{ "id": "nexus-sen-1-0007-494148", "citation": "Res. 15777-2010 Sala Constitucional", "section": "nexus_decisions", "doc_type": "constitutional_decision", "title_es": "Municipalidad de Puntarenas debe coordinar solución a inundaciones por mareas altas en Barrio El Carmen", "title_en": "Municipality of Puntarenas must coordinate solution to high-tide flooding in Barrio El Carmen", "summary_es": "La Sala Constitucional conoció un recurso de amparo interpuesto por un vecino de Barrio El Carmen, Puntarenas, contra el Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes, por las constantes inundaciones que sufría debido al desbordamiento del estero durante mareas altas, lo que ponía en peligro su salud, su vivienda y sus pertenencias. La Sala determinó que el problema era conocido por las autoridades municipales, quienes no habían adoptado medidas suficientes para resolverlo, y que otras instituciones como el Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados y el Ministerio de Salud tenían responsabilidades concurrentes. Tras analizar la situación, el Tribunal concluyó que existía una clara omisión y negligencia de la Municipalidad de Puntarenas, la cual, conforme al artículo 169 constitucional, debe velar por los intereses locales y coordinar con otras entidades. Por ello, declaró con lugar el recurso y ordenó al Alcalde adoptar, en un plazo máximo de seis meses, las medidas necesarias y las coordinaciones interinstitucionales para solucionar definitivamente las inundaciones, bajo apercibimiento de incurrir en delito de desobediencia.", "summary_en": "The Constitutional Chamber reviewed an amparo filed by a resident of Barrio El Carmen, Puntarenas, against the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation, due to recurring flooding caused by the estuary overflowing during high tides, endangering his health, home, and belongings. The Chamber found that municipal authorities were aware of the problem but had failed to take sufficient measures, while other institutions like the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers and the Ministry of Health also held concurrent responsibilities. After analysis, the Court concluded that the Municipality of Puntarenas had been clearly negligent and inactive, contravening its duty under Article 169 of the Constitution to safeguard local interests and coordinate with other bodies. It granted the amparo and ordered the Mayor to adopt, within six months, the necessary measures and inter-institutional coordination to permanently solve the flooding, warning that non-compliance would constitute criminal disobedience.", "court_or_agency": "Sala Constitucional", "date": "24/09/2010", "year": "2010", "topic_ids": [ "art-50-constitution" ], "primary_topic_id": "art-50-constitution", "es_concept_hints": [ "recurso de amparo", "mareas altas", "estero", "alcantarillado pluvial", "omisión municipal", "Artículo 169 constitucional", "coordinación interinstitucional", "desobediencia" ], "article_citations": [], "keywords_es": [ "amparo ambiental", "inundaciones", "mareas altas", "Barrio El Carmen", "Puntarenas", "alcantarillado pluvial", "omisión municipal", "Artículo 169 constitucional", "Municipalidad de Puntarenas", "derecho a un ambiente sano", "coordinación interinstitucional", "desobediencia" ], "keywords_en": [ "environmental amparo", "flooding", "high tides", "Barrio El Carmen", "Puntarenas", "stormwater drainage", "municipal omission", "Article 169 of the Constitution", "Municipality of Puntarenas", "right to a healthy environment", "interinstitutional coordination", "disobedience" ], "excerpt_es": "III.- Sobre el caso concreto.- Ahora bien en lo que corresponde al reclamo concreto que presenta el recurrente, sean las inundaciones provocadas por las mareas altas en el sector de Barrio El Carmen a un costado del \"Muelle Turístico\" en Puntarenas, pues el estero se sale, se encuentra también una clara y evidente omisión por parte de las autoridades municipales por lo que de seguido se expondrá. De la relación de hechos probados, ha quedado debidamente demostrado que es del conocimiento de las autoridades municipales de Puntarenas los problemas de inundación producto de las mareas altas, que sufren las viviendas localizadas en el sitio conocido como El Crematorio en el Barrio El Carmen de esa ciudad. Tanto las autoridades del Ministerio de Salud, como las