{ "id": "nexus-sen-1-0007-411696", "citation": "Res. 06568-2008 Sala Constitucional", "section": "nexus_decisions", "doc_type": "constitutional_decision", "title_es": "Amparo ambiental contra botadero de basura de Tilarán", "title_en": "Environmental amparo against Tilarán landfill", "summary_es": "La Sala Constitucional declara con lugar un recurso de amparo interpuesto por un vecino del cantón de Tilarán contra la Municipalidad de Tilarán, el Ministerio de Salud y el Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía por la contaminación generada por un botadero municipal a cielo abierto que opera desde 1979 sin estudio de impacto ambiental ni viabilidad ambiental. Se acreditó que el vertedero contamina la quebrada La Cabra, una naciente de agua y terrenos aledaños, afectando la salud de la población y el ambiente. La Sala determina que las autoridades recurridas incumplieron sus deberes de vigilancia y control por omisión prolongada (más de 27 años), limitándose a órdenes sanitarias insuficientes y tardías. Se ordena a la Municipalidad y al Ministerio de Salud adoptar de inmediato medidas integrales para solucionar el problema, y al MINAE y SETENA verificar su cumplimiento. Además, condena a la Municipalidad al pago de costas, daños y perjuicios por el daño ambiental ocasionado, liquidados en vía contencioso-administrativa.", "summary_en": "The Constitutional Chamber grants an amparo action filed by a neighbor of Tilarán canton against the Municipality of Tilarán, the Ministry of Health, and the Ministry of Environment and Energy due to pollution from an open-air municipal dump operating since 1979 without an environmental impact study or environmental viability permit. Evidence showed the landfill was contaminating La Cabra creek, a water spring, and adjacent lands, harming public health and the environment. The Chamber found that the respondent authorities breached their oversight duties through prolonged omission (over 27 years), merely issuing insufficient and late sanitary orders. It orders the Municipality and the Ministry of Health to immediately adopt comprehensive measures to solve the problem, and MINAE/SETENA to verify compliance. Additionally, it orders the Municipality to pay costs, damages, and losses for the environmental harm, to be determined in administrative contentious proceedings.", "court_or_agency": "Sala Constitucional", "date": "22/04/2008", "year": "2008", "topic_ids": [ "art-50-constitution", "environmental-law-7554", "procedural-environmental" ], "primary_topic_id": "procedural-environmental", "es_concept_hints": [ "amparo ambiental", "botadero a cielo abierto", "intereses difusos", "lixiviados", "orden sanitaria", "viabilidad ambiental", "contaminación de nacientes", "responsabilidad por omisión" ], "article_citations": [], "keywords_es": [ "amparo ambiental", "botadero de basura", "contaminación ambiental", "salud pública", "omisión administrativa", "SETENA", "estudio de impacto ambiental", "recurso de amparo", "Tilarán", "desechos sólidos", "costas por daño ambiental" ], "keywords_en": [ "environmental amparo", "landfill", "environmental pollution", "public health", "administrative omission", "SETENA", "environmental impact study", "amparo remedy", "Tilarán", "solid waste", "environmental damages costs" ], "excerpt_es": "La Sala considera que las autoridades competentes en salvaguardar el ambiente y salud de los habitantes no han ejercido sus funciones correctamente por cuanto no han ejecutado ninguna acción oportuna para frenar la causa de contaminación ambiental en general que produce el vertedero de basura en cuestión, en especial a la quebrada La Cabra y a la finca de empresa recurrente que colinda con la propiedad, que se dedica a actividades ganaderas. [...] las actas de inspección realizadas por diferentes funcionarios públicos que constan en el expediente, demuestran que tanto las actuaciones de la Municipalidad como las órdenes del Ministerio de Salud no han sido lo suficientemente efectivas ni oportunas como para impedir que se siga dando contaminación en el ambiente y se siga poniendo en peligro la salud de la población y de los animales. [...] la Sala ya ha dicho que en materia de protección al ambiente, además de una actitud correctiva, también se debe tener una actitud preventiva porque los errores son irreversibles y de un alto costo ambiental...", "excerpt_en": "The Chamber considers that the authorities responsible for safeguarding the environment and the health of the inhabitants have not correctly exercised their functions since they have not taken any timely action to stop the cause of the environmental pollution produced by the landfill in question, especially to La Cabra creek and the farm of the appellant, which is adjacent to the property and dedicated to cattle ranching. [...] the inspection records carried out by different public officials in the file show that both the actions of the Municipality and the orders of the Ministry of Health have not been sufficiently effective or timely to prevent continued environmental contamination and endangerment of the health of the population and animals. [...] the Chamber has already held that in environmental protection matters, in addition to a corrective attitude, a preventive attitude is also required because mistakes are irreversible and carry a high environmental cost...", "outcome": { "label_en": "Granted", "label_es": "Con lugar", "summary_en": "The Court ordered the Municipality of Tilarán and the Ministry of Health to comprehensively solve the landfill pollution, and MINAE/SETENA to verify compliance, with costs and damages awarded against the Municipality.", "summary_es": "Se ordena a la Municipalidad de Tilarán y al Ministerio de Salud solucionar integralmente la contaminación del botadero, y a MINAE/SETENA verificar cumplimiento, con condena en costas y daños a la Municipalidad." }, "pull_quotes": [ { "context": "Considerando VIII", "quote_en": "the action that the Political Constitution imposes on the State against sources of environmental pollution is multidirectional and definitively active, absolutely intolerant of situations that threaten or affect optimal environmental conditions", "quote_es": "la acción que la Constitución Política impone al Estado frente a los focos de contaminación ambiental es multidireccional y definitivamente activa, absolutamente intolerante frente a situaciones que amenazan o afectan las condiciones ambientales óptimas" }, { "context": "Considerando VIII", "quote_en": "a complacent attitude is unacceptable for the Administration, being satisfied with merely knowing that something is being done, since in the meantime harm to the environment and health continues repeatedly", "quote_es": "no es aceptable para la Administración una actitud complaciente y que se tranquilice con solo saber que se está haciendo algo pues mientras tanto, la afectación al ambiente y a la salud se sigue dando de manera reiterada" }, { "context": "Considerando VIII", "quote_en": "harm to the environment can be measured based on the economic resources available, which is entirely erroneous", "quote_es": "las lesiones al ambiente se pueden medir en función de los recursos económicos de que se dispongan, lo cual es del todo errado" } ], "cites": [ { "id": "norm-27738", "citation": "Ley 7554", "title_en": "Organic Environmental Law", "title_es": "Ley Orgánica del Ambiente", "doc_type": "law", "date": "04/10/1995", "year": "1995" }, { "id": "norm-6581", "citation": "Ley 5395", "title_en": "General Health Law", "title_es": "Ley General de Salud", "doc_type": "law", "date": "30/10/1973", "year": "1973" }, { "id": "norm-871", "citation": "Constitución Política 0 (Asamblea Nacional Constituyente, 07/11/1949)", "title_en": "Right to a Healthy and Ecologically Balanced Environment — Article 50 of the Political Constitution", "title_es": "Derecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado — Artículo 50 de la Constitución Política", "doc_type": "constitution", "date": "07/11/1949", "year": "1949" } ], "cited_by": [ { "id": "nexus-sen-1-0007-92711", "citation": "Res. 03705-1993 Sala Constitucional", "title_en": "Definition of the right to a healthy environment and closure of the dump in La Caraña creek", "title_es": "Definición del derecho al ambiente y cierre de botadero en quebrada La Caraña", "doc_type": "constitutional_decision", "date": "30/07/1993", "year": "1993" }, { "id": "norm-27738", "citation": "Ley 7554", "title_en": "Organic Environmental Law", "title_es": "Ley Orgánica del Ambiente", "doc_type": "law", "date": "04/10/1995", "year": "1995" }, { "id": "norm-6581", "citation": "Ley 5395", "title_en": "General Health Law", "title_es": "Ley General de Salud", "doc_type": "law", "date": "30/10/1973", "year": "1973" }, { "id": "norm-871", "citation": "Constitución Política 0 (Asamblea Nacional Constituyente, 07/11/1949)", "title_en": "Right to a Healthy and Ecologically Balanced Environment — Article 50 of the Political Constitution", "title_es": "Derecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado — Artículo 50 de la Constitución Política", "doc_type": "constitution", "date": "07/11/1949", "year": "1949" } ], "references": { "internal": [], "external": [] }, "source_url": "https://nexuspj.poder-judicial.go.cr/document/sen-1-0007-411696", "tier": 2, "is_environmental": true, "_editorial_citation_count": 0, "regulations_by_article": null, "amendments_by_article": null, "dictamen_by_article": null, "concordancias_by_article": null, "afectaciones_by_article": null, "resoluciones_by_article": null, "cited_by_votos": [], "cited_norms": [], "cited_norms_inverted": [ { "doc_id": "norm-27738", "norm_num": "7554", "norm_name": "Ley Orgánica del Ambiente", "tipo_norma": "Ley", "norm_fecha": "04/10/1995" }, { "doc_id": "norm-6581", "norm_num": "5395", "norm_name": "Ley General de Salud", "tipo_norma": "Ley", "norm_fecha": "30/10/1973" }, { "doc_id": "norm-871", "norm_num": "0", "norm_name": "Derecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado — Artículo 50 de la Constitución Política", "tipo_norma": "Constitución Política", "norm_fecha": "07/11/1949" } ], "sentencias_relacionadas": [], "temas_y_subtemas": [], "cascade_only": false, "amendment_count": 0, "body_es_text": "* 070058090007CO * \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n* 070058090007CO * \n\r\n\r\n\nExp: 07-005809-0007-CO \n\r\n\r\n\nRes. Nº 2008-06568 \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nSALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San\r\n José, a las dieciséis horas y veinte minutos del\r\nveintidós de abril del\r\ndos mil ocho. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n Recurso\r\nde amparo que se tramita en expediente número 07-005809-0007-CO, interpuesto\r\npor CARLOS ADRIAN VARGAS MURILLO, mayor, cédula de identidad\r\nnúmero 0501180589, vecino de Tilarán, a favor de Ganadera La Gitana contra\r\nel ALCALDE MUNICIPAL DE TILARAN, la DIRECTORA DEL AREA DE SALUD DE TILARAN, la\r\nMINISTRA DE SALUD y el MINISTRO DEL AMBIENTE Y ENERGIA.- \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nResultando: \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n 1.- Por escrito recibido en la Secretaría de\r\nla Sala a las diecisiete horas del primero de mayo de dos mil siete, el\r\nrecurrente interpone recurso de amparo contra la ALCALDE MUNICIPAL DE\r\nTILARAN, la DIRECTORA DEL AREA DE SALUD DE TILARAN, la MINISTRA DE SALUD y el\r\nMINISTRO DEL AMBIENTE Y ENERGIA y manifiesta que desde hace mas de diez\r\naños funciona un botadero de municipal de basura para la ciudad de Tilarán, sin\r\nque exista un estudio de impacto ambiental al respecto a pesar que hay una\r\nnaciente de agua, la cual es utilizada para toma y uso de agua para consumo\r\nhumano. Alrededor de dicho botadero discurre también una quebrada denominada\r\n\"La Cabra\", la cual se encuentra también contaminada por basura\r\norgánica, química, óxida, ácida, lo cual también ha perjudicado su ganado que\r\nbebe agua de este lugar. Adicionalmente el área donde está el basurero es una\r\nzona de recarga acuífera, y allí se queman árboles que la protegen. El 6 de\r\nmayo de 2004 un grupo de vecinos interpuso una denuncia ante la Directora del\r\nArea de Salud de Tilarán debido a la contaminación ambiental que provoca por\r\nmalos olores, el humo de las quemas y la contaminación de la quebrada,\r\nnaciente; sin embargo la autoridad sanitaria no realizó ningún acto para\r\nsolventar este problema, únicamente giró una orden sanitaria que obliga a la\r\nMunicipalidad a fumigar el basurero para mitigar moscas. En abril de 2007, se\r\nle solicitó una copia del\r\nexpediente relacionado al botadero en cuestión y se les indicó que únicamente\r\nse registran dos ordenes sanitarias. El 17 y 19 de abril de 2007 un grupo de\r\nvecinos presentó una denuncia ante la Fundación para el Area de Conservación\r\nArenal y ante el Ministro del Ambiente. Solicita el recurrente que se declare\r\ncon lugar y se ordene el cierre del\r\nbotadero municipal: \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n 2.- \r\nMediante memoriales\r\npresentados respectivamente a las 16:25 hrs. del cuatro, y diecinueve\r\nhoras del catorce, ambos del mes de mayo de dos mil siete, Josefina Gómez\r\nGómez, y María Eduvina Alvarez Carranza y otros vecinos, se adhieren al\r\nrecurso presentado (folios 68, 113 y 132) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n 3.-\r\nInforma bajo juramento María Elena Madrigal, en su calidad de Directora del\r\nArea de Conservación Arenal- Tempisque del\r\nMinisterio de Ambiente y Energía (folios 72 y 109), que la naciente se utiliza\r\nsolo para generar electricidad y no se utiliza en actividades agrícolas y\r\npiscícolas aguas abajo. La posible contaminación al pasar el agua por las\r\nturbinas generadores disminuye considerablemente. Desconoce si el Departamento\r\nde Aguas ha dado captaciones de agua para consumo humano. Solicita que se\r\ndesestime el recurso planteado. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n 4.- \r\nInforman bajo juramento María Luisa Avila e Hilda María Barrantes Guerrero en\r\nsu condición respectiva de Ministra y Directora de Area Rectora de Salud de\r\nTilarán (folio 76) que no tienen conocimiento que existan nacientes en el lugar\r\ny mucho menos que exista captación de agua para consumo humano. No obstante se\r\nestá realizando la investigación correspondiente y de ser necesario se\r\ngiraran las ordenes sanitarias correspondientes. Este Ministerio tiene\r\nconocimiento de que se está realizando un proyecto de relleno sanitario\r\nRegional Cañas, según expediente administrativo No. 171-2005-SETENA entregado a\r\nla SETENA con fecha 20 de febrero de 2007. Solicita se declare sin lugar el\r\nrecurso. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n 5.- \r\nMediante escrito recibido a las diecinueve horas diez minutos del catorce de mayo de dos mil siete, el\r\nrecurrente amplía los hechos alegados en el presente recurso de amparo (folio\r\n114) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n 6.- \r\nRoberto Dobles Mora en su\r\ncondición de Ministro de Ambiente y Energía (folio 134) reitera lo indicado por\r\nla Directora del Area de Conservación Arenal Tempisque. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n 7.- \r\nInforma Jovel Arias Ortega en su condición de Alcalde de la Municipalidad\r\nde Tilarán (folio 154) que el lugar denunciado ha sido considerado entre los\r\nmás aptos del país, no es cierto que el agua de la naciente ni la quebrada\r\nestén contaminadas producto de la basura que se deja en el relleno sanitario y\r\nen ningún momento la basura depositada cae en el relleno. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n 8.-\r\nMediante memoriales presentados respectivamente a las trece horas cuarenta y\r\ncinco minutos y diez horas treinta minutos del\r\ncuatro y once, ambos del\r\nmes junio de 2007, el recurrente aporta prueba adicional (folio 159 y 167) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n9.- Por resolución de las quince horas y treinta\r\nminutos del diez de octubre del 2007 se solicita prueba para mejor\r\nresolver al Ministerio de Salud y a la Secretaria Técnica Nacional Ambiental\r\n(folio 193) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n10.- El 30 de octubre de 2007 José Alcidez Ruiz y Luz Marina Alfaro Hernández solicitan se les tengo como coadyuvantes (folio\r\n289) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n11.- Informan María Luisa Avila Agüero y Hilda María\r\nBarrantes Guerrero en su condición respectiva de Ministra y Directora del Area\r\nRectora de salud de Tilarán (folio 292) que el sistema que utiliza la\r\nMunicipalidad de Tilarán para el depósito de desechos sólidos es vertedero a\r\ncielo abierto y funciona desde hace 25 años , por lo que no cuenta con los\r\nsistemas apropiados de control de lixiviados, por lo que es probable que se\r\npresente algún tipo de contaminación, lo cual no excluye a la quebrada “La\r\nCabra”. Por otra parte, se desconoce la visita técnica en el oficio INGZA-2007-102-.\r\nEl 14 de mayo de 2007 el Area Rectora de Salud realizó la inspección al\r\nvertedero municipal y se emitió la orden sanitaria No. 015-07, se inició\r\nel procedimiento administrativo y se le otorgó un plazo de diez días al Alcalde\r\nde Tilarán para que procediera a : recoger todos los depósitos de basura que se\r\nencuentran en la entrada y en las márgenes del vertedero, o sea colindancia con\r\nlas fincas vecinas; compactar y tapar con tierra las trincheras utilizadas para\r\nel depósito de la basura, desistir de realizar quemas de basura dentro del\r\nvertedero, colocar un portón en la entrada del vertedero. El 1 de junio de 2007\r\nel Alcalde informó de las gestiones realizadas. Por otra parte no les consta\r\nque la zona en cuestión sea una zona de recarga acuífera y actualmente los\r\nproblemas de contaminación ya no se presentan por las acciones tomadas por la\r\nMunicipalidad, aparte que el suministro de agua por parte del AYA, refiere que\r\nla red de distribución del\r\nagua potable llega hasta el botadero. Así las cosas, el 30 de octubre del 2007\r\nse realizó otra inspección al sitio y se comprobó que en efecto se han ido\r\ncumpliendo uno a uno los puntos ordenados, se ha mejorado considerablemente las\r\ncondiciones de saneamiento por lo que actualmente no representa ningún peligro\r\npara la salud o el ambiente, por lo que los problemas de contaminación\r\nprácticamente no existen. Solicita se declare sin lugar el recurso. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n12.- A las diecisiete horas cuarenta y ocho minutos del cuatro de noviembre el representante del amparado reitera que\r\na la fecha continúa y aún más se ha agravado el problema de contaminación\r\ndenunciado (folio 324) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n13.- El 15 de noviembre de 2007 el recurrente\r\naporta prueba para mejor resolver (folio 338) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n14.- El 22 de noviembre de 2007 el recurrente aporta\r\nprueba adicional y mediante memorial del 28 de diciembre de 2007 el recurrente\r\ndenuncia la presencia de desechos hospitalarios así como la realización de\r\nquemas (folios 387, 418) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n15.- El 10 de enero y el 17 de enero, ambos del 2008 el recurrente\r\naporta prueba adicional (folio 424 y 436) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n16.- Informa bajo juramento Tatiana Cruz Ramírez\r\nen su condición de Secretaria General de la Secretaria Técnica Nacional\r\nAmbiental (folio 443) que no existe un estudio de impacto ambiental ni ninguna\r\nviabilidad ambiental otorgada al vertedero de basura de Tilarán. Además, no le\r\nconsta si dicho lugar contamina la quebrada La Cabra” así como las nacientes de agua debido que no\r\nexiste un expediente administrativo para iniciar el procedimiento de evaluación\r\nambiental ni tampoco hay ninguna denuncia presentada. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n17.- Mediante memoriales presentados por el\r\nrepresentante de la empresa amparada se refiere al informe presentado por la\r\nSetena (folio 472) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n18- Por memorial interpuesto a esta Sala, un\r\ngrupo de vecinos presenta su coayuvancia a este proceso (folio 483) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n19.- El 17 de marzo el recurrente presenta pruebas\r\npara mejor resolver (folio 485) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n 20.- En los procedimientos seguidos\r\nse ha observado las prescripciones legales. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n Redacta\r\nel Magistrado González Quiroga; y, \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n Considerando: \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n I.-\r\nOBJETO DEL\r\nRECURSO. Alega el\r\nrecurrente que la Municipalidad de Tilarán mantiene abierto un botadero de\r\nbasura que no reúne las condiciones exigidas y que está produciendo un grave daño\r\nal ambiente y a la salud de los animales y de las personas que habitan cerca.\r\nIndican que han realizado múltiples gestiones ante diferentes instancias, pero\r\nno se le ha dado respuesta positiva al problema y la contaminación sigue\r\nafectando la zona, por lo que solicitan la intervención de este Tribunal. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n II.