia areas, proceed to file complaints regarding three specific points in the Canton of San Ramón where there are problems with the electrical wiring (cableado en el tendido eléctrico). -First post: Located on Avenida 0, 24 meters east of the Club de Amigos, across from the Washington Apartments. -Second post: Located on Avenida 05, 200 meters north and 25 east of the front of the San Ramón Parish, next to the Librería Católica de San Ramón, across from Boutique Mova. -Third post: Located on Avenida 5, 25 meters from Asembis, across from Pro Plan Concentrados, next to D'Feria Centro de Carnes. Second: That in Official Communication MSR-AM-GM-DDU-SMA-194-2025, prepared by Licentiate [Name 009], Coordinator of the Natural Resources Area, a response is given to your complaint filed on the seventeenth of September of the year 2025, in which the following is indicated in relation to your claims: \"As the head of the Environmental Municipal Services Unit of the Municipality of San Ramón, I must begin by pointing out that when we speak of visual pollution (contaminación visual), we refer to the saturation of visual elements in an environment, which results in an overload of information and which ultimately breaks with the harmony and aesthetics of a natural or urban landscape. This type of pollution is generated by the presence of artificial elements, such as: ● Excessive advertising: Billboards, signs, and posters that invade streets and buildings. ● Posts and wiring (postes y cableado): The excess of electrical and telecommunications cables hanging from posts in cities. ● Garbage and waste: The accumulation of waste, landfills, or abandoned vehicles that deteriorate the visual quality of an area. ● Buildings: Constructions or buildings that do not integrate into the environment, whether due to their design, size, or because they are in a poor state. ● Graffiti and traffic signs: Excessive graffiti or disorderly traffic signaling can also contribute to visual pollution. This type of pollution has a significant impact on people's health and on the environment, such as: ● Stress and visual fatigue: Overexposure to visual stimuli can cause eye fatigue, headaches, and difficulty concentrating. ● Psychological conditions: It can generate stress, anxiety, and bad moods by overloading the nervous system. ● Decreased efficiency: Constant visual distraction can affect productivity and attention, especially in drivers, which increases the risk of accidents. ● Impact on tourism: Visually polluted landscapes are less attractive to tourists, which can negatively affect the local economy. ● Damage to flora and fauna: In the case of light pollution (a type of visual pollution), excess artificial light can interrupt the sleep and wake cycles of animals, altering their behavior and migration. Now, regarding what was stated by the complainants in the note received by the Mayor's Office on the 18th day of September of this year.\n\nIn which they mention 4 points in the city of San Ramón, where the electrical, telephone, and telecommunications lines hanging from the poles have formed an accumulation of cables that, in addition to generating an impact on the urban landscape of the city of San Ramón, also causes saturation, which puts residents at risk. On Thursday, September 25 of this year, I conducted an inspection of each of the points indicated by the complainants, with the purpose of evaluating each case individually, an assessment that yielded the following results. Point 1. Location: In front of Departamento Washington Georeferencing: 448676 / 1115356 Situation: Pole of the electrical system of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE) that functions as support and guide for the electrical and telecommunications networks and that also serves as support for the luminaires, which is also serving as support for the cables and equipment of the cable companies that provide their service in the city. This has led to the formation of a disorderly network of cables in a relatively small space, which generates a negative visual impact for the people who live in and visit the city of San Ramón, as seen in the following photographs. Point 2. Location: In front of Librería Católica Georeferencing: 448563 / 1115657 Situation: Pole of the electrical system of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE) that functions as support and guide for the electrical and telecommunications networks and that also serves as support for the luminaires, which is also serving as support for the cables and equipment of the cable companies that provide their service in the city. This has led to the formation of a disorderly network of cables in a relatively small space, which generates a negative visual impact for the people who live in and visit the city of San Ramón, as seen in the following photographs. Point 3. Carniceria Feria Centro de Carnes Georeferencing: 448623 / 1115648 Situation: Pole of the electrical system of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE) that functions as support and guide for the electrical and telecommunications networks and that also serves as support for the luminaires, which is also serving as support for the cables and equipment of the cable companies that provide their service in the city. This has led to the formation of a disorderly network of cables in a relatively small space, which generates a negative visual impact for the people who live in and visit the city of San Ramón, as seen in the following photographs. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Based on the information provided in the complaint filed by the gentlemen and ladies, [Nombre 006], [Nombre 001], [Nombre 004], [Nombre 005] and the observations made in the field visit, this municipal office concludes that: 1. The complainants are correct in pointing out that at the points indicated in their complaint, a serious problem of visual pollution (contaminación visual) is occurring, which is reflected in the disorderly accumulation of cables and equipment of all kinds hanging from the poles, generating a negative visual impact in the aforementioned urban spaces. 2. That although the role of the Autoridad Reguladora de los Servicios Públicos (ARESEP), the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE), and the Municipalities themselves is: ● To grant and supervise permits ● To control infrastructure ● To manage public space ● To generate cantonal regulations for telecommunications. By virtue of the foregoing, this municipal office recommends the formation of the institutional commission, which will be responsible for establishing actions and regulations regarding the issue set forth in this report. Furthermore, we recommend promoting an approach with the ARESEP and the ICE itself, for comprehensive attention to this problem, which is not limited to the points indicated by the complainants, but affects the entire city.” (the underlining is ours) Third: that as this is not a complaint specifically related to the direct actions of this Municipality and since different recommendations were provided in Official Letter MSR-AM-GM- DDU-SMA-194-2025, prepared by Licenciado [Nombre 009], Coordinator of the Área de Recursos Naturales; this Municipal Mayor's Office commits to appointing an Institutional Commission in charge of approaching the Autoridad Reguladora de los Servicios Públicos (Aresep), the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones (Sutel), the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (Ice), and the Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación, Tecnología y Telecomunicaciones (MICITT), in order to transfer this complaint to these Institutions; likewise, this Commission will be responsible for regulating and establishing the corresponding actions to analyze and create the necessary regulations to regulate and supervise installation permits for cabling on the electrical grid, should the existing ones need to be updated. Fourth: Regarding the Claims of the Complaint, we proceed to state the following in relation to each one of them: 1. That an inspection be carried out by the Municipality at the denounced site, in order to verify the state of disorder and accumulation of overhead cabling (cableado aéreo) and other unusable materials on the public road, and that we be formally notified of the result of said inspection.\n\nRegarding this claim, you are informed that through Official Letter MSR-AM-GM-DDU-SMA-194-2025, the inspection requested in the complaint was carried out, through which effectively Mr. [Name 009], Coordinator of the Natural Resources Area, determines that a disorderly accumulation of cables and equipment of all kinds hanging from the posts is indeed evident, generating a negative visual impact on urban spaces.\n\n2. That we be expressly told which corrective actions will be adopted to resolve the denounced problem, indicating the specific execution deadlines and the institutions or companies responsible for implementing them. Additionally, we request that we be provided with a clear schedule of activities, with defined dates and responsible parties, that guarantees the effective execution within reasonable timeframes of the corrective actions necessary to solve the denounced problem. This Mayor's Office will proceed to appoint a Commission that will be in charge of forwarding these complaints to the Institutions responsible for the telecommunications infrastructure of the Canton of San Ramón; however, we cannot commit to providing specific dates for the solution of the denounced problem, because as has been indicated in this Official Letter, matters related to cabling on telecommunications towers are not our competence. Nevertheless, we commit to forwarding your complaint so that the corresponding Public Institution addresses what is detailed herein and provides due follow-up.