{
  "id": "nexus-sen-1-0007-469519",
  "citation": "Res. 00688-2010 Sala Constitucional",
  "section": "nexus_decisions",
  "doc_type": "constitutional_decision",
  "title_es": "Contaminación sónica por karaoke: inacción estatal",
  "title_en": "Karaoke noise pollution — state inaction violates fundamental rights",
  "summary_es": "La Sala Constitucional conoce un amparo interpuesto por un vecino de Los Ángeles de Río Cuarto de Grecia contra el Ministerio de Salud y la Municipalidad de Grecia. El recurrente acusa la inacción de ambas autoridades frente a la contaminación sónica generada desde 2006 por un bar y restaurante que opera actividades de karaoke sin permisos y sin condiciones para contener el ruido. La Sala recuerda el marco normativo disperso sobre contaminación sónica, destacando los artículos 59 a 63 de la Ley Orgánica del Ambiente, la Ley General de Salud y el principio precautorio, y la conexión del ruido con los derechos a la salud, a un ambiente sano y a la intimidad. En el caso concreto, comprueba que tanto el Ministerio de Salud como la Municipalidad de Grecia incurrieron en pasividad e inacción: el Ministerio tardó más de tres años en dictar un acto de clausura y la Municipalidad no ejecutó ninguna acción tras constatar la irregularidad. La Sala declara con lugar el recurso, ordena a las autoridades tomar medidas inmediatas para cesar la contaminación sónica, condena al Estado y al Municipio al pago de costas, daños y perjuicios, y apercibe al dueño y arrendatario del local.",
  "summary_en": "The Constitutional Chamber hears an amparo filed by a neighbor of Los Ángeles de Río Cuarto de Grecia against the Ministry of Health and the Municipality of Grecia. The petitioner claims both authorities failed to act regarding noise pollution produced since 2006 by a bar and restaurant that operates karaoke activities without permits and without proper sound containment. The Chamber reviews the fragmented regulatory framework on noise pollution, emphasizing Articles 59–63 of the Environmental Organic Law, the General Health Law, and the precautionary principle, and the link between noise and the rights to health, a healthy environment, and privacy. In the specific case, it finds that both the Ministry and the Municipality were passive: the Ministry took over three years to issue a closure order and the Municipality took no action after verifying the irregularity. The Chamber grants the amparo, orders the authorities to take immediate measures to stop the noise, orders the State and the Municipality to pay costs and damages, and warns the owner and tenant of the premises.",
  "court_or_agency": "Sala Constitucional",
  "date": "15/01/2010",
  "year": "2010",
  "topic_ids": [
    "art-50-constitution",
    "procedural-environmental"
  ],
  "primary_topic_id": "procedural-environmental",
  "es_concept_hints": [
    "contaminación sónica",
    "ruido",
    "amparo",
    "principio precautorio",
    "derecho a la salud",
    "derecho a la intimidad",
    "Ley Orgánica del Ambiente",
    "Ministerio de Salud"
  ],
  "article_citations": [],
  "keywords_es": [
    "contaminación sónica",
    "ruido",
    "karaoke",
    "amparo",
    "Ministerio de Salud",
    "Municipalidad de Grecia",
    "derecho a la salud",
    "derecho a un ambiente sano",
    "derecho a la intimidad",
    "inacción administrativa",
    "Ley Orgánica del Ambiente",
    "Ley General de Salud",
    "principio precautorio",
    "clausura",
    "servicios públicos"
  ],
  "keywords_en": [
    "noise pollution",
    "karaoke",
    "amparo",
    "Ministry of Health",
    "Municipality of Grecia",
    "right to health",
    "right to a healthy environment",
    "right to privacy",
    "administrative inaction",
    "Environmental Organic Law",
    "General Health Law",
    "precautionary principle",
    "closure",
    "public services"
  ],
  "excerpt_es": "Dada la lentitud con la que ha actuado el Ministerio de Salud y la inacción de la Municipalidad de Grecia, respecto de solucionar el problema de contaminación sónica que produce el Bar Los Angeles en rio cuarto de Grecia, se constata la violación a los derechos fundamentales de los amparados en cuanto a su derecho a la salud, derecho a la intimidad, derecho a gozar de un ambiente sano, derecho de pronta respuesta y derecho a la prestación eficiente de servicios públicos. Siendo, lo procedente acoger este recurso en todos sus extremos, condenar en daños y perjuicios a los recurridos y en consecuencia ordenarles tomar inmediatamente las medidas correspondientes según el ámbito de sus competencias a efectos de poner al Bar en cuestión en regla para que se obtenga de producir contaminación sónica.",
  "excerpt_en": "Given the slowness with which the Ministry of Health acted and the inaction of the Municipality of Grecia to solve the problem of noise pollution produced by the Bar Los Angeles in río cuarto de Grecia, there is a violation of the petitioners’ fundamental rights to health, privacy, enjoyment of a healthy environment, prompt response, and efficient provision of public services. It is therefore appropriate to grant this amparo in all its aspects, order the respondents to pay damages, and consequently order them to immediately take the appropriate measures within their powers to regularize the bar in question so that it ceases producing noise pollution.",
  "outcome": {
    "label_en": "Granted",
    "label_es": "Con lugar",
    "summary_en": "The amparo is granted due to violation of the rights to health, healthy environment, privacy, prompt response, and efficient public services, and the Ministry of Health and Municipality of Grecia are ordered to take immediate measures to stop the noise pollution.",
    "summary_es": "Se declara con lugar el amparo por violación a los derechos a la salud, ambiente sano, intimidad, pronta respuesta y prestación eficiente de servicios públicos, y se ordena al Ministerio de Salud y la Municipalidad de Grecia tomar medidas inmediatas para cesar la contaminación sónica."
  },
  "pull_quotes": [
    {
      "context": "Considerando III",
      "quote_en": "This Chamber has recognized that both the right to health and the right to an environment free from pollution —without which the former cannot be effective— are fundamental rights, and therefore the State is obliged to protect them...",
      "quote_es": "Esta Sala ha reconocido, que tanto el derecho a la salud como a un ambiente libre de contaminación -sin el cual el primero no podría hacerse efectivo- son derechos fundamentales, de modo que es obligación del Estado proveer a su protección..."
    },
    {
      "context": "Considerando IV",
      "quote_en": "the slow actions of the Ministry of Health to enforce its orders, regularize the bar’s operations, and stop the noise pollution violated the petitioners’ fundamental rights",
      "quote_es": "las actuaciones lentas del Ministerio de Salud para ejecutar sus actos, poner a derecho el funcionamiento irregular del bar en cuestión y detener el problema de contaminación sónica ocasionó la violación de los derechos fundamentales de los amparados"
    },
    {
      "context": "Considerando IV",
      "quote_en": "this Chamber does not understand how, after verifying the irregularity under which the Bar Los Angeles operated... lacking the required permit to operate karaoke, the municipal authorities simply did not use their legal powers to regularize the bar",
      "quote_es": "no comprende esta Sala como, luego de haber comprobado la irregularidad bajo la cual funcionaba el Bar Los Angeles... al no contar con el permiso correspondiente para operar un karaoke, simplemente las autoridades municipales no hacen uso de sus competencias legales para poner a derecho el bar en cuestión"
    }
  ],
  "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-38533",
      "citation": "Ley 7135",
      "title_en": "Constitutional Jurisdiction Law",
      "title_es": "Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "11/10/1989",
      "year": "1989"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-5027",
      "citation": "Ley 4573",
      "title_en": "Penal Code — Law 4573",
      "title_es": "Código Penal — Ley 4573",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "04/05/1970",
      "year": "1970"
    },
    {
      "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"
    }
  ],
  "cited_by": [
    {
      "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-38533",
      "citation": "Ley 7135",
      "title_en": "Constitutional Jurisdiction Law",
      "title_es": "Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "11/10/1989",
      "year": "1989"
    },
    {
      "id": "norm-5027",
      "citation": "Ley 4573",
      "title_en": "Penal Code — Law 4573",
      "title_es": "Código Penal — Ley 4573",
      "doc_type": "law",
      "date": "04/05/1970",
      "year": "1970"
    },
    {
      "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"
    }
  ],
  "references": {
    "internal": [],
    "external": []
  },
  "source_url": "https://nexuspj.poder-judicial.go.cr/document/sen-1-0007-469519",
  "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-38533",
      "norm_num": "7135",
      "norm_name": "Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "11/10/1989"
    },
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-5027",
      "norm_num": "4573",
      "norm_name": "Código Penal — Ley 4573",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "04/05/1970"
    },
    {
      "doc_id": "norm-6581",
      "norm_num": "5395",
      "norm_name": "Ley General de Salud",
      "tipo_norma": "Ley",
      "norm_fecha": "30/10/1973"
    }
  ],
  "sentencias_relacionadas": [],
  "temas_y_subtemas": [],
  "cascade_only": false,
  "amendment_count": 0,
  "body_es_text": "Exp: 09-018154-0007-CO \n\r\n\r\n\nRes. Nº 2010-000688\n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nSALA\r\nCONSTITUCIONAL DE LA CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José, a las nueve horas y\r\ntrece minutos del quince de enero del dos mil diez.\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n Recurso de amparo interpuesto por ALEX\r\nGERARDO ALFARO VÍQUEZ, cédula de identidad número 0205860446, contra el\r\nMINISTERIO DE SALUD Y LA MUNICIPALIDAD DE GRECIA.\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nResultando:\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n1.- Por escrito\r\nrecibido en la Secretaría de la Sala a las 09 horas 06 minutos del 07 de\r\ndiciembre del 2009, el recurrente interpone recurso de amparo contra el\r\nMINISTERIO DE SALUD Y LA MUNICIPALIDAD DE GRECIA y manifiesta que: a) Es\r\nvecino de Los Ángeles de Río Cuarto de Grecia, Alajuela, frente a la Escuela\r\nJosé Sánchez Chavarría. Desde el año 2006, el Bar y Restaurante Los Ángeles,\r\npropiedad de Trino Montero Carmona, realiza actividades de karaoke durante todo\r\nel día y también hasta altas horas de la madrugada, lo cual hace sin contar con\r\ninstalaciones adecuadas para contener el ruido, y sin tener permisos del\r\nMinisterio de Salud o la respectiva patente municipal, ya que actualmente ésta\r\nse encuentra vencida; b) El ruido excesivo interrumpe el proceso de\r\naprendizaje de los niños de la escuela José Sánchez Chavarría, ubicada a 100\r\nmetros de distancia, y afecta las actividades religiosas del Templo Católico\r\n-que se localiza frente al establecimiento- y de la Iglesia Evangélica de la\r\ncomunidad. El sitio, además, se ha constituido en un punto de reunión para\r\nindividuos indeseables y ya se han producido reyertas allí; c) Además de\r\nlo anterior, como las personas que abandonan el negocio a altas horas de la\r\nnoche hacen ruidos con los motores de sus automóviles, a los vecinos de la\r\ncomunidad se les hace muy difícil dormir. Desde el año 2006 se presentaron las\r\nprimeras denuncias contra el local ante el Ministerio y la Municipalidad, y\r\npese a las constantes intervenciones de la Fuerza Pública del lugar y a las\r\nacciones de funcionarios Municipales y del Ministerio de Salud -que han\r\nrealizado varios apercibimientos al negocio, bajo pena de cierre, y más bien\r\nhan sido amenazados por Montero Carmona-, en la práctica el problema nunca se\r\nha solucionado, ya que ni el Ministerio ni la corporación local han actuado con\r\nla debida diligencia para hacer cumplir sus propias\r\ndecisiones. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n2.