- HECHOS PROBADOS. De\r\nimportancia para la decisión de este asunto, se estiman como debidamente demostrados los siguientes\r\nhechos, sea porque así han sido acreditados o bien porque el recurrido haya omitido\r\nreferirse a ellos según lo prevenido en el auto inicial: \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\na) Desde el año de 1979 se encuentra funcionando el vertedero\r\nmunicipal de Tilarán y no consta en los archivos municipales ningún estudio de\r\nimpacto ambiental (folio 409, 423, 439) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n b) El 6 de mayo de 2004 un grupo de vecinos de Tilarán interpuso una\r\ndenuncia ante Dirección de Protección al Ambiente Humano del Ministerio de\r\nSalud por la contaminación ambiental que produce el botadero municipal (folio\r\n23) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nc) Por orden sanitaria No. 2370-B del 28 de marzo de 2006 el Ministerio de\r\nSalud ordenó a la Municipalidad de Tilarán proceder a realizar una fumigación\r\nen el vertedero para la eliminación de moscas (folio 29) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nd) Mediante orden sanitaria No. 2384-B del 23 de mayo de 2006 el Ministerio\r\nde Salud reitera la orden de realizar la fumigación (folio 30) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n e) Mediante oficio TIL-PAH-012-07 del 20 de abril de 2007 el Area\r\nrectora de Salud de Tilarán hace constar que únicamente se registran 2 órdenes\r\nsanitarias con fecha de 23 de junio de 2006 y 18 de mayo de 2006 y tenían como\r\npropósito la fumigación del vertedero (folio 28) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nf) Mediante inspecciones realizadas por agentes de la policía de la Fuerza\r\nPública de Tilarán en el mes de abril de 2007 hacen constar que en la\r\nnaciente de agua existe gran cantidad de basura, al igual que en la quebrada\r\n(folio 36 y 38) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\ng) El 17 de abril de 2007 un grupo de vecinos presentaron una denuncia por\r\ncontaminación ambiental producida por el basurero de Tilarán ante el Area de\r\nConservación Arenal – Tempisque del Minae (folio 40) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nh) En el mes de mayo de 2007 la Fuerza Pública de Tilarán realizó una\r\ninspección en el Basurero Municipal, en la Hacienda Casa Blanca (folio 129-131)\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\ni) El 10 de mayo de 2007 los inspectores del Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados\r\nhacen constar que existe un foco de contaminación en la Quebrada La Cabra por\r\nparte del “relleno sanitario”, arrojan basura a las propiedades vecinas y\r\nexiste proliferación de vectores, como moscas (folio 313) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nj) Mediante orden sanitaria No. 015-07 del 17 de mayo de 2007 el Ministerio\r\nde Salud ordenó al Alcalde Municipal realizar una serie de medidas de índole\r\nsanitaria con respecto al vertedero de desechos sólidos en un plazo de diez\r\ndías (folio 140) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nk) El veterinario Oficial del Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería hace\r\nconstar que en la inspección realizada el 2 de mayo del año en curso en la\r\nfinca del recurrente existía la gran cantidad de basura dentro y fuera de la\r\nfinca, la contaminación de la quebrada y la cantidad e moscas (folio 149) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nl) La Dirección de Gestión Ambiental del Instituto Costarricense de\r\nAcueductos y Alcantarillados realizó una visita in situ y constató que existe\r\ncontaminación de la quebrada Cabra y fincas vecinas debido en parte al\r\nvertedero de basura (folio 169) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nm) El Area de Conservación Arena Tempisque hace constar que en la\r\nquebrada se están filtrando los lixiviados del botadero y es fuente de plagas y\r\nenfermedades (folio 172) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nn) La Policía de Proximidad de la Fuerza Pública de Tilarán hace constar\r\nque el 12 de julio de 2007 se presentó en la entrada principal del basurero\r\nmunicipal de Tilarán y se observo gran cantidad de basura (folio 182) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nñ) El 30 de agosto de 2007 la Dirección Ambiental de Recurso Hídrico del\r\nInstituto del Aya realizo una inspección in situ y comprobó contaminación y\r\nacarreo de desechos en la quebrada La Cabra, deforestación, gran cantidad\r\nde insectos tales como moscas y criaderos de mosquitos (folio 356) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\no) En la inspección realizada el 30 de octubre de 2007 por funcionarios del\r\nMinisterio de Salud hacen constar que la basura existente en el sitio se ha\r\ndisminuido considerablemente por los trabajos de limpieza y las fumigaciones\r\nefectuados por la Municipalidad (folio 301 \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\np) El 1 de noviembre de 2007 los agentes de policía de la fueraza pública y\r\nel veterinario oficial del Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería manifiestan\r\nque la quebrada se encuentra contaminada con basura (folio 328, 334 y 406) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nq) A las 8:00 horas del 12 de noviembre de 2007 el Comandante de la Fuerza\r\nPública de Tilarán hace constar que la basura en el vertedero aumentó\r\nconsiderablemente y los factores contaminantes tales como residuos de\r\nherbicidas, llantas, láminas de zinc, estañones que se ubican a una distancia\r\nde dos metros de la naciente de agua (folios 388-406) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nr) Mediante memorial DPUCC-400-2007 del 14 de noviembre de 2007 el\r\nCoordinador de Desarrollo y Control Local de la Municipalidad recurrida informa\r\nsobre las gestiones realizadas en el vertedero denunciado tales como:\r\nvigilancia, control de acceso e información y se acordonaron montículos de\r\ntierra (folio 410) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\ns) El 16 de diciembre de 2007 el funcionario del Area de Conservación\r\nArenal Tempisque del Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía constató que la quebrada\r\nse encuentra contaminada por basura proveniente del vertedero al igual que los\r\ndrenajes naturales y la naciente de agua (folio 427) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nt) Mediante informe No. ASA-419-2007-SETENA del 11 de diciembre de 2007,\r\nlos inspectores hacen constar que el botadero de basura no cuenta con estudio\r\nde impacto ambiental, que ha producido contaminación con desechos sólidos y\r\nlixiviados en la quebrada cabra y ha generado un impacto negativo en el medio\r\nambiente circundante (folio 463) \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n II.-\r\nSOBRE LA LEGITIMACIÓN DEL RECURRENTE. En cuanto a la legitimación de Carlos Adrián Vargas Murillo para accionar\r\nante esta jurisdicción en tutela del derecho a un ambiente sano que aduce\r\nviolentado por la inercia de las autoridades recurridas, es reiterada la\r\njurisprudencia de la Sala en el sentido de que, como se trata de intereses\r\ndifusos, cualquier miembro de la comunidad afectada está legitimado para acudir\r\na la vía de amparo, en procura de la protección al ambiente. Al respecto, es de\r\nparticular relevancia lo dicho por este Tribunal Constitucional en sentencia\r\nnúmero 3705-93 de las quince horas del treinta de julio de mil novecientos\r\nnoventa y seis, que en lo conducente dispone: \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\"Tratándose de la protección jurídica del ambiente, la legitimación de\r\nlos particulares para actuar judicialmente y lograr la aplicación de las normas\r\nque tienen esa finalidad o bien, solicitar la tutela jurisdiccional para\r\namparar sus derechos violados, es de gran importancia. Pero debe analizarse\r\ndesde varios puntos de vista, es decir, en relación con la naturaleza del\r\nproceso, las pretensiones y las partes intervinientes y, también tomando en\r\ncuenta que el quebranto de las normas ambientales puede provocarlo con su\r\nactuación u omisión tanto un sujeto de derecho privado como de derecho público.\r\nEste último, simplemente omitiendo ejercer el control debido sobre la actuación\r\nde los sujetos privados, cuando infringen las normas ambientales, ignorando su\r\ncompetencia funcional, que le exige ejercer ese control; o bien, infringiendo\r\ndirectamente con su actuación disposiciones jurídicas destinadas a proteger y\r\nconservar el ambiente. Esta Sala en Sentencia Número 2233- 93 al señalar que la\r\npreservación y protección del ambiente es un derecho fundamental, da cabida a\r\nla legitimación para acudir a la vía de amparo. En el derecho ambiental, el\r\npresupuesto procesal de la legitimación tiende a extenderse y ampliarse en una\r\ndimensión tal, que lleva necesariamente al abandono del concepto tradicional,\r\ndebiendo entender que en términos generales, toda persona puede ser parte y que\r\nsu derecho no emana de títulos de propiedad, derechos o acciones concretas que\r\npudiera ejercer según las reglas del derecho convencional, sino que su\r\nactuación procesal responde a lo que los modernos tratadistas denominan el\r\ninterés difuso, mediante el cual la legitimación original del interesado\r\nlegítimo o aún del simple interesado, se difunde entre todos los miembros de\r\nuna determinada categoría de personas que resultan así igualmente afectadas por\r\nlos actos ilegales que los vulneran. Tratándose de la protección del\r\nambiente, el interés típicamente difuso que legitima al sujeto para accionar,\r\nse transforma, en virtud de su incorporación al elenco de los derechos de la\r\npersona humana, convirtiéndose en un verdadero \"derecho reaccional\",\r\nque, como su nombre lo indica, lo que hace es apoderar a su titular para\r\n\"reaccionar\" frente a la violación originada en actos u omisiones\r\nilegítimos. Es por ello que la vulneración de ese derecho fundamental,\r\nconstituye una ilegalidad constitucional, es decir, una causal específica de\r\namparo contra los actos concretos o normas autoaplicativas o, en su caso, en la\r\nacción de inconstitucionalidad contra todas las normas o contra los actos no\r\nsusceptibles de amparo, e incluso, contra las omisiones, categoría ésta que en\r\nel caso del derecho al ambiente se vuelve especialmente importante, porque al\r\ntratarse de conservar el medio que la naturaleza nos ha dado, la violación más\r\nfrecuente se produce por la inercia de las autoridades públicas en realizar los\r\nactos necesarios para protegerlos.” \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n III.- SOBRE LAS COADYUVANCIAS: Tal y como se indicó en el considerando\r\nanterior, en el derecho ambiental, el presupuesto procesal de la legitimación\r\ntiende a extenderse y ampliarse en una dimensión tal que lleva a entender que\r\nen términos generales toda persona puede ser parte. En tal virtud, la solicitud\r\nde coadyuvancia presentada por Josefina Gómez Gómez, y María Eduvina Alvarez\r\nCarranza, José Alcidez Ruiz y Luz Marina Alfaro y otros vecinos \r\ntienen legitimación para figurar como parte en este amparo de\r\nconformidad con el último párrafo del artículo 34 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción\r\nConstitucional. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nIV.- SOBRE EL FONDO. En reiteradas ocasiones esta Sala ha manifestado\r\nque tanto el derecho a la salud -derivado del derecho a la vida- como el\r\nderecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado, constituyen derechos\r\nfundamentales. El Estado está obligado a tomar las medidas necesarias para\r\nproteger el medio ambiente y evitar grados de contaminación que pongan en\r\npeligro la salud de los administrados, lo que sin duda alguna es competencia\r\nlegalmente otorgada al Ministerio de Salud y el Ministerio de Ambiente y\r\nEnergía, entre otras instituciones, pero también, en relación con el caso que\r\nnos ocupa, el Código Municipal en igual sentido obliga a las Municipalidades a\r\nvelar porque al administrado se le garantice el disfrute real y efectivo del\r\nderecho a la salud y a un ambiente sano. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n V.- Ahora bien, no cabe duda de que\r\nun botadero y no un relleno técnico sanitario de basura es un grave foco de\r\ncontaminación ambiental de diversa índole, con el inminente peligro para la\r\nsalud de los pobladores, de los vecinos, de los que transitan o de las personas\r\nque permanecen en él por varias horas buscando entre la basura desechos que\r\npuedan ser de su utilidad. La Sala considera que es deber de las\r\nautoridades recurridas, así como de todas las personas que tengan alguna\r\ninjerencia sobre este tema, salvaguardar una mejor calidad de vida de las\r\npersonas del cantón y de todos los habitantes en general, sin que haya que\r\nesperar que por las condiciones ambientales, de construcción y planificación\r\ndel botadero de basura, se sufra un deterioro mayor del que se esté dando que\r\nagrave la salud o el ambiente. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n VI.- En materia de desechos sólidos,\r\nexisten varias normas que establecen la obligación del Estado de darle un\r\nadecuado tratamiento a los mismos en aras de garantizar la protección del\r\nambiente y en ese sentido, a fin de desarrollar y garantizar lo dispuesto en el\r\nartículo 50 de la Constitución Política, y en relación con el caso que nos\r\nocupa, la Ley General de Salud en su artículo 262 estipula: \"Toda\r\npersona, natural o jurídica está obligada a contribuir a la promoción y\r\nmantenimiento de las condiciones del medio ambiente natural y de los ambientes\r\nartificiales que permitan llenar las necesidades vitales y de salud de la\r\npoblación.\". Por su parte, el artículo 263 del mismo cuerpo normativo\r\ndispone: \"Queda prohibida toda acción, práctica u operación que\r\ndeteriore el medio ambiente natural o que alterando la composición o\r\ncaracterísticas intrínsecas de sus elementos básicos, especialmente el aire, el\r\nagua y el suelo, produzcan una disminución de su calidad y estética, haga tales\r\nbienes inservibles para algunos de los usos a que están destinados o cree éstos\r\npara la salud humana o para la fauna o la flora inofensiva al hombre. \r\nToda persona queda obligada a cumplir diligentemente las acciones, prácticas u\r\nobras establecidas en la ley y reglamentos destinadas a eliminar o a controlar\r\nlos elementos y factores del ambiente natural, físico o biológico y del\r\nambiente artificial, perjudiciales para la salud humana\". A su vez, el\r\nartículo 17 de la Ley Orgánica del Ambiente establece: \"las\r\nactividades humanas que alteren o destruyan elementos del ambiente o generen\r\nresiduos, materiales tóxicos o peligrosos, requerirán una evaluación de impacto\r\nambiental por parte de la Secretaría Nacional Ambiental creada en esta\r\nley. Su aprobación previa, de parte de este organismo, será requisito\r\nindispensable para iniciar las actividades, obras o proyectos\". \r\nEn relación con tales normas, debe tenerse presente que para autorizar el\r\nfuncionamiento de cualquier depósito de desechos sólidos, es imprescindible que\r\nse cumplan los requisitos correspondientes y una vez cumplidos los\r\nrequerimientos exigidos por la ley y revisados los estudios técnicos que deban\r\npresentarse al efecto, le corresponde tanto al Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía\r\ncomo al Ministerio de Salud y a la Municipalidad del lugar -en razón de la\r\nespecialidad de la materia y de la autoridad del gobierno local- autorizar o no\r\nel funcionamiento del proyecto que interese, tomando en consideración los\r\nintereses nacionales y locales en la protección del ambiente y una vez\r\nautorizado, darle el seguimiento correspondiente a efecto de que el\r\nfuncionamiento se realice dentro del marco legalmente establecido. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n VII.- En el caso concreto, resulta\r\nevidente que muchos de estos requisitos que son necesarios para el correcto\r\nfuncionamiento del vertedero de basura de Tilarán, fueron obviados o han sido\r\ndel todo incumplidos durante los más de veintisiete años que tiene este\r\nvertedero de estar en operación y por ello, se está presentando actualmente el\r\nserio problema que denuncia el recurrente, cuya propiedad se encuentra contiguo\r\nal vertedero y que ha sido corroborado por las propias autoridades de la\r\nSecretaría Técnica Ambiental, Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía, del\r\nMinisterio de Agricultura y Ganadería del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos\r\ny Alcantarillado, oficiales de la Fuerza Pública y del Ministerio de\r\nSalud, quienes en este último caso, a pesar que los vecinos presentaron\r\nuna denuncia por este problema en el año 2004, no es hasta en el año 2006 que\r\nlas autoridades sanitarias giran un par de ordenes sanitarias que obligan a la\r\nMunicipalidad a fumigar el lugar y nuevamente hasta el año 2007 y en forma\r\nposterior a la presentación del presente recurso de amparo que los funcionarios\r\ndel Area de Salud de Tilarán dictan otra orden con la finalidad que la\r\nMunicipalidad accionada recoja los depósitos de basura que se encuentran en la\r\nentrada y en los márgenes del vertedero, entre otros. Por otra parte, el 17 de\r\nabril de 2007 un grupo de vecinos presentaron una denuncia por contaminación\r\nambiental producida por el basurero de Tilarán ante el Area de Conservación\r\nArenal – Tempisque del Minae y a la fecha de interposición del este amparo\r\ntampoco había realizado ninguna diligencia para comprobar lo denunciado, a\r\npesar que está de por medio la contaminación de una quebrada y una naciente de\r\nagua. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nVIII.- Ahora bien, la Sala observa que en el presente caso las autoridades\r\ncompetentes en salvaguardar el ambiente y salud de los habitantes no han\r\nejercido sus funciones correctamente por cuanto no han ejecutado ninguna\r\nacción oportuna para frenar la causa de contaminación ambiental en general que\r\nproduce el vertedero de basura en cuestión, en especial a la quebrada La\r\nCabra y a la finca de empresa recurrente que colinda con la propiedad,\r\nque se dedica a actividades ganaderas. Además, según las últimas\r\ninspecciones realizadas por funcionarios de la Dirección Ambiental de\r\nRecurso Hídrico del Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados , así como del\r\nArea de Conservación de Arenal Tempisque, hacen constar que en dicho lugar\r\nexiste proliferación de plagas, que la quebrada La Cabra se encuentra contaminada\r\npor todos los desechos que provienen del vertedero, tales como llantas, bolsas\r\nde basura y otros, todo lo cual fue confirmado por los funcionarios del\r\nDepartamento Auditoría y Seguimiento Ambietal de la Setena que concluyeron que\r\nel manejo realizado en el vertedero ha generado un impacto negativo en el medio\r\nambiente circundante y que la contaminación de la quebrada Cabra repercute en\r\nlos usuarios del agua (personas, animales doméstivcos, animales silvestres),\r\ntanto de dicha quebrada como del afloramiento de agua que se encuentra en la\r\npropiedad. En virtud de lo anterior, la Sala considera que a pesar que en el\r\nmes de mayo de 2007 el Ministerio de Salud mediante orden sanitaria No.\r\n015-07 ordenó al Alcalde Municipal realizar una serie de medidas de\r\níndole sanitaria con respecto al vertedero de desechos sólidos y por su parte\r\nla Municipalidad alega que ha cumplido, las actas de inspección\r\nrealizadas por diferentes funcionarios públicos que constan en el expediente,\r\ndemuestran que tanto las actuaciones de la Municipalidad como las órdenes del\r\nMinisterio de Salud no han sido lo suficientemente efectivas ni oportunas como\r\npara impedir que se siga dando contaminación en el ambiente y se siga poniendo\r\nen peligro la salud de la población y de los animales. Debe recordarse que esta\r\nSala ya ha dicho que en materia de protección al ambiente, además de una\r\nactitud correctiva, también se debe tener una actitud preventiva porque los\r\nerrores son irreversibles y de un alto costo ambiental y en ese sentido, en sentencia\r\nNo. 05906-99, dispuso esta Sala que \"la acción que la Constitución\r\nPolítica impone al Estado frente a los focos de contaminación ambiental\r\nes multidireccional y definitivamente activa, absolutamente intolerante frente\r\na situaciones que amenazan o afectan las condiciones ambientales óptimas que\r\nestán garantizadas por ella misma a los habitantes\", con lo cual, es\r\nválida cualquier acción encaminada a la protección del ambiente, pero también\r\nse hace necesario que las medidas adoptadas no solamente se queden en el papel,\r\nsino que efectivamente sean ejecutadas. Por tal razón, en el caso concreto,\r\nconsidera la Sala que el Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía, el Ministerio de\r\nSalud y la Municipalidad recurrida , han incumplido con la obligación\r\nbásica, principal e ineludible que tienen estas entidades de vigilar por el\r\ncumplimiento de requisitos de este tipo de vertederos cuando se encuentran en\r\nsu jurisdicción y de ejercer las medidas que sean necesarias para garantizar\r\nque tales actividades se realicen y se desarrollen ajustadas a derecho a efecto\r\nde que se garantice el derecho de los ciudadanos a disfrutar de un ambiente\r\nsano y ecológicamente equilibrado. De esta forma, los órganos citados no\r\ndeben sentirse satisfechos con solo dictar recomendaciones o comprobar mejoras\r\npues si bien es cierto, la eliminación de desechos sólidos es una actividad de\r\npor sí odiosa, también es lo cierto que, por ende, las normas que la rigen y\r\nlas disposiciones particulares como las órdenes sanitarias que se dicten, deben\r\ninterpretarse de manera extensiva, tratando de aplicarlas continuamente de la\r\nmanera más rigurosa que técnicamente sea posible, motivo por el cual no es\r\naceptable para la Administración una actitud complaciente y que se tranquilice\r\ncon solo saber que se está haciendo algo pues mientras tanto, la afectación al\r\nambiente y a la salud se sigue dando de manera reiterada. En ese contexto,\r\ntampoco es válida la justificación que da el Alcalde recurrido en el sentido de\r\nque hay carencia de recursos pues de admitir tal explicación se estaría\r\naceptando y legitimando que las lesiones al ambiente se pueden medir en función\r\nde los recursos económicos de que se dispongan, lo cual es del todo errado. En\r\nconsecuencia, resulta evidente que la desatención por más de veintisiete años,\r\nque la Municipalidad y el Ministerio de Salud han tenido con respecto al\r\nproblema de contaminación aquí planteado es el principal motivo para estimar el\r\npresente recurso. En un caso similar la Sala en sentencia No. 20006-08983 de\r\nlas once horas dieciséis minutos del veintitrés de junio de 2006 dispuso: “\r\nEstima este Tribunal Constitucional que el Ministerio de Salud ha sido omiso en\r\nel cumplimiento de sus obligaciones en tutela del derecho a la salud del\r\namparado y demás vecinos de la urbanización de marras, al no hacer uso de sus\r\npotestades legales con el fin de solucionar, definitivamente, el problema\r\nsanitario que les afecta y que han denunciado formalmente, pues ha realizado\r\nuna actividad insuficiente, inoportuna e ineficaz que se comprueba con el\r\nhecho de que el problema subsiste, al no haber concretado ninguna acción en\r\nejercicio del poder de policía que le asiste por ley para hacer cumplir sus\r\nórdenes. Queda así en los miembros de este Tribunal Constitucional la\r\npercepción de que ha sido la actuación de una “\r\nAdministración de papel”, que agota su actividad en meros trámites\r\nburocráticos, simplemente limitándose a realizar inspecciones y girar\r\nrecomendaciones u órdenes sanitarias, sin que se tome medida alguna para\r\ncorroborar que se hayan cumplido y, lo que es peor, sin que se evidencien de su\r\nparte acciones eficaces, verdaderamente encaminadas a resolver en definitiva la\r\nproblemática sanitaria expuesta, como corresponde para cumplir el fin público\r\nque se le ha encomendado, lo que redunda en detrimento de la salud y el medio\r\nambiente y, por consiguiente, en violación del artículo 50 constitucional,\r\nsituación que resulta intolerable para esta Sala \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n VIII.