\n\n3. That the Municipality, in its capacity as local authority and as hierarchical superior of the Mayor's Office, take pertinent action before the ICE and the SUTEL in coordination with the public electricity service provider companies, cable and telecommunications companies, so that these institutions adopt immediate measures for the removal and ordering of disused or poorly maintained cabling that generates urban visual pollution (contaminación visual urbana), guaranteeing respect for public ornament (ornato), safety, and the collective right to the landscape. In Costa Rica, in the year 2023, Law No. 10.216, Law to Incentivize and Promote the Construction of Telecommunications Infrastructure in Costa Rica (Ley para incentivar y promover la construcción de infraestructura de telecomunicaciones en Costa Rica) was created, in which its article 4 states the following: \"ARTICLE 4- Municipalities. The Executive Branch, through the telecommunications authority, with the corresponding technical criteria, shall establish via regulation the technical provisions related to the deployment of telecommunications infrastructure, which must be complied with by all the country's municipalities.\" The governing body for telecommunications in the Country is the Ministry of Science, Innovation, Technology and Telecommunications (Micitt), which through Executive Decree Number 44335, drafted the Regulation to the Law to Incentivize and Promote the Construction of Telecommunications Infrastructure in Costa Rica (Reglamento a la Ley para Incentivar Y Promover la Construcción de Infraestructura de Telecomunicaciones en Costa Rica), on the procedures and technical specifications of telecommunications infrastructure. With the intention of complying with the provisions of the aforementioned article 4, the Municipality of San Ramón, through Agreement No. of Ordinary Session No. 15 of July 12, 2024, adopted in all its terms Executive Decree Number 44335 - MICITT, which in its article 14 [sic], regulates the following regarding this claim: \"ARTICLE 8. Shared Use of Infrastructure. The competent institutions that design and build infrastructure that may be used for the deployment of public telecommunications networks must facilitate the shared use of said infrastructure, provided that the continuity and security of the provision of the services provided by the institution are not compromised. In no case may a preferential or exclusive right to shared use of the infrastructure be established for the benefit of a specific telecommunications operator, or a specific telecommunications network. The shared use of said infrastructure must be facilitated under conditions of equality, transparency, and non-discrimination.\" As can be observed in this article, it is stated that public telecommunications networks must be shared, for which an agreement for said use will be executed and a fee (canon) will be charged for the enjoyment of this service. This regulation also indicates that an exclusive right to shared use of the infrastructure cannot be established. In Law No. 449, Creation Law of the Costa Rican Institute of Electricity (ICE) (Ley de Creación del Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE)), specifically in its second article subsection h), it establishes within the powers of this Public Institution the administration of telecommunications networks, note below: Article 2.- The purposes of the Institute, towards the achievement of which all its efforts and work programs shall be directed, shall be the following: (...) h) To procure the establishment, improvement, extension, and operation of telecommunications networks in a sustainable manner, as well as to provide and market telecommunications and infocommunications products and services and information, as well as others in convergence. The concessions that the ICE and its companies require for the fulfillment of these purposes shall be subject to the terms, duties, obligations, and other conditions established by applicable law. As can be seen in this subsection, it is established that the ICE has the competence to regulate the operation of telecommunications, the concessions currently granted in its favor and in use, for the corresponding legal term, and to define new ones; it also has the power to establish a fee (canon) as remuneration for this service provided.\n\n4. That we be provided documentary justification for the existence or non-existence of permits and authorizations granted to the service provider companies for the maintenance of the cabling at the denounced site, including the agreements or permits issued by the Municipality, the Ministry of Health, the SUTEL, or any other competent authority.\n\nAs indicated in the previous claim, this Municipality is not responsible for granting wiring installation authorizations to telecommunications service providers; rather, within Law No. 449, Law of Creation of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE), the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE) is established as responsible for granting the corresponding permits, as well as the agreements with Public and Private Institutions. Our competence is to grant the pertinent construction permits for the installation of new structures. It is for this reason that we are unable to provide you with the requested documents. 5. That, in the event of proven regulatory non-compliance, the Mayor's Office issue a formal opinion on the visual pollution (contaminación visual) that these events produce in the urban space, and that in exercise of its powers, it file joint complaints before the ICE and SUTEL, representing the collective interests of the inhabitants, and proceed to initiate the corresponding sanctioning administrative procedures against the companies responsible for the abandonment and accumulation of wiring on the public road. Regarding this claim, the Inter-institutional Commission that is intended to be created, will be responsible for elevating and transferring these complaints to the pertinent Institutions. 6. That, in the event that the Municipality does not carry out said procedures nor promote the corresponding complaints, we request that it expressly explain the reasons for its inaction, since the municipal administration is the one called upon to ensure the protection of the administered parties against environmental and landscape damages derived from visual pollution (contaminación visual). Regarding this claim, it is noted to you that this Mayor's Office is taking all possible measures to comply with its responsibilities, in relation to what is indicated in this complaint. 7. That the collective right to the landscape and to a healthy and balanced environment be recognized, and that we be guaranteed that the adopted measures are not merely palliative, but rather represent structural and permanent solutions. Regarding this claim, you are informed that through Official Letter MSR-AM-GM-DDU-SMA-194-2025, the importance of maintaining a healthy and ecologically balanced environment was recognized by the Office of Environmental Management, which is also regulated within article 50 of the Political Constitution. It is important to inform the complainants that, for greater speed in the process, they have the possibility of filing the complaint directly with the respective Public Institutions, so that the action and response times are not delayed, given that transferring a complaint to another Agency normally takes its time. Official Letter MSR-AM-1117-2025 was notified to the email address indicated for this medium in the complaint filed via the email guadamuzamberth@gmail.com. It is indicated to the Honorable Magistrates of this Constitutional Chamber, that the requests related to the municipal actions presented by the Petitioners, as well as that the topics addressed in these requests have no direct bearing on this Municipality, given that the issue presented herein is the competence of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad according to what is indicated within its Law of Creation of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE). What is indicated by the Petitioners in stating that this Administration has not responded to them is not accepted, and it is important to point out that in our response it is indicated that the transfer process usually takes its time; it is for this reason that through Official Letter MSR-AM-1117-2025, the Petitioners are recommended to go directly to the ICE Offices to file the complaint. … As can be seen in this subparagraph, it is established that the ICE has the competence to regulate the operation of telecommunications, the concessions currently granted in its favor and in use, for the corresponding legal term, and to define new ones; furthermore, it has the power to establish a fee as remuneration for this granted service, thus demonstrating that regarding this type of complaint, the Municipality has no competence or power to act (…).\"\n\n6.- In the processing of the case, the legal prescriptions have been observed.\n\nDrafted by Magistrate Araya García; and,\n\nConsidering:\n\nI.