del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes se eximen de responsabilidad y trasladan la solución del problema a otras autoridades. Al respecto, esta Sala considera que no le corresponde determinar quien es la autoridad competente para actuar, ni dentro de qué ámbitos debe hacerse, y por ello no entra a valorar la actuación que debieran tener estas instituciones, o la responsabilidad de cada una de esas entidades, pero frente a la grave amenaza de derechos fundamentales que se ha puesto en evidencia en este amparo, considera indispensable que se actúe y se dicten las órdenes para que se proceda de manera inmediata a buscar las soluciones o a adoptar las decisiones que otrora debieron haberse dictado pero que se han ido rezagando en el tiempo. Entonces, como de conformidad con el artículo 169 constitucional, las municipales son las llamadas a administrar de los intereses y servicios locales en cada cantón, este Tribunal solamente se enfocará a analizar la actuación municipal, como el ente rector de buscar la solucionar o de buscar entre las distintas instancias públicas la coordinación necesaria para solucionar el problema.\n\nIV.- Siguiendo el mismo orden de ideas del considerando anterior, no se consideran válidas, las argumentaciones externadas bajo juramento por parte del Alcalde recurrido, con las cuales se pretende justificar las omisiones que se han venido dando para atender la situación en esa zona del país. Por el contrario, la Sala es del criterio de que se ha dado una negligencia por parte de la Administración que está lesionando derechos fundamentales del recurrente y de los vecinos del lugar, que amerita una inmediata intervención del aparato estatal para corregirla. Aunado a lo anterior, estima la Sala que la Municipalidad de accionada ha tolerado y permitido que se lesione el derecho al ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado de la población del Barrio El Carmen en Puntarenas.", "excerpt_en": "III.- On the specific case.- Now, regarding the specific claim raised by the petitioner, namely the flooding caused by high tides in the Barrio El Carmen sector next to the \"Tourist Pier\" in Puntarenas, since the estuary overflows, there is also a clear and evident omission on the part of municipal authorities, as will be set forth below. From the proven facts, it has been duly demonstrated that the municipal authorities of Puntarenas are aware of the flooding problems caused by high tides suffered by the homes located in the place known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city. Both the authorities of the Ministry of Health and those of the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation exempt themselves from responsibility and pass the solution to the problem to other authorities. In this regard, this Chamber considers that it is not its role to determine which authority is competent to act, nor within what scope it should do so, and therefore it does not assess the role those institutions should have or the responsibility of each of those entities, but in the face of the serious threat to fundamental rights that has been put in evidence in this amparo, it considers it indispensable that action be taken and orders be issued so that solutions are immediately sought or decisions are adopted that should have been made long ago but have been postponed over time. Therefore, since under Article 169 of the Constitution, municipalities are called upon to administer local interests and services in each canton, this Court will only focus on analyzing the municipal action, as the governing body to seek the solution or to seek among the various public agencies the necessary coordination to solve the problem.\n\nIV.- Following the same line of reasoning as the previous recital, the arguments made under oath by the respondent Mayor, which seek to justify the omissions that have been occurring in addressing the situation in that area of the country, are not considered valid. On the contrary, the Chamber is of the opinion that there has been negligence on the part of the Administration that is harming the fundamental rights of the petitioner and the neighbors of the place, which warrants immediate intervention by the state apparatus to correct it. In addition, the Chamber considers that the respondent Municipality has tolerated and allowed the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the