- La Sala concluye que en\r\nel presente caso nos encontramos ante un problema sanitario grave que afecta al\r\nmedio ambiente y la salud de los habitantes de la comunidad de Tilarán; y\r\nen reiterada jurisprudencia la Sala ha dicho que no se puede aceptar que\r\na los seres humanos se les niegue el derecho a un ambiente sano, el derecho a\r\nla salud, debido a la incapacidad de las autoridades públicas correspondientes\r\npara ejercer efectivamente las potestades de vigilancia y la solución a los\r\nproblemas otorgadas por ley. De los documentos y los informes rendidos bajo\r\njuramento que constan en el presente expediente, se desprende que las\r\nautoridades recurridas, a pesar que desde hace años tienen conocimiento del\r\nproblema aquí expuesto, no han realizado los actos necesarios para\r\ngarantizar la salud de los habitantes y la protección al medio ambiente. De\r\nesta forma, las autoridades recurridas son responsables del daño a los derechos\r\nfundamentales de las personas amparadas, por la omisión en velar pronta y\r\neficazmente por la salud de esa población, y al medio ambiente. La persistencia\r\ndel problema demuestra que las acciones en ejercicio de la potestad de control\r\no vigilancia desplegadas en tutela de la salud y del medio ambiente por parte\r\ndel Misterio de Salud, de la Municipalidad de Tilarán, del Ministerio de\r\nAmbiente y Energía y de la Setena dentro del marco de sus competencias, han\r\nsido claramente insuficientes, incurriendo así en responsabilidad por omisión\r\nen el ejercicio de esas potestades que, a su vez, lesiona el derecho\r\nconstitucional innominado o atípico de los administrados a que les presten\r\nservicios públicos eficientes y eficaces. De lo dicho y por estimarse que con\r\nlos hechos denunciados y con las pocas actuaciones efectivas que han sido\r\ndesarrolladas por los recurridos, se ha estado lesionado seriamente al ambiente\r\ny el derecho a la salud de los habitantes del cantón de Tilarán, se procede a\r\nla estimación del recurso. Ahora bien, esta declaratoria implica, para el\r\nMinisterio de Salud y para la Municipalidad de Tilarán, la inmediata puesta en\r\nejecución de las medidas técnicas respectivas para solucionar este problema.\r\nPor su parte, el Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía, como órgano rector de la\r\nmateria ambiental, y mediante la Secretaría Técnica Ambiental deberá ejercer\r\nuna activa actitud vigilante del cumplimiento de lo que aquí se está ordenando\r\ny dictar las medidas que, dentro del ámbito de sus competencias sean\r\nprocedentes para darle cumplimiento efectivo a las ordenes sanitarias que se\r\ndicten. De igual manera deberán las autoridades recurridas proceder a dictar y\r\nejecutar los actos que en derecho correspondan a fin de darle una solución\r\ndefinitiva e integral al problema de los desechos sólidos en el cantón de\r\nTilarán. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nPor tanto: \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nSe declara con lugar el recurso por daño\r\nambiental. Se ordena a Jovel Arias Ortega , en su condición de Alcalde\r\nMunicipal de Tilarán, y a Hilda María Barrantes Guerrero en su condición\r\nde Directora del Area Rectora de Salud de Tilarán o a quienes ocupen dichos\r\ncargos, adoptar cada uno dentro del ámbito de sus competencias, las\r\nmedidas que sean necesarias para darle una solución integral al problema de\r\ncontaminación ambiental que presenta el vertedero de basura de Tilarán a partir\r\nde la notificación de esta sentencia. Se ordena a Tatiana Cruz\r\nRamírez en su condición de Secretaria General de la Secretaria Técnica Nacional\r\nAmbiental o a quien ocupe su cargo, a María Elena Madrigal, en su calidad\r\nde Directora del Area de Conservación Arenal- Tempisque del Ministerio de\r\nAmbiente y Energía y a María Luisa Avila Agüero en su condición de\r\nMinistra de Salud o a quien ocupe su cargo, verificar lo\r\nanteriormente ordenado y proceder, si es del caso, como en derecho corresponda.\r\nSe le advierte a los recurridos citados que, con base en lo establecido en el\r\nartículo 71 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, se le podrá imponer\r\nprisión de tres meses a dos años, o de veinte a sesenta días multa, a quien no\r\ncumpliera o hiciera cumplir esta orden. Se condena a la Municipalidad del\r\nCantón de Tilarán al pago de las costas, daños y perjuicios causados con\r\nlos hechos que sirven de fundamento a esta declaratoria por el daño ambiental\r\nocasionado, los que se liquidarán en ejecución de sentencia de lo contencioso\r\nadministrativo. Notifíquese esta resolución a Jovel Arias Ortega , Hilda\r\nMaría Barrantes Guerrero , Tatiana Cruz Ramírez, María Elena Madrigal y a\r\nMaría Luisa Avila Agüero en forma personal. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nAna Virginia Calzada M. \n\r\n\r\n\nPresidenta a.i. \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\nGilbert Armijo S.\r\n \r\nErnesto Jinesta L. \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\nFernando Cruz C.\r\n \r\nFederico Sosto L. \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\nHoracio González Q.\r\n \r\nJorge Araya G.", "body_en_text": "* 070058090007CO * \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n* 070058090007CO * \n\nExp: 07-005809-0007-CO \n\nRes. Nº 2008-06568 \n\n \n\n\n\nCONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at sixteen hours and twenty minutes of the twenty-second of April of two thousand eight.\n\n\n\n Amparo action processed in case file number 07-005809-0007-CO, filed by CARLOS ADRIAN VARGAS MURILLO, of legal age, identity card number 0501180589, resident of Tilarán, on behalf of Ganadera La Gitana against the MUNICIPAL MAYOR OF TILARAN, the DIRECTOR OF THE HEALTH AREA OF TILARAN, the MINISTER OF HEALTH and the MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY.-\n\n\n\nConsidering:\n\n\n\n 1.- By brief received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at seventeen hours on the first of May of two thousand seven, the petitioner files an amparo action against the MUNICIPAL MAYOR OF TILARAN, the DIRECTOR OF THE HEALTH AREA OF TILARAN, the MINISTER OF HEALTH and the MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY and states that for more than ten years a municipal garbage dump for the city of Tilarán has been operating, without an environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental, EIA) existing in this regard despite there being a spring (naciente) of water, which is used for water intake and use for human consumption. Around said dump also runs a stream called \"La Cabra\", which is also contaminated by organic, chemical, oxidized, and acidic garbage, which has also harmed his livestock that drink water from this place. Additionally, the area where the garbage dump is located is an aquifer recharge zone, and trees that protect it are burned there. On May 6, 2004, a group of residents filed a complaint before the Director of the Health Area of Tilarán due to the environmental contamination caused by bad odors, smoke from the burning, and the contamination of the stream and spring (naciente); however, the health authority did not perform any act to solve this problem, it only issued a sanitary order that obliges the Municipality to fumigate the dump to mitigate flies. In April 2007, a copy of the file related to the dump in question was requested, and they were told that only two sanitary orders are registered. On April 17 and 19, 2007, a group of residents filed a complaint before the Fundación para el Area de Conservación Arenal and before the Minister of Environment. The petitioner requests that the action be granted and the closure of the municipal dump be ordered:\n\n\n\n\n 2.- By means of briefs filed respectively at 4:25 p.m. on the fourth, and nineteen hours on the fourteenth, both of the month of May two thousand seven, Josefina Gómez Gómez, and María Eduvina Alvarez Carranza and other residents, join the filed action (folios 68, 113 and 132)\n\n\n\n\n 3.- María Elena Madrigal reports under oath, in her capacity as Director of the Area de Conservación Arenal-Tempisque of the Ministry of Environment and Energy (folios 72 and 109), that the spring (naciente) is used only to generate electricity and is not used in agricultural and fish-farming activities downstream. The possible contamination is considerably reduced upon the water passing through the generating turbines. She does not know if the Department of Waters has granted water intakes for human consumption. She requests that the filed action be dismissed.\n\n\n\n\n 4.- María Luisa Avila and Hilda María Barrantes Guerrero report under oath in their respective capacities as Minister and Director of the Governing Health Area of Tilarán (folio 76) that they have no knowledge that springs (nacientes) exist in the place, much less that there is a water intake for human consumption. However, the corresponding investigation is being carried out and, if necessary, the corresponding sanitary orders will be issued. This Ministry is aware that a Regional Cañas sanitary landfill (relleno sanitario) project is being carried out, according to administrative file No. 171-2005-SETENA delivered to SETENA on February 20, 2007. They request that the action be declared without merit.\n\n\n\n\n 5.- By means of a brief received at nineteen hours and ten minutes on the fourteenth of May of two thousand seven, the petitioner expands on the facts alleged in this amparo action (folio 114)\n\n\n\n\n 6.- Roberto Dobles Mora in his capacity as Minister of Environment and Energy (folio 134) reiterates what was indicated by the Director of the Area de Conservación Arenal Tempisque.\n\n\n\n\n 7.- Jovel Arias Ortega reports in his capacity as Mayor of the Municipality of Tilarán (folio 154) that the denounced place has been considered among the most suitable in the country, it is not true that the water of the spring (naciente) or the stream are contaminated as a result of the garbage left in the sanitary landfill (relleno sanitario), and at no time does the deposited garbage fall into the landfill.\n\n\n\n\n 8.- By means of briefs filed respectively at thirteen hours forty-five minutes and ten hours thirty minutes on the fourth and eleventh, both of the month of June 2007, the petitioner provides additional evidence (folio 159 and 167)\n\n\n\n9.- By resolution at fifteen hours and thirty minutes on the tenth of October 2007, evidence for a better resolution is requested from the Ministry of Health and the Secretaria Técnica Nacional Ambiental (folio 193)\n\n\n\n10.- On October 30, 2007, José Alcidez Ruiz and Luz Marina Alfaro Hernández request to be considered as coadjuvants (folio 289)\n\n\n\n11.- María Luisa Avila Agüero and Hilda María Barrantes Guerrero report in their respective capacity as Minister and Director of the Governing Health Area of Tilarán (folio 292) that the system used by the Municipality of Tilarán for the deposit of solid waste is an open-air dump (vertedero a cielo abierto) and has been operating for 25 years, therefore it does not have the appropriate leachate (lixiviados) control systems, making it probable that some type of contamination is present, which does not exclude the “La Cabra” stream. On the other hand, the technical visit in official communication INGZA-2007-102- is unknown. On May 14, 2007, the Governing Health Area carried out the inspection of the municipal dump (vertedero) and sanitary order No. 015-07 was issued, the administrative procedure was initiated, and a period of ten days was granted to the Mayor of Tilarán to proceed to: collect all the garbage deposits located at the entrance and on the margins of the dump (vertedero), that is, bordering neighboring properties; compact and cover with earth the trenches used for the deposit of garbage, desist from carrying out garbage burning within the dump (vertedero), place a gate at the entrance of the dump (vertedero). On June 1, 2007, the Mayor reported on the actions taken. Furthermore, it is not evident to them that the area in question is an aquifer recharge zone and currently the contamination problems no longer occur due to the actions taken by the Municipality, apart from the fact that the water supply by AYA, states that the drinking water distribution network reaches the garbage dump (botadero). Thus, on October 30, 2007, another inspection of the site was carried out and it was verified that the ordered points have indeed been complied with one by one, the sanitation conditions have considerably improved so that currently it does not represent any danger to health or the environment, so the contamination problems practically do not exist. They request that the action be declared without merit.\n\n\n\n\n12.- At seventeen hours forty-eight minutes on the fourth of November, the representative of the petitioner reiterates that to date the denounced contamination problem continues and has even worsened (folio 324)\n\n\n\n13.- On November 15, 2007, the petitioner provides evidence for a better resolution (folio 338)\n\n\n\n14.- On November 22, 2007, the petitioner provides additional evidence and by means of a brief dated December 28, 2007, the petitioner denounces the presence of hospital waste as well as the carrying out of burning (folios 387, 418)\n\n\n\n15.- On January 10 and January 17, both of 2008, the petitioner provides additional evidence (folios 424 and 436)\n\n\n\n16.- Tatiana Cruz Ramírez reports under oath in her capacity as General Secretary of the Secretaria Técnica Nacional Ambiental (folio 443) that no environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental, EIA) or any environmental viability (viabilidad ambiental) granted to the Tilarán garbage dump (vertedero de basura) exists. Furthermore, it is not evident to her if said place contaminates the “La Cabra” stream as well as the water springs (nacientes de agua) because there is no administrative file to initiate the environmental assessment procedure (procedimiento de evaluación ambiental) nor is there any complaint filed.\n\n\n\n\n17.- By means of briefs filed by the representative of the petitioner company, he refers to the report presented by Setena (folio 472)\n\n\n\n18- By means of a brief filed with this Chamber, a group of residents presents their coadjuvancy to this process (folio 483)\n\n\n\n19.- On March 17, the petitioner presents evidence for a better resolution (folio 485)\n\n\n\n 20.- In the proceedings followed, the legal prescriptions have been observed.\n\n\n\n Magistrate González Quiroga drafts; and,\n\n\n\n Considering:\n\n\n\n I.- OBJECT OF THE ACTION. The petitioner alleges that the Municipality of Tilarán keeps a garbage dump (botadero de basura) open that does not meet the required conditions and is causing serious damage to the environment and the health of the animals and people who live nearby. They indicate that they have made multiple efforts before different instances, but no positive response has been given to the problem, and contamination continues to affect the area, therefore they request the intervention of this Court.\n\n\n\n\n II.- PROVEN FACTS. Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly proven, either because they have been accredited or because the respondent omitted to refer to them as provided in the initial order:\n\n\n\n\na) Since 1979, the municipal dump (vertedero municipal) of Tilarán has been operating, and no environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental, EIA) is recorded in the municipal archives (folio 409, 423, 439)\n\n\n\n b) On May 6, 2004, a group of residents of Tilarán filed a complaint before the Directorate for the Protection of the Human Environment of the Ministry of Health for the environmental contamination produced by the municipal garbage dump (botadero municipal) (folio 23)\n\n\n\nc) By sanitary order No. 2370-B of March 28, 2006, the Ministry of Health ordered the Municipality of Tilarán to proceed to carry out a fumigation in the dump (vertedero) for the elimination of flies (folio 29)\n\n\n\nd) By means of sanitary order No. 2384-B of May 23, 2006, the Ministry of Health reiterates the order to carry out the fumigation (folio 30)\n\n\n\n e) By means of official communication TIL-PAH-012-07 of April 20, 2007, the Governing Health Area of Tilarán certifies that only 2 sanitary orders are registered, dated June 23, 2006, and May 18, 2006, and their purpose was the fumigation of the dump (vertedero) (folio 28)\n\n\n\nf) By means of inspections carried out by police agents of the Public Force of Tilarán in the month of April 2007, they certify that in the water spring (naciente de agua) there is a large amount of garbage, as well as in the stream (folio 36 and 38)\n\n\n\ng) On April 17, 2007, a group of residents filed a complaint for environmental contamination produced by the Tilarán garbage dump (basurero) before the Area de Conservación Arenal – Tempisque of MINAE (folio 40)\n\n\n\nh) In the month of May 2007, the Public Force of Tilarán carried out an inspection at the Municipal Garbage Dump, at the Hacienda Casa Blanca (folio 129-131)\n\n\n\ni) On May 10, 2007, inspectors from the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados certify that there is a source of contamination in the Quebrada La Cabra from the “sanitary landfill” (relleno sanitario), they throw garbage onto neighboring properties, and there is a proliferation of vectors, such as flies (folio 313)\n\n\n\nj) By means of sanitary order No. 015-07 of May 17, 2007, the Ministry of Health ordered the Municipal Mayor to carry out a series of sanitary measures regarding the solid waste dump (vertedero de desechos sólidos) within a period of ten days (folio 140)\n\n\n\nk) The Official veterinarian of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock certifies that in the inspection carried out on May 2 of the current year on the petitioner's property, there was a large amount of garbage inside and outside the property, the contamination of the stream, and the quantity of flies (folio 149)\n\n\n\nl) The Directorate of Environmental Management of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados conducted an on-site visit and verified that there is contamination of the La Cabra stream and neighboring properties due in part to the garbage dump (vertedero de basura) (folio 169)\n\n\n\nm) The Area de Conservación Arenal Tempisque certifies that the dump's (botadero) leachates (lixiviados) are filtering into the stream, and it is a source of pests and diseases (folio 172)\n\n\n\nn) The Community Police of the Public Force of Tilarán certifies that on July 12, 2007, they appeared at the main entrance of the municipal garbage dump (basurero municipal) of Tilarán and a large quantity of garbage was observed (folio 182)\n\n\n\nñ) On August 30, 2007, the Environmental Directorate of Water Resources of the AYA Institute carried out an on-site inspection and verified contamination and carrying of waste in the La Cabra stream, deforestation, a large quantity of insects such as flies, and mosquito breeding grounds (folio 356)\n\n\n\no) In the inspection carried out on October 30, 2007, by officials of the Ministry of Health, they certify that the garbage existing on the site has been considerably reduced by the cleaning work and fumigations carried out by the Municipality (folio 301)\n\n\n\np) On November 1, 2007, the police agents of the public force and the official veterinarian of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock state that the stream is contaminated with garbage (folio 328, 334 and 406)\n\n\n\nq) At 8:00 a.m. on November 12, 2007, the Commander of the Public Force of Tilarán certifies that the garbage in the dump (vertedero) increased considerably and the contaminating factors such as herbicide residues, tires, zinc sheets, and metal drums are located at a distance of two meters from the water spring (naciente de agua) (folios 388-406)\n\n\n\nr) By means of official memorandum DPUCC-400-2007 of November 14, 2007, the Coordinator of Development and Local Control of the respondent Municipality reports on the actions carried out at the denounced dump (vertedero) such as: monitoring, access control and information, and earth mounds were cordoned off (folio 410)\n\n\n\ns) On December 16, 2007, the official of the Area de Conservación Arenal Tempisque of the Ministry of Environment and Energy verified that the stream is contaminated by garbage from the dump (vertedero), as are the natural drainages and the water spring (naciente de agua) (folio 427)\n\n\n\nt) By means of report No. ASA-419-2007-SETENA of December 11, 2007, the inspectors certify that the garbage dump (botadero de basura) does not have an environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental, EIA), that it has produced contamination with solid waste and leachates (lixiviados) in the La Cabra stream, and has generated a negative impact on the surrounding environment (folio 463)\n\n\n\n\n II.