- Preliminarily. Preliminarily to analyzing the merits of the allegation – for the alleged violation of the right to a prompt and fulfilled procedure – it must be clarified that, from judgment No. 2008-02545 of 8:55 a.m. on February 22, 2008, this Chamber has referred to the contentious-administrative jurisdiction – with some exceptions – those matters in which it is discussed whether the public administration has or has not complied with the deadlines set by the General Law of Public Administration (articles 261 and 325) or sectorial laws for special administrative procedures, to resolve by final act an administrative procedure – instructed ex officio or at the request of a party – or to hear the applicable administrative remedies. Precisely, in the sub lite, an exceptional case is presented, as it involves a complaint filed by the claimants in which they accuse that the respondent authorities have not processed an alleged environmental impact (afectación ambiental) due to urban landscape pollution and safety risks, caused by the amount of wiring placed on the electrical posts.\n\nII.- Object of the appeal. The petitioners allege that on September 9 and 17, 2025, they filed a complaint before the Municipality of San Ramón, the branch of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad in that locality, and SUTEL, due to the visual pollution (contaminación visual) generated by the excess and abandonment of overhead cabling installed on the electricity posts, and to date, the problem has not been resolved.\n\n**III.- Proven facts.** For the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly demonstrated, either because they have been accredited or because the respondent has omitted to refer to them according to the provisions of the initial order:\n\n**Regarding the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad:**\n\na) On September 9, 2025, the petitioners filed a complaint before the San Ramón Agency for pollution of the urban landscape and safety risks due to the amount of wiring placed on the electrical pole located at the following points in the city: Avenida 0, 24 meters east of the Club de Amigos, in front of the Departamentos Washington, Avenida 05, 200 meters north and 25 east of the front of the Parroquia de San Ramón, next to the Librería Católica de San Ramón, in front of Boutique Mova, and Avenida 5, 25 meters from ASEMBIS, in front of PRO PLAN Concentrados, beside D´Feria Centro de Carnes (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nb) On September 19, 2025, official letter 08900-SUTELDGM-2025 was received via email from the Directorate of Regulatory Relations, in which the ICE was requested to do the following: *(…) 1. Coordinate with the operators owning telecommunication networks that use the passive infrastructure in the indicated areas of the canton of San Ramón (according to background items 1, 2, 3 and 4). Furthermore, inform this Superintendency about the corrective actions they will take to remedy the situation described by the complainants, considering that ICE is the owner of the passive infrastructure (poles) in the region mentioned in this note. (Intentional emphasis). 2. Implement practices for the surveillance and auditing that ICE, both as owner of passive infrastructure to support telecommunication networks and as an operator of fixed telecommunication networks, in compliance with resolution RCS-302-2022, must carry out. These practices must be applied in all areas served by ICE, in order to guarantee the organization and adequate management of telecommunication networks. 3. Notify Sutel, at the email gestiondocumental@sutel.go.cr, of the actions taken for the purpose of controlling and organizing the telecommunication networks that are installed on the passive infrastructure to support telecommunication networks (poles) (…)”* (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nc) On September 30, 2025, official letter 09180-SUTELDGM-2025 was received via email from the Directorate of Regulatory Relations, in which the ICE was requested to do the following: *“(…) 1. Verify in situ the installation practices described in the complaint document and accredited in the images provided, in particular: a) Verification of the correct arrangement of the storage loops, in accordance with the applicable standard for that purpose, b) Identification of duplicate poles that have not been removed and c) Idle telecommunication networks not removed. 2. Coordinate with the network owners the necessary corrective actions to remedy the detected incidents and prevent the recurrence of poor installation practices. 3. Send this Superintendency a detailed report containing: a) Results of the verifications carried out. b) List of acts or omissions detected and their precise location. c) Agreed corrective measures and execution deadline. d) Documentary and photographic evidence supporting the actions taken. 4. Address the claim made by the complainant, informing this Superintendency about the steps taken for its resolution (…)”* (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nd) On September 23, 2025, the complaint was addressed and a first notice was sent to the operators; Liberty, Telecable, Tigo, Claro and Ufinet so that they would carry out relocation works for the disused networks (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\ne) On September 29, 2025, a second notice -reminder to the operators- was sent so that they would submit the photographic reports of the actions taken to address the request (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nf) On September 29, 2025, a response was received from Tigo, indicating that they had made the technical corrections and attached a photographic record (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\ng) On October 1, 2025, the Coordinator of Improvements and Relocations of ICE sent an ultimatum to the operators Liberty, Telecable, Claro, and Ufinet indicating that, if they did not execute the requested work, the cutting of the networks would proceed (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nh) On October 1, 2025, Telecable indicated that the work was completed successfully (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\ni) On October 2, 2025, ICE sent a third notice to the operators that had not responded: CLARO, UFINET, AND LIBERTY, indicating that the deadline to carry out the work expired on September 26, 2025 (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nj) By brief 263-776-2025, of October 6, 2025, ICE informed SUTEL of the actions taken to address the complaint for visual pollution in the urban area of the canton of San Ramón de Alajuela (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nk) By brief 09521-SUTEL-DGM-2025, of October 8, 2025, SUTEL requested that ICE indicate the actions taken to comply with the complaint filed (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nl) On October 13, 2025, via official communications 9183-960-2025, 9183-955-2025, 9183-956-2025, 9183-957-2025, 9183-960-2025, 9183-961-2025, and 9183-995-2025, the contract manager for Ufinet, Tigo, Telecable, and Liberty was respectively notified of the anomalies identified, such as loose coils that must be properly secured, the presence of duplicate poles due to the failure to relocate the operators' networks to the new poles and onto broken poles, unfinished work on service drops (salidas a poste), among others (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nm) On October 13, 2025, by email, official communication no. 263-802-2025 was sent to SUTEL, with the actions taken (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nn) ICE granted each operator a two-month period for the purpose of guaranteeing compliance with the conditions stipulated in the corresponding service contracts, which expired on December 13, 2025 (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\no) On October 27, 2025, by email, note no. 263-831-2025 was sent to SUTEL, in response to official communication no. 09521-SUTEL-DGM-2025, in which the Regulator was informed of the non-compliances identified during the field inspection carried out on October 20, 2025, which verified the following: service drops (acometidas) in disuse; double network (coaxial and fiber); duplicate pole infrastructure (doble postería); poorly detailed reserve coils; lack of optimization of space on poles (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\np) On November 4, 2025, by email, the report from the operator Liberty was received, detailing the actions executed and the corrections made to its networks (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nq) On November 5, 2025, by email, the response official communication no. 6429-426-2025 was received from the operator Kölbi, with the detail of the actions carried out in the sector of San Ramón, in response to the requests made by SUTEL in official communications nos. 08900-SUTELDGM-2025 and 09521-SUTEL-DGM-2025 (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nr) On November 6, 2025, by email, an unnumbered response official communication was received, sent by the operator UFINET, detailing the actions executed in response to what was requested by SUTEL in official communications no. 08900-SUTEL-DGM-2025 and 09521-SUTEL-DGM-2025 (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\ns) On November 24, 2025, by email, the report from the operator TELECABLE was received, detailing the actions carried out in the sector of San Ramón, in response to the requests made by SUTEL through official communications nos. 08900-SUTEL-DGM-2025 and 09521-SUTEL-DGM-2025 (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nt) On December 5, 2025, by email, the response official communication no. 6429-458-2025 was received from the operator Kölbi, detailing the actions carried out in response to official communication 09180-SUTEL-DGM-2025 (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nu) During the week of January 5 to 9, 2026, an on-site verification by the technical staff of the Shared Use of Infrastructure Area of the current state of the denounced pole infrastructure (postería) was scheduled, considering that the deadline granted to the operators for the execution of the work expired on December 13, 2025 (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nv) On December 18, 2025, the resolution on the course of this amparo was notified to the authorities of ICE (see notification certificates).