population of Barrio El Carmen in Puntarenas to be harmed.", "outcome": { "label_en": "Granted", "label_es": "Con lugar", "summary_en": "The Mayor of Puntarenas is ordered to coordinate and adopt measures within 6 months to solve the flooding in El Crematorio, Barrio El Carmen; the Municipality is condemned to pay costs.", "summary_es": "Se ordena al Alcalde de Puntarenas realizar las coordinaciones y adoptar medidas en 6 meses para solucionar las inundaciones en El Crematorio, Barrio El Carmen; se condena a la Municipalidad al pago de costas." }, "pull_quotes": [ { "context": "Considerando III", "quote_en": "In this regard, it cannot be forgotten that coordination among public agencies is indisputably necessary in order to ensure the protection of the environment and, consequently, the public health of the population.", "quote_es": "En ese sentido, no puede olvidarse que es indiscutiblemente necesaria la coordinación entre las dependencias públicas, en aras de garantizar la protección del medio ambiente y por ende, la salud pública de la población." }, { "context": "Considerando III", "quote_en": "any omission of the duty of collaboration and coordination among public institutions could endanger the protection of the environment and public health.", "quote_es": "cualquier omisión al deber de colaboración y coordinación entre instituciones públicas, podría poner en peligro la protección del ambiente y de la salud pública." }, { "context": "Considerando IV", "quote_en": "the Chamber is of the opinion that there has been negligence on the part of the Administration that is harming the fundamental rights of the petitioner and the neighbors of the place, which warrants immediate intervention by the state apparatus to correct it.", "quote_es": "la Sala es del criterio de que se ha dado una negligencia por parte de la Administración que está lesionando derechos fundamentales del recurrente y de los vecinos del lugar, que amerita una inmediata intervención del aparato estatal para corregirla." } ], "cites": [ { "id": "norm-37097", "citation": "Ley 2726", "title_en": "Organic Law of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers", "title_es": "Ley Constitutiva del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados", "doc_type": "law", "date": "14/04/1961", "year": "1961" }, { "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-40197", "citation": "Ley 7794", "title_en": "Municipal Code", "title_es": "Código Municipal", "doc_type": "law", "date": "30/04/1998", "year": "1998" }, { "id": "norm-871", "citation": "Constitución Política 0 (Asamblea Nacional Constituyente, 07/11/1949)", "title_en": "Right to a Healthy and Ecologically Balanced Environment — Article 50 of the Political Constitution", "title_es": "Derecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado — Artículo 50 de la Constitución Política", "doc_type": "constitution", "date": "07/11/1949", "year": "1949" } ], "cited_by": [ { "id": "nexus-sen-1-0007-158355", "citation": "Res. 05445-1999 Sala Constitucional", "title_en": "Reaffirmation of municipal autonomy and its limits regarding legality control", "title_es": "Reiteración de autonomía municipal y sus límites frente al control de legalidad", "doc_type": "constitutional_decision", "date": "14/07/1999", "year": "1999" }, { "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-40197", "citation": "Ley 7794", "title_en": "Municipal Code", "title_es": "Código Municipal", "doc_type": "law", "date": "30/04/1998", "year": "1998" }, { "id": "norm-871", "citation": "Constitución Política 0 (Asamblea Nacional Constituyente, 07/11/1949)", "title_en": "Right to a Healthy and Ecologically Balanced Environment — Article 50 of the Political Constitution", "title_es": "Derecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado — Artículo 50 de la Constitución Política", "doc_type": "constitution", "date": "07/11/1949", "year": "1949" } ], "references": { "internal": [ { "target_id": "norm-37097", "kind": "concept_anchor", "label": "Ley 2726 Art. 2 incisos a), d) y g)" } ], "external": [ { "ref_id": "nexus-sen-1-0007-511939", "url": "", "kind": "related_voto", "label": "", "nexus_id": "sen-1-0007-511939" } ] }, "source_url": "https://nexuspj.poder-judicial.go.cr/document/sen-1-0007-494148", "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-38533", "norm_num": "7135", "norm_name": "Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional", "tipo_norma": "Ley", "norm_fecha": "11/10/1989" }, { "doc_id": "norm-40197", "norm_num": "7794", "norm_name": "Código