- ON THE LEGITIMACY OF THE PETITIONER. Regarding the legitimacy of Carlos Adrián Vargas Murillo to bring action before this jurisdiction in protection of the right to a healthy environment that he alleges has been violated by the inertia of the respondent authorities, the Chamber's jurisprudence is reiterated in the sense that, as it concerns diffuse interests, any member of the affected community is legitimated to resort to the amparo process, in pursuit of environmental protection. In this regard, what was stated by this Constitutional Court in judgment number 3705-93 of fifteen hours on the thirtieth of July of nineteen ninety-six is of particular relevance, which, insofar as pertinent, provides:\n\n\n\n\n\n\"Regarding the legal protection of the environment, the legitimacy of individuals to act judicially and achieve the application of norms that have that purpose, or to request jurisdictional protection to safeguard their violated rights, is of great importance. But it must be analyzed from several points of view, that is, in relation to the nature of the process, the claims, and the intervening parties, and also taking into account that the breach of environmental norms can be caused by the action or omission of a subject of both private and public law. The latter, simply by omitting to exercise due control over the actions of private subjects, when they infringe environmental norms, ignoring their functional competence, which requires them to exercise that control; or, by directly infringing with their actions legal provisions intended to protect and conserve the environment. This Chamber, in Judgment Number 2233-93, when pointing out that the preservation and protection of the environment is a fundamental right, allows for legitimacy to resort to the amparo process. In environmental law, the procedural prerequisite of legitimacy tends to extend and expand in such a dimension that it necessarily leads to the abandonment of the traditional concept, it being necessary to understand that in general terms, any person can be a party and that their right does not emanate from property titles, rights or specific actions that they could exercise according to the rules of conventional law, but rather their procedural action responds to what modern scholars call the diffuse interest, through which the original legitimacy of the legitimately interested party or even the simply interested party is diffused among all the members of a certain category of persons who are thus equally affected by the illegal acts that violate them. When it comes to the protection of the environment, the typically diffuse interest that legitimates the subject to bring action is transformed, by virtue of its incorporation into the list of human rights, becoming a true \"reactional right\", which, as its name indicates, empowers its holder to \"react\" against the violation originated in illegitimate acts or omissions. That is why the violation of that fundamental right constitutes a constitutional illegality, that is, a specific cause of amparo against specific acts or self-applicable norms or, as the case may be, in the action of unconstitutionality against all norms or against acts not susceptible to amparo, and even, against omissions, a category that in the case of the right to the environment becomes especially important, because when it comes to conserving the environment that nature has given us, the most frequent violation is produced by the inertia of public authorities in performing the necessary acts to protect them.”\n\n\n\n\n\n III.- ON THE COADJUVANCIES: As indicated in the preceding recital (considerando), in environmental law, the procedural prerequisite of legitimacy tends to extend and expand in such a dimension that it leads to the understanding that in general terms any person can be a party. By virtue of this, the request for coadjuvancy presented by Josefina Gómez Gómez, and María Eduvina Alvarez Carranza, José Alcidez Ruiz and Luz Marina Alfaro and other residents have legitimacy to appear as a party in this amparo in accordance with the last paragraph of article 34 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional.\n\n\n\n\nIV.- ON THE MERITS. On repeated occasions, this Chamber has stated that both the right to health -derived from the right to life- and the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment constitute fundamental rights. The State is obliged to take the necessary measures to protect the environment and avoid degrees of contamination that endanger the health of the administered individuals, which without a doubt is competence legally granted to the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Environment and Energy, among other institutions, but also, in relation to the case at hand, the Municipal Code in the same sense obliges the Municipalities to ensure that the administered individual is guaranteed the real and effective enjoyment of the right to health and a healthy environment.\n\n\n\n\n V.- Now, there is no doubt that a garbage dump (botadero) and not a technical sanitary landfill (relleno técnico sanitario de basura) is a serious source of diverse environmental contamination, with imminent danger to the health of the inhabitants, neighbors, those who transit, or persons who remain in it for several hours searching among the garbage for waste that may be useful to them. The Chamber considers that it is the duty of the respondent authorities, as well as of all persons who have any involvement in this matter, to safeguard a better quality of life for the people of the canton and all inhabitants in general, without having to wait for the environmental, construction and planning conditions of the garbage dump (botadero de basura) to cause a greater deterioration than what is already occurring, which aggravates health or the environment.\n\n\n\n\n VI.- In solid waste matters, there are several norms that establish the State's obligation to give it adequate treatment in order to guarantee environmental protection, and in that sense, in order to develop and guarantee what is provided in article 50 of the Political Constitution, and in relation to the case at hand, the Ley General de Salud, in its article 262 stipulates: \"Every person, natural or legal, is obliged to contribute to the promotion and maintenance of the conditions of the natural environment and artificial environments that allow meeting the vital and health needs of the population.\". For its part, article 263 of the same normative body provides: \"Any action, practice or operation that deteriorates the natural environment or that, by altering the composition or intrinsic characteristics of its basic elements, especially air, water and soil, produces a decrease in its quality and aesthetics, renders such goods useless for some of the uses for which they are intended, or creates risks for human health or for harmless fauna or flora to man, is prohibited. Every person is obliged to diligently comply with the actions, practices or works established in the law and regulations intended to eliminate or control the elements and factors of the natural, physical or biological environment and of the artificial environment, harmful to human health\". In turn, article 17 of the Ley Orgánica del Ambiente establishes: \"human activities that alter or destroy elements of the environment or generate waste, toxic or hazardous materials, shall require an environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental) by the Secretaría Nacional Ambiental created in this law. Its prior approval, by this body, shall be an indispensable requirement to initiate the activities, works or projects\". In relation to such norms, it must be borne in mind that to authorize the operation of any solid waste deposit, it is essential that the corresponding requirements be met, and once the requirements demanded by law have been fulfilled and the technical studies that must be presented for this purpose have been reviewed, it is the responsibility of both the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Ministry of Health, and the Municipality of the place -by reason of the specialty of the matter and the authority of the local government- to authorize or not the operation of the project of interest, taking into consideration national and local interests in the protection of the environment, and once authorized, to provide the corresponding follow-up so that the operation is carried out within the legally established framework.\n\n\n\n\n VII.- In the specific case, it is evident that many of these requirements that are necessary for the correct operation of the Tilarán garbage dump (vertedero de basura) were omitted or have been completely unfulfilled during the more than twenty-seven years that this dump (vertedero) has been in operation, and therefore, the serious problem denounced by the petitioner is currently occurring, whose property is adjacent to the dump (vertedero) and which has been corroborated by the authorities themselves of the Secretaría Técnica Ambiental, Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillado, officers of the Public Force, and the Ministry of Health, who in the latter case, despite the fact that the neighbors filed a complaint about this problem in 2004, it was not until 2006 that the health authorities issued a couple of sanitary orders that oblige the Municipality to fumigate the place, and again not until 2007, and after the filing of this amparo action, that the officials of the Health Area of Tilarán issue another order with the purpose that the respondent Municipality collect the garbage deposits found at the entrance and on the margins of the dump (vertedero), among others. On the other hand, on April 17, 2007, a group of residents filed a complaint for environmental contamination produced by the Tilarán garbage dump (basurero) before the Area de Conservación Arenal – Tempisque of MINAE, and as of the date of filing this amparo, it had also not carried out any diligence to verify the complaint, even though the contamination of a stream and a water spring (naciente de agua) is at stake.\n\n\n\n\nVIII.- Now, the Chamber observes that in the present case, the competent authorities for safeguarding the environment and the health of the inhabitants have not correctly exercised their functions, as they have not executed any timely action to curb the cause of environmental contamination in general produced by the garbage dump (vertedero de basura) in question, especially to the La Cabra stream and to the property of the petitioner company that borders the property, which is dedicated to livestock activities. Furthermore, according to the latest inspections carried out by officials of the Environmental Directorate of Water Resources of the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, as well as of the Area de Conservación de Arenal Tempisque, they certify that in said place there is a proliferation of pests, that the La Cabra stream is contaminated by all the waste coming from the dump (vertedero), such as tires, garbage bags, and others, all of which was confirmed by the officials of the Environmental Auditing and Monitoring Department of SETENA, who concluded that the management carried out at the dump (vertedero) has generated a negative impact on the surrounding environment and that the contamination of the La Cabra stream affects the water users (people, domestic animals, wild animals), both of said stream and of the water outcrop found on the property.\n\nIn light of the foregoing, the Chamber considers that despite the fact that in May 2007 the Ministry of Health, through sanitary order No. 015-07, ordered the Municipal Mayor to carry out a series of sanitary measures regarding the solid waste dump (vertedero de desechos sólidos) and the Municipality claims to have complied, the inspection reports carried out by different public officials that appear in the case file demonstrate that neither the actions of the Municipality nor the orders of the Ministry of Health have been sufficiently effective or timely to prevent continued contamination of the environment and the ongoing endangerment of the health of the population and animals. It must be remembered that this Chamber has already stated that in matters of environmental protection, in addition to a corrective attitude, a preventive attitude must also be maintained because errors are irreversible and carry a high environmental cost, and in that sense, in judgment No. 05906-99, this Chamber held that \"the action that the Political Constitution imposes on the State in the face of sources of environmental contamination is multidirectional and definitively active, absolutely intolerant of situations that threaten or affect the optimal environmental conditions guaranteed by it to the inhabitants,\" whereby any action aimed at protecting the environment is valid, but it is also necessary that the adopted measures not only remain on paper, but actually be executed. For this reason, in the specific case, the Chamber considers that the Ministry of Environment and Energy (Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía), the Ministry of Health, and the respondent Municipality have breached the basic, principal, and inescapable obligation that these entities have to monitor compliance with requirements for this type of dump when located within their jurisdiction and to exercise the measures necessary to ensure that such activities are carried out and developed in accordance with the law, in order to guarantee the right of citizens to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. Thus, the cited bodies should not be satisfied with merely issuing recommendations or verifying improvements, because while it is true that solid waste disposal is an inherently odious activity, it is also true that, therefore, the rules governing it and particular provisions such as the sanitary orders issued must be interpreted broadly, endeavoring to apply them continuously in the most rigorous manner technically possible, which is why a complacent attitude is unacceptable for the Administration, nor one that is reassured merely by knowing that something is being done, since in the meantime, the impact on the environment and health continues to occur repeatedly. In this context, the justification given by the respondent Mayor regarding a lack of resources is also not valid, because accepting such an explanation would mean accepting and legitimizing that harm to the environment can be measured based on the available economic resources, which is entirely erroneous. Consequently, it is evident that the neglect for more than twenty-seven years that the Municipality and the Ministry of Health have shown regarding the pollution problem raised here is the main reason for granting this appeal (recurso). In a similar case, the Chamber, in judgment No. 20006-08983 of eleven hours sixteen minutes on June twenty-third, two thousand six, held: \"This Constitutional Court (Tribunal Constitucional) finds that the Ministry of Health has been negligent in fulfilling its obligations to protect the right to health of the petitioner (amparado) and the other residents of the aforementioned subdivision (urbanización), by failing to use its legal powers to definitively solve the sanitary problem that affects them and that they have formally denounced, as it has carried out insufficient, untimely, and ineffective activity, proven by the fact that the problem persists, not having concretized any action in exercise of the police power granted to it by law to enforce its orders. The perception thus remains in the members of this Constitutional Court that the performance has been that of a 'Paper Administration' (Administración de papel), which exhausts its activity in mere bureaucratic procedures, simply limiting itself to carrying out inspections and issuing recommendations or sanitary orders, without taking any measure to corroborate that they have been complied with and, what is worse, without evidencing on its part effective actions, truly aimed at definitively resolving the exposed sanitary problem, as corresponds to fulfill the public purpose entrusted to it, which results in detriment to health and the environment and, consequently, in violation of Article 50 of the Constitution, a situation that is intolerable for this Chamber.\n\nVIII.- The Chamber concludes that in the present case we find ourselves facing a serious sanitary problem that affects the environment and the health of the inhabitants of the community of Tilarán; and in reiterated jurisprudence the Chamber has said that it cannot be accepted that human beings be denied the right to a healthy environment, the right to health, due to the inability of the corresponding public authorities to effectively exercise the oversight powers and the solution to the problems granted by law. From the documents and the reports rendered under oath that appear in the present case file, it follows that the respondent authorities, despite having known about the problem presented here for years, have not carried out the necessary acts to guarantee the health of the inhabitants and the protection of the environment. In this way, the respondent authorities are responsible for the damage to the fundamental rights of the protected persons (personas amparadas), for the omission in promptly and effectively ensuring the health of that population and the environment. The persistence of the problem demonstrates that the actions in exercise of the control or oversight power deployed in protection of health and the environment by the Ministry of Health, the Municipality of Tilarán, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, and SETENA within the framework of their competencies, have been clearly insufficient, thus incurring liability for omission in the exercise of those powers which, in turn, injures the unnamed or atypical constitutional right of the administered persons to receive efficient and effective public services. Based on the foregoing and because it is deemed that with the denounced facts and with the few effective actions that have been carried out by the respondents, the environment and the right to health of the inhabitants of the canton of Tilarán have been seriously harmed, the appeal is hereby granted. Now, this declaration implies, for the Ministry of Health and for the Municipality of Tilarán, the immediate implementation of the respective technical measures to solve this problem. For its part, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, as the governing body of environmental matters, and through the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, SETENA), shall exercise an active and vigilant attitude regarding compliance with what is being ordered herein and shall issue the measures that, within the scope of its competencies, are appropriate to give effective compliance to the sanitary orders issued. Likewise, the respondent authorities must proceed to issue and execute the acts that are legally appropriate in order to provide a definitive and comprehensive solution to the problem of solid waste in the canton of Tilarán.\n\nPor tanto:\n\nThe appeal (recurso) for environmental damage is granted. Jovel Arias Ortega, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of Tilarán, and Hilda María Barrantes Guerrero, in her capacity as Director of the Governing Health Area of Tilarán, or whoever holds those positions, are each ordered, within the scope of their competencies, to adopt the measures necessary to provide a comprehensive solution to the environmental contamination problem presented by the Tilarán garbage dump, effective from the notification of this judgment. Tatiana Cruz Ramírez, in her capacity as General Secretary of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat, or whoever holds her position, María Elena Madrigal, in her capacity as Director of the Arenal-Tempisque Conservation Area (Area de Conservación Arenal-Tempisque) of the Ministry of Environment and Energy, and María Luisa Avila Agüero, in her capacity as Minister of Health, or whoever holds her position, are ordered to verify the foregoing order and proceed, if warranted, as legally appropriate. The cited respondents are warned that, based on the provisions of Article 71 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional), a prison term of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, may be imposed on whoever fails to comply or ensure compliance with this order. The Municipality of the Canton of Tilarán is ordered to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts that serve as the basis for this declaration for the environmental damage caused, which shall be liquidated in the execution of the judgment of the contentious-administrative proceedings. Notify this resolution personally to Jovel Arias Ortega, Hilda María Barrantes Guerrero, Tatiana Cruz Ramírez, María Elena Madrigal, and María Luisa Avila Agüero.\n\nAna Virginia Calzada M.\nActing Presidenta a.i.\n\nGilbert Armijo S.\nErnesto Jinesta L.\n\nFernando Cruz C.\nFederico Sosto L.\n\nHoracio González Q.\nJorge Araya G.\n\n17.