\n\nRegarding the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones:\n\na) On September 17, 2025, the appellant filed a complaint with the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones (SUTEL), for the chaotic accumulation of cabling and visual pollution in the downtown area of San Ramón (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nb) By brief no. 8900-SUTEL-DGM-2025 of September 19, 2025, the Directorate of Regulatory Relations of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad was requested: \"(…) For the acts denounced in writing NI-12454-2025, it is hereby requested to coordinate with the owners of telecommunications networks that use the passive infrastructure (poles) in the canton of San Ramón, region indicated in this official communication, in order to adopt the necessary verification and correction measures in accordance with the applicable regulations. Said actions must include, as a minimum: 1.\n\nVerify in situ the installation practices described in the complaint and evidenced in the images provided, in particular: a) Verification of the correct disposal of reserve rolls, in accordance with the applicable standard for that purpose, b) Identification of duplicate poles that have not been removed, and c) Idle telecommunications networks not removed. 2. Coordinate with the network owners the necessary corrective actions to remedy the incidents detected and prevent the recurrence of poor installation practices. 3. Submit to this Superintendency a detailed report containing: a) Results of the verifications carried out. b) List of acts or omissions detected and their precise location. c) Corrective measures agreed upon and execution deadline. d) Documentary and photographic evidence supporting the actions taken. 4. Address the claim made by the complainant, informing this Superintendency about the steps taken for its resolution. (…) (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nc) On October 7, 2025, through official letter no. 263-776-2025-2025, ICE responded to what was requested by SUTEL, indicating the following: “(…) On October 2, 2025, Notice I was sent to all Operators with a presence in the area, so that they would appear in the San Ramón zone to identify their networks and begin the corresponding dismantling and relocation work. Likewise, through official letters 9183-955-2025, 9183-956-2025, 9183-957-2025, 9183-960-2025, 9183-961-2025 and 9183-962-2025, the operators identified in the area subject to the complaint were warned. In said communication, compliance with the conditions established in the current service contracts is urged. …Regarding what was requested on this point, the requirements were addressed in subsections no. 1 and no. 2 of this official letter according to the following detail: a) Results of the verifications carried out The non-compliances indicated in the complaint were verified \"in situ\", so the respective notifications were made to the Operators. b) List of acts or omissions detected and their precise location. The non-compliances identified are summarized as: -Lack of network relocation. -Removal of disused elements and networks. The georeferenced location of each of the non-compliances is detailed in the photographs provided in point no. 1 of this official letter. c) Corrective measures agreed upon and execution deadline. In the notifications sent to each of the Operators present in the complaint sector, in accordance with current regulations, an execution period of 2 months was established from receipt of the notification, for which the Shared Infrastructure Use Area of the Telecommunications Management will carry out the respective follow-up aimed at ensuring compliance with the conditions established in the corresponding service contract (…)” (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nd) By brief 09521-SUTEL-DGM-2025 of October 8, 2025, SUTEL asked ICE to provide a response indicating the actions taken regarding the complaint (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\ne) On October 6, 2025, by brief 263-776-2025, ICE informed SUTEL of the actions taken, including the removal of disused networks by fifty percent, for which the attention of the involved operators was requested again (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nf) On October 17, 2025, SUTEL notified the appellants of official letter 09853-SUTEL-DGM-2025, in which they were informed that the matter was transferred to the ICE of San Ramón so that it could coordinate with the telecommunications network operators that use the infrastructure and indicate the corrective actions. ICE reported the corrective actions of relocation and removal of disused networks with the operators LIBERTY, TELECABLE, MILLICOM, CLARO and UFINET, which was carried out between September 25 and 29, with pending work remaining to be done by some operators, for which follow-up will continue (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\ng) On December 17, 2025, the resolution proceeding with this amparo was notified to the SUTEL authorities (see notification records).\n\nRegarding the Municipality of San Ramón:\n\na) On September 18, 2025, the appellants filed a complaint before the Municipality of San Ramón for contamination of the urban landscape and safety risks due to the amount of cabling placed on the electrical poles located at the following points: 1-Avenida 0, 24 meters east of the Club de Amigos, in front of the Washington Apartments, 2- Avenida 05, 200 meters north and 25 east from the front of the San Ramón Parish, next to the Librería Católica de San Ramón, in front of Boutique Mova, and 3- Avenida 5, 25 meters from ASEMBIS, in front of PRO PLAN Concentrados, alongside D´Feria Centro de Carnes (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nb) On September 25, 2025, a technical inspection was carried out which confirmed the veracity of the complaint and verified that a problem of visual pollution was occurring, reflected in the disorderly accumulation of cables and equipment of all kinds hanging from the poles. The formation of an institutional commission to establish actions and regulations regarding the exposed issue was recommended, as well as an approach between ARESEP and ICE, for the comprehensive attention of the problem (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nc) Through official letter MSR-AM-GM-DDU-SMA-194-2025 of September 26, 2025, the person in charge of municipal environmental services informed the mayor of the result of the inspection (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nd) Through official letter MSR-AM-1117-2025 of October 31, 2025, the mayor informed the complainants of the response to each of the concerns raised, explaining that the municipality is not in charge of granting authorizations for the installation of cabling to companies providing telecommunications services, but rather that the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE) is responsible for granting the corresponding permits, as well as the agreements with public and private institutions.\n\n(see evidence provided in the case file).\n\ne) On October 31, 2025, official communication MSR-AM-1117-2025 was notified to the means indicated by the complainants, in response to the complaint filed, and three files were attached, including official communication MSR-AM-GM-DDU-SMA-194-2025 (see evidence provided in the case file).\n\nf) On December 18, 2025, the resolution admitting this amparo was notified to the authorities of the Municipalidad de San Ramón (see notification records).\n\nIV.- Facts not proven. The following facts of relevance to this resolution are not deemed demonstrated:\n\na) To date, that the disused or irregularly installed cabling in the areas denounced by the appealing party has been completely removed.\n\nb) To date, that ICE has resolved the petition filed by the appellants and communicated the pertinent findings to the indicated means.\n\nV.- The Constitución Política, in its article 50, enshrines the right of every person to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. Constitutional jurisprudence has reiterated that the concept of \"environment\" is not limited to untouched nature, but includes the urban landscape. \"Visual pollution\" has been doctrinally established as the alteration or imbalance of the landscape, which affects the living conditions and vital functions of living beings.\n\nIn the sub lite, the appellants allege that they reported to the Municipalidad de San Ramón, ICE, and SUTEL the amount of cabling placed on the electrical posts located at the following points: 1- Avenida 0, 24 meters east of the Club de Amigos, in front of the Departamentos Washington, 2- Avenida 05, 200 meters north and 25 east of the front of the Parroquia de San Ramón, beside the Librería Católica de San Ramón, in front of Boutique Mova, and 3- Avenida 5, 25 meters from ASEMBIS, in front of PRO PLAN Concentrados, next to D´Feria Centro de Carnes, because they are disorderly, crossed, poorly tied, and exposed, which generates pollution of the urban landscape and risks to people's safety.