Municipal", "tipo_norma": "Ley", "norm_fecha": "30/04/1998" }, { "doc_id": "norm-871", "norm_num": "0", "norm_name": "Derecho a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado — Artículo 50 de la Constitución Política", "tipo_norma": "Constitución Política", "norm_fecha": "07/11/1949" } ], "sentencias_relacionadas": [ "sen-1-0007-511939" ], "temas_y_subtemas": [], "cascade_only": false, "amendment_count": 0, "body_es_text": "Exp: 10-002988-0007-CO\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nRes. Nº\r\n2010015777\n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\nSALA CONSTITUCIONAL DE LA\r\n CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA. San José,\r\na las nueve horas y cuatro minutos del\r\nveinticuatro de setiembre del\r\ndos mil diez.\n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nRecurso de amparo interpuesto por Geovanny Salas Campos, mayor, portador de\r\nla cédula de identidad 6-172-331, contra el Ministerio de Obras Públicas y\r\nTransportes. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nResultando:\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n1.- Por escrito recibido en la\r\n Secretaría de la\r\n Sala a las dieciséis horas treinta y cinco minutos del\r\nveintiocho de febrero de dos mil diez, el recurrente interpone recurso de\r\namparo contra el Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes y manifiesta que\r\nactualmente existe la problemática de que cada vez que hay mareas altas en el\r\nsector de Barrio El Carmen a un costado del \"Muelle Turístico\" en\r\nPuntarenas, el estero se sale, lo que provoca inundaciones en las casas\r\naledañas al lugar y pérdidas de sus pertenencias. Añade que las autoridades\r\nrecurridas no buscan una solución como\r\nconstruir un muro de contención de piedra con cemento como el que está en Playa de Puntarenas, lo\r\ncual evitaría que el agua se despliegue a las casas. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n2.- Informa bajo juramento María Luisa Avila Agüero, Ministra de Salud\r\n(folio 9), que atención del recurso, se procedió a realizar\r\ninspección en el lugar, así consta en el acta de inspección número 039-F-2010\r\nde las nueve horas con treinta minutos del día siete de abril del dos mil diez,\r\nque al momento de la visita se observan tuberías de desfogue de la alcantarilla\r\ndirigidas hacia el estero. Que durante la visita se\r\ndeterminó que no existe denuncia alguna presentada por el recurrente en esa\r\nRegión, relacionada con esa situación, consecuentemente no tenían conocimiento del problema. No\r\nobstante, en razón de que ese problema debe ser atendido en forma conjunta por\r\nel Ministerio de Salud, el Instituto de Costarricense de Acueductos y\r\nAlcantarillados y el Gobierno Local, ya se les remitió un oficio al Jefe\r\nCantonal de Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados y a la Alcadesa Municipal,\r\nconcediéndoles un plazo de 8 días para que informen sobre las acciones que\r\ntomen, orientadas a solucionar el problema de marras en forma definitiva,\r\nmotivo por el cual solicita a ese Tribunal eximir de toda responsabilidad al\r\nMinisterio de Salud. Solicita que se desestime el recurso\r\nplanteado.\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n3.- Informa Francisco Jiménez Reyes, en su\r\ncondición Ministro de Obras Públicas y Transportes, (folio 27), que conforme a\r\nlas disposiciones de la Ley\r\n4071, la cual data del mes de enero de 1968, se declaró como zona urbana la\r\nciudad de Puntarenas, en cuenta la zona de particular generación de la\r\nproblemática antes comentada y se dejó esa bajo exclusiva competencia y\r\nresponsabilidad del Municipio de Puntarenas. Razón por la cual, ese Ministerio se ve impedido para llevar adelante\r\niniciativas, acciones u obra en la zona de Puntarenas y dentro de ella, en la\r\nzona en que se dan inundaciones. Indica que se trata de una problemática en\r\ntorno a la cual ese Ministerio no presenta relación\r\ndirecta, ni obligación o responsabilidad. La cual debe ser atendida y definida\r\npor la Municipalidad\r\nde Puntarenas. Solicita se desestime el recurso, en cuanto a ese\r\nMinisterio.\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n4.