- By means of briefs submitted by the representative of the protected company, reference is made to the report presented by SETENA (folio 472)\n\n18- By means of a brief filed with this Chamber, a group of neighbors submits their joinder (coayuvancia) to this proceeding (folio 483)\n\n19.- On March 17, the appellant presents evidence for better resolution (folio 485)\n\n20.- In the proceedings conducted, the legal requirements have been observed.\n\nDrafted by Magistrate González Quiroga; and,\n\nConsidering:\n\nI.- PURPOSE OF THE APPEAL. The appellant alleges that the Municipality of Tilarán maintains an open garbage dump that does not meet the required conditions and is causing serious damage to the environment and to the health of the animals and people living nearby. They indicate that they have made multiple efforts before different entities, but no positive response has been given to the problem and the pollution continues to affect the area; therefore, they request the intervention of this Court.\n\nII.- PROVEN FACTS. Important for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly proven, either because they have been accredited or because the respondent has omitted to refer to them as required in the initial order:\n\na) Since 1979, the Tilarán municipal landfill has been in operation, and there is no record in the municipal archives of any environmental impact assessment (estudio de impacto ambiental) (folio 409, 423, 439)\n\nb) On May 6, 2004, a group of Tilarán residents filed a complaint before the Human Environment Protection Directorate of the Ministry of Health for the environmental pollution produced by the municipal dump (folio 23)\n\nc) By health order No. 2370-B of March 28, 2006, the Ministry of Health ordered the Municipality of Tilarán to proceed with fumigation of the landfill to eliminate flies (folio 29)\n\nd) By health order No. 2384-B of May 23, 2006, the Ministry of Health reiterates the order to carry out fumigation (folio 30)\n\ne) By official communication TIL-PAH-012-07 of April 20, 2007, the Tilarán Health Area attests that only 2 health orders are registered, dated June 23, 2006, and May 18, 2006, and their purpose was the fumigation of the landfill (folio 28)\n\nf) Through inspections carried out by police officers of the Public Force of Tilarán in April 2007, they attest that at the spring (naciente) there is a large quantity of garbage, as well as in the stream (quebrada) (folio 36 and 38)\n\ng) On April 17, 2007, a group of neighbors filed a complaint for environmental pollution produced by the Tilarán dump before the Arenal – Tempisque Conservation Area (Area de Conservación Arenal – Tempisque) of MINAE (folio 40)\n\nh) In May 2007, the Public Force of Tilarán carried out an inspection at the Municipal Dump, at the Hacienda Casa Blanca (folio 129-131)\n\ni) On May 10, 2007, inspectors from the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados) attest that there is a source of pollution in the La Cabra stream from the \"sanitary landfill,\" garbage is thrown onto neighboring properties, and there is a proliferation of vectors, such as flies (folio 313)\n\nj) By health order No. 015-07 of May 17, 2007, the Ministry of Health ordered the Municipal Mayor to carry out a series of sanitary measures regarding the solid waste landfill within ten days (folio 140)\n\nk) The official veterinarian of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock attests that in the inspection carried out on May 2 of the current year, on the appellant's farm, there was a large quantity of garbage inside and outside the farm, contamination of the stream, and a quantity of flies (folio 149)\n\nl) The Environmental Management Directorate of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados) carried out an on-site visit and verified that there is contamination of the Cabra stream and neighboring farms due in part to the garbage landfill (folio 169)\n\nm) The Arenal Tempisque Conservation Area attests that leachate from the dump is seeping into the stream, and it is a source of pests and diseases (folio 172)\n\nn) The Community Police of the Public Force of Tilarán attests that on July 12, 2007, they appeared at the main entrance of the municipal dump of Tilarán and observed a large quantity of garbage (folio 182)\n\nñ) On August 30, 2007, the Environmental Water Resources Directorate of the AyA Institute carried out an on-site inspection and verified contamination and transport of waste in the La Cabra stream, deforestation, a large quantity of insects such as flies, and mosquito breeding sites (folio 356)\n\no) In the inspection carried out on October 30, 2007, by officials of the Ministry of Health, they attest that the garbage existing at the site has decreased considerably due to the cleaning work and fumigations carried out by the Municipality (folio 301)\n\np) On November 1, 2007, public force police officers and the official veterinarian of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock state that the stream is contaminated with garbage (folio 328, 334 and 406)\n\nq) At 8:00 a.m. on November 12, 2007, the Commander of the Public Force of Tilarán attests that the garbage in the landfill increased considerably, and the polluting factors such as herbicide residues, tires, zinc sheets, and drums are located at a distance of two meters from the spring (folios 388-406)\n\nr) By brief DPUCC-400-2007 of November 14, 2007, the Development and Local Control Coordinator of the respondent Municipality reports on the efforts carried out at the reported landfill, such as: surveillance, access control, and information, and earthen mounds were cordoned off (folio 410)\n\ns) On December 16, 2007, the official of the Arenal Tempisque Conservation Area of the Ministry of Environment and Energy verified that the stream is contaminated by garbage from the landfill, as are the natural drainages and the spring (folio 427)\n\nt) By report No. ASA-419-2007-SETENA of December 11, 2007, the inspectors attest that the garbage dump does not have an environmental impact assessment, that it has produced contamination with solid waste and leachate in the Cabra stream, and has generated a negative impact on the surrounding environment (folio 463)\n\nII.- ON THE STANDING OF THE APPELLANT. Regarding the standing of Carlos Adrián Vargas Murillo to bring action before this jurisdiction in protection of the right to a healthy environment, which he claims is violated by the inaction of the respondent authorities, the Chamber’s jurisprudence is reiterated in the sense that, since these are diffuse interests, any member of the affected community has standing to resort to the amparo proceeding in pursuit of environmental protection. In this regard, what this Constitutional Court stated in judgment number 3705-93, at three o'clock in the afternoon on July thirtieth, nineteen ninety-six, is of particular relevance, and it provides, as pertinent:\n\n\"When it comes to the legal protection of the environment, the standing of individuals to act judicially and achieve the application of the norms that have that purpose, or to request jurisdictional protection to safeguard their violated rights, is of great importance. But it must be analyzed from several points of view, that is, in relation to the nature of the proceeding, the claims, and the intervening parties, and also taking into account that the breach of environmental norms can be caused, by action or omission, by a subject of private law as well as by one of public law. The latter, simply by omitting to exercise due control over the actions of private subjects when they infringe environmental norms, ignoring its functional competence that requires it to exercise that control; or, by directly infringing through its action legal provisions intended to protect and conserve the environment. This Chamber, in Judgment Number 2233-93, by stating that the preservation and protection of the environment is a fundamental right, opens the door to standing to resort to the amparo proceeding. In environmental law, the procedural prerequisite of standing tends to extend and broaden to such a dimension that it necessarily leads to the abandonment of the traditional concept, it being understood that in general terms, any person can be a party and that their right does not emanate from property titles, rights, or specific actions they could exercise according to the rules of conventional law, but rather their procedural action responds to what modern scholars call the diffuse interest, through which the original standing of the legitimate interested party or even the simply interested party diffuses among all the members of a certain category of persons who are thus equally affected by the illegal acts that violate them. Regarding environmental protection, the typically diffuse interest that gives a subject standing to bring action is transformed, by virtue of its incorporation into the list of human rights, becoming a true 'reactional right,' which, as its name indicates, empowers its holder to 'react' against the violation originating from illegitimate acts or omissions. That is why the violation of that fundamental right constitutes a constitutional illegality, that is, a specific cause for amparo against concrete acts or self-executing norms or, as the case may be, in an action of unconstitutionality against all norms or against acts not susceptible to amparo, and even against omissions, a category which, in the case of the right to the environment, becomes especially important, because when dealing with conserving the environment that nature has given us, the most frequent violation occurs due to the inertia of public authorities in carrying out the necessary acts to protect it.\"\n\nIII.- ON THE JOINDERS: As indicated in the preceding considering, in environmental law, the procedural prerequisite of standing tends to extend and broaden to such a dimension that it leads to an understanding that, in general terms, any person can be a party. By virtue of this, the request for joinder (coadyuvancia) presented by Josefina Gómez Gómez, María Eduvina Alvarez Carranza, José Alcidez Ruiz, Luz Marina Alfaro, and other neighbors have standing to appear as a party in this amparo proceeding, in accordance with the last paragraph of Article 34 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction.\n\nIV.- ON THE MERITS. On repeated occasions, this Chamber has stated that both the right to health—derived from the right to life—and the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment constitute fundamental rights. The State is obligated to take the necessary measures to protect the environment and avoid levels of pollution that endanger the health of the citizens, which is undoubtedly a competence legally granted to the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Environment and Energy, among other institutions. Moreover, in relation to the case at hand, the Municipal Code likewise obligates the Municipalities to ensure that citizens are guaranteed the real and effective enjoyment of the right to health and to a healthy environment.\n\nV.- Now then, there is no doubt that a dump, and not a technical sanitary landfill, is a serious source of environmental pollution of various kinds, with imminent danger to the health of the residents, neighbors, passersby, or people who remain there for several hours searching through the garbage for items that may be useful to them. The Chamber considers that it is the duty of the respondent authorities, as well as of all persons who have any involvement in this matter, to safeguard a better quality of life for the people of the canton and all inhabitants in general, without having to wait for the environmental, construction, and planning conditions of the garbage dump to cause a deterioration greater than that which is already occurring, aggravating health or the environment.\n\nVI.- Regarding solid waste, there are several norms that establish the State's obligation to give it adequate treatment in order to guarantee environmental protection. In that sense, to develop and guarantee what is provided in Article 50 of the Political Constitution, and in relation to the case at hand, the General Health Law in its Article 262 stipulates: \"All persons, natural or legal, are obligated to contribute to the promotion and maintenance of the conditions of the natural environment and artificial environments that allow fulfilling the vital and health needs of the population.\" For its part, Article 263 of the same normative body provides: \"All actions, practices, or operations that deteriorate the natural environment or that, by altering the composition or intrinsic characteristics of its basic elements, especially air, water, and soil, produce a decrease in their quality and aesthetics, render such goods unusable for some of the uses for which they are intended, or create risks to human health or to wildlife or flora harmless to man are prohibited. All persons are obligated to diligently comply with the actions, practices, or works established in the law and regulations intended to eliminate or control the elements and factors of the natural, physical, or biological environment and the artificial environment that are harmful to human health.\" In turn, Article 17 of the Organic Law of the Environment establishes: \"human activities that alter or destroy elements of the environment or generate residues, toxic or hazardous materials, shall require an environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental) by the National Environmental Secretariat created in this law. Its prior approval from this agency shall be an essential requirement to initiate the activities, works, or projects.\" In relation to such norms, it must be kept in mind that to authorize the operation of any solid waste deposit, it is essential that the corresponding requirements be met, and once the requirements demanded by law are fulfilled and the technical studies that must be submitted for this purpose are reviewed, it is up to the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Ministry of Health, and the Municipality of the place—by reason of the specialty of the matter and the authority of the local government—to authorize or not the operation of the project in question, taking into consideration the national and local interests in environmental protection, and once authorized, to provide the corresponding follow-up so that its operation is carried out within the legally established framework.\n\nVII.- In the specific case, it is evident that many of these requirements, which are necessary for the correct operation of the Tilarán garbage landfill, were omitted or have been completely breached during the more than twenty-seven years that this landfill has been in operation. As a result, the serious problem reported by the appellant, whose property is adjacent to the landfill, is currently occurring. This has been corroborated by the authorities themselves from the Technical Environmental Secretariat, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), officers of the Public Force, and the Ministry of Health. In the latter case, despite the neighbors having filed a complaint about this problem in 2004, it was not until 2006 that the health authorities issued a couple of health orders requiring the Municipality to fumigate the site, and again not until 2007, and after the filing of this amparo appeal, that officials of the Tilarán Health Area issued another order to have the sued Municipality pick up the garbage deposits located at the entrance and on the margins of the landfill, among others. Furthermore, on April 17, 2007, a group of neighbors filed a complaint for environmental pollution produced by the Tilarán dump before the Arenal – Tempisque Conservation Area of MINAE, and by the date of filing this amparo, it had also not performed any diligence to verify the complaint, despite the fact that the contamination of a stream and a spring is at stake.\n\nVIII.- Now then, the Chamber observes that in the present case, the authorities competent to safeguard the environment and the health of the inhabitants have not exercised their functions correctly, as they have not executed any timely action to stop the cause of environmental pollution in general produced by the garbage landfill in question, especially to the La Cabra stream and to the farm of the appellant entity that borders the property, which is engaged in livestock activities. Moreover, according to the latest inspections carried out by officials of the Environmental Water Resources Directorate of the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), as well as the Arenal Tempisque Conservation Area, they attest that at said location there is a proliferation of pests, that the La Cabra stream is contaminated by all the waste coming from the landfill, such as tires, garbage bags, and others, all of which was confirmed by the officials of the Environmental Audit and Monitoring Department of SETENA who concluded that the management conducted at the landfill has generated a negative impact on the surrounding environment and that the contamination of the Cabra stream affects the water users (people, domestic animals, wild animals), both from said stream and from the water outcrop located on the property. By virtue of the foregoing, the Chamber considers that despite the fact that in May 2007 the Ministry of Health, through health order No. 015-07, ordered the Municipal Mayor to carry out a series of sanitary measures regarding the solid waste landfill and, for its part, the Municipality alleges it has complied, the inspection reports prepared by various public officials contained in the case file demonstrate that neither the actions of the Municipality nor the orders of the Ministry of Health have been sufficiently effective or timely to prevent continued environmental pollution and continued endangerment of the health of the population and animals. It must be remembered that this Chamber has already stated that in matters of environmental protection, in addition to a corrective attitude, a preventive attitude must also be maintained because errors are irreversible and of high environmental cost. In that sense, in judgment No. 05906-99, this Chamber held that \"the action that the Political Constitution imposes on the State in the face of sources of environmental pollution is multidirectional and definitively active, absolutely intolerant of situations that threaten or affect the optimal environmental conditions guaranteed by it to the inhabitants,\" with which, any action aimed at protecting the environment is valid, but it is also necessary that the measures adopted not only remain on paper but are effectively executed. For this reason, in this specific case, the Chamber considers that the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Ministry of Health, and the sued Municipality have failed to comply with the basic, principal, and unavoidable obligation these entities have to oversee compliance with the requirements for this type of landfill when they are within their jurisdiction and to exercise the necessary measures to guarantee that such activities are carried out and developed in accordance with the law, in order to guarantee the right of citizens to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. In this way, the cited bodies should not be satisfied with merely issuing recommendations or verifying improvements, because even though it is true that the elimination of solid waste is an inherently odious activity, it is also true that, therefore, the norms that govern it and the specific provisions such as the health orders issued must be interpreted broadly, trying to apply them continuously in the most rigorous manner technically possible, which is why a complacent attitude that is satisfied merely by knowing that something is being done is not acceptable for the Administration, since meanwhile, the impact on the environment and health continues to occur repeatedly. In this context, the justification given by the sued Mayor regarding a lack of resources is not valid either, because admitting such an explanation would mean accepting and legitimizing that environmental injuries can be measured based on the economic resources available, which is completely wrong. Consequently, it is evident that the neglect for more than twenty-seven years that the Municipality and the Ministry of Health have shown regarding the pollution problem raised here is the principal reason for granting this appeal. In a similar case, the Chamber, in judgment No.\n\n20006-08983 of\neleven hours sixteen minutes on June twenty-third, two thousand six, ordered: \"\nThis Constitutional Court considers that the Ministry of Health has been negligent in\nthe fulfillment of its obligations in protection of the right to health of the\npetitioner and other residents of the urbanization in question, by not making use of its\nlegal powers in order to definitively solve the\nsanitary problem that affects them and that they have formally denounced, given that it has carried out\nan insufficient, untimely, and ineffective activity that is proven by the\nfact that the problem persists, as it has not taken any action in\nexercise of the police power that assists it by law to enforce its\norders. Thus, the members of this Constitutional Court are left with the\nperception that the action has been that of a “\nPaper Administration”, which exhausts its activity in mere bureaucratic\nprocedures, simply limiting itself to conducting inspections and issuing\nrecommendations or sanitary orders, without taking any measure to\ncorroborate that they have been complied with and, what is worse, without evidencing on its\npart effective actions, truly aimed at definitively solving the\nsanitary problem presented, as is appropriate to fulfill the public purpose\nentrusted to it, which results in detriment to health and the environment\nand, consequently, in violation of Article 50 of the Constitution,\na situation that is intolerable to this Chamber

