\"In this regard, it should be noted that the Chamber, as a\ngeneral rule, has admitted unconstitutionality actions filed\nagainst the jurisdictional interpretation of norms, when it concerns the\nreiterated criteria of judicial bodies, because if the action were admitted\nagainst what was resolved by a jurisdictional body in a specific case, it\nwould be interpreting the provisions of Article 3, in contradiction with what\nis regulated in Article 74, both of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction, which\nstates that an unconstitutionality action is not applicable against the jurisdictional\nacts of the Judicial Branch. This has been stated by the Chamber in\nnumerous resolutions from which the relevant part is transcribed\nbelow:
\"In this regard, the claimants must take into\naccount that, it is the case law that this Chamber has recognized as the object\nof constitutional review, in cases where a specific\ntrend of the courts of justice proves contrary to the block of\nconstitutional legitimacy, and only when effective\nreiteration of a legal criterion issued by the jurisdictional\nauthorities is demonstrated, through a plurality of judgments, as a non-written\nsource of the system of precedents, in the resolution of all or at\nleast a representative number of cases assigned to judges within\ntheir competence, can it be said that case law exists\nin that sense, as this Court previously indicated in judgment\nnumber 6489-93, of ten hours twenty-four minutes of December ninth,\nnineteen ninety-three, in its Considering III:
\"... When Article 3 of the Law of\nConstitutional Jurisdiction indicates that the Political Constitution shall be deemed infringed\nwhen this results from the interpretation that public\nauthorities make of the laws with constitutional norms and principles, what it\nallows is the examination of the constitutionality of the case law, that is, of\nreiterated judicial pronouncements, for the purpose of enforcing them in matters\nin progress not yet resolved. It does not allow, as the claimant intends, for\nthe judgments of the first and second instance to be reviewed, so that a specific\njudicial interpretation is not applied in the Court of Cassation; because this\nwould be equivalent to turning the Constitutional Chamber into one more instance\nfor the review of judgments.\"(judgment No.\n1995-5981 of 15:51 hours of\nNovember 7, 1995)\"
III.-
\"Equally entitled to that protection shall be\nthe mother, the child, the elderly, and the destitute invalid.\"
It is evident according to the transcribed norm, the\ndual duty that the Costa Rican State has: a) On the one hand, it must produce an\nadequate normative framework in order to provide special protection for\nthose groups of people, which constitutes a true fundamental right; and\nb) Respect and ensure respect, through the\ncorresponding administrative agencies and courts of justice, for such rights.\nFrom the concept of the Social Rule of Law, it is possible to derive\nobligations for public authorities, precisely in the pursuit\nof the greatest well-being of \"all the inhabitants of the country,\" among\nwhich, the Constitution specifically points to children,\nmothers, the elderly, and destitute persons. The Social State enshrined in\nour Political Constitution develops in its normative content a\nrelevant and obligatory state intervention in social matters in favor of those\nspecial sectors of the population that, by their condition, so require;\nsuch is the case – without a doubt – of the elderly, or persons of the third\nage, or older adults. Until a few years ago, there was no legal framework\naimed at adequately guaranteeing the\nspecial protection and state guardianship that the older adult of our\ncountry requires; however, on October nineteenth, nineteen ninety-nine,\nthe Legislative Assembly enacted the Comprehensive Law for the older adult,\nnumber 7935, with which it is intended:
\"a) Guarantee older\nadults, equality of opportunity and a dignified life in all\nspheres.
b) Guarantee the active participation of\nolder adults in the formulation and application of the policies that\naffect them.
c) Promote the permanence of older\nadults in their family and community nucleus.
d) Foster forms of organization and\nparticipation of older adults, that allow the country to\ntake advantage of the experience and knowledge of this population.
e) Promote comprehensive and\ninter-institutional care of older adults by public\nand private entities, and ensure the proper functioning of the programs and\nservices intended for this population.
However, it cannot and should not be expected that this\nlegal framework exhausts the guardianship and\nspecial protection by the State of the fundamental rights of adults, since it is\nprecisely from the legal framework that this\njurisprudential development must be carried out by the judiciary, which is binding and must be respected. The\nlegal framework is only an introductory framework that\nprovides that \"the older adult must be considered any person of\nsixty-five years or older.\" Likewise, it intends, among other things, comprehensive\ncare for this group, defined in the law as the satisfaction of the\nphysical, material, biological, emotional, social, labor,\nproductive, and spiritual needs of older adults. To facilitate\na full and healthy old age for them,\ntheir habits, functional capacities, and preferences shall be considered. For this\nreason, and given the vulnerability of this sector of the population, their\nprotection against the violence they suffer is also provided for, understanding this\nas \"any action or omission, direct or indirect, exercised against an\nolder adult, that produces, as a consequence, the impairment of their\nphysical, sexual, psychological, or financial integrity. Older\nadults have the right to have their physical, psychological, and moral integrity respected, a\nright that also includes the protection of their image, autonomy,\nthought, dignity, and values.\" For this purpose, this same law provides the mechanism for the protection of said\nrights, a clear example of which is Article 57, whose legal interpretation\nis the one being challenged in this action. This norm\nprovides:
\"ARTICLE 57.- Protective measures (medidas de protección)
To prevent physical, psychological,\nfinancial, or sexual violence
Indeed, the challenged provision refers to\nthe domestic violence law solely for procedural purposes, because to\nconstitute a case of domestic violence, the legal basis for this\nprotection does not derive from a law of that nature, but from the Comprehensive Law for\nthe older adult, whose sole purpose is to guarantee older\nadults equality of opportunity and a life of dignity in all spheres,\nprotecting them against anyone who intends the impairment of their\nphysical, sexual, psychological, or financial integrity.
IV.- The summary proceeding for protective measures regulated in the Law against\nDomestic Violence has been endorsed by this Court, in consideration of the\nvulnerability of the sectors under protection in accordance with Article 51\nof the Political Constitution. A programmatic norm that establishes the obligation of the State to provide special protection to the family as the natural element and essential foundation of society, as well as\nto mothers, children, the elderly, and the destitute invalid. In such terms,\nnot only this law but the Comprehensive Law for the Older Adult\nis a manifestation of compliance with that constitutional directive,\nwhose spirit permeates its entire content. In it are guaranteed the right to\nlife, to health, and to physical integrity, as established in our\nConstitution and by International Human Rights Law. It is\nthus that this Constitutional Right is violated not only when one of the\nmembers of a family nucleus, abusing their physical force or their position of\nauthority, inflicts physical, sexual, psychological, or financial abuse\non one or more of its members, but also when other persons injure in\nsome way an older adult, whose vulnerability is inherent. In the interest of\ntheir protection, respect, and integrity, is that the legislator considered it opportune\nto provide adult victims of violence with an agile and\ntimely proceeding, that would immediately guarantee them compliance with the aforementioned\nconstitutional postulates, referring only for the purposes of the\napplication of protective measures to the Law against domestic violence.