- Informa bajo juramento Juan Luis\r\nBolaños Alvarado, en su condición de Alcalde Municipal del Cantón Central de Puntarenas, (folio 30\r\ny 36), que según lo informado por el Ing. Oscar Brenes Quirós, Director de la Unidad Técnica de\r\nGestión Vial de la\r\n Municipalidad de Puntarenas, mediante oficio UTGV-0415-2010\r\nde fecha 30 de junio del 2010, existe una problemática en el sitio que obedece\r\na una serie de factores que se encuentran fuera del alcance de la Municipalidad de\r\nPuntarenas, dado que incide el efecto producido por el deshielo de los polos\r\ncomo efecto del calentamiento global, el cual genera un aumento en el nivel de\r\nlas aguas de los océanos y esa condición da como resultado que al menos dos\r\nveces al año cuando se presentan mareas máximas, las viviendas localizadas en\r\nel sitio conocido como El Crematorio en el Barrio El Carmen de esa ciudad,\r\nsufran problemas de inundación. Aunado a lo anterior, indica que el sistema de\r\nevacuación pluvial y sanitario de la ciudad de Puntarenas, tienen su descarga\r\nen el sector del Estero de Puntarenas, razón por la cual cuando la marea está\r\nalta y llueve, se genera un efecto de obstrucción de la descarga de aguas,\r\nprovocando a su vez inundaciones en la zona mencionada; situación que se\r\nrevierte al momento en que la marea empieza a bajar, ya que permite la salida\r\nde las aguas hacia los sitios indicados. Que no es cierto que esa municipalidad\r\nno brinde atención a la problemática porque el 14 de junio del año en curso,\r\nantes de que se le notificara este amparo, se hizo una inspección al sitio del\r\nproblema en conjunto con el Departamento de Obras Pluviales del Ministerio de\r\nObras Públicas y Transportes y como parte de la solución las autoridades del\r\nMinisterio de Obras Públicas y Transportes trabajarán en un muro de gaviones,\r\nrevestido con concreto que permita detener el flujo de la marea hacia las\r\nviviendas ubicadas en el Crematorio del barrio El Carmen de Puntarenas. Solicita se desestime el recurso planteado. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n5.- En los procedimientos seguidos se ha\r\nobservado 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 Redacta la Magistrada Salazar Cambronero; y,\n\r\n\r\n\nConsiderando:\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nI.- Hechos probados. De importancia para\r\nla decisión de este asunto, se estiman como debidamente demostrados los siguientes hechos: a) mediante\r\noficio UTGV-0415-2010 de fecha 30 de junio del 2010, suscrito por el Ing. Oscar Brenes\r\nQuirós, Director de la\r\n Unidad Técnica de Gestión Vial de la Municipalidad de\r\nPuntarenas, existe una problemática en el sitio que obedece a una serie de\r\nfactores que se encuentran fuera del alcance de la Municipalidad de\r\nPuntarenas, dado que incide el efecto producido por el deshielo de los polos\r\ncomo efecto del calentamiento global, el cual genera un aumento en el nivel de\r\nlas aguas de los océanos y esa condición da como resultado que al menos dos\r\nveces al año cuando se presentan mareas máximas, las viviendas localizadas en\r\nel sitio conocido como El Crematorio en el Barrio El Carmen de esa ciudad,\r\nsufran problemas de inundación, (informe a folio 36 y folio 40); b) el\r\n14 de junio del año en curso, se hizo una inspección al sitio del problema en\r\nconjunto con el Departamento de Obras Pluviales del Ministerio de Obras\r\nPúblicas y Transportes y como parte de la solución las autoridades del\r\nMinisterio de Obras Públicas y Transportes trabajarán en un muro de gaviones,\r\nrevestido con concreto que permita detener el flujo de la marea hacia las\r\nviviendas ubicadas en el Crematorio del barrio El Carmen de Puntarenas,\r\n(informe a folio 37).\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nII.- Sobre el fondo. Dada la relevancia que tiene para el análisis del caso\r\nconcreto, es preciso acotar que los problemas generados por el alcantarillado\r\nde la ciudad de Puntarenas ya han sido analizados por este Tribunal en las\r\nsentencias números 2008-010662, de las dieciséis horas y cuarenta y ocho\r\nminutos del veintiséis de junio del dos mil ocho, 2008-013311 de las\r\ntrece horas y catorce minutos del veintinueve de agosto del dos mil ocho,\r\n2008-13638 de las once horas con treinta y ocho minutos del cinco de septiembre\r\nde dos mil ocho, 2009-13161 de las diez horas con cuarenta y siete minutos del\r\nveintiuno de agosto de dos mil nueve, 2009-16065 del doce horas y\r\ncincuenta y tres minutos del dieciséis de octubre del dos mil nueve y\r\n2010-004595, de las diez horas y once minutos del cinco de marzo del dos mil\r\ndiez. Sobre el tema en cuestión, en este último\r\npronunciamiento, se indicó en lo que interesa:\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n“V.