\n\n\n\n
\n\n

 VIII.-  The Chamber concludes that in\nthe present case we are faced with a serious sanitary problem that affects the\nenvironment and the health of the inhabitants of the community of Tilarán; and\nin reiterated jurisprudence the Chamber has stated that it cannot be accepted that\nhuman beings be denied the right to a healthy environment, the right\nto health, due to the incapacity of the corresponding public authorities\nto effectively exercise the powers of surveillance and the solution to\nproblems granted by law. From the documents and the reports rendered under\noath that appear in the present file, it follows that the\nrespondent authorities, despite having been aware for years of\nthe problem set forth herein, have not carried out the necessary acts to\nguarantee the health of the inhabitants and the protection of the environment. In\nthis way, the respondent authorities are responsible for the damage to the fundamental\nrights of the amparo petitioners, due to the omission in promptly and\neffectively ensuring the health of that population, and the environment. The persistence\nof the problem demonstrates that the actions in exercise of the power of control\nor surveillance deployed in protection of health and the environment by the\nMinistry of Health, the Municipality of Tilarán, the Ministry of\nEnvironment and Energy, and SETENA within the framework of their competencies, have\nbeen clearly insufficient, thus incurring in liability for omission\nin the exercise of those powers which, in turn, injures the\ninnominate or atypical constitutional right of the administered persons to be provided\nefficient and effective public services. Based on the foregoing and considering that with\nthe denounced facts and the few effective actions that have been\ncarried out by the respondents, the environment\nand the right to health of the inhabitants of the canton of Tilarán have been seriously injured, the\nappeal is granted. Now then, this declaration implies, for the\nMinistry of Health and for the Municipality of Tilarán, the immediate implementation\nof the respective technical measures to solve this problem.\nFor its part, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, as the governing body of\nenvironmental matters, and through the Secretaría Técnica Ambiental, must exercise\nan active, vigilant attitude regarding compliance with what is being ordered herein\nand issue the measures that, within the scope of its competencies, are\nappropriate to give effective compliance to the sanitary orders that are\nissued. Likewise, the respondent authorities must proceed to issue and\nexecute the acts that in law correspond in order to provide a\ndefinitive and comprehensive solution to the problem of solid waste in the canton of\nTilarán.

\n\n
\n\n

Therefore:

\n\n
\n\n

The appeal for environmental damage is granted. Jovel Arias Ortega, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of Tilarán, and Hilda María Barrantes Guerrero, in her capacity as Director of the Rector Area of Health of Tilarán, or whoever occupies said positions, are ordered to adopt, each within the scope of their competencies, the measures necessary to provide a comprehensive solution to the problem of environmental pollution presented by the Tilarán garbage dump, starting from the notification of this judgment. Tatiana Cruz Ramírez, in her capacity as General Secretary of the Secretaría Técnica Nacional Ambiental, or whoever occupies her position, María Elena Madrigal, in her capacity as Director of the Arenal-Tempisque Conservation Area of the Ministry of Environment and Energy, and María Luisa Avila Agüero, in her capacity as Minister of Health, or whoever occupies her position, are ordered to verify the foregoing and to proceed, if applicable, as in law corresponds. The cited respondents are warned 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, may be imposed on whoever fails to comply or enforce this order. The Municipality of the Canton of Tilarán is condemned to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts that serve as the basis for this declaration due to the environmental damage caused, which shall be liquidated in the execution of judgment of the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. Notify this resolution to Jovel Arias Ortega, Hilda María Barrantes Guerrero, Tatiana Cruz Ramírez, María Elena Madrigal, and María Luisa Avila Agüero personally.

\n\n
\n\n

Ana Virginia Calzada M.

\n\n

Acting President

\n\n

 

\n\n

Gilbert Armijo S.\n Ernesto Jinesta L.

\n\n

 

\n\n

 

\n\n

 

\n\n

 

\n\n

Fernando Cruz C.\n Federico Sosto L.

\n\n

 

\n\n

 

\n\n

 

\n\n

 

\n\n

Horacio González Q.\n Jorge Araya G.

\n\n

 

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

III.- ON THE COADJUVANCIES: As indicated in the preceding recital, in environmental law, the procedural requirement of standing tends to be extended and broadened to such a dimension that it leads to the understanding that, in general terms, any person may be a party. By virtue of this, the coadjuvancy request presented by Josefina Gómez Gómez, and María Eduvina Alvarez Carranza, José Alcidez Ruiz and Luz Marina Alfaro and other neighbors have standing to appear as a party in this amparo in accordance with the last paragraph of Article 34 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction.

\n\n

IV.- ON THE MERITS. On repeated occasions, this Chamber has stated that both the right to health—derived from the right to life—and the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment constitute fundamental rights. The State is obligated to take the necessary measures to protect the environment and prevent levels of contamination that endanger the health of the governed, which is undoubtedly a legally granted competence of the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Environment and Energy, among other institutions, but also, in relation to the case at hand, the Municipal Code similarly obligates the Municipalities to ensure that the governed are guaranteed the real and effective enjoyment of the right to health and a healthy environment.

\n\n

V.- Now then, there is no doubt that an open dump (botadero) and not a technical sanitary landfill is a serious source of environmental contamination of various kinds, with imminent danger to the health of the inhabitants, the neighbors, those who pass by, or persons who remain there for several hours searching through the trash for waste that may be of use to them. The Chamber considers that it is the duty of the respondent authorities, as well as of all persons who have any involvement with this issue, to safeguard a better quality of life for the people of the canton and for all inhabitants in general, without having to wait for the environmental, construction, and planning conditions of the garbage dump to cause a deterioration greater than what is already occurring, which worsens health or the environment.

\n\n

VI.- In matters of solid waste (desechos sólidos), several regulations exist that establish the State's obligation to provide adequate treatment for it in order to guarantee the protection of the environment, and in that sense, in order to develop and guarantee the provisions of Article 50 of the Political Constitution, and in relation to the case at hand, the General Health Law in its Article 262 stipulates: \"Every person, natural or juridical, is obligated to contribute to the promotion and maintenance of the conditions of the natural environment and of the artificial environments that allow the vital and health needs of the population to be met.\". For its part, Article 263 of the same normative body provides: \"Any action, practice, or operation that deteriorates the natural environment or that, by altering the composition or intrinsic characteristics of its basic elements, especially air, water, and soil, produces a diminishment of its quality and aesthetics, renders such goods unusable for some of the uses for which they are intended, or creates risks to human health or to flora or fauna harmless to man, is prohibited. Every person is obligated to diligently comply with the actions, practices, or works established in the law and regulations aimed at eliminating or controlling the elements and factors of the natural, physical, or biological environment and of the artificial environment, that are harmful to human health\". In turn, Article 17 of the Organic Environmental Law establishes: \"human activities that alter or destroy elements of the environment or generate waste, toxic or hazardous materials, shall require an environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental) by the National Environmental Secretariat created in this law. Its prior approval, by this body, shall be an indispensable requirement to initiate the activities, works, or projects\". In relation to such regulations, it must be kept in mind that to authorize the operation of any solid waste deposit, it is essential that the corresponding requirements are met, and once the requirements demanded by law are fulfilled and the technical studies that must be presented to this effect are reviewed, it is the responsibility of both the Ministry of Environment and Energy, and the Ministry of Health, and the Municipality of the place—due to the specialty of the matter and the authority of the local government—to authorize or not the operation of the project of interest, taking into consideration the national and local interests in environmental protection, and once authorized, to provide the corresponding follow-up so that the operation is carried out within the legally established framework.