\n\nOn this matter, it is pertinent to indicate that this Chamber, through ruling no. 2026008044, of 9:25 a.m. on March 6, 2026, heard and resolved a matter substantially similar to the present one, concerning four other points in the cantón of San Ramón, at which time the amparo appeal filed against the respondent authorities was partially granted, based on the considerations transcribed below:\n\n\"(...) VI.- On the Responsibility of Local Governments. Article 169 of the Constitución Política provides for the duty of the country's municipalities to look after the interests of the inhabitants of their jurisdiction; hence, in repeated pronouncements, this Tribunal has indicated that said corporations are obligated to eliminate any type of threat that endangers the rights to health and a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the people living in their cantón (see Ruling No. 2008-11739 of 12:12 p.m. on July 25, 2008, reiterated in No. 2020-014753, of 9:15 a.m. on August 7, 2020).\n\nAlthough the technical regulation of the telecommunications sector corresponds to specialized bodies of the Poder Ejecutivo and sectoral regulatory entities, the truth is that municipalities, in accordance with articles 169 and 170 of the Constitución Política, and the municipal autonomous regime, hold competence in matters of territorial planning, management of public space, and safeguarding the local interest. In turn, in accordance with the Código Municipal, municipalities are responsible for urban planning and the protection of the environmental surroundings within their jurisdiction.\n\nIn the present case, the Alcaldesa acknowledges that, on September 18, 2025, the appellants filed a complaint regarding the situation raised herein and, as a result of the inspection carried out, it was verified that there is a 'serious problem of visual pollution' and a 'disorderly accumulation of cables and equipment' that negatively impacts the urban space, for which the creation of an institutional commission and outreach to ARESEP and ICE was recommended to address the situation comprehensively.\n\nThus, on October 31, 2025, the Mayor's Office (Alcaldía) sent the complainants a response to each of the concerns raised in their complaint and explained to them that the Municipality is not the entity charged with granting cable installation authorizations to telecommunications service provider companies, but rather that this corresponds to the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, which is the entity responsible for granting the corresponding permits, as well as the agreements with public and private institutions, and therefore urged them to file the complaint before the competent public institutions.\n\nAlthough, within a reasonable time and prior to the filing of this appeal, the Mayor resolved the complaint filed and notified the petitioners of the outcome, thereby not harming the right to prompt and complete justice, the fact is that the mere creation of a commission or the acknowledgment of the problem is insufficient if it does not translate into concrete, material inspection (fiscalización) and ordering actions that cease the violation of public space.\n\nMunicipal autonomy is not reduced to tax or formal administrative powers, but rather entails a correlative duty of effective guardianship of the cantonal environment. In that sense, even though the respondent Municipality is not the competent body to directly impose on telecommunications operators the removal or reorganization of the cabling, it does have the obligation to:\n\na) Inspect (fiscalizar) the use of cantonal public space.\nb) Coordinate with the competent national entities.\nc) Issue urban regulations within its scope of competence.\nd) Adopt reasonable administrative measures to prevent risks and mitigate visual pollution.\n\nThus, absolute inactivity or the omission of inter-institutional management in the face of a notorious and prolonged situation of structural disorder in the cabling constitutes an indirect violation of the right to a healthy environment and the duty of protection incumbent upon all public authorities.\n\nThe denounced problem demonstrates that the actions exercised under the control or oversight authority deployed to protect health and the environment by the Municipality of San Ramón within the framework of its competencies have been clearly insufficient, thereby incurring liability by omission in the exercise of those powers, which, in turn, harms the constitutional right of citizens to receive efficient and effective public services.\n\nBy virtue of the foregoing, the respondent Municipality is responsible for the harm to the fundamental rights of the protected persons, due to the omission in promptly and effectively ensuring the health of the population and the environment.\n\nConsequently, with respect to the Municipality of San Ramón, the appeal is declared with merit, and it is warned that, henceforth, it must actively exercise its competencies in matters of urban landscape protection, citizen security, and public space management, under penalty of incurring liability by omission. Therefore, it is appropriate to order it to put into effective operation the institutional commission mentioned in official communication MSR-AM-GM-DDU-SMA-197-2025, and it must define a permanent work schedule to prevent the problem of infrastructure saturation from recurring in other sectors of the canton through coordination work with the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad.\n\n**VII. - On the Inspection (Fiscalización) Duty of SUTEL and ICE.** As governing entities and administrators of passive infrastructure, including poles and networks, SUTEL and ICE have the obligation to ensure that private operators comply with the technical installation standards.\n\nArticles 77 of the Ley de la Autoridad Reguladora de los Servicios Públicos, and 77 of the Reglamento de la Ley General de Telecomunicaciones, state that SUTEL is responsible for guaranteeing the right to the joint or shared use of infrastructures, conduits, ducts, poles, towers, stations, and other installations required for the installation and operation of public telecommunications networks, as well as for the provision of services available to the public and the colocation (coubicación) of equipment.\n\nFor its part, ICE, in this case, as the owner of the infrastructure that supports public telecommunications networks, is under the obligation to grant rights of way, shared use, and colocation of equipment, and to apply the current regulations and guidelines issued by the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones.\n\nLikewise, it is their duty to guarantee and provide the necessary maintenance to their scarce resource to ensure adequate operation and the continuity of shared use (article 08, of the Reglamento sobre el uso compartido de infraestructura para redes públicas de telecomunicaciones, GCO-NRE-REG-00469-2016).\n\nPrecisely, the Reglamento sobre el uso compartido de infraestructura para el soporte de redes públicas de telecomunicaciones, in article 13, also establishes that:\n\n“Article 13. On the efficient use of network elements in telecommunications infrastructure by infrastructure owners.\n\nWhen owners of infrastructure that support public telecommunications networks become aware of underutilization or inefficient use of network elements in the space assigned to a telecommunications operator and/or service provider, they must notify them, so that the uninstallation and removal of this type of network elements is carried out, unless there is a valid justification to keep them in the infrastructure. For this, a maximum period of 2 months must be granted.\n\nSUTEL, ex officio or at the request of a party, shall have the power to request the telecommunications operator and/or provider to remove these idle, unused elements, or those that do not have a duly planned use”\n\nTherefore, according to the foregoing, once an intervention request is received or ex officio, SUTEL is competent to require operators and/or telecommunications service providers to remove those elements that are in an idle condition, that are not being used, or whose existence does not respond to a duly supported technical planning. This normative attribution is of special relevance in the management and organization of infrastructure, as it seeks to prevent saturation, inefficient use, or the permanence of installations lacking operational justification.\n\nIn the case under study, it was verified that on September 17, 2025, the appellant filed a complaint before the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones (SUTEL) regarding the chaotic accumulation of wiring and visual pollution in the central area of San Ramón, and within a prudential period, the complaint was forwarded to ICE and it was asked to coordinate with the owners of telecommunications networks that make use of the passive infrastructure (poles) to adopt the necessary verification and corrective measures and report on actions taken.\n\nBy virtue of this, once SUTEL became aware of the actions taken by ICE and the operators and/or providers that offer telecommunications services, on October 17, 2025, it proceeded to inform the complainants of what had been done. Thus, in that sense, the right to prompt and complete justice was not violated, since the matter was resolved within a reasonable time and before the filing of this appeal. Therefore, regarding this point, the appeal is declared without merit.