- Informa bajo\r\njuramento MARIA LUISA AVILA AGUERO, en su calidad de Ministra de Salud (folio\r\n035), que: a) El día 20 de setiembre del 2006 se recibe denuncia\r\ninterpuesta por varios vecinos en el Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia, por\r\ndisconformidad con karaoque que se realiza en Bar Los Angeles. Se generó un\r\nreporte de inspección o.661-2006 del 29 de setiembre del 2006 el cual se\r\nexplica por si solo; b) Aproximadamente dos años y medio después se\r\nrecibe una segunda denuncia con fecha 29 de abril del 2009. El 18 de mayo del\r\n2009 se recibe acta de visita al Bar Los Angeles por parte del inspector de\r\npatentes y construcciones de la Municipalidad de Grecia. El 08 de mayo del 2009\r\nse llevó a cabo visita de inspección como consecuencia de la segunda denuncia,\r\ny se origina el informe no.357-2009. El 09 de setiembre del 2009 se recibe\r\ncopia de nota dirigida al Concejo Municipal de Grecia, adjuntándose informe de\r\ninspección por parte de la Municipalidad de Grecia. También constan en el\r\nexpediente varios informes de la Fuerza Pública de Grecia; c) El 17 de\r\nsetiembre del 2009 se recibe nota suscrita por el señor Trino Montero Carmona,\r\npropietario del establecimiento de marras, donde solicita medición sónica y\r\ncopia del expediente. Mediante oficio DARSG-563-2009 del 23 de setiembre se dio\r\nrespuesta a la nota anterior. La Autoridad Sanitaria solicitó apoyo a la\r\ndelegación de Fuerza Pública para realizar inspección al Bar Los Ángeles y\r\nnotificar de apercibimiento de suspensión de actividades de karaoke. En el\r\noficio no. DARSG-572-2009 del 28 de setiembre del 2009 se apercibió al\r\npropietario del lugar para que suspendiera la actividad de karaoke; d) El\r\n03 de noviembre del 2009 se recibe informe de la Fuerza Pública. Según oficio\r\nno. DARSG-675-2009 del 04 de noviembre del 2009 se apercibió al propietario\r\nsobre acto de clausura del establecimiento en cuestión. El 09 de noviembre del\r\n2009 se recibe nueva denuncia mediante la cual se indica que el citado\r\nestablecimiento está funcionando el karaoke durante el día y la noche. El 11 de\r\nnoviembre se recibió recurso de revocatoria con apelación en subsidio contra el\r\nacto de clausura. El recurso de revocatoria fue declarado sin lugar mediante\r\nresolución DRRS-DR-J-3085-2009 de las 08:33 horas del 10 de diciembre del 2009,\r\ny el recurso de apelación también fue declarado sin lugar mediante resolución\r\nDM-JB-1000-2010 de las 08:30 horas del 04 de enero del 2010, por cuanto el\r\nestablecimiento comercial denunciado no cuenta con permiso de esa institución\r\npara realizar actividades de karaoke, ni cuenta con las condiciones\r\nestructurales para la realización de dicha actividad. Así que las actuaciones\r\nhan sido diligentes y oportunas, por lo que solicita que se desestime el\r\nrecurso planteado.\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n3.- Según\r\nconstancia que corre al folio 070 no aparece que el Alcalde de la Municipalidad\r\nde Grecia haya presentado escrito o documento alguno a fin de rendir el informe\r\nque se le solicitó.\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n4.- En los\r\nprocedimientos seguidos se ha observado las prescripciones legales.\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\nRedacta el Magistrado Cruz Castro; y,\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nConsiderando:\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nI - Objeto del\r\nrecurso.- El recurrente, vecino de Los Ángeles de Río Cuarto de Grecia\r\nAlajuela, acusa la inacción de las autoridades recurridas frente al problema de\r\ncontaminación sónica que se produce desde el año 2006 en el Bar y Restaurante\r\nLos Ángeles, el cual realiza actividades de karaoke durante todo el día y\r\ntambién hasta altas horas de la madrugada. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n II .- Hechos probados.- De importancia\r\npara la decisión de este asunto, se estiman como debidamente demostrados los\r\nsiguientes hechos, sea porque así han sido acreditados o bien porque el\r\nrecurrido haya omitido referirse 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. \r\nQue el 20 de\r\nsetiembre del 2006 el Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia recibe denuncia\r\ninterpuesta por varios vecinos por disconformidad con karaoque que se realiza\r\nen Bar Los Angeles (folio 05-08). La cual generó el reporte de inspección\r\nno.661-2006 del 29 de setiembre del 2006 según el cual se indica que “se\r\nconcluye que el local no cuenta con condiciones físicas que garanticen el\r\nconfinamiento de los ruidos producto de la actividad de karaoke, por lo que se\r\nrecomienda no autorizar más la actividad…” (informe al folio 036, folio\r\n068-069).\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nb. \r\nQue el 29 de\r\nabril del 2009 el Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia recibe nueva denuncia. \r\nLa cual generó el reporte de inspección no.357-2009 del 08 de mayo\r\ndel 2009 según el cual se indica que “la actividad carece del permiso\r\ncorrespondiente … no cuenta con condiciones estructurales que garanticen el\r\nconfinamiento de los ruidos producto de la actividad de karaoke… se le apercibe\r\nque debe de abstenerse de realizar la actividad complementaria de karaoke en el\r\nestablecimiento de marras…” (informe al folio 036, folio 066-067).\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nc. \r\nQue el 15 de\r\nmayo del 2009 el inspector de patentes y construcciones de la Municipalidad\r\nde Grecia realiza visita al Bar Los Angeles y consigna en el acta que “En\r\ncuanto al permiso de karaoke, no presenta ningún documento, se le advierte que\r\ndebe suspender dicha actividad, hasta que tenga el permiso correspondiente…” (folio 017). \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nd. Que el 14 de julio del 2009 vecinos de Los Angeles\r\ndenuncia el ruido que ocasiona el Bar Los Angeles ante el Concejo Municipal de\r\nla Municipalidad de Grecia (folio 018).\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\ne. Que Fuerza Pública de Grecia realizó varios informes\r\nrespecto del Bar Los Angeles (informe al folio 037). \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nf. \r\nQue el 17 de\r\nsetiembre del 2009 el Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia recibe nota suscrita\r\npor el señor Trino Montero Carmona, propietario del establecimiento de marras,\r\ndonde solicita medición sónica y copia del expediente. Mediante oficio no.\r\nDARSG-563-2009 del 23 de setiembre del 2009 se dio respuesta a la\r\nnota anterior (informe al folio 037, folio 063).\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\ng. \r\nQue mediante oficio no. DARSG-572-2009 del 28\r\nde setiembre del 2009 el Area Rectora de Salud apercibió al propietario del\r\nlugar para que suspendiera la actividad de karaoke. Para lo cual, solicitó\r\napoyo a la delegación de Fuerza Pública (informe al folio 037, 060-062).\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nh. \r\nSegún oficio no. DARSG-675-2009 del 04 de noviembre\r\ndel 2009 el Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia apercibió al propietario sobre acto\r\nde clausura del establecimiento en cuestión (informe al folio 037, folio\r\n057-059).\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\ni. \r\nQue el 09 de noviembre del 2009 se recibe nueva\r\ndenuncia mediante la cual se indica que el citado establecimiento está\r\nfuncionando el karaoke durante el día y la noche (informe al folio 037).\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nj. \r\nQue el 11 de noviembre del 2009 se recibió recurso\r\nde revocatoria con apelación en subsidio contra el acto de clausura.\r\nEl recurso de revocatoria fue declarado sin lugar mediante resolución\r\nDRRS-DR-J-3085-2009 de las 08:33 horas del 10 de diciembre del 2009, y\r\nel recurso de apelación también fue declarado sin lugar mediante\r\nresolución DM-JB-1000-2010 de las 08:30 horas del 04 de enero del 2010,\r\npor cuanto el establecimiento comercial denunciado no cuenta con permiso de esa\r\ninstitución para realizar actividades de karaoke, ni cuenta con las condiciones\r\nestructurales para la realización de dicha actividad (informe al folio 037,\r\nfolio 041-047, 052-056).\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nIII .- Sobre la contaminación\r\nsónica, y su relación con el derecho a la salud, el derecho a gozar de un\r\nambiente libre de contaminación y el derecho a la intimidad (derecho a la\r\ntranquilidad).- Esta Sala ha reconocido, que tanto el derecho a la salud\r\ncomo a un ambiente libre de contaminación -sin el cual el primero no podría\r\nhacerse efectivo- son derechos fundamentales, de modo que es obligación del\r\nEstado proveer a su protección, ya sea a través de políticas generales para\r\nprocurar ese fin, o bien a través de actos concretos por parte de la\r\nAdministración. Existen varios tipos de contaminación, uno de ellos está\r\nreferido a la contaminación sónica producida por el ruido. El ruido es\r\nconsiderado como una de la formas de agresión al ambiente que aumenta las\r\nincomodidades en una sociedad cada vez más industrializada. Las molestias por\r\nruidos afectan la calidad de vida y la salud de las personas, ya que pueden\r\ntraer consigo consecuencias fisiológicas y psíquicas, sobre todo ante la\r\npersistencia de una grave contaminación acústica. Para abordar tal problemática\r\nel Estado debe diseñar políticas contra esa clase de contaminación atmosférica,\r\ndirigidas a proteger a las personas de la exposición excesiva al ruido. En\r\nrelación con las políticas para aminorar y evitar la contaminación sónica así\r\ncomo para promover la protección de los valores jurídicamente relevantes que en\r\neste caso se ven involucrados, que son el medio ambiente y la salud, la Sala\r\nobserva que si bien sobresalen esfuerzos normativos al respecto, al Estado\r\ncostarricense le ha sido difícil estructurar un conjunto de normas que permitan\r\nhacer frente al problema del ruido así como diseñar y poner en práctica un plan\r\nde reducción del ruido que permita controlar de manera más eficiente el\r\nfenómeno ambiental. Tal carencia normativa no es un problema particular de\r\nnuestro país, pues el ruido se presenta de difícil tratamiento dado en primer\r\nlugar a su naturaleza temporal, no acumulativa y a la clara dispersión de sus\r\nagentes contaminadores, -nótese que el ruido proviene de un sinnúmero de\r\nfuentes que atacan las diversas situaciones en las que se desenvuelve el\r\nindividuo (calle, lugar de trabajo, vivienda, hospitales, zonas comerciales,\r\nparques, escuelas, etcétera). Es claro que el problema del ruido se agudiza\r\ndebido tanto a la dispersión y aumento de las fuentes de contaminación así como\r\nal desarrollo de la industria, de la construcción, relacionado con el grado de\r\nurbanización y densidad de la red vial, entre otros factores. A lo anterior se\r\nsuma que el diseño de la política ambiental no ha concedido prioridad a este\r\ntipo de contaminación, que como se dijo, es de difícil tratamiento, y a los\r\nproblemas relativos a su definición; razones todas que han obstaculizado el\r\ncontrol del ruido. No existe en nuestro ordenamiento jurídico, una normativa\r\ngeneral que contemple todas las principales cuestiones relacionadas con el\r\ntema, sino que se cuenta con dispersas y variadas normas contenidas en\r\ndiferentes cuerpos normativos entre las que destaca la Ley Orgánica del\r\nAmbiente, que es la No.7554 de 4 de octubre de 1995, que concede al ruido un\r\nlugar en los artículos 59 a 63 del Capítulo XV denominado\r\n\"Contaminación\" y en el que incorpora el principio precautorio de\r\nmanera genérica al indicar que compete al Estado adoptar las medidas que sean necesarias\r\npara prevenir o corregir la contaminación ambiental (artículo 59). El artículo\r\n60 en su inciso e) recoge también el principio precautorio específicamente en\r\nmateria de contaminación acústica y dota de competencia al Estado, las\r\nmunicipalidades y las demás instituciones públicas, para prevenir y controlar\r\nla contaminación del ambiente, debiendo dar prioridad al establecimiento y\r\noperación de servicios adecuados en áreas fundamentales para la salud\r\nambiental, entre los que destaca el control de la contaminación sónica. Se\r\nrefuerza el principio precautorio en los artículos 61 y 63 referente el primero\r\na contingencia ambiental y según el cual la autoridad competente dictará las\r\nmedidas preventivas y correctivas necesarias cuando sucedan contingencias por\r\ncontaminación ambiental y otras que no estén contempladas en esta ley. El\r\nartículo 63 de la ley de cita dispone el procedimiento y medidas a tomar para\r\nla prevención y control del deterioro de la atmósfera, y para disminuir y\r\ncontrolar las emisiones que sobrepasen los límites permisibles. Por su parte,\r\nla Ley General de Salud dispone en su artículo 302 la protección de la\r\nexposición a los ruidos al señalar que ningún establecimiento industrial podrá\r\nfuncionar si sus labores constituyen un elemento de peligro, insalubridad o\r\nincomodidad para la vecindad \"... ya sea por las condiciones de\r\nmanutención del local en que funciona, por la forma o sistemas que emplea en la\r\nrealización de sus operaciones, por la forma o sistema que utiliza para\r\neliminar los desechos, residuos o emanaciones resultantes de sus faenas, o por\r\nlos ruidos que produce la operación.\" En el último párrafo del artículo\r\n294, la Ley General de Salud se incluye al ruido como elemento susceptible de\r\nprovocar la contaminación de la atmósfera en los siguientes términos:\r\n\"Será asimismo considerada como contaminación atmosférica la emisión de\r\nsonidos que sobrepasen las normas aceptadas internacionalmente y declaradas\r\noficiales por el Ministerio.