\n\n

VII.- In the specific case, it is evident that many of these requirements, which are necessary for the correct operation of the garbage dump (vertedero) of Tilarán, were omitted or have been completely breached during the more than twenty-seven years that this dump has been in operation, and for this reason, the serious problem denounced by the petitioner is currently occurring, whose property is located adjacent to the dump, and which has been corroborated by the authorities themselves of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (Secretaría Técnica Ambiental), Ministry of Environment and Energy (Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía), the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers (Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados), officers of the Public Force, and of the Ministry of Health, who in this last case, despite the residents having filed a complaint about this problem in 2004, it was not until 2006 that the health authorities issued a couple of sanitary orders obligating the Municipality to fumigate the place, and again not until 2007 and after the filing of this amparo action, that officials of the Health Area of Tilarán issued another order with the aim that the respondent Municipality collect the trash deposits found at the entrance and along the margins of the dump, among others. On the other hand, on April 17, 2007, a group of residents filed a complaint for environmental contamination produced by the Tilarán garbage dump before the Arenal-Tempisque Conservation Area of MINAE (Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía), and as of the date of filing of this amparo, no diligence had been carried out to verify what was denounced, even though the contamination of a stream and a water spring (naciente) is at stake.

\n\n

VIII.- Now then, the Chamber observes that in the present case, the authorities competent to safeguard the environment and health of the inhabitants have not exercised their functions correctly, since they have not executed any timely action to stop the cause of the general environmental contamination produced by the garbage dump in question, especially to the La Cabra stream and to the farm of the petitioner company that borders the property, which is dedicated to livestock activities. Furthermore, according to the latest inspections carried out by officials of the Environmental Directorate of Water Resources of the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, as well as of the Arenal-Tempisque Conservation Area, they record that in said place there is a proliferation of pests, that the La Cabra stream is contaminated by all the waste coming from the dump, such as tires, garbage bags, and others, all of which was confirmed by the officials of the Department of Environmental Auditing and Monitoring of SETENA (Secretaría Técnica Ambiental), who concluded that the management carried out at the dump has generated a negative impact on the surrounding environment and that the contamination of the Cabra stream has repercussions on water users (people, domestic animals, wild animals), both from said stream and from the water emergence (afloramiento de agua) found on the property. By virtue of the foregoing, the Chamber considers that despite the fact that in May 2007, the Ministry of Health, through sanitary order No. 015-07, ordered the Municipal Mayor to carry out a series of sanitary measures regarding the solid waste dump, and for its part, the Municipality alleges that it has complied, the inspection reports carried out by different public officials that are in the case file (expediente) demonstrate that neither the actions of the Municipality nor the orders of the Ministry of Health have been sufficiently effective or timely to prevent the environment from continuing to be contaminated and the health of the population and animals from continuing to be endangered. It must be remembered that this Chamber has already said that in matters of environmental protection, in addition to a corrective attitude, a preventive attitude must also be taken because the errors are irreversible and of a high environmental cost, and in that sense, in judgment No. 05906-99, this Chamber provided that \"the action that the Political Constitution imposes on the State in the face of sources of environmental contamination is multidirectional and definitively active, absolutely intolerant of situations that threaten or affect the optimal environmental conditions that are guaranteed by it to the inhabitants\", with which, any action aimed at protecting the environment is valid, but it is also necessary that the adopted measures not only remain on paper, but are effectively executed. For this reason, in the specific case, the Chamber considers that the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Ministry of Health, and the respondent Municipality have failed to comply with the basic, principal, and inescapable obligation that these entities have to monitor the compliance with requirements for this type of dump when they are within their jurisdiction and to exercise the measures that are necessary to guarantee that such activities are carried out and developed in accordance with the law, in order to guarantee the right of citizens to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. In this way, the cited bodies should not be satisfied with merely issuing recommendations or verifying improvements, because although it is true that the elimination of solid waste is an inherently odious activity, it is also true that, therefore, the regulations that govern it and specific provisions such as the sanitary orders issued must be interpreted extensively, trying to apply them continuously in the most rigorous manner that is technically possible, which is why a complacent attitude is not acceptable for the Administration, nor should it be appeased just by knowing that something is being done, because meanwhile, the impact on the environment and health continues to occur repeatedly. In that context, the justification given by the respondent Mayor that there is a lack of resources is also not valid, because admitting such an explanation would be accepting and legitimizing that injuries to the environment can be measured based on the economic resources available, which is entirely wrong. Consequently, it is evident that the neglect for more than twenty-seven years that the Municipality and the Ministry of Health have shown with respect to the contamination problem raised here is the main reason to grant the present action. In a similar case, the Chamber, in judgment No. 20006-08983 of eleven hours sixteen minutes of June twenty-third, two thousand six, provided: \"This Constitutional Court considers that the Ministry of Health has been negligent in fulfilling its obligations in protection of the right to health of the amparo petitioner and other residents of the urbanization in question, by not making use of its legal powers in order to definitively solve the sanitary problem that affects them and that they have formally denounced, because it has carried out insufficient, untimely, and ineffective activity, which is proven by the fact that the problem persists, having not concretized any action in exercise of the police power that assists it by law to enforce its orders. Thus, there remains in the members of this Constitutional Court the perception that it has been the performance of a \"\"paper Administration\", that exhausts its activity in mere bureaucratic procedures, simply limiting itself to carrying out inspections and issuing recommendations or sanitary orders, without taking any measure to corroborate that they have been complied with and, what is worse, without evidencing on its part effective actions, truly aimed at definitively resolving the sanitary problem exposed, as is appropriate to fulfill the public purpose that has been entrusted to it, which results in detriment to health and the environment and, consequently, in violation of constitutional Article 50, a situation that is intolerable for this Chamber

\n\n

VIII.- The Chamber concludes that in the present case we are faced with a serious sanitary problem that affects the environment and the health of the inhabitants of the community of Tilarán; and in reiterated case law, the Chamber has said that it cannot be accepted that human beings be denied the right to a healthy environment, the right to health, due to the incapacity of the corresponding public authorities to effectively exercise the oversight powers and the solution to the problems granted by law. From the documents and the reports rendered under oath that are in the present case file (expediente), it follows that the respondent authorities, despite having been aware of the problem exposed here for years, have not carried out the necessary acts to guarantee the health of the inhabitants and the protection of the environment. In this way, the respondent authorities are responsible for the damage to the fundamental rights of the persons protected by this amparo, due to the omission in promptly and effectively watching over the health of that population, and the environment. The persistence of the problem demonstrates that the actions in exercise of the power of control or oversight deployed in protection of health and the environment by the Ministry of Health, the Municipality of Tilarán, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, and SETENA within the framework of their competencies, have been clearly insufficient, thus incurring responsibility by omission in the exercise of those powers that, in turn, injures the unnamed or atypical constitutional right of the governed to be provided with efficient and effective public services. Based on the foregoing, and considering that with the denounced facts and with the few effective actions that have been carried out by the respondents, the environment and the right to health of the inhabitants of the canton of Tilarán have been seriously injured, the action is granted. Now then, this declaration implies, for the Ministry of Health and for the Municipality of Tilarán, the immediate implementation of the respective technical measures to solve this problem. For its part, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, as the governing body of environmental matters, and by means of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (Secretaría Técnica Ambiental), must exercise an active, vigilant attitude regarding compliance with what is being ordered here and issue the measures that, within the scope of their competencies, are appropriate to effectively comply with the sanitary orders issued. Likewise, the respondent authorities must proceed to issue and execute the acts that are legally appropriate in order to provide a definitive and comprehensive solution to the problem of solid waste in the canton of Tilarán.