\n\nOn the other hand, it is not considered that SUTEL has violated the right to health and the environment of the protected parties, since as a sectorial regulatory body, its role is to regulate the legal, technical, and economic conditions under which said infrastructure can be used in a shared manner by the operators and/or telecommunications service providers available to the public. Note that, it was through the complaint filed by the appellants that it became aware of the problem and, to provide a solution, it asked ICE, as the owner of the poles in that locality, to coordinate with the owners of telecommunications networks that make use of the passive infrastructure the adoption of the necessary verification and corrective measures, and it also asked said body to implement practices in surveillance and auditing in order to guarantee the organization and adequate management of telecommunications networks. To comply with this, it required ICE to report on the actions taken, and on October 6, 2025, it was informed that, by that date, the removal of disused networks had been 50% completed, and that a two-month period had been granted to the operators to conclude the corrective actions. Ultimately, constitutional control cannot become a mechanism for attributing automatic responsibility in every dysfunctional material situation, when arbitrary inactivity or deliberate neglect on the part of the regulatory body is not proven. Thus, SUTEL issued the necessary acts to provide a solution to the problem raised by the appellants.\n\nIt is noted that, without prejudice to criminal or civil liability, it will be SUTEL that is responsible for intervening if the parties do not reach an agreement on the shared use of the scarce resource or if there is a conflict, and for proceeding to sanction the administrative infractions incurred by operators or providers, and also those who illegally operate telecommunications networks or provide telecommunications services.\n\n(article 65, of the General Telecommunications Law, No. 8642 and 55 of the Regulation on shared use of infrastructure for public telecommunications networks)\n\nWithout prejudice to the foregoing, this Chamber deems it pertinent to remind SUTEL of its permanent duty of oversight (fiscalización) and supervision of compliance with technical obligations by operators, especially when these affect the urban environment and may have environmental repercussions.\n\nAs a corollary to the foregoing, it is not proven, in the specific case, that the Superintendency of Telecommunications incurred in arbitrary or illegitimate action or omission that violates the fundamental right to a healthy environment, and what is appropriate is to declare the appeal (recurso) without merit against this administrative body.\n\nTake note. Despite the fact that this amparo appeal must be declared without merit regarding SUTEL, follow-up must be given to the administrative proceedings initiated that are the subject of this amparo, within the framework of its legal powers, in order to verify compliance with the technical obligations of the operating companies and to adopt, as applicable, the measures that correspond.\n\nVIII.- Regarding the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE). As for this entity, like the previous ones, it received the complaint from the administered parties and proceeded to execute the corresponding administrative acts and verified that there were unused connections (acometidas en desuso); duplicate networks (coaxial and fiber); duplicate pole line (doble postería); poorly detailed reserve loops; lack of optimization of space on poles, and proceeded to notify the operators Liberty, Telecable, Tigo, Claro, and Ufinet to carry out the relocation work for the unused networks, which was reiterated on several occasions and granted each operator a period of two months, with the purpose of guaranteeing compliance with the conditions stipulated in the corresponding service contracts, which expired on December 13, 2025, that is, after the date of filing of this appeal. It is noted that, by the month of November 2025, some of the operators had already executed the ordered actions, and for the week of December 15 to 19, 2025, an inspection was scheduled by personnel from the Shared Infrastructure Use Area (Área de Uso Compartido de Infraestructura) to verify the current state of the denounced pole line (postería); however, the Chamber is unaware of its result.\n\nEven though the telecommunications operating companies are the owners of the installed cabling, the fact is that the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, in its capacity as owner and administrator of the pole line (postería), holds a legal position of guarantor regarding the appropriate and safe use of that infrastructure. In such capacity, it cannot disregard the deterioration of the public space derived from the negligent use of the poles under its administration, since that would imply tolerating practices contrary to urban planning norms and technical regulations regarding electrical and telecommunications safety.\n\nIn the sub lite, there is an administrative omission in the exercise of the police, control, and supervision powers that correspond to ICE over its own infrastructure, which has generated an infringement of the fundamental right to a healthy and balanced environment, as well as a certain threat to the health and physical integrity of the appellants and the community.\n\nThe disorderly accumulation of cabling, the so-called \"marañamiento\" (tangling) of lines and the permanence of unused networks constitute a form of visual pollution that degrades the urban landscape and undermines the right of inhabitants to a safe and aesthetically harmonious environment.\n\nIn this sense, the passivity of the respondent entity does not constitute a mere aesthetic deficiency, but rather an omission with constitutional relevance, insofar as it compromises the health and physical safety of people as well as the regularity in the management of the public domain. Inaction in the face of the technical non-compliance of the operators makes the administrator of the pole line (postería) co-responsible for the injury to health and the environment caused, since the administration of public infrastructure cannot be exercised outside the principles of legality, efficiency, and protection of the general interest.\n\nIt is evident, then, that the lack of effective oversight (fiscalización) has produced an injury to the right to the environment and a latent threat to the health and integrity of persons, given the risk of collapses or electrical accidents. Consequently, the omission of ICE in the exercise of its control powers transgresses the constitutional mandates of administrative efficiency and protection of the environment.\n\nOn the other hand, there is no record that, as of the filing date of this appeal, the authorities of the corresponding branch had communicated to the appellants the concrete result of the actions undertaken, which also entails an injury to the right to prompt and complete justice.\n\nThis right is not satisfied by the mere issuance of specific acts, but rather requires a substantive and effective response that addresses the problem raised in a real and timely manner.\n\nIn the specific case, administrative inoperability is evident, because, despite approximately two months having passed since the filing of the complaints and the existence of express acknowledgment of the poor state of the wiring by the authorities, as of the date of filing of this appeal the urban landscape of San Ramón has not undergone substantial changes, keeping the administered parties in a situation of risk and uncertainty. The persistence of the problem reveals that the oversight (fiscalización) has been negligent or ineffective. Public institutions cannot limit their actions to mere correspondence forwarding; they are obligated to guarantee the effective removal of disused or improperly installed wiring in contravention of the applicable technical regulations.\n\n**IX.- Conclusion.** It is evident that both the Municipality of San Ramón and the ICE Branch in the canton of San Ramón have failed in their duty of inter-institutional coordination to resolve a fully identified problem of visual pollution. The lack of execution and the persistence of the technical disorder at the four denounced points justify the intervention of this Court to order the restoration of the visual balance and safety of the downtown area of San Ramón (…)\n\n**Therefore:**\n\nThe appeal is declared with merit. [Name 008] and [Name 009], in their respective capacities as Mayor and Head of the Municipal Environmental Services Unit, both of the Municipality of San Ramón, or whoever occupies those positions, are ordered to, within a period of FIFTEEN BUSINESS DAYS from the notification of this judgment, put into effective operation the institutional commission mentioned in official letter MSR-AM-GM-DDU-SMA-197-2025, and must define a permanent work schedule to prevent the problem of saturation of telecommunications cables on the infrastructure from recurring in other sectors of the canton. Furthermore, they must coordinate with the COSTA RICAN ELECTRICITY INSTITUTE, jointly and effectively, within their respective spheres of competence, so that within a period of ONE MONTH, counted from the notification of this resolution, the process of cleaning, ordering, and removal of all telecommunications cabling that is disused, irregularly installed, or that generates a chaotic accumulation at the four specific points denounced by the appellants is completed. In turn, Alex Rodríguez Cambronero, in his capacity as Coordinator of the Integrated Agency of San Ramón of the Costa Rican Electricity Institute, or whoever occupies that position, is ordered to take the necessary administrative and technical actions so that: a) Within a period of SIX MONTHS, counted from the notification