\" El Legislador costarricense ha previsto sanciones\r\nde tipo penal, específicamente mediante el artículo 390 inciso 2 del Código\r\nPenal, aplicables a los transgresores de los umbrales y franjas de\r\ncontaminación tolerables de ruido. La legislación laboral protege también a los\r\ntrabajadores expuestos a decibelios altos en sus lugares de trabajo, lo que\r\nhace mediante el Reglamento de Control de Ruidos y Vibraciones, que es Decreto\r\nEjecutivo número 10541 de 14 de setiembre de 1979 elaborado por el Consejo de\r\nSeguridad e Higiene del Trabajo del Ministerio de Trabajo, y el Reglamento para\r\nContratación Laboral y Condiciones Salud Ocupacional de Adolescentes\r\nN°29220-MTSS (artículos 6 y 7); con el propósito de prevenir problemas de\r\naudición de los trabajadores que laboran en locales de trabajo en que los\r\nruidos superan los límites establecidos. A nivel supranacional la Conferencia\r\nde las Naciones Unidas sobre Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo celebrada en Río de\r\nJaneiro en Junio de 1992 plantea los lineamientos a seguir para combatir la\r\ncontaminación sónica. Las normas citadas si bien dispersas, están todas\r\ndirigidas a combatir desde diferentes flancos (ambiental, penal, laboral,\r\nsalubridad, internacional) la agresión directa y cotidiana al derecho al medio\r\nambiente, provocada por la contaminación sónica como parte de la contaminación\r\nde la atmósfera, concepto definido en el artículo 62 de la Ley Orgánica del\r\nAmbiente como: \"(…) la presencia en ella y en concentraciones superiores a\r\nlos niveles permisibles fijados, de partículas sólidas, polvo, humo, vapor,\r\ngases, malos olores, radiaciones, ruidos, ondas acústicas imperceptibles y\r\notros agentes de contaminación que el Poder Ejecutivo defina como tales en el\r\nreglamento.\" La normativa citada ejemplifica los esfuerzos realizados en\r\nmateria de control de ruido que sirve de vehículo para preservar el medio\r\nambiente, tema que está indisolublemente vinculado o conectado con otros\r\nderechos constitucionales, como el derecho a la salud, siendo una de las\r\nfinalidades principales del medio ambiente, la protección de la salud. De este\r\npunto de confluencia entre el medio ambiente y la salud, puede entonces decirse\r\nque un deterioro ambiental por exceso de ruido afecta al bienestar de las\r\npersonas y puede provocar daño a su salud, lo que justifica plenamente, a pesar\r\nde las evidentes dificultades que presenta el tema, la regulación de este\r\nagente contaminador. Así entonces, la realización de ciertas actividades que\r\neventualmente generen contaminación sónica se encuentran limitadas por respeto\r\nde la intimidad, el derecho a un ambiente sano y el derecho a la salud. Entre\r\nlas entidades estatales llamadas a velar por estos derechos están la Policía,\r\nla Municipalidad y el Ministerio de Salud, principalmente este último quien\r\ntiene la potestad de determinar la existencia de contaminación sónica. La\r\npolicía tiene a su cargo el resguardo del orden público, la Municipalidad el\r\ndeber de verificación los permisos para operar y el Ministerio de Salud le\r\ncorresponde la inspección y medición sónica -entre otras diligencias\r\nnecesarias-, a fin de poder determinar debidamente si efectivamente se presenta\r\nel problema sanitario de contaminación, así como que se establezcan las\r\neventuales medidas que técnicamente procedan para su solución. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nIV .- Sobre el caso concreto.- Tomando\r\ncomo base lo dicho en el considerando anterior, del informe rendido por el\r\nrepresentante de la autoridad recurrida -que se tienen por dados bajo fe de\r\njuramento con las consecuencias, incluso penales, previstas en el artículo 44\r\nde la Ley que rige esta Jurisdicción-, y la prueba aportada para la resolución\r\ndel presente asunto, se comprueba que en este caso se ha producido una\r\nviolación al derecho a la salud, al derecho a gozar de un ambiente libre de\r\ncontaminantes, y al derecho a la intimidad, de todos los vecinos del Bar Los\r\nAngeles ubicado en río cuarto de Grecia; además de una violación al derecho a\r\nla prestación eficiente de servicios públicos y al derecho de obtener pronta\r\nrespuesta, tal como se explica a continuación. En efecto, se comprueba lo\r\nafirmado por el recurrente, en el sentido de que el Bar en cuestión realiza\r\nactividades de karaoke desde el año 2006 sin contar con los debidos permisos y\r\nocasionando contaminación sónica. Sin embargo, a pesar de que tanto el\r\nMinisterio de Salud como la Municipalidad de Grecia han comprobado dicha\r\nsituación han sido lentos en el cumplimiento de las obligaciones que son\r\npropias de su esfera de competencias y tal pasividad ha afectado a los\r\namparados. A) Pasividad del Ministerio de Salud: Lo cual se comprueba\r\ntras observar que la primera denuncia interpuesta en contra del bar en cuestión\r\ndata de setiembre del 2006, y no es sino hasta tres años después, el 28 de\r\nsetiembre del 2009 que se procede a apercibir al propietario del lugar de\r\nsuspender la actividad de karaoke. Dictándose el acto de clausura hasta el 04 de\r\ndiciembre del 2009. Es decir, no es que el Ministerio recurrido no haya\r\nactuado, pues se comprueba que realizó dos inspecciones (una el 29 de setiembre\r\ndel 2006 y otra el 08 de mayo del 2009), realizó un apercibimiento al dueño del\r\nlocal (el 28 de setiembre del 2009), ordenó la clausura del establecimiento (el\r\n04 de noviembre del 2009), y resolvió los recursos de revocatoria y apelación\r\ncontra dicho acto (el 10 de diciembre del 2009 y el 04 de enero del 2010); sino\r\nque las actuaciones han sido lentas y pasivas, aún después de comprobar el\r\nfuncionamiento irregular del local en cuestión. Tal como se dijo, nótese que,\r\ntras la segunda inspección realizada el 08 de mayo del 2009, no es sino hasta\r\nSEIS MESES después que se procede a dictar el acto de clausura en noviembre del\r\n2009; y a la fecha de rendición del informe solicitado por esta Sala en enero\r\n2010 -habiendo transcurrido ya DOS MESES desde dictado dicho acto- no se\r\ncomprueba que en efecto se haya procedido a la clausura. En conclusión,\r\nlas actuaciones lentas del Ministerio de Salud para ejecutar sus actos, poner a\r\nderecho el funcionamiento irregular del bar en cuestión y detener el\r\nproblema de contaminación sónica ocasionó la violación de los derechos\r\nfundamentales de los amparados. B) Inacción de la Municipalidad de Grecia: En\r\natención a la omisión en que incurrió esta Municipalidad de informar\r\ndebidamente a esta Sala acerca de las infracciones constitucionales acusadas\r\npor el recurrente, aplicando lo dispuesto en el artículo 45 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción\r\nConstitucional que permite tener por ciertos los hechos referidos por el\r\nrecurrente, queda acreditado ante este Tribunal Constitucional que los vecinos\r\ndel Bar Los Angeles plantearon varias denuncias ante esa Corporación Municipal\r\nalegando el funcionamiento irregular de dicho bar. Sin embargo, dicha\r\nMunicipalidad no ha resuelto en forma definitiva las denuncias planteadas. A\r\npesar de que realizó una inspección el 15 de mayo del 2009 y constató la\r\nirregularidad, no procedió a ejecutar ninguna acción al respecto, ocasionando\r\ncon ello una violación a los derechos fundamentales de todos los vecinos del\r\nbar en cuestión. Recuérdese que corresponde a los gobiernos locales velar por\r\nla correcta aplicación de la normativa que tiene que ver con el funcionamiento\r\nde establecimientos mercantiles que expenden licores, siendo, en consecuencia,\r\nresponsable por el uso indebido de las patentes otorgadas, por las infracciones\r\nal régimen jurídico y en síntesis, por los excesos que se cometan; atribuciones\r\ny deberes éstos, para los cuales, cuenta con facultades de fiscalización y\r\ncontrol propias del poder de policía sobre las actividades que se desarrollan\r\nen su jurisdicción y para las cuales ha otorgado las respectivas licencias.\r\nEsto implica, que los entes municipales pueden disponer sobre la inspección de\r\nlos locales comerciales, dictar medidas cautelares de cierre en caso de\r\nflagrancia, en cuyo caso podría decretarse hasta el cierre temporal, previo\r\nlevantamiento de la información correspondiente para la imposición de una\r\nsanción, y estricto respecto del principio constitucional del debido proceso y\r\nel derecho de defensa. Por ello que no comprende esta Sala como, luego de haber\r\ncomprobado la irregularidad bajo la cual funcionaba el Bar Los Angeles –según\r\nvisita realizada el 08 de mayo del 2009 (folio 017)- al no contar con el\r\npermiso correspondiente para operar un karaoke, simplemente las autoridades\r\nmunicipales no hacen uso de sus competencias legales para poner a derecho el\r\nbar en cuestión. En conclusión, la falta de actuación del ente municipal\r\npara poner a derecho el funcionamiento irregular del bar en cuestión ocasionó\r\nla violación de los derechos fundamentales de los amparados.\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nV .- En conclusión.- Dada la\r\nlentitud con la que ha actuado el Ministerio de Salud y la inacción de la\r\nMunicipalidad de Grecia, respecto de solucionar el problema de contaminación\r\nsónica que produce el Bar Los Angeles en rio cuarto de Grecia, se constata la\r\nviolación a los derechos fundamentales de los amparados en cuanto a su derecho\r\na la salud, derecho a la intimidad, derecho a gozar de un ambiente sano,\r\nderecho de pronta respuesta y derecho a la prestación eficiente de servicios\r\npúblicos. Siendo, lo procedente acoger este recurso en todos sus extremos,\r\ncondenar en daños y perjuicios a los recurridos y en consecuencia ordenarles\r\ntomar inmediatamente las medidas correspondientes según el ámbito de sus\r\ncompetencias a efectos de poner al Bar en cuestión en regla para que se obtenga\r\nde producir contaminación sónica. Asimismo, aunque no hayan sido parte de este\r\nproceso, por haberse acreditado la irregularidad y para que no haya mayores\r\ntardanzas en el restablecimiento de los derechos fundamentados violados, se\r\nordena al dueño y arrendatario del local en cuestión a acatar las órdenes que\r\ndichas instituciones les giren y a abstenerse se continuar produciendo\r\ncontaminación sónica.\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. En consecuencia se\r\nordena a MARIA LUISA AVILA AGUIERO, en su calidad de Ministra de Salud, y a\r\nGIOVANNY ARGUEDAS QUESADA, en su calidad de Alcalde de la Municipalidad de\r\nGrecia, o a quienes en su lugar ocupen estos cargos proceder a tomar\r\ninmediatamente las medidas según el ámbito de sus competencias a efectos de\r\nponer al Bar Los Angeles ubicado en Rio Cuarto de Grecia en regla para que se\r\nobtenga de producir contaminación sónica. Se ordena a TRINO MONTERO CARMORA, en\r\nsu calidad del propietario del local y JOSE ANIBAL CASCANTE SOTO, en su calidad\r\nde arrendatario del local, obtenerse de producir contaminación sónica y acatar\r\nlas medidas que al respecto le impongan el Ministerio de Salud y la\r\nMunicipalidad de Grecia. Lo anterior, bajo apercibimiento de que podrían\r\nincurrir en el delito tipificado en el artículo 71 de la Ley de la Jurisdicción\r\nConstitucional, el cual dispone que se impondrá prisión de tres meses a dos\r\naños, o de veinte a sesenta días multa, a quien recibiere una orden que deba\r\ncumplir o hacer cumplir, dictada en un recurso de amparo y no la cumpliere o no\r\nla hiciere cumplir, siempre que el delito no esté más gravemente penado. Se\r\ncondena al Estado y a la Municipalidad de Grecia al pago de las costas, daños y\r\nperjuicios causados con los hechos que sirven de base a esta declaratoria, los\r\nque se liquidarán en ejecución de sentencia de lo contencioso administrativo. Notifíquese\r\nen forma personal a MARIA LUISA AVILA AGUIERO, en su calidad de Ministra de\r\nSalud, a GIOVANNY ARGUEDAS QUESADA, en su calidad de Alcalde de la\r\nMunicipalidad de Grecia, o a quienes en su lugar ocupen estos cargos. Comuníquese\r\na todas las partes y a TRINO MONTERO CARMORA, en su calidad del propietario del\r\nlocal y JOSE ANIBAL CASCANTE SOTO, en su calidad de arrendatario del local, por\r\nmedio de notificador de este despacho en el sitio denominado Bar y Restaurante\r\nLos Angeles en Rio Cuarto de Grecia de Alajuela. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\nAna Virginia Calzada M. \n\r\n\r\n\nPresidenta\n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n Adrián\r\nVargas B.\r\n Gilbert\r\nArmijo S. \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\n Fernando\r\nCruz C.\r\n Fernando Castillo V. \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\n Doris\r\nArias M\r\n Ricardo\r\nGuerrero P",