\n\nof four, and nineteen hours of the fourteenth, both of the month of May of two thousand seven, Josefina Gómez Gómez, and María Eduvina Alvarez Carranza and other neighbors, join the filed appeal (folios 68, 113 and 132)\n\n**3.-** María Elena Madrigal reports under oath, in her capacity as Director of the Arenal-Tempisque Conservation Area of the Ministry of Environment and Energy (folios 72 and 109), that the spring (naciente) is used only to generate electricity and is not used for agricultural and fish-farming activities downstream. The possible contamination when the water passes through the generating turbines decreases considerably. She does not know if the Water Department has granted water concessions for human consumption. She requests that the filed appeal be dismissed.\n\n**4.-** María Luisa Avila and Hilda María Barrantes Guerrero report under oath, in their respective capacities as Minister and Director of the Tilarán Health Area (folio 76), that they have no knowledge that springs (nacientes) exist in the place, much less that there is water collection for human consumption. However, the corresponding investigation is being carried out and, if necessary, the corresponding sanitary orders will be issued. This Ministry is aware that a Cañas Regional landfill project is being carried out, according to administrative file No. 171-2005-SETENA delivered to SETENA on February 20, 2007. They request that the appeal be dismissed.\n\n**5.-** By means of a filing received at nineteen hours ten minutes of the fourteenth of May of two thousand seven, the appellant expands the facts alleged in the present amparo appeal (folio 114)\n\n**6.-** Roberto Dobles Mora, in his capacity as Minister of Environment and Energy (folio 134), reiterates what was stated by the Director of the Arenal Tempisque Conservation Area.\n\n**7.-** Jovel Arias Ortega reports, in his capacity as Mayor of the Municipality of Tilarán (folio 154), that the denounced place has been considered among the most suitable in the country, it is not true that the water of the spring (naciente) or the creek are contaminated as a result of the garbage left in the landfill, and at no time does the deposited garbage fall into the landfill.\n\n**8.-** Through memorials filed respectively at thirteen hours forty-five minutes and ten hours thirty minutes of the fourth and eleventh, both of the month of June of 2007, the appellant provides additional evidence (folio 159 and 167)\n\n**9.-** By resolution of fifteen hours and thirty minutes of the tenth of October of 2007, evidence for better resolution is requested from the Ministry of Health and the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (folio 193)\n\n**10.-** On October 30, 2007, José Alcidez Ruiz and Luz Marina Alfaro Hernández request to be considered as joint parties (coadyuvantes) (folio 289)\n\n**11.-** María Luisa Avila Agüero and Hilda María Barrantes Guerrero report, in their respective capacities as Minister and Director of the Tilarán Health Area (folio 292), that the system used by the Municipality of Tilarán for solid waste disposal is an open-air dump and has been operating for 25 years, therefore it does not have the appropriate leachate control systems, so it is likely that some type of contamination occurs, which does not exclude the “La Cabra” creek. On the other hand, the technical visit in official communication INGZA-2007-102- is unknown. On May 14, 2007, the Health Area conducted an inspection of the municipal dump and sanitary order No. 015-07 was issued, the administrative procedure was initiated, and a period of ten days was granted to the Mayor of Tilarán to proceed to: collect all garbage deposits found at the entrance and on the margins of the dump, that is, bordering neighboring farms; compact and cover with earth the trenches used for garbage deposit, desist from burning garbage inside the dump, place a gate at the dump entrance. On June 1, 2007, the Mayor reported on the actions taken. On the other hand, they cannot certify that the area in question is an aquifer recharge zone and currently the contamination problems no longer occur due to the actions taken by the Municipality, besides the fact that the water supply from AYA refers that the potable water distribution network reaches the dump. Thus, on October 30, 2007, another inspection of the site was carried out and it was verified that, in effect, the ordered points have been complied with one by one, the sanitation conditions have considerably improved, and it currently represents no danger to health or the environment, so the contamination problems practically do not exist. They request that the appeal be declared without merit.\n\n**12.-** At seventeen hours forty-eight minutes of the fourth of November, the representative of the protected party reiterates that to date the denounced contamination problem continues and has even worsened (folio 324)\n\n**13.-** On November 15, 2007, the appellant provides evidence for better resolution (folio 338)\n\n**14.-** On November 22, 2007, the appellant provides additional evidence, and through a memorial dated December 28, 2007, the appellant denounces the presence of hospital waste as well as the carrying out of burning (folios 387, 418)\n\n**15.-** On January 10 and January 17, both of 2008, the appellant provides additional evidence (folio 424 and 436)\n\n**16.-** Tatiana Cruz Ramírez reports under oath, in her capacity as General Secretary of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (folio 443), that there is no environmental impact assessment (estudio de impacto ambiental) nor any environmental feasibility granted to the Tilarán garbage dump. Furthermore, she cannot certify whether said place contaminates the \"La Cabra\" creek as well as the water springs (nacientes) because there is no administrative file to initiate the environmental assessment procedure, nor is there any complaint filed.\n\n**17.-** Through memorials filed by the representative of the protected company, reference is made to the report presented by Setena (folio 472)\n\n**18-** Through a memorial filed before this Chamber, a group of neighbors presents their joint participation (coayuvancia) in this process (folio 483)\n\n**19.-** On March 17, the appellant presents evidence for better resolution (folio 485)\n\n**20.-** In the proceedings followed, the legal prescriptions have been observed.\n\nDrafted by Magistrate **González Quiroga**; and,\n\n**Considering:**\n\n**I.- OBJECT OF THE APPEAL.** The appellant claims that the Municipality of Tilarán keeps open a garbage dump that does not meet the required conditions and is causing serious damage to the environment and the health of animals and people living nearby. They indicate that they have made multiple efforts before different instances, but no positive response has been given to the problem and the contamination continues to affect the area, for which they request the intervention of this Court.\n\n**II.- PROVEN FACTS.** Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly demonstrated, either because they have been thus accredited or because the respondent has omitted to refer to them as provided in the initial order:\n\na) Since 1979, the municipal dump of Tilarán has been operating, and no environmental impact assessment (estudio de impacto ambiental) is on file in the municipal archives (folio 409, 423, 439)\n\nb) On May 6, 2004, a group of neighbors of Tilarán filed a complaint before the Directorate of Human Environment Protection of the Ministry of Health for the environmental contamination produced by the municipal dump (folio 23)\n\nc) By sanitary order No. 2370-B of March 28, 2006, the Ministry of Health ordered the Municipality of Tilarán to proceed to carry out fumigation at the dump for the elimination of flies (folio 29)\n\nd) Through sanitary order No. 2384-B of May 23, 2006, the Ministry of Health reiterates the order to carry out fumigation (folio 30)\n\ne) Through official communication TIL-PAH-012-07 of April 20, 2007, the Tilarán Health Area certifies that only 2 sanitary orders dated June 23, 2006, and May 18, 2006, are recorded, and their purpose was the fumigation of the dump (folio 28)\n\nf) Through inspections carried out by police agents of the Fuerza Pública of Tilarán in the month of April 2007, they certify that in the water spring (naciente) there is a large amount of garbage, as well as in the creek (folio 36 and 38)\n\ng) On April 17, 2007, a group of neighbors filed a complaint for environmental contamination produced by the Tilarán dump before the Arenal – Tempisque Conservation Area of MINAE (folio 40)\n\nh) In the month of May 2007, the Fuerza Pública of Tilarán conducted an inspection at the Municipal Dump, at the Casa Blanca Hacienda (folio 129-131)\n\ni) On May 10, 2007, the inspectors of the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers certify that there is a source of contamination in the La Cabra Creek from the “landfill” (relleno sanitario), garbage is thrown onto neighboring properties, and there is a proliferation of vectors, such as flies (folio 313)\n\nj) Through sanitary order No. 015-07 of May 17, 2007, the Ministry of Health ordered the Municipal Mayor to carry out a series of sanitary measures regarding the solid waste dump within a period of ten days (folio 140)\n\nk) The Official Veterinarian of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock certifies that in the inspection carried out on May 2 of the current year at the appellant's farm, there was a large amount of garbage inside and outside the farm, contamination of the creek, and a quantity of flies (folio 149)\n\nl) The Environmental Management Directorate of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers conducted an on-site visit and verified that there is contamination of the Cabra creek and neighboring farms due in part to the garbage dump (folio 169)\n\nm) The Arenal Tempisque Conservation Area certifies that leachates from the dump are seeping into the creek and it is a source of pests and diseases (folio 172)\n\nn) The Community Police of the Fuerza Pública of Tilarán certifies that on July 12, 2007, upon arriving at the main entrance of the Tilarán municipal dump, a large amount of garbage was observed (folio 182)\n\nñ) On August 30, 2007, the Water Resource Environmental Directorate of the AYA Institute conducted an on-site inspection and verified contamination and transport of waste in the La Cabra creek, deforestation, and a large quantity of insects such as flies and mosquito breeding sites (folio 356)\n\no) In the inspection carried out on October 30, 2007, by officials of the Ministry of Health, they certify that the existing garbage on the site has been considerably reduced by the cleaning and fumigation work carried out by the Municipality (folio 301)\n\np) On November 1, 2007, the police agents of the Fuerza Pública and the official veterinarian of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock state that the creek is contaminated with garbage (folio 328, 334 and 406)\n\nq) At 8:00 hours on November 12, 2007, the Commander of the Fuerza Pública of Tilarán certifies that the garbage at the dump increased considerably and the contaminating factors such as herbicide residues, tires, zinc sheets, and drums are located at a distance of two meters from the water spring (naciente) (folios 388-406)\n\nr) Through memorandum DPUCC-400-2007 of November 14, 2007, the Coordinator of Development and Local Control of the appealed Municipality reports on the actions carried out at the denounced dump, such as: surveillance, access and information control, and mounds of earth were cordoned off (folio 410)\n\ns) On December 16, 2007, the official of the Arenal Tempisque Conservation Area of the Ministry of Environment and Energy verified that the creek is contaminated by garbage from the dump, as are the natural drainages and the water spring (naciente) (folio 427)\n\nt) Through report No. ASA-419-2007-SETENA of December 11, 2007, the inspectors certify that the garbage dump does not have an environmental impact assessment (estudio de impacto ambiental), that it has produced contamination with solid waste and leachates in the Cabra creek, and has generated a negative impact on the surrounding environment (folio 463)\n\n**II.- ON THE STANDING OF THE APPELLANT.** Regarding the standing of Carlos Adrián Vargas Murillo to bring an action before this jurisdiction in protection of the right to a healthy environment that he claims violated by the inaction of the appealed authorities, the Chamber's jurisprudence is reiterated in the sense that, since these are diffuse interests, any member of the affected community has standing to resort to the amparo procedure, in pursuit of environmental protection. In this regard, what was stated by this Constitutional Court in judgment number 3705-93 of fifteen hours of July thirty, nineteen ninety-six, is of particular relevance, which in pertinent part provides:\n\n\"Regarding the legal protection of the environment, the standing of individuals to act judicially and achieve the application of the norms that have that purpose, or indeed, to request jurisdictional relief to protect their violated rights, is of great importance. But it must be analyzed from several points of view, that is, in relation to the nature of the process, the claims, and the intervening parties, and also taking into account that the violation of environmental norms can be caused by the action or omission of both a subject of private law and of public law. The latter, simply by omitting to exercise due control over the actions of private subjects when they infringe environmental norms, ignoring their functional competence, which requires them to exercise that control; or indeed, by directly infringing with their actions legal provisions intended to protect and conserve the environment. This Chamber, in Judgment Number 2233-93, by indicating that the preservation and protection of the environment is a fundamental right, allows for standing to resort to the amparo procedure. In environmental law, the procedural prerequisite of standing tends to extend and broaden in such a dimension that it necessarily leads to the abandonment of the traditional concept, it being understood that, in general terms, any person can be a party and that their right does not emanate from property titles, rights, or concrete actions that they could exercise according to the rules of conventional law, but rather that their procedural action responds to what modern scholars call the diffuse interest, through which the original standing of the legitimate interested party, or even of the simple interested party, is diffused among all the members of a certain category of persons who are thus equally affected by the illegal acts that violate them. Regarding environmental protection, the typically diffuse interest that legitimizes the subject to bring an action is transformed, by virtue of its incorporation into the list of human rights, becoming a true 'reactional right', which, as its name indicates, empowers its holder to 'react' against the violation originating from illegitimate acts or omissions. That is why the violation of that fundamental right constitutes a constitutional illegality, that is, a specific ground for amparo against concrete acts or self-applicable norms, or, as the case may be, in the action of unconstitutionality against all norms or against acts not susceptible to amparo, and even against omissions, a category which in the case of the right to the environment becomes especially important, because in trying to conserve the environment that nature has given us, the most frequent violation occurs through the inertia of public authorities in carrying out the necessary acts to protect them.\"\n\n**III.- ON THE JOINT PARTICIPATIONS (COADYUVANCIAS):** As indicated in the previous consideration, in environmental law, the procedural prerequisite of standing tends to extend and broaden in such a dimension that it is understood that, in general terms, any person can be a party. By virtue thereof, the request for joint participation (coadyuvancia) filed by Josefina Gómez Gómez, and María Eduvina Alvarez Carranza, José Alcidez Ruiz and Luz Marina Alfaro and other neighbors have standing to appear as a party in this amparo in accordance with the last paragraph of Article 34 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction.\n\n**IV.- ON THE MERITS.** On repeated occasions, this Chamber has stated that both the right to health—derived from the right to life—and the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment constitute fundamental rights. The State is obliged to take the necessary measures to protect the environment and avoid degrees of contamination that endanger the health of the administered, which is undoubtedly a competence legally granted to the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Environment and Energy, among other institutions, but also, in relation to the case at hand, the Municipal Code similarly obliges Municipalities to ensure that the administered person is guaranteed the real and effective enjoyment of the right to health and to a healthy environment.\n\n**V.-** Now, there is no doubt that an open dump, and not a technical sanitary landfill, is a serious source of environmental contamination of various kinds, with the imminent danger to the health of the inhabitants, neighbors, those who pass through, or the people who remain in it for several hours searching among the garbage for waste that may be of use to them. The Chamber considers that it is the duty of the appealed authorities, as well as of all persons who have any involvement in this matter, to safeguard a better quality of life for the people of the canton and all inhabitants in general, without having to wait for the environmental, construction, and planning conditions of the garbage dump to cause a greater deterioration than what is occurring, which could worsen health or the environment.\n\n**VI.-** Regarding solid waste, several regulations establish the State's obligation to provide adequate treatment thereof in order to guarantee environmental protection and, in that sense, to develop and guarantee what is established in Article 50 of the Political Constitution, and in relation to the case at hand, the General Health Law in its Article 262 stipulates: \"*Every person, natural or juridical, is obliged to contribute to the promotion and maintenance of the conditions of the natural environment and of the artificial environments that allow meeting the vital and health needs of the population.*\". For its part, Article 263 of the same regulatory body provides: \"*Any action, practice, or operation that deteriorates the natural environment or that, by altering the composition or intrinsic characteristics of its basic elements, especially air, water, and soil, produces a decrease in its quality and aesthetics, renders such goods unusable for some of the uses for which they are intended, or creates risks to human health or to fauna or flora harmless to man, is prohibited. Every person is obliged to diligently comply with the actions, practices, or works established in the law and regulations aimed at eliminating or controlling the elements and factors of the natural, physical, or biological environment and of the artificial environment that are harmful to human health*\". In turn, Article 17 of the Organic Law of the Environment establishes: \"*human activities that alter or destroy elements of the environment or generate waste, toxic or hazardous materials, will require an environmental impact assessment (evaluación de impacto ambiental) by the National Environmental Secretariat created in this law. Its prior approval, by this agency, will be an indispensable requirement to initiate the activities, works, or projects*\". In relation to such regulations, it must be borne in mind that to authorize the operation of any solid waste deposit, it is essential that the corresponding requirements be met, and once the requirements demanded by law have been fulfilled and the technical studies that must be submitted for this purpose have been reviewed, it is the responsibility of both the Ministry of Environment and Energy and the Ministry of Health and the Municipality of the place - by reason of the specialty of the matter and the authority of the local government - to authorize or not the operation of the project of interest, taking into consideration national and local interests in environmental protection and, once authorized, to carry out the corresponding follow-up so that the operation is carried out within the legally established framework.\n\n**VII.-** In the specific case, it is evident that many of these requirements that are necessary for the correct operation of the Tilarán garbage dump were omitted or have been entirely breached during the more than twenty-seven years this dump has been in operation, and for this reason, the serious problem denounced by the claimant, whose property is adjacent to the dump and which has been corroborated by the authorities themselves of the Technical Environmental Secretariat, Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, officers of the Public Force, and the Ministry of Health, is currently occurring. In this last case, despite the neighbors having filed a complaint about this problem in 2004, it was not until 2006 that the health authorities issued a couple of health orders requiring the Municipality to fumigate the site, and again not until 2007, and subsequent to the filing of this amparo remedy, that officials from the Tilarán Health Area issued another order so that the respondent Municipality would collect the garbage deposits found at the entrance and on the margins of the dump, among others. On the other hand, on April 17, 2007, a group of neighbors filed a complaint for environmental pollution caused by the Tilarán dump before the Arenal – Tempisque Conservation Area (Area de Conservación Arenal – Tempisque) of MINAE, and as of the date of filing of this amparo, no diligence had been carried out to verify what was denounced, despite the fact that the pollution of a stream (quebrada) and a spring (naciente) of water is at stake.\n\n**VIII.-** Now then, this Chamber observes that in the present case, the competent authorities responsible for safeguarding the environment and health of the inhabitants have not correctly exercised their functions, since they have not executed any timely action to curb the cause of environmental pollution in general produced by the garbage dump in question, especially to the La Cabra stream (quebrada La Cabra) and to the farm of the claimant company that borders the property, which is dedicated to livestock activities. Furthermore, according to the latest inspections carried out by officials of the Environmental Directorate of Water Resources of the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, as well as the Arenal Tempisque Conservation Area, they record that in said place there is a proliferation of pests, that the La Cabra stream is polluted by all the waste coming from the dump, such as tires, garbage bags, and others, all of which was confirmed by the officials of the Department of Environmental Auditing and Follow-up of SETENA, who concluded that the management carried out at the dump has generated a negative impact on the surrounding environment and that the pollution of the Cabra stream affects the users of the water (people, domestic animals, wild animals), both from said stream and from the water outcrop (afloramiento de agua) located on the property. By virtue of the foregoing, this Chamber considers that despite the fact that in May 2007, the Ministry of Health, through health order No. 015-07, ordered the Municipal Mayor to carry out a series of sanitary measures regarding the solid waste dump, and for its part, the Municipality alleges that it has complied, the inspection reports carried out by different public officials that appear in the case file demonstrate that both the actions of the Municipality and the orders of the Ministry of Health have not been sufficiently effective or timely to prevent the environment from continuing to be polluted and the health of the population and animals from continuing to be endangered. It must be remembered that this Chamber has already stated that in matters of environmental protection, in addition to a corrective attitude, a preventive attitude must also be maintained because the errors are irreversible and of a high environmental cost, and in that sense, in judgment No. 05906-99, this Chamber ruled that \"*the action that the Political Constitution imposes on the State against sources of environmental pollution is multidirectional and definitively active, absolutely intolerant of situations that threaten or affect the optimal environmental conditions guaranteed by it to the inhabitants*\", with which, any action aimed at protecting the environment is valid, but it is also necessary that the measures adopted not only remain on paper, but are effectively executed. For this reason, in the specific case, this Chamber considers that the Ministry of Environment and Energy, the Ministry of Health, and the respondent Municipality have breached the basic, principal, and unavoidable obligation that these entities have to monitor compliance with requirements for this type of dump when they are within their jurisdiction and to exercise the measures that are necessary to guarantee that such activities are carried out and developed in accordance with the law, in order to guarantee the right of citizens to enjoy a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. Thus, the mentioned bodies should not feel satisfied with merely issuing recommendations or verifying improvements, because although it is true that the disposal of solid waste is an odious activity in itself, it is also true that, therefore, the regulations governing it and the specific provisions such as the health orders issued must be interpreted extensively, trying to apply them continuously in the most rigorous manner technically possible, which is why a complacent attitude that is satisfied merely by knowing that something is being done is not acceptable for the Administration, since in the meantime, the impact on the environment and health continues to occur repeatedly. In that context, the justification given by the respondent Mayor to the effect that there is a lack of resources is also not valid, since admitting such an explanation would mean accepting and legitimizing that injuries to the environment can be measured based on the economic resources available, which is entirely wrong. Consequently, it is evident that the neglect for more than twenty-seven years that the Municipality and the Ministry of Health have had with respect to the pollution problem raised here is the principal reason to grant this remedy. In a similar case, this Chamber in judgment No. 20006-08983 at eleven hours sixteen minutes on June twenty-third, two thousand six, ruled: \"*This Constitutional Chamber considers that the Ministry of Health has been negligent in fulfilling its obligations in protection of the right to health of the amparo claimant and other residents of the aforementioned urbanization, by not making use of its legal powers in order to definitively solve the sanitary problem that affects them and that they have formally denounced, since it has carried out insufficient, inopportune, and ineffective activity, which is proven by the fact that the problem persists, having taken no action in exercise of the police power that assists it by law to enforce its orders. The perception thus remains in the members of this Constitutional Chamber that it has been the performance of a \"paper Administration\", which exhausts its activity in mere bureaucratic procedures, simply limiting itself to carrying out inspections and issuing recommendations or sanitary orders, without taking any measure to verify that these have been complied with and, what is worse, without evidencing on its part effective actions, truly aimed at definitively resolving the sanitary problem presented, as corresponds to fulfill the public purpose that has been entrusted to it, which results in detriment to health and the environment and, consequently, in violation of Article 50 of the Constitution, a situation that is intolerable for this Chamber*.\n\n**VIII.-** This Chamber concludes that in the present case we are faced with a serious sanitary problem that affects the environment and the health of the inhabitants of the community of Tilarán; and in reiterated jurisprudence, this Chamber has stated that it cannot be accepted that human beings be denied the right to a healthy environment, the right to health, due to the inability of the corresponding public authorities to effectively exercise the powers of surveillance and the solution to problems granted by law. From the documents and reports rendered under oath that appear in the present case file, it is inferred that the respondent authorities, despite having been aware of the problem presented here for years, have not carried out the necessary acts to guarantee the health of the inhabitants and the protection of the environment. Thus, the respondent authorities are responsible for the damage to the fundamental rights of the amparo claimants, due to the omission in promptly and effectively ensuring the health of that population and the environment. The persistence of the problem demonstrates that the actions in exercise of the power of control or surveillance deployed in protection of health and the environment by the Ministry of Health, the Municipality of Tilarán, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, and SETENA within the framework of their competencies, have been clearly insufficient, thus incurring responsibility for omission in the exercise of those powers which, in turn, injures the unnamed or atypical constitutional right of the administered to be provided with efficient and effective public services. From what has been said, and considering that with the denounced facts and with the few effective actions that have been carried out by the respondents, the environment and the right to health of the inhabitants of the canton of Tilarán have been seriously injured, the remedy is granted. Now then, this declaration implies, for the Ministry of Health and for the Municipality of Tilarán, the immediate execution of the respective technical measures to solve this problem. For its part, the Ministry of Environment and Energy, as the governing body of environmental matters, and through the Technical Environmental Secretariat, must exercise an active vigilant attitude regarding compliance with what is being ordered herein and dictate the measures that, within the scope of its competencies, are appropriate to effectively comply with the health orders issued. Likewise, the respondent authorities must proceed to dictate and execute the acts that correspond in law in order to provide a definitive and comprehensive solution to the solid waste problem in the canton of Tilarán.\n\n**Por tanto:**\n\nThis remedy is granted for environmental damage. Jovel Arias Ortega, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of Tilarán, and Hilda María Barrantes Guerrero, in her capacity as Director of the Governing Health Area of Tilarán, or whoever occupies said positions, are ordered to adopt, each within the scope of their competencies, the measures that are necessary to provide a comprehensive solution to the environmental pollution problem presented by the Tilarán garbage dump, starting from the notification of this judgment. Tatiana Cruz Ramírez, in her capacity as Secretary General of the National Environmental Technical Secretariat, or whoever occupies her position, María Elena Madrigal, in her capacity as Director of the Arenal-Tempisque Conservation Area of the Ministry of Environment and Energy, and María Luisa Avila Agüero, in her capacity as Minister of Health, or whoever occupies her position, are ordered to verify what was previously ordered and to proceed, if applicable, as corresponds in law. The aforementioned respondents are warned that, based on what is established in Article 71 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction, imprisonment of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, may be imposed on whoever fails to comply or fails to enforce this order. The Municipality of the Canton of Tilarán is condemned to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts that serve as the basis for this declaration for the environmental damage caused, which shall be liquidated in the execution of the judgment in contentious-administrative proceedings. Let this resolution be personally notified to Jovel Arias Ortega, Hilda María Barrantes Guerrero, Tatiana Cruz Ramírez, María Elena Madrigal, and María Luisa Avila Agüero.\n\n**Ana Virginia Calzada M.**\n\n**Acting Presidenta**\n\n**Gilbert Armijo S. Ernesto Jinesta L.**\n\n**Fernando Cruz C. Federico Sosto L.**\n\n**Horacio González Q. Jorge Araya G.**" }