- Sobre el fondo: En el informe rendido\r\npor la Alcaldesa\r\ny por la Presidenta\r\ndel Consejo Municipal de la\r\n Municipalidad de Puntarenas, los recurridos confirman la\r\nexistencia del problema denunciado por el recurrente, y es que efectivamente\r\nexiste un desbordamiento de las aguas pluviales que no son contenidas por el\r\nalcantarillado público. Sin embargo, a manera de descargo, citan que en cuanto\r\na la obstrucción del alcantarillado, el ayuntamiento ha realizado varios\r\nesfuerzos para resolver el problema denunciado, por lo que se procedió a su limpieza\r\ny hasta se adquirió una máquina destaqueadora de varilla para limpiar y\r\ndestapar cualquier obstrucción que existiera en los mismos. Con relación a la\r\nevacuación de aguas pluviales, se dice que ese\r\nayuntamiento estudia posibles alternativas para solucionar dicho problema. Con\r\nbase en lo expuesto, en opinión de esta Sala, las diligencias llevadas a cabo\r\npor parte de la\r\n Municipalidad de Puntarenas, si bien se han dado, no han sido\r\nsuficientes para solucionar los problemas que aquejan a los vecinos del Barrio\r\nEl Carmen, puesto que el problema de las aguas pluviales se sigue dando y sigue\r\ninvadiendo las aceras y locales que se encuentran a la orilla de dicho\r\nalcantarillado. En esa tesitura esta corporación municipal ha faltado a la\r\nfunción de tutela de los intereses locales que le ha sido encomendados, pues no\r\nse constata en el expediente que hayan utilizado todos los poderes que el\r\nordenamiento le confiere para velar en forma amplia por la preservación de los\r\nintereses y servicios locales, de conformidad con lo dispuesto en el artículo\r\n169 de la\r\n Constitución Política y el desarrollo que de dicha norma hace\r\nel Código Municipal. Considera este Tribunal, que es claro que pese a que la\r\nmunicipalidad accionada conoce con anterioridad de los problemas que aquejan a\r\nlos vecinos de Barrio El Carmen de Puntarenas, aún no han adoptado las medidas\r\nsuficientes requeridas para solucionar en definitiva el problema. En cuanto al\r\ndesfogue de las aguas pluviales, en el informe se dice que ese ayuntamiento ha\r\nlimpiado de desechos sólidos las alcantarillas, que inclusive compró una\r\nmáquina destaqueadora de varilla, y que estudia posibles alternativas para\r\nsolucionar dicho problema a futuro con donaciones extranjeras, lo que refleja\r\nque el trabajo hasta ahora realizado no ha sido suficiente, y el Sistema de\r\nAlcantarillado Pluvial sigue presentando serios problemas, lo cual afecta los\r\nintereses y derechos del recurrente, ya que es evidente, tal y como lo confirmó\r\nel Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados que el alcantarillado pluvial\r\ncolapsa en época de lluvias, no pudiendo retener la totalidad de las aguas\r\n(folio 86). En cuanto a la obstrucción del alcantarillado, no tiene este\r\nTribunal claro si la “máquina destaqueadora de varilla” si quiera se ha usado,\r\nya que verifica el ayuntamiento su compra pero no su uso, y en las fotos que\r\nadjunta sólo se aprecian unos hombres recogiendo desechos sólidos de algunos\r\ntragantes y cajas de registro, lo que no garantiza que a lo largo del Sistema\r\nde Alcantarillado pluvial no existan obstrucciones. Tampoco se extrae del\r\nexpediente si la limpieza que se realizó por parte de la Municipalidad se\r\nllevó a cabo en el alcantarillado pluvial o sanitario, ni que a parte de esto\r\nse hayan llevado a cabo acciones de coordinación con las otras instituciones\r\ndel Estado encargadas de atender este tipo de problemas, salvo las gestiones\r\nante el Ministerio de Salud, o la inspección realizada por el Instituto de\r\nAcueductos y Alcantarillados, que indica que la red de Alcantarillado Sanitario\r\nestá perfectamente y que es la red de alcantarillado pluvial la que está\r\ncolapsada (Ver folio 86), y que pese a que supuestamente la Municipalidad limpió\r\nlas alcantarillas de desechos sólidos, tales acciones no parece que hayan\r\nsurtido ningún resultado positivo, ya que el desbordamiento de aguas pluviales\r\nse sigue dando inundando las aceras y los locales que se encuentran junto a las\r\nmismas. Así las cosas, pese a que el municipio conoce del\r\nproblema de aguas que aquí se cuestiona desde meses atrás, aún no ha podido\r\nsolventar el problema”.