of this judgment, he coordinates with the telecommunications operators the ordering and total removal of the disused wiring in the affected area; b) Execute, together with the telecommunications operators, a plan for the ordering and tensioning of the remaining cables to eliminate the negative visual impact and guarantee safety; c) Establish a protocol for permanent oversight (fiscalización) to prevent the situation of visual chaos from repeating itself in the future; and d) Resolve and notify the resolution of the complaint filed by the appellant party on September 17, 2025. The foregoing is under the warning that, based on the provisions of Article 71 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional), imprisonment from three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, will be imposed on anyone who receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in an amparo appeal, and does not comply with it or does not have it enforced, provided that the crime is not more severely punished. The Municipality of San Ramón and the Costa Rican Electricity Institute are ordered to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts that serve as the basis for this declaration, which will be liquidated in the execution of the sentence of the contentious-administrative proceeding. Regarding the Telecommunications Superintendency, the appeal is declared without merit, although it must take note of what is indicated in the final paragraph of Considerando VII of this judgment. Magistrate Castillo Víquez records a note. Magistrate Salazar Alvarado partially dissents and declares the appeal without merit regarding the alleged violation of the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment, since this aspect of the appeal should be resolved in the legality jurisdiction (…).\n\nIn this regard, it is clarified that this amparo appeal denounces the excess of wiring on the poles located at: \"a) Avenida 0, 24 meters east of the Club de Amigos, in front of the Washington Apartments, b) Avenida 05, 200 meters north and 25 east from the front of the San Ramón Parish, next to the San Ramón Catholic Bookstore, in front of the Mova Boutique, and c) Avenida 5, 25 meters from ASEMBIS, in front of PRO PLAN Concentrados, next to D´Feria Centro de Carnes\". Likewise, in the aforementioned precedent, the wiring placed on the electrical poles located at: \"four points in the city, on Avenida Segunda of San Ramón, on sidewalks and in front of various commercial premises (Pizza Grace, Eureka Bookstore, The Corner Pub, and Sala de Juegos Mora)\" is questioned. Furthermore, as in the aforementioned precedent, the Municipality of San Ramón mentions official letter MSR-AM GM-DDU-SMA-197-2025, dated October 1, 2025, which establishes that an inspection was carried out at the indicated location and that document was issued with conclusions and recommendations (the formation of the institutional commission is recommended).\n\nOn the other hand, in the present matter, the appellants allege a lack of attention to several complaints filed in this regard before the Municipalidad de San Ramón, the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones, and the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad.\n\nIn other words, it is deemed proven that these are complaints regarding visual pollution (contaminación visual) in common areas of said canton, and therefore this Court relies on that precedent for the resolution of this new amparo appeal.\n\nVI.- From the comprehensive review of the case file, the reports rendered under oath—with the consequences set forth in Article 44 of the Law of this Jurisdiction—and the evidentiary record incorporated, this Court holds as accredited that the appellants denounced, on September 9, 17, and 18, 2025, a persistent situation of visual pollution (contaminación visual), structural disorder, and accumulation of disused electrical and telecommunications cabling, particularly in various urban sectors of the canton of San Ramón de Alajuela, which generated a negative impact on the urban landscape and risks to public safety.\n\nAs can be gleaned from the proven facts, said complaints were filed before the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE), the Municipalidad de San Ramón, and the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones (SUTEL), with each of these entities deploying actions within its respective scope of competence. However, the constitutional analysis requires determining whether such actions were timely, sufficient, and effective to guarantee the fundamental rights invoked.\n\nRegarding the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, it is on record that, in its capacity as owner and administrator of the passive infrastructure (postería), it received the respective complaints and, after these were also forwarded by SUTEL, executed various administrative proceedings, such as field inspections, notifications, and warnings to the telecommunications operators using said infrastructure—Liberty, Telecable, Tigo, Claro, Ufinet, and Kölbi—granting them deadlines for the relocation of networks, the removal of disused lines, and the correction of multiple detected irregularities, among them idle service drops, double network, double postería, improperly placed reserve coils, and unfinished work.\n\nHowever, it was also demonstrated that, as of the date this appeal was filed, relevant irregularities persisted in the denounced areas and the total removal of the disused cabling and the comprehensive correction of the problem had not been accredited, despite the existence of such anomalies having been expressly acknowledged. Likewise, the record does not show that ICE had communicated the concrete results of the proceedings carried out to the appellants in a clear and timely manner, which negatively affected their right to prompt and complete justice.\n\nAs this Chamber has repeatedly held, even when the operating companies are owners of the installed networks, ICE, as the administrator of the postería, holds a legal position of guarantor regarding the proper, safe, and orderly use of said infrastructure. Consequently, it cannot disregard the negative effects that the negligent use of the poles generates on the public space, as this compromises the constitutional right to a healthy and balanced environment, as well as the health and physical integrity of individuals. The omission or ineffective enforcement in the exercise of its control and supervision powers constitutes, therefore, an infraction of constitutional relevance.\n\nFor its part, regarding the Municipalidad de San Ramón, it is accredited that it received the complaint for visual pollution (contaminación visual) and that, through a technical inspection, it expressly acknowledged the veracity of the denounced facts, concluding that there was a serious problem of visual pollution (contaminación visual) arising from the disorder of cables and equipment on the urban postería. However, it is also verified that an excessive period—more than two months—elapsed without providing a formal response to the complainants, which was only produced on the occasion of the processing of this amparo.\n\nAdditionally, although the municipality expressed its intention to form an institutional commission and to coordinate with other competent entities, the record does not show that such measures have effectively materialized or translated into concrete and verifiable actions of enforcement, ordering, or mitigation of the denounced problem. As this Court has pointed out, municipal autonomy entails not only formal powers but an active duty of guardianship over the urban environment and the cantonal public space. Consequently, even if it is not its responsibility to directly order the operators to remove the cabling, it is indeed obligated to enforce, coordinate inter-institutionally, and adopt reasonable measures to prevent environmental and urban risks. Inactivity or merely declaratory management is insufficient and constitutes an omission that harms fundamental rights.\n\nFinally, with respect to the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones (SUTEL), it was deemed proven that said entity received multiple complaints of a similar nature and, within a reasonable period, proceeded to forward them to ICE as the owner of the passive infrastructure, issued clear directives for the verification and correction of the indicated irregularities, and requested detailed reports on the actions executed. Likewise, prior to the filing of this appeal, SUTEL communicated to the complainants the proceedings carried out and the reports rendered by ICE, with no evidence of an omissive, arbitrary, or illegitimate conduct on the part of the regulatory body.\n\nIt must be recalled that SUTEL's function is circumscribed to the regulation, supervision, and enforcement of the technical and legal conditions for the shared use of the infrastructure, and it is not responsible for the direct material execution of the cabling removal. Within this framework, this Court considers that SUTEL acted within its scope of competence and did not harm the fundamental rights of the appellants, without prejudice to its permanent duty of continuous supervision and eventual sanctioning power before future non-compliance (see, in a similar sense, judgment no. 2026014326 of 9:20 a.m. on April 24, 2026).\n\nVII.- Conclusion. By virtue of the foregoing, it is appropriate to partially grant the appeal solely against the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad and the Municipalidad de San Ramón on the indicated points. As for the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones, the appeal is to be denied. However, as indicated in the cited precedent, said authority is reminded that it must follow up on the administrative proceedings initiated that are the subject of this amparo, within the framework of its legal powers, for purposes of verifying compliance with the technical obligations of the operating companies and adopting, as applicable, the corresponding measures.\n\nVIII.- Note by Magistrate Castillo Víquez, regarding prompt and complete administrative justice. I have supported the thesis of this Court, that when a person subject to the law alleges a violation of the right to prompt and complete justice in the administrative sphere, those who must hear the legal controversy are the Contentious-Administrative Courts and not this Chamber.\n\nNow, with the recent enactment of Law No. 9097, Law Regulating the Right of Petition (Ley de Regulación del Derecho de Petición), it has been established that this right is subject to judicial protection through the amparo remedy established by Article 32 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional), in relation to Article 27 of the Political Constitution of the Republic of Costa Rica (Constitución Política de la República de Costa Rica), in those cases where the petitioner considers that the material actions of the Administration, its administrative acts, or its response are affecting their fundamental rights. In my view, the recently enacted legislation does not imply that this Court must modify its jurisprudential line, since, based on numeral 7 of its Law, it is exclusively responsible for defining its own jurisdiction. Therefore, except for those legal-constitutional disputes that have been recognized by this Chamber itself as exceptional cases, which may be heard in this jurisdiction through the constitutional process of guarantee of amparo, in other cases, and for the reasons given by this Court (judgment No. 2008-02545 of 8:55 a.m. on February 22, 2008), the competent judges are those of the contentious-administrative jurisdiction (jurisdicción de lo contencioso-administrativo), all of which is in accordance with numeral 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights (Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos), the Law of the Constitution (values, principles, and norms), and the corresponding legal norms based on a logical, systemic, and teleological interpretation of the legal system.\n\n**IX.- NOTE BY JUDGE SALAZAR ALVARADO.** In environmental matters, it is this judge's opinion that if the Public Administration has already intervened, its knowledge and resolution correspond to the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. However, I do address the merits of the matter when other rights of the persons affected by the source of contamination are at stake, including health, quality of life, and the right to enjoy a healthy and pollution-free environment (Article 50 of the Political Constitution), as is the case here, in which the petitioner indicates that they filed a complaint for urban landscape contamination and safety risks due to the amount of cabling placed on electric posts, which has not been definitively resolved.\n\n**X.- Partial dissenting vote regarding the operative part of this judgment by Judge Garro Vargas.** While I agree with the majority of the Chamber that the writ should be partially granted, I differ on where to place the enforcement phase of the matter, due to the lack of adequate mechanisms provided by the regulations governing this constitutional jurisdiction to follow up on a judgment that involves technical aspects of some complexity, as in this case where, within the period to be established, counted from the notification of this judgment, the Municipality of San Ramón and the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, through the respondent authorities, must provide a definitive solution to the problem of visual contamination generated by the excess and disorder of cabling on posts in the denounced sectors of the urban area of the canton. In contrast, what is provided by the Contentious-Administrative Procedural Code regarding enforcement (Article 155 and following) has evident advantages, such as the possibility of requesting schedules, imposing fines, establishing responsibilities, monitoring stages of compliance, among other tools suitable for supervising structural orders of this nature. Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of Article 56 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction, I believe that the enforcement phase must be carried out before the Enforcement Area of the Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda, under the judgment enforcement rules of said Code.\n\n**XI.- Documentation provided to the case file.** The parties are warned that if they have provided any document on paper, 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 30 business days counted from the notification of this judgment. Otherwise, all material that is not withdrawn within this period will be destroyed, according to the provisions of the \"Regulation on Electronic Case Files before the Judiciary\" (Reglamento sobre Expediente Electrónico ante el Poder Judicial), approved by the Corte Plena in session No. 27-11 of August 22, 2011, article XXVI and published in the Judicial Newsletter (Boletín Judicial) number 19 of January 26, 2012, as well as in the agreement approved by the Consejo Superior del Poder Judicial, in session No. 43-12 held on May 3, 2012, article LXXXI.\n\n**Therefore:**\n\nThe writ is partially granted, solely, against the Municipality of San Ramón and the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad. [Name 008], in her capacity as mayor of the Municipality of San Ramón, or whoever holds the position, is ordered to effectively put into operation the institutional commission mentioned in official letter MSR-AM-GM-DDU-SMA-197-2025, and must define a permanent work schedule to prevent the problem of overcrowding of telecommunications cables on the infrastructure from recurring in other sectors of the canton. Furthermore, she must coordinate with the INSTITUTO COSTARRICENSE DE ELECTRICIDAD, jointly and effectively, within their respective spheres of competence, so that the process of cleaning, organizing, and removing all telecommunications cabling that is in disuse, irregularly installed, or generating chaotic accumulation at the three specific points denounced by the petitioners is finalized, all within the period set in judgment no. 2026-008044 of 09:25 a.m. on March 06, 2026.\n\nIn turn, Alex Rodríguez Cambronero, in his capacity as coordinator of the Agencia Integrada de San Ramón of the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, or whoever holds the position, is ordered to arrange the necessary administrative and technical actions to: a) coordinate with the telecommunications operators the tidying and complete removal of disused cabling (cableado en desuso) in the affected area; b) Execute, together with the telecommunications operators, a plan for the organizing and tensioning of the remaining cables to eliminate the negative visual impact and guarantee safety; and c) Establish a permanent oversight protocol to prevent the situation of visual chaos from recurring in the future. All of the foregoing, within the time limit set in judgment no. 2026-008044 of 09:25 hours on March 6, 2026. Likewise, within a period of one month, counted from the notification of this judgment, he must resolve and notify the resolution of the complaint filed by the appellant on September 9, 2025. The foregoing, under the warning that based on the provisions of Article 71 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, imprisonment of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, shall be imposed on anyone who receives an order that must be obeyed or enforced, issued in an amparo appeal, and does not obey it or does not enforce it, provided the crime is not more severely penalized.\n\nThe Municipalidad de San Ramón and the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad are condemned to pay the costs (costas), damages (daños) and losses (perjuicios) caused by the facts serving as the basis for this declaration, which shall be liquidated in the enforcement of judgment of the administrative contentious jurisdiction. Regarding the Superintendencia de Telecomunicaciones, the appeal is declared without merit, although it must take note of what is indicated in Considerando VII of this judgment.\n\nMagistrate Castillo Víquez records a note. Magistrate Salazar Alvarado places a note. Magistrate Garro Vargas dissents regarding the enforcement of this judgment and, in accordance with Article 56 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, orders that it must be conducted before the Enforcement Area of the Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo y Civil de Hacienda, under the enforcement rules established in Articles 155 and following of the Código Procesal Contencioso Administrativo. Likewise, she orders that a copy of the judgment be sent to her so that the enforcement proceedings of this ruling may be initiated.\n\nNotifíquese.-\n\n| | | | |\n| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |\n| | Fernand Castillo V. | | |\n| | President | | |\n| | | Fernand Cruz C. | |\n\nIngrid Hess H.
Digitally Signed Document
-- Verification Code --
0OUSDH0Z8JE61
EXPEDIENTE N° 25-036844-0007-CO
Telephones: 2549-1500 / 800-SALA-4TA (800-7252-482).
\n\nFax: 2220-4607 / 2220-4844. Email: www.poder-judicial.go.cr/salaconstitucional. Address: (Sabana Sur, Calle Morenos, 100 mts. South of the Perpetuo Socorro church)." }