  "body_en_text": "Exp: 09-018154-0007-CO\n\nRes. No. 2010-000688\n\nCONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at nine hours and thirteen minutes of January fifteenth, two thousand ten.\n\nAmparo action filed by ALEX GERARDO ALFARO VÍQUEZ, identity card number 0205860446, against the MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND THE MUNICIPALITY OF GRECIA.\n\nWhereas:\n\n1.- By brief received in the Secretariat of the Chamber at 09 hours 06 minutes of December 7, 2009, the petitioner files an amparo action against the MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND THE MUNICIPALITY OF GRECIA and states that: a) He is a resident of Los Ángeles de Río Cuarto de Grecia, Alajuela, in front of the Escuela José Sánchez Chavarría. Since 2006, the Bar y Restaurante Los Ángeles, owned by Trino Montero Carmona, carries out karaoke activities throughout the day and also until the early hours of the morning, which it does without having adequate facilities to contain the noise, and without having permits from the Ministry of Health or the respective municipal license, since the latter is currently expired; b) The excessive noise interrupts the learning process of the children at the Escuela José Sánchez Chavarría, located 100 meters away, and affects the religious activities of the Catholic Temple -which is located in front of the establishment- and of the Evangelical Church of the community. The site, moreover, has become a meeting point for undesirable individuals and fights have already occurred there; c) In addition to the above, as the people who leave the business in the early morning hours make noise with the engines of their cars, it is very difficult for the community residents to sleep. Since 2006, the first complaints were filed against the premises before the Ministry and the Municipality, and despite the constant interventions of the Fuerza Pública of the place and the actions of Municipal officials and the Ministry of Health -who have issued several warnings to the business, under penalty of closure (cierre), and have instead been threatened by Montero Carmona-, in practice the problem has never been solved, since neither the Ministry nor the local corporation have acted with due diligence to enforce their own decisions.\n\n2.- MARIA LUISA AVILA AGUERO, in her capacity as Minister of Health, reports under oath (folio 035), that: a) On September 20, 2006, a complaint filed by several residents was received at the Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia, due to disagreement with the karaoke taking place at Bar Los Angeles. An inspection report no. 661-2006 of September 29, 2006 was generated, which is self-explanatory; b) Approximately two and a half years later, a second complaint was received on April 29, 2009. On May 18, 2009, a visit record to Bar Los Angeles was received from the license and construction inspector of the Municipality of Grecia. On May 8, 2009, an inspection visit was carried out as a result of the second complaint, and report no. 357-2009 was issued. On September 9, 2009, a copy of a note addressed to the Municipal Council of Grecia was received, attaching an inspection report from the Municipality of Grecia. Also on file are several reports from the Fuerza Pública of Grecia; c) On September 17, 2009, a note signed by Mr. Trino Montero Carmona, owner of the establishment in question, was received, requesting sonic measurement and a copy of the file. By official letter DARSG-563-2009 of September 23, a response was given to the previous note. The Health Authority requested support from the Fuerza Pública delegation to carry out an inspection of Bar Los Ángeles and notify a warning of suspension of karaoke activities. By official letter no. DARSG-572-2009 of September 28, 2009, the owner of the place was warned to suspend the karaoke activity; d) On November 3, 2009, a report from the Fuerza Pública was received. According to official letter no. DARSG-675-2009 of November 4, 2009, the owner was warned about the closure (clausura) order of the establishment in question. On November 9, 2009, a new complaint was received indicating that the cited establishment was operating karaoke during the day and night. On November 11, an appeal for reconsideration (recurso de revocatoria) with a subsidiary appeal was received against the closure order. The appeal for reconsideration was declared without merit by resolution DRRS-DR-J-3085-2009 at 08:33 hours on December 10, 2009, and the appeal was also declared without merit by resolution DM-JB-1000-2010 at 08:30 hours on January 4, 2010, because the denounced commercial establishment does not have a permit from that institution to carry out karaoke activities, nor does it have the structural conditions for carrying out said activity. Thus, the actions have been diligent and timely, so it requests that the filed action be dismissed.\n\n3.- According to the record on folio 070, it does not appear that the Mayor of the Municipality of Grecia has filed any brief or document in order to render the report that was requested.\n\n4.- In the proceedings followed, the legal requirements have been observed.\n\nDrafted by Magistrate Cruz Castro; and,\n\nConsidering:\n\nI - Object of the action.- The petitioner, a resident of Los Ángeles de Río Cuarto de Grecia, Alajuela, accuses the inaction of the respondent authorities regarding the problem of noise pollution (contaminación sónica) that has been produced since 2006 at the Bar y Restaurante Los Ángeles, which carries out karaoke activities throughout the day and also until the early morning hours.\n\nII.- Proven facts.- Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly demonstrated, either because they have been accredited or because the respondent has omitted to refer to them according to what was provided in the initial order:\n\na. That on September 20, 2006, the Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia received a complaint filed by several residents due to disagreement with the karaoke taking place at Bar Los Angeles (folio 05-08). This generated inspection report no. 661-2006 of September 29, 2006, according to which it is indicated that \"it is concluded that the premises do not have physical conditions that guarantee the containment of noises resulting from the karaoke activity, therefore it is recommended not to authorize the activity any further...\" (report on folio 036, folio 068-069).\n\nb. That on April 29, 2009, the Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia received a new complaint. This generated inspection report no. 357-2009 of May 8, 2009, according to which it is indicated that \"the activity lacks the corresponding permit... does not have structural conditions that guarantee the containment of noises resulting from the karaoke activity... they are warned that they must refrain from carrying out the complementary karaoke activity in the establishment in question...\" (report on folio 036, folio 066-067).\n\nc. That on May 15, 2009, the license and construction inspector of the Municipality of Grecia made a visit to Bar Los Angeles and recorded in the record that \"As for the karaoke permit, he does not present any document, he is warned that he must suspend said activity, until he has the corresponding permit...\" (folio 017).\n\nd. That on July 14, 2009, residents of Los Angeles denounced the noise caused by Bar Los Angeles before the Municipal Council of the Municipality of Grecia (folio 018).\n\ne. That the Fuerza Pública of Grecia prepared several reports regarding Bar Los Angeles (report on folio 037).\n\nf. That on September 17, 2009, the Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia received a note signed by Mr. Trino Montero Carmona, owner of the establishment in question, requesting sonic measurement and a copy of the file. By official letter no. DARSG-563-2009 of September 23, 2009, a response was given to the previous note (report on folio 037, folio 063).\n\ng. That by official letter no. DARSG-572-2009 of September 28, 2009, the Area Rectora de Salud warned the owner of the place to suspend the karaoke activity. For this purpose, it requested support from the Fuerza Pública delegation (report on folio 037, 060-062).\n\nh. According to official letter no. DARSG-675-2009 of November 4, 2009, the Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia warned the owner about the closure (clausura) order of the establishment in question (report on folio 037, folio 057-059).\n\ni. That on November 9, 2009, a new complaint was received indicating that the cited establishment was operating karaoke during the day and night (report on folio 037).\n\nj. That on November 11, 2009, an appeal for reconsideration (recurso de revocatoria) with a subsidiary appeal was received against the closure order. The appeal for reconsideration was declared without merit by resolution DRRS-DR-J-3085-2009 at 08:33 hours on December 10, 2009, and the appeal was also declared without merit by resolution DM-JB-1000-2010 at 08:30 hours on January 4, 2010, because the denounced commercial establishment does not have a permit from that institution to carry out karaoke activities, nor does it have the structural conditions for carrying out said activity (report on folio 037, folio 041-047, 052-056).\n\nIII.- On noise pollution (contaminación sónica), and its relationship with the right to health, the right to enjoy an environment free from contamination, and the right to privacy (right to tranquility).- This Chamber has recognized that both the right to health and the right to an environment free from contamination -without which the former could not be effective- are fundamental rights, so it is the obligation of the State to provide for their protection, either through general policies to procure that end, or through concrete acts by the Administration. There are various types of pollution, one of which refers to noise pollution (contaminación sónica) produced by noise. Noise is considered one of the forms of aggression against the environment that increases discomforts in an increasingly industrialized society. Annoyances from noises affect people's quality of life and health, as they can bring physiological and psychological consequences, especially in the face of persistent serious acoustic pollution. To address this problem, the State must design policies against that kind of atmospheric pollution, aimed at protecting people from excessive exposure to noise. In relation to the policies to reduce and prevent noise pollution (contaminación sónica) and to promote the protection of the legally relevant values involved in this case, which are the environment and health, the Chamber observes that although normative efforts in this regard stand out, the Costa Rican State has found it difficult to structure a set of rules to deal with the problem of noise, as well as to design and implement a noise reduction plan to control this environmental phenomenon more efficiently. Such regulatory deficiency is not a particular problem of our country, since noise is difficult to treat due, firstly, to its temporal, non-cumulative nature and the clear dispersion of its polluting agents - note that noise comes from a countless number of sources that attack the various situations in which the individual develops (street, workplace, home, hospitals, commercial zones, parks, schools, etc.). It is clear that the problem of noise is exacerbated due to both the dispersion and increase of pollution sources and the development of industry and construction, related to the degree of urbanization and density of the road network, among other factors. Added to the above is that the design of environmental policy has not given priority to this type of pollution, which, as stated, is difficult to treat, and to the problems related to its definition; all reasons that have hindered noise control. There does not exist in our legal system a general regulation that addresses all the main issues related to the topic; rather, there are dispersed and varied norms contained in different regulatory bodies, among which stands out the Ley Orgánica del Ambiente, which is Law No. 7554 of October 4, 1995, which grants noise a place in Articles 59 to 63 of Chapter XV titled \"Pollution\" and incorporates the precautionary principle in a generic manner by indicating that it is the State's responsibility to adopt the measures necessary to prevent or correct environmental pollution (Article 59). Article 60, in its subsection e), also incorporates the precautionary principle specifically regarding acoustic pollution and grants competence to the State, the municipalities, and other public institutions to prevent and control environmental pollution, and they must give priority to the establishment and operation of adequate services in fundamental areas for environmental health, among which noise pollution (contaminación sónica) control stands out. The precautionary principle is reinforced in Articles 61 and 63. The former refers to environmental contingency, according to which the competent authority shall dictate the necessary preventive and corrective measures when contingencies due to environmental pollution and others not contemplated in this law occur. Article 63 of the cited law provides the procedure and measures to take for the prevention and control of atmospheric deterioration, and to reduce and control emissions that exceed permissible limits. For its part, the Ley General de Salud provides in its Article 302 for protection from exposure to noise by indicating that no industrial establishment may operate if its work constitutes an element of danger, unhealthiness, or discomfort for the neighborhood \"... whether due to the maintenance conditions of the premises in which it operates, the form or systems it employs in the execution of its operations, the form or system it uses to eliminate the waste, residues, or emanations resulting from its tasks, or due to the noises produced by the operation.\" In the last paragraph of Article 294, the Ley General de Salud includes noise as an element capable of causing atmospheric pollution in the following terms: \"The emission of sounds that exceed internationally accepted and officially declared norms by the Ministry shall likewise be considered atmospheric pollution.\" The Costa Rican Legislator has provided for criminal sanctions, specifically through Article 390, subsection 2 of the Código Penal, applicable to transgressors of the tolerable pollution thresholds and ranges for noise. Labor legislation also protects workers exposed to high decibels in their workplaces, which it does through the Reglamento de Control de Ruidos y Vibraciones, which is Decreto Ejecutivo number 10541 of September 14, 1979, prepared by the Consejo de Seguridad e Higiene del Trabajo of the Ministry of Labor, and the Reglamento para Contratación Laboral y Condiciones Salud Ocupacional de Adolescentes N° 29220-MTSS (Articles 6 and 7); with the purpose of preventing hearing problems for workers who work in workplaces where noises exceed established limits. At the supranational level, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 sets out the guidelines to follow to combat noise pollution (contaminación sónica). The cited norms, although dispersed, are all aimed at combating from different flanks (environmental, criminal, labor, health, international) the direct and daily aggression against the right to the environment, caused by noise pollution (contaminación sónica) as part of atmospheric pollution, a concept defined in Article 62 of the Ley Orgánica del Ambiente as: \"(…) the presence in it, and in concentrations exceeding the established permissible levels, of solid particles, dust, smoke, vapor, gases, bad odors, radiation, noises, imperceptible acoustic waves, and other polluting agents that the Executive Branch defines as such in the regulation.\" The cited regulations exemplify the efforts made in noise control that serve as a vehicle to preserve the environment, a topic that is inextricably linked or connected to other constitutional rights, such as the right to health, because one of the main purposes of the environment is the protection of health. From this point of confluence between the environment and health, it can then be said that environmental deterioration due to excessive noise affects people's well-being and can cause damage to their health, which fully justifies, despite the evident difficulties presented by the topic, the regulation of this polluting agent. Thus, therefore, the carrying out of certain activities that eventually generate noise pollution (contaminación sónica) is limited out of respect for privacy, the right to a healthy environment, and the right to health. Among the state entities called upon to protect these rights are the Police, the Municipality, and the Ministry of Health, principally the latter, which has the power to determine the existence of noise pollution (contaminación sónica). The police are responsible for safeguarding public order, the Municipality has the duty to verify operating permits, and the Ministry of Health is responsible for inspection and sonic measurement -among other necessary steps-, in order to be able to properly determine if the health problem of pollution is effectively present, as well as to establish the eventual measures that are technically appropriate for its solution.\n\nIV.- Regarding the specific case.- Taking as a basis what is stated in the previous considering clause, from the report rendered by the representative of the respondent authority -which is taken as given under oath with the consequences, including criminal ones, provided for in Article 44 of the Law that governs this Jurisdiction-, and the evidence provided for the resolution of the present matter, it is verified that in this case a violation of the right to health, the right to enjoy an environment free from pollutants, and the right to privacy of all the residents of Bar Los Angeles located in Rio Cuarto de Grecia has occurred; in addition to a violation of the right to the efficient provision of public services and the right to obtain a prompt response, as explained below. Indeed, what was affirmed by the petitioner is verified, in the sense that the Bar in question has carried out karaoke activities since 2006 without having the proper permits and causing noise pollution (contaminación sónica). However, despite the fact that both the Ministry of Health and the Municipality of Grecia have verified this situation, they have been slow in fulfilling the obligations proper to their sphere of competencies, and such passivity has affected the protected parties. A) Passivity of the Ministry of Health: This is verified after observing that the first complaint filed against the bar in question dates from September 2006, and it is not until three years later, on September 28, 2009, that steps are taken to warn the owner of the place to suspend the karaoke activity. The closure (clausura) order was not issued until December 4, 2009. That is to say, it is not that the respondent Ministry has not acted, as it is verified that it conducted two inspections (one on September 29, 2006, and another on May 8, 2009), issued a warning to the owner of the premises (on September 28, 2009), ordered the closure (clausura) of the establishment (on November 4, 2009), and resolved the appeals for reconsideration and appeal against said act (on December 10, 2009, and January 4, 2010); rather, the actions have been slow and passive, even after verifying the irregular operation of the premises in question. As stated, note that after the second inspection carried out on May 8, 2009, it is not until SIX MONTHS later that the closure (clausura) order is issued in November 2009; and at the date of submission of the report requested by this Chamber in January 2010 -with TWO MONTHS having already elapsed since said order was issued- it is not verified that the closure (clausura) has actually been carried out. In conclusion, the slow actions of the Ministry of Health to execute its acts, to bring the irregular operation of the bar in question into compliance, and to stop the problem of noise pollution (contaminación sónica) caused the violation of the fundamental rights of the protected parties. B) Inaction of the Municipality of Grecia: Considering the omission incurred by this Municipality to duly inform this Chamber about the constitutional violations alleged by the petitioner, applying what is provided in Article 45 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, which allows the facts stated by the petitioner to be taken as true, it is accredited before this Constitutional Court that the residents of Bar Los Angeles filed several complaints before that Municipal Corporation alleging the irregular operation of said bar. However, said Municipality has not definitively resolved the complaints filed. Although it conducted an inspection on May 15, 2009, and verified the irregularity, it did not proceed to execute any action in that regard, thereby causing a violation of the fundamental rights of all the residents of the bar in question. It should be remembered that it is the responsibility of local governments to ensure the correct application of the regulations related to the operation of commercial establishments that sell liquor, being, consequently, responsible for the improper use of the granted licenses, for violations of the legal regime, and, in sum, for any excesses committed; these being attributions and duties for which it has oversight and control powers inherent to the police power over the activities carried out in its jurisdiction and for which it has granted the respective licenses. This implies that municipal entities can order the inspection of commercial premises, dictate precautionary measures of closure in case of flagrancy, in which case even temporary closure could be decreed, after gathering the corresponding information for imposing a sanction, and with strict respect for the constitutional principle of due process and the right of defense. This is why this Chamber does not understand how, after having verified the irregularity under which Bar Los Angeles operated –according to the visit made on May 8, 2009 (folio 017)– by not having the corresponding permit to operate a karaoke, the municipal authorities simply did not make use of their legal powers to bring the bar in question into compliance. In conclusion, the lack of action by the municipal entity to bring the irregular operation of the bar in question into compliance caused the violation of the fundamental rights of the protected parties.\n\nV.- In conclusion.- Given the slowness with which the Ministry of Health has acted and the inaction of the Municipality of Grecia, regarding solving the problem of noise pollution (contaminación sónica) produced by Bar Los Angeles in Rio Cuarto de Grecia, the violation of the fundamental rights of the protected parties is verified with respect to their right to health, right to privacy, right to enjoy a healthy environment, right to a prompt response, and right to the efficient provision of public services. The appropriate action is to grant this amparo action in all its aspects, to order the respondents to pay damages and losses, and consequently to order them to immediately take the corresponding measures according to the scope of their competencies in order to bring the Bar in question into compliance so that it ceases to produce noise pollution (contaminación sónica). Likewise, although they were not parties to this proceeding, given that the irregularity has been accredited and to avoid further delays in the restoration of the violated fundamental rights, the owner and the lessee of the premises in question are ordered to comply with the orders that said institutions issue to them and to refrain from continuing to produce noise pollution (contaminación sónica).\n\nTherefore:\n\nThe amparo action is declared WITH merit. Consequently, MARIA LUISA AVILA AGUIERO, in her capacity as Minister of Health, and GIOVANNY ARGUEDAS QUESADA, in his capacity as Mayor of the Municipality of Grecia, or whoever holds these positions in their place, are ordered to immediately take measures according to the scope of their competencies in order to bring Bar Los Angeles located in Rio Cuarto de Grecia into compliance so that it ceases to produce noise pollution (contaminación sónica). TRINO MONTERO CARMORA, in his capacity as owner of the premises, and JOSE ANIBAL CASCANTE SOTO, in his capacity as lessee of the premises, are ordered to cease producing noise pollution (contaminación sónica) and to comply with the measures imposed in this regard by the Ministry of Health and the Municipality of Grecia. The foregoing, under warning that they may incur the crime typified in Article 71 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional, which provides that imprisonment of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, shall be imposed on anyone who receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in an amparo action, and does not comply with it or does not have it complied with, provided the crime is not more severely punished. The State and the Municipality of Grecia are ordered to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts that serve as the basis for this declaration, which shall be settled in the enforcement of the judgment in the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. Notify personally MARIA LUISA AVILA AGUIERO, in her capacity as Minister of Health, GIOVANNY ARGUEDAS QUESADA, in his capacity as Mayor of the Municipality of Grecia, or whoever holds these positions in their place. Notify all parties and TRINO MONTERO CARMORA, in his capacity as owner of the premises, and JOSE ANIBAL CASCANTE SOTO, in his capacity as lessee of the premises, through a notifier of this office at the site called Bar y Restaurante Los Angeles in Rio Cuarto de Grecia de Alajuela.\n\nAna Virginia Calzada M.\nPresiding Judge\n\nAdrián Vargas B.\nGilbert Armijo S.\n\nFernando Cruz C.\nFernando Castillo V.\n\nDoris Arias M Ricardo Guerrero P\n\n**Exp: 09-018154-0007-CO**\n\n**Res. No. 2010-000688**\n\n**CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at nine hours and thirteen minutes of the fifteenth of January of two thousand ten.**\n\nAppeal for amparo filed by ALEX GERARDO ALFARO VÍQUEZ, identity card number 0205860446, against the MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND THE MUNICIPALITY OF GRECIA.\n\n**Resultando:**\n\n**1.-** By document received in the Secretariat of the Chamber at 09 hours 06 minutes of December 7, 2009, the petitioner files an appeal for amparo against the MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND THE MUNICIPALITY OF GRECIA and states that: **a)** He is a resident of Los Ángeles de Río Cuarto de Grecia, Alajuela, in front of the José Sánchez Chavarría School. Since 2006, the Bar y Restaurante Los Ángeles, owned by Trino Montero Carmona, has carried out karaoke activities throughout the day and also until late hours of the night, which it does without having adequate facilities to contain the noise, and without having permits from the Ministry of Health or the respective municipal license (patente municipal), as this is currently expired; **b)** The excessive noise interrupts the learning process of the children at the José Sánchez Chavarría School, located 100 meters away, and affects the religious activities of the Catholic Temple -which is located in front of the establishment- and of the Evangelical Church of the community. The site has also become a meeting point for undesirable individuals and brawls have already occurred there; **c)** In addition to the above, as the people who leave the business at late hours of the night make noise with the engines of their automobiles, it is very difficult for the residents of the community to sleep. Since 2006, the first complaints against the premises were filed before the Ministry and the Municipality, and despite the constant interventions of the Fuerza Pública of the area and the actions of Municipal officials and the Ministry of Health -who have made several warnings (apercibimientos) to the business, under penalty of closure, and have instead been threatened by Montero Carmona-, in practice the problem has never been solved, since neither the Ministry nor the local corporation have acted with due diligence to enforce their own decisions.\n\n**2.-** MARIA LUISA AVILA AGUERO, in her capacity as Minister of Health, reports under oath (folio 035), that: **a)** On September 20, 2006, a complaint filed by several neighbors was received at the Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia, regarding disagreement with karaoke performed at Bar Los Angeles. Inspection report No. 661-2006 was generated on September 29, 2006, which is self-explanatory; **b)** Approximately two and a half years later, a second complaint was received dated April 29, 2009. On May 18, 2009, a visit record to Bar Los Ángeles was received from the license and construction inspector of the Municipality of Grecia. On May 8, 2009, an inspection visit was carried out as a consequence of the second complaint, and report No. 357-2009 was generated. On September 9, 2009, a copy of a note addressed to the Municipal Council of Grecia was received, attaching an inspection report from the Municipality of Grecia. Several reports from the Fuerza Pública of Grecia are also in the file; **c)** On September 17, 2009, a note signed by Mr. Trino Montero Carmona, owner of the establishment in question, was received, requesting a sonic measurement and a copy of the file. The previous note was responded to by official letter DARSG-563-2009 of September 23. The Health Authority requested support from the delegation of the Fuerza Pública to carry out an inspection of Bar Los Ángeles and to notify the warning (apercibimiento) of suspension of karaoke activities. In official letter No. DARSG-572-2009 of September 28, 2009, the owner of the place was warned (apercibió) to suspend the karaoke activity; **d)** On November 3, 2009, a report from the Fuerza Pública was received. According to official letter No. DARSG-675-2009 of November 4, 2009, the owner was warned (apercibió) about the closure (clausura) of the establishment in question. On November 9, 2009, a new complaint was received indicating that the said establishment is operating karaoke during the day and night. On November 11, a motion for reversal (recurso de revocatoria) with appeal in subsidio was received against the closure. The motion for reversal was declared without merit by resolution DRRS-DR-J-3085-2009 at 08:33 hours on December 10, 2009, and the appeal was also declared without merit by resolution DM-JB-1000-2010 at 08:30 hours on January 4, 2010, because the reported commercial establishment does not have a permit from that institution to carry out karaoke activities, nor does it have the structural conditions for carrying out said activity. Thus, the actions have been diligent and timely, and therefore requests that the filed appeal be dismissed.\n\n**3.-** According to the record on folio 070, it does not appear that the Mayor of the Municipality of Grecia has presented any document or brief to render the report that was requested.\n\n**4.-** In the proceedings followed, the legal prescriptions have been observed.\n\nDrafted by Magistrate **Cruz Castro**; and,\n\n**Considering:**\n\n**I** **- Object of the appeal.-** The petitioner, a resident of Los Ángeles de Río Cuarto de Grecia Alajuela, accuses the inaction of the respondent authorities regarding the problem of sonic pollution (contaminación sónica) that has been occurring since 2006 at the Bar y Restaurante Los Ángeles, which carries out karaoke activities throughout the day and also until late hours of the night.\n\n**II** **.- Proven facts.-** Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed as duly proven, either because they have been accredited or because the respondent has omitted to refer to them as provided for in the initial order:\n\na. That on *September 20, 2006*, the Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia received a **complaint** filed by several neighbors due to disagreement with karaoke performed at Bar Los Angeles (folio 05-08). This generated **inspection** report No. 661-2006 of *September 29, 2006*, according to which it is indicated that *“it is concluded that the premises do not have physical conditions that guarantee the containment (confinamiento) of the noise produced by the karaoke activity, therefore it is recommended not to authorize the activity any further…”* (report at folio 036, folio 068-069).\n\nb. That on *April 29, 2009*, the Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia received a new **complaint.** This generated **inspection** report No. 357-2009 of *May 8, 2009*, according to which it is indicated that *“the activity lacks the corresponding permit … it does not have structural conditions that guarantee the containment (confinamiento) of the noise produced by the karaoke activity… it is warned (apercibe) that it must refrain from carrying out the complementary karaoke activity in the establishment in question…”* (report at folio 036, folio 066-067).\n\nc. That on *May 15, 2009*, the license and construction inspector of the Municipality of Grecia visited Bar Los Angeles and recorded in the record that *“Regarding the karaoke permit, he does not present any document, he is warned that he must suspend said activity, until he has the corresponding permit…”* (folio 017).\n\nd. That on *July 14, 2009*, residents of Los Angeles filed a complaint regarding the noise caused by Bar Los Angeles before the Municipal Council of the Municipality of Grecia (folio 018).\n\ne. That the Fuerza Pública of Grecia made several reports regarding Bar Los Angeles (report at folio 037).\n\nf. That on *September 17, 2009*, the Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia received a note signed by Mr. Trino Montero Carmona, owner of the establishment in question, requesting a sonic measurement and a copy of the file. By means of **official letter No. DARSG-563-2009** of *September 23, 2009*, the previous note was answered (report at folio 037, folio 063).\n\ng. That by means of **official letter No. DARSG-572-2009** of *September 28, 2009*, the Area Rectora de Salud warned (apercibió) the owner of the place to suspend the karaoke activity. To do so, it requested support from the Fuerza Pública delegation (report at folio 037, 060-062).\n\nh. According to official letter No. DARSG-675-2009 of *November 4, 2009*, the Area Rectora de Salud de Grecia warned (apercibió) the owner about the **closure (acto de clausura) of the establishment** in question (report at folio 037, folio 057-059).\n\ni. That on *November 9, 2009*, a **new complaint** was received indicating that the cited establishment is operating karaoke during the day and night (report at folio 037).\n\nj. That on *November 11, 2009*, a **motion for reversal** **with appeal** in subsidio was received against the closure. The motion for reversal was declared **without merit** by resolution DRRS-DR-J-3085-2009 at 08:33 hours on *December 10, 2009*, and the appeal was also declared **without merit** by resolution DM-JB-1000-2010 at 08:30 hours on *January 4, 2010*, because the reported commercial establishment does not have a permit from that institution to carry out karaoke activities, nor does it have the structural conditions for carrying out said activity (report at folio 037, folio 041-047, 052-056).\n\n**III** **.- On sonic pollution, and its relationship with the right to health, the right to enjoy an environment free of contamination, and the right to privacy (right to tranquility).-** This Chamber has recognized that both the right to health and the right to an environment free of contamination -without which the former could not be realized- are fundamental rights, so it is the obligation of the State to provide for their protection, either through general policies to procure that end, or through specific acts by the Administration. There are several types of pollution, one of them refers to sonic pollution (contaminación sónica) produced by noise. Noise is considered one of the forms of aggression to the environment that increases discomforts in an increasingly industrialized society. Annoyances from noise affect people's quality of life and health, as they can bring with them physiological and psychological consequences, especially in the face of persistent severe acoustic pollution. To address such a problem, the State must design policies against that class of atmospheric pollution, directed at protecting people from excessive exposure to noise. In relation to the policies to reduce and avoid sonic pollution as well as to promote the protection of the legally relevant values that in this case are involved, which are the environment and health, the Chamber observes that although normative efforts stand out in this regard, the Costa Rican State has found it difficult to structure a set of rules that allow it to face the noise problem as well as to design and put into practice a noise reduction plan that allows for more efficient control of the environmental phenomenon. Such normative lack is not a particular problem of our country, as noise presents itself as difficult to treat given, in the first place, its temporary, non-cumulative nature and the clear dispersion of its polluting agents -note that noise comes from a countless number of sources that attack the diverse situations in which the individual develops (street, workplace, dwelling, hospitals, commercial zones, parks, schools, etc.). It is clear that the noise problem is worsening due both to the dispersion and increase of pollution sources as well as to the development of industry and construction, related to the degree of urbanization and density of the road network, among other factors. To the above is added that the design of the environmental policy has not granted priority to this type of pollution, which, as said, is of difficult treatment, and to the problems relating to its definition; all reasons that have hindered noise control. In our legal system, there is no general regulation that contemplates all the main issues related to the subject, but rather there are dispersed and varied rules contained in different normative bodies among which the Ley Orgánica del Ambiente, No. 7554 of October 4, 1995, stands out, which grants noise a place in articles 59 to 63 of Chapter XV called \"Contamination\" and in which it incorporates the precautionary principle (principio precautorio) in a generic manner by indicating that it is incumbent upon the State to adopt the measures that are necessary to prevent or correct environmental pollution (article 59). Article 60 in its subsection e) also includes the precautionary principle specifically regarding acoustic pollution and empowers the State, the municipalidades and other public institutions, to prevent and control environmental pollution, having to give priority to the establishment and operation of adequate services in fundamental areas for environmental health, among which the control of sonic pollution stands out. The precautionary principle is reinforced in articles 61 and 63, the first referring to environmental contingency and according to which the competent authority shall dictate the necessary preventive and corrective measures when contingencies due to environmental pollution and others not contemplated in this law occur. Article 63 of the cited law provides the procedure and measures to be taken for the prevention and control of the deterioration of the atmosphere, and to diminish and control the emissions that exceed the permissible limits. For its part, the Ley General de Salud provides in its article 302 for protection from exposure to noise by indicating that no industrial establishment may operate if its labors constitute an element of danger, insalubrity or discomfort for the vicinity \"...\n\n…by the conditions of maintenance of the premises in which it operates, by the form or systems it employs in carrying out its operations, by the form or system it uses to eliminate the waste, residues, or emanations resulting from its work, or by the noise produced by the operation.\" In the last paragraph of Article 294, the General Health Law includes noise as an element capable of causing atmospheric pollution, in the following terms: \"The emission of sounds that exceed internationally accepted and officially declared standards by the Ministry shall likewise be considered atmospheric pollution.\" The Costa Rican Legislator has provided for criminal sanctions, specifically through Article 390 subsection 2 of the Criminal Code, applicable to violators of tolerable noise pollution thresholds and ranges. Labor legislation also protects workers exposed to high decibel levels in their workplaces, which it does through the Regulation for the Control of Noise and Vibrations (Reglamento de Control de Ruidos y Vibraciones), which is Executive Decree (Decreto Ejecutivo) number 10541 of September 14, 1979, prepared by the Occupational Safety and Health Council of the Ministry of Labor, and the Regulation for Labor Contracting and Occupational Health Conditions for Adolescents (Reglamento para Contratación Laboral y Condiciones Salud Ocupacional de Adolescentes) N°29220-MTSS (Articles 6 and 7); with the purpose of preventing hearing problems for workers who work in workplaces where noise exceeds established limits. At the supranational level, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 sets forth the guidelines to follow to combat noise pollution (contaminación sónica). The cited norms, although dispersed, are all aimed at combating from different flanks (environmental, criminal, labor, health, international) the direct and daily aggression to the right to the environment, caused by noise pollution as part of atmospheric pollution, a concept defined in Article 62 of the Organic Law of the Environment (Ley Orgánica del Ambiente) as: \"(…) the presence in it and in concentrations higher than the fixed permissible levels, of solid particles, dust, smoke, vapor, gases, bad odors, radiations, noises, imperceptible acoustic waves and other polluting agents that the Executive Branch defines as such in the regulation.\" The cited regulations exemplify the efforts made in the area of noise control that serves as a vehicle to preserve the environment, a subject that is inextricably linked or connected with other constitutional rights, such as the right to health, one of the main purposes of the environment being the protection of health. From this point of confluence between the environment and health, it can then be said that environmental deterioration due to excess noise affects people's well-being and can cause damage to their health, which fully justifies, despite the evident difficulties the subject presents, the regulation of this polluting agent. Thus, the performance of certain activities that eventually generate noise pollution is limited by respect for privacy, the right to a healthy environment, and the right to health. Among the state entities called upon to safeguard these rights are the Police, the Municipality, and the Ministry of Health, mainly the latter, which has the authority to determine the existence of noise pollution. The police are responsible for maintaining public order, the Municipality has the duty to verify operating permits, and the Ministry of Health is responsible for inspection and noise measurement -among other necessary proceedings-, in order to be able to properly determine if the health problem of pollution actually exists, as well as to establish the eventual measures that are technically appropriate for its solution.\n\nIV .- On the specific case.- Taking as a basis what was stated in the preceding whereas clause (considerando), from the report rendered by the representative of the respondent authority -which is taken as given under oath with the consequences, including criminal ones, provided for in Article 44 of the Law governing this Jurisdiction-, and the evidence provided for the resolution of this matter, it is verified that in this case there has been a violation of the right to health, the right to enjoy an environment free of pollutants, and the right to privacy, of all the neighbors of Bar Los Angeles located in río cuarto de Grecia; in addition to a violation of the right to the efficient provision of public services and the right to obtain a prompt response, as explained below. Indeed, what the petitioner affirmed is verified, in the sense that the Bar in question has carried out karaoke activities since 2006 without the proper permits and causing noise pollution (contaminación sónica). However, despite the fact that both the Ministry of Health and the Municipality of Grecia have verified this situation, they have been slow in fulfilling the obligations that are proper to their sphere of competence, and such passivity has affected the protected parties. A) Passivity of the Ministry of Health: This is verified upon observing that the first complaint filed against the bar in question dates from September 2006, and it is not until three years later, on September 28, 2009, that the owner of the place is warned to suspend the karaoke activity. The closure order (acto de clausura) was not issued until December 4, 2009. That is, it is not that the respondent Ministry has not acted, as it is verified that it carried out two inspections (one on September 29, 2006, and another on May 8, 2009), issued a warning (apercibimiento) to the owner of the premises (on September 28, 2009), ordered the closure of the establishment (on November 4, 2009), and resolved the appeals for revocation and appeal against said order (on December 10, 2009, and January 4, 2010); but rather that the actions have been slow and passive, even after verifying the irregular operation of the premises in question. As stated, note that, after the second inspection carried out on May 8, 2009, it is not until SIX MONTHS later that the closure order was issued in November 2009; and as of the date of the rendering of the report requested by this Chamber in January 2010 - TWO MONTHS having already elapsed since said order was issued - it is not verified that the closure has actually been carried out. In conclusion, the slow actions of the Ministry of Health to execute its orders, to bring the irregular operation of the bar in question into compliance, and to stop the problem of noise pollution caused the violation of the fundamental rights of the protected parties. B) Inaction of the Municipality of Grecia: In consideration of the omission incurred by this Municipality to duly inform this Chamber about the constitutional violations alleged by the petitioner, applying the provisions of Article 45 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional) which allows the facts referred to by the petitioner to be taken as true, it is accredited before this Constitutional Court that the neighbors of Bar Los Angeles filed several complaints before that Municipal Corporation alleging the irregular operation of said bar. However, said Municipality has not definitively resolved the complaints filed. Despite conducting an inspection on May 15, 2009, and confirming the irregularity, it did not proceed to execute any action in this regard, thereby causing a violation of the fundamental rights of all the neighbors of the bar in question. It is recalled that it is the responsibility of local governments to ensure the correct application of the regulations related to the operation of commercial establishments that sell liquor, being, consequently, responsible for the improper use of the granted licenses (patentes), for violations of the legal regime, and in summary, for the excesses committed; attributions and duties these, for which it has inspection and control powers inherent to the police power over the activities carried out in its jurisdiction and for which it has granted the respective licenses. This implies that municipal entities may provide for the inspection of commercial premises, issue precautionary closure measures in cases of flagrancy, in which case even temporary closure could be decreed, subject to the prior collection of the corresponding information for the imposition of a sanction, and strict respect for the constitutional principle of due process and the right of defense. Therefore, this Chamber does not understand how, after having verified the irregularity under which Bar Los Angeles operated –according to a visit made on May 8, 2009 (folio 017)– by not having the corresponding permit to operate a karaoke, the municipal authorities simply did not make use of their legal powers to bring the bar in question into compliance. In conclusion, the lack of action by the municipal entity to bring the irregular operation of the bar in question into compliance caused the violation of the fundamental rights of the protected parties.\n\nV .- In conclusion.- Given the slowness with which the Ministry of Health has acted and the inaction of the Municipality of Grecia, regarding solving the problem of noise pollution (contaminación sónica) produced by Bar Los Angeles in rio cuarto de Grecia, the violation of the fundamental rights of the protected parties is verified regarding their right to health, right to privacy, right to enjoy a healthy environment, right to a prompt response, and right to the efficient provision of public services. It being appropriate to grant this appeal (recurso) in all its aspects, to order the respondents to pay damages and losses, and consequently to order them to immediately take the corresponding measures according to the scope of their competencies in order to bring the Bar in question into compliance so that it ceases to produce noise pollution. Likewise, although they have not been parties to this process, given that the irregularity has been accredited and so that there are no further delays in the reestablishment of the violated fundamental rights, the owner and lessee (arrendatario) of the premises in question are ordered to comply with the orders that said institutions issue to them and to refrain from continuing to produce noise pollution.\n\nPor tanto:\n\nThe appeal (recurso) is declared GRANTED. Consequently, MARIA LUISA AVILA AGUIERO, in her capacity as Minister of Health, and GIOVANNY ARGUEDAS QUESADA, in his capacity as Mayor of the Municipality of Grecia, or whoever occupies these positions in their stead, are ordered to proceed to immediately take the measures according to the scope of their competencies in order to bring Bar Los Angeles located in Rio Cuarto de Grecia into compliance so that it ceases to produce noise pollution (contaminación sónica). TRINO MONTERO CARMORA, in his capacity as owner of the premises, and JOSE ANIBAL CASCANTE SOTO, in his capacity as lessee (arrendatario) of the premises, are ordered to cease producing noise pollution and to comply with the measures imposed in this regard by the Ministry of Health and the Municipality of Grecia. The foregoing, under warning (apercibimiento) that they could incur the crime defined in Article 71 of the Law of Constitutional Jurisdiction (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional), which provides that a penalty of imprisonment from three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, shall be imposed on anyone who receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in an amparo appeal, and does not comply with it or does not have it complied with, provided that the crime is not more severely punished. The State and the Municipality of Grecia are ordered to pay the costs (costas), damages, and losses (daños y perjuicios) caused by the facts that serve as the basis for this declaration, which shall be liquidated in the execution of the sentence of the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. Notify personally MARIA LUISA AVILA AGUIERO, in her capacity as Minister of Health, GIOVANNY ARGUEDAS QUESADA, in his capacity as Mayor of the Municipality of Grecia, or whoever occupies these positions in their stead. Notify all parties and TRINO MONTERO CARMORA, in his capacity as owner of the premises, and JOSE ANIBAL CASCANTE SOTO, in his capacity as lessee (arrendatario) of the premises, by means of a notifier of this office at the site called Bar y Restaurante Los Angeles in Rio Cuarto de Grecia de Alajuela.\n\n\n\nAna Virginia Calzada M.\n\nPresidenta\n\n\n\nAdrián Vargas B.\n                                                                                        Gilbert Armijo S.\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                                                        Fernando Cruz C.\n                                                                                        Fernando Castillo V.\n\nDoris Arias M\n                                                                                            Ricardo Guerrero P\n\n<u>In conclusion</u>, the failure of the municipal entity to act to regularize the irregular operation of the bar in question caused the violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioners.\"</span><span lang=EN style='mso-ansi-language:EN'><o:p></o:p></span></p>\n\n<p class=MsoNormal><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>\n\n</div>\n\n</body>\n\n</html>\"\n\nArticle 60, subsection e) also incorporates the precautionary principle specifically regarding noise pollution (contaminación acústica) and grants competence to the State, municipalities, and other public institutions to prevent and control environmental pollution, with priority given to the establishment and operation of adequate services in areas fundamental to environmental health, among which the control of noise pollution (contaminación sónica) stands out. The precautionary principle is reinforced in Articles 61 and 63, the former referring to environmental contingency (contingencia ambiental), according to which the competent authority shall issue the necessary preventive and corrective measures when contingencies arise from environmental pollution and others not contemplated in this law. Article 63 of the cited law provides the procedure and measures to be taken for the prevention and control of the deterioration of the atmosphere, and to reduce and control emissions that exceed permissible limits. For its part, the General Health Law (Ley General de Salud) provides in its Article 302 for protection from exposure to noise, stating that no industrial establishment may operate if its work constitutes a danger, health hazard, or nuisance to the neighborhood \"... whether due to the maintenance conditions of the premises where it operates, the form or systems it employs in carrying out its operations, the form or system it uses to eliminate waste, residues, or emanations resulting from its tasks, or due to the noise produced by the operation.\" In the last paragraph of Article 294, the General Health Law includes noise as an element likely to cause atmospheric pollution (contaminación atmosférica) in the following terms: \"The emission of sounds that exceed internationally accepted standards and officially declared by the Ministry shall also be considered atmospheric pollution.\" The Costa Rican legislator has provided for criminal sanctions, specifically through Article 390, subsection 2 of the Penal Code (Código Penal), applicable to transgressors of tolerable noise pollution thresholds and bands. Labor legislation also protects workers exposed to high decibels in their workplaces, which it does through the Regulation on the Control of Noise and Vibrations (Reglamento de Control de Ruidos y Vibraciones), which is Executive Decree (Decreto Ejecutivo) No. 10541 of September 14, 1979, prepared by the Occupational Safety and Hygiene Council (Consejo de Seguridad e Higiene del Trabajo) of the Ministry of Labor, and the Regulation for the Labor Contracting and Occupational Health Conditions of Adolescents No. 29220-MTSS (Articles 6 and 7); with the purpose of preventing hearing problems for workers who work in workplaces where noise exceeds established limits. At the supranational level, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 sets forth the guidelines to follow to combat noise pollution. The cited norms, although dispersed, are all aimed at combating from different flanks (environmental, criminal, labor, health, international) the direct and daily aggression against the right to the environment, caused by noise pollution as part of atmospheric pollution, a concept defined in Article 62 of the Organic Environmental Law (Ley Orgánica del Ambiente) as: \"(...) the presence therein, in concentrations exceeding the established permissible levels, of solid particles, dust, smoke, vapor, gases, bad odors, radiation, noise, imperceptible acoustic waves, and other pollutants that the Executive Branch defines as such in the regulation.\" The cited regulations exemplify the efforts made in the area of noise control, which serves as a vehicle to preserve the environment, a topic that is inextricably linked or connected with other constitutional rights, such as the right to health, one of the main purposes of the environment being the protection of health. From this point of confluence between the environment and health, it can therefore be said that environmental deterioration due to excess noise affects people's well-being and may cause damage to their health, which fully justifies, despite the evident difficulties the subject presents, the regulation of this polluting agent. Thus, the carrying out of certain activities that may eventually generate noise pollution are limited out of respect for privacy, the right to a healthy environment, and the right to health. Among the state entities called upon to safeguard these rights are the Police, the Municipality, and the Ministry of Health, primarily the latter which has the authority to determine the existence of noise pollution. The police are responsible for safeguarding public order, the Municipality has the duty of verifying operating permits, and the Ministry of Health is responsible for inspection and sound measurement (sonic measurement, medición sónica) -among other necessary procedures-, in order to duly determine whether the health problem of pollution actually exists, as well as to establish any measures that are technically appropriate for its solution.\n\n**IV .- On the specific case.-** Taking as a basis what was stated in the preceding recital, from the report rendered by the representative of the respondent authority -which is taken as given under oath with the consequences, including criminal ones, provided for in Article 44 of the Law governing this Jurisdiction-, and the evidence provided for the resolution of this matter, it is proven that in this case a violation has occurred of the right to health, the right to enjoy a pollutant-free environment, and the right to privacy, of all the neighbors of Bar Los Angeles located in Río Cuarto de Grecia; in addition to a violation of the right to efficient public service delivery and the right to obtain a prompt response, as explained below. Indeed, what the petitioner asserts is proven, in that the Bar in question has been conducting karaoke activities since 2006 without the proper permits and causing noise pollution. However, even though both the Ministry of Health and the Municipality of Grecia have verified this situation, they have been slow in fulfilling the obligations that are within their sphere of competence, and such passivity has affected the protected parties. **A) Passivity of the Ministry of Health:** This is proven after observing that the first complaint filed against the bar in question dates back to September 2006, and it is not until three years later, on September 28, 2009, that the proprietor of the location was warned to suspend the karaoke activity. The closure order being issued until December 4, 2009. That is, it is not that the respondent Ministry has failed to act, as it is proven that it conducted two inspections (one on September 29, 2006, and another on May 8, 2009), issued a warning to the owner of the premises (on September 28, 2009), ordered the closure of the establishment (on November 4, 2009), and resolved the motions for reconsideration and appeal against said act (on December 10, 2009, and January 4, 2010); rather, the actions have been slow and passive, even after verifying the irregular operation of the premises in question. As stated, note that, after the second inspection carried out on May 8, 2009, it is not until SIX MONTHS later that the closure order was issued in November 2009; and as of the date of the report requested by this Chamber in January 2010 - TWO MONTHS having already passed since said act was ordered - it is not proven that the closure has indeed been carried out. *In conclusion*, the slow actions of the Ministry of Health to execute its orders, bring the irregular operation of the bar in question into compliance, and stop the noise pollution problem caused the violation of the fundamental rights of the protected parties. **B) Inaction of the Municipality of Grecia:** In consideration of the omission incurred by this Municipality in duly informing this Chamber about the constitutional violations alleged by the petitioner, applying the provision of Article 45 of the Constitutional Jurisdiction Law (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional) that permits taking the facts referred to by the petitioner as true, it is accredited before this Constitutional Court that the neighbors of Bar Los Angeles filed several complaints before that Municipal Corporation alleging the irregular operation of said bar. However, said Municipality has not definitively resolved the complaints filed. Despite conducting an inspection on May 15, 2009, and confirming the irregularity, it did not proceed to execute any action in this regard, thereby causing a violation of the fundamental rights of all the neighbors of the bar in question. It should be remembered that local governments are responsible for ensuring the correct application of regulations related to the operation of commercial establishments that sell liquor, being, consequently, responsible for the improper use of the patents granted, for infractions of the legal regime, and in summary, for the excesses committed; these attributes and duties, for which they have powers of supervision and control inherent to the police power over activities carried out within their jurisdiction and for which they have granted the respective licenses. This implies that municipal entities may order the inspection of commercial premises, dictate precautionary closure measures in cases of flagrancy, in which case even temporary closure could be decreed, prior to gathering the corresponding information for the imposition of a sanction, and with strict respect for the constitutional principle of due process and the right of defense. Therefore, this Chamber does not understand how, after having verified the irregularity under which Bar Los Angeles operated –according to a visit made on May 8, 2009 (folio 017)– for not having the corresponding permit to operate a karaoke, the municipal authorities simply did not make use of their legal powers to bring the bar in question into compliance. *In conclusion*, the lack of action by the municipal entity to bring the irregular operation of the bar in question into compliance caused the violation of the fundamental rights of the protected parties.\n\n**V .- In conclusion.-** Given the slowness with which the Ministry of Health has acted and the inaction of the Municipality of Grecia, regarding solving the noise pollution problem produced by Bar Los Angeles in Río Cuarto de Grecia, the violation of the fundamental rights of the protected parties is established, regarding their right to health, right to privacy, right to enjoy a healthy environment, right to a prompt response, and right to efficient public service delivery. The appropriate course being to grant this appeal in its entirety, award damages against the respondents, and consequently order them to immediately take the corresponding measures according to their respective areas of competence in order to bring the Bar in question into compliance so that it ceases producing noise pollution. Likewise, even though they were not parties to this proceeding, given that the irregularity has been accredited and so that there are no further delays in the restoration of the violated fundamental rights, the owner and lessee of the premises in question are ordered to comply with the orders that said institutions give them and to abstain from continuing to produce noise pollution.\n\n**Por tanto:**\n\nIt is declared WITH merit the appeal. Consequently, MARIA LUISA AVILA AGUIERO, in her capacity as Minister of Health, and GIOVANNY ARGUEDAS QUESADA, in his capacity as Mayor of the Municipality of Grecia, or whoever occupies these positions in their stead, are ordered to immediately take the measures according to their respective areas of competence in order to bring Bar Los Angeles located in Rio Cuarto de Grecia into compliance so that it ceases producing noise pollution. TRINO MONTERO CARMORA, in his capacity as owner of the premises, and JOSE ANIBAL CASCANTE SOTO, in his capacity as lessee of the premises, are ordered to cease producing noise pollution and to comply with the measures that the Ministry of Health and the Municipality of Grecia impose on them in this regard. The foregoing, under warning that they may incur the crime typified in Article 71 of the Constitutional Jurisdiction Law, which provides that imprisonment of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, shall be imposed on anyone who receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in an amparo appeal, and does not comply with it or have it complied with, provided the crime is not more severely punished. The State and the Municipality of Grecia are ordered to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts that serve as a basis for this declaration, which shall be liquidated in the enforcement of the judgment of the administrative contentious jurisdiction. **Notify personally** MARIA LUISA AVILA AGUIERO, in her capacity as Minister of Health, GIOVANNY ARGUEDAS QUESADA, in his capacity as Mayor of the Municipality of Grecia, or whoever occupies these positions in their stead. **Communicate** to all parties and to TRINO MONTERO CARMORA, in his capacity as owner of the premises, and JOSE ANIBAL CASCANTE SOTO, in his capacity as lessee of the premises, by means of a bailiff of this office at the site called Bar y Restaurante Los Angeles in Rio Cuarto de Grecia de Alajuela.\n\n**Ana Virginia Calzada M.**\n\n**Presidenta**\n\n**Adrián Vargas B. Gilbert Armijo S.**\n\n**Fernando Cruz C. Fernando Castillo V.**\n\n**Doris Arias M Ricardo Guerrero P**"
}