\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n IV.- De la lectura del\r\nprecedente transcrito, se deduce que en la ciudad de Puntarenas existe un\r\nproblema en el alcantarillado pluvial, el cual genera inundaciones y\r\nestancamiento de agua. En atención a lo anterior, se estima procedente analizar\r\nlas actuaciones de cada una de las instituciones recurridas, con el fin de\r\ndeterminar si han incurrido o no en lesiones a lo\r\ndispuesto por el numeral 50 constitucional.\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n V.-Sobre la actuación de al Municipalidad de Puntarenas. Si bien en su informe, la Alcaldesa Municipal de Puntarenas aduce que con\r\nel fin de atender la problemática descrita por el recurrente, la Corporación accionada\r\nha efectuado labores de limpieza y reparación de las alcantarillas y \r\ntragantes, con el fin de mitigar los efectos de la situación mencionada,\r\na partir del informe rendido por el Ministerio de Salud, se desprende que\r\nal cuatro de diciembre de dos mil nueve, -fecha en que se llevó a cabo una\r\ninspección-, dicha autoridad no había efectuado trabajos en las calles 9, 11 y\r\n13 de Puntarenas, ya que los tragantes se encontraban llenos de desechos\r\nsólidos y algunos incluso con agua estancada. En ese sentido, conviene indicar\r\nque si bien la Sala\r\nconstata que los recurridos han efectuado diversas gestiones a efectos de\r\nbrindar una solución definitiva al problema analizado en este expediente, lo\r\ncierto es que la situación no sólo se mantiene, sino que se agrava por la falta\r\nde acción de la\r\n Municipalidad accionada, al no realizar las labores de\r\nlimpieza que permitan reducir los efectos negativos que puedan generarse para\r\nla población. Asimismo, debe indicarse que ya en anteriores sentencias, este\r\nTribunal ha dejado claro que las autoridades accionadas se encuentran obligadas\r\na establecer canales de coordinación y compromisos mutuos con el fin de\r\nsolucionar la problemática con el alcantarillado pluvial de la ciudad de\r\nPuntarenas, de ahí que la falta de cumplimiento de lo ordenado no lleve a otra\r\ncosa más que agravar la situación, en claro perjuicio de los derechos a la\r\nsalud y a un ambiente sano y ecológicamente equilibrado de los habitantes del\r\nlugar. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n VI.-Sobre la actuación del\r\nInstituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados. En su informe rendido bajo juramento, el Jefe de la Región Pacífico\r\nCentral del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados aduce\r\nque la atención del problema que aqueja al recurrente es competencia\r\nexclusiva de la\r\n Municipalidad de Puntarenas, en atención a lo señalado por el\r\nTítulo IV del Código Municipal, pues dicha autoridad es el órgano que recauda\r\nlos montos respectivos para mantenimiento y buen funcionamiento de la red\r\npluvial. Con respecto a lo anterior, debe indicarse que si bien el Jefe\r\nrecurrido lleva razón al señalar la responsabilidad de la Municipalidad en la\r\natención del problema citado, lo cierto es que el Instituto Costarricense de\r\nAcueductos y Alcantarillados también se encuentra obligado a brindar atención a\r\nla problemática mencionada, pues, de conformidad con lo dispuesto por el\r\nartículo 2 incisos a) d) y g) de la Ley Constitutiva del Instituto\r\nCostarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, ley 2726 del catorce de abril de\r\nmil novecientos sesenta y uno, corresponde a dicha institución:\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\na) Dirigir y vigilar todo lo concerniente para proveer a los habitantes de\r\nla república de un servicio de agua potable, recolección y evacuación de aguas\r\nnegras y residuos industriales líquidos y de aguas pluviales en las áreas\r\nurbanas;\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n(…)\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nd) Asesorar a los demás organismos del Estado y coordinar las actividades\r\npúblicas y privadas en todos los asuntos relativos al establecimiento de\r\nacueductos y alcantarillados y control de la contaminación de los recursos de\r\nagua, siendo obligatoria, en todo caso, su consulta, e inexcusable el\r\ncumplimiento de sus recomendaciones; \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n(…)\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\ng) Administrar y operar directamente los sistemas de acueductos y\r\nalcantarillados en todo el país, los cuales se irán asumiendo tomando en cuenta\r\nla conveniencia y disponibilidad de recursos. Los sistemas que actualmente\r\nestán administrados y operados por las corporaciones municipales podrán seguir\r\na cargo de éstas, mientras suministren un servicio\r\neficiente. (…) Queda facultada la institución para convenir con organismos\r\nlocales, la administración de tales servicios o administrarlos a través de\r\njuntas administradoras de integración mixta entre el Instituto y las\r\nrespectivas comunidades, siempre que así conviniere para la mejor prestación de\r\nlos servicios y de acuerdo con los reglamentos respectivos. Por las mismas\r\nrazones y con las mismas características, también podrán crearse juntas administradoras regionales que involucren a varias\r\nmunicipalidades; \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n VII.-\r\nTal y como se deduce de la lectura de las normas de cita, el Instituto Costarricense\r\nde Acueductos y Alcantarillados tiene una obligación residual en el manejo de\r\nlos sistemas de alcantarillado que se encuentren bajo la administración de las\r\nmunicipalidades, pues éste debe intervenir cuando dichas corporaciones no\r\npresten en forma efectiva dicho servicio, en atención a su obligación de\r\ngarantizar a los habitantes del país un servicio de agua potable,\r\nrecolección y evacuación de aguas negras y residuos industriales líquidos y de\r\naguas pluviales en las áreas urbanas, tal y como señala el inciso a) del\r\nartículo 2 de la Ley\r\n2726. En virtud de lo expuesto, no resulta de recibo el argumento del Jefe de la Región Pacífico\r\nCentral del Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, pues\r\ndicha autoridad no puede rehuir los deberes que le han sido otorgados\r\nlegalmente, sobre todo si se toma en cuenta que se está ante la presencia de\r\nuna situación que implica una lesión a lo dispuesto por los artículos 21 y 50\r\nconstitucionales. En ese sentido, si bien el Tribunal constata que el Instituto\r\naccionado ha brindado recomendaciones a la Municipalidad\r\nrecurrida con respecto al manejo del problema del alcantarillado pluvial de la\r\nciudad de Puntarenas, lo cierto es que ello resulta insuficiente, pues la\r\ninstitución también debe intervenir directamente en la solución de dicha\r\nproblemática, ya que su actuación no puede limitarse a una intervención\r\nindirecta en la atención de los hechos mencionados por el recurrente. Por lo\r\nanterior, el recurso debe ser acogido también en cuanto a dicha autoridad, como\r\nen efecto se hace.\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n VIII.-Sobre\r\nla actuación del\r\nMinisterio de Salud. La Sala considera que el\r\nMinisterio de Salud no ha incurrido en omisión alguna que lesione los derechos\r\nfundamentales del recurrente, pues se tiene por demostrado que ha efectuado las\r\nacciones dentro del ámbito de sus competencias para brindar solución a la\r\nproblemática descrita en el libelo de interposición, de ahí que el recuso debe\r\nser desestimado en cuanto a esta autoridad.\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n IX.-Así, en razón de lo expuesto anteriormente, lo procedente es acoger el\r\nrecurso interpuesto en cuanto al Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y\r\nAlcantarillados y la\r\n Municipalidad de Puntarenas, haciendo ver a los recurridos\r\nque el artículo 71 de la Ley\r\nde la\r\n Jurisdicción Constitucional establece prisión de tres meses a\r\ndos años o de veinte a sesenta días multa, para aquellas personas que incumplan\r\ncon lo ordenado por esta Sala, de ahí que se les haga la advertencia a los\r\naccionados que deberán proceder a solventar la problemática analizada en el\r\npresente asunto, pues de lo contrario se podrá testimoniar piezas al Ministerio\r\nPúblico por el delito de desobediencia…(sentencia 2010-004595)”\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nIII.- Sobre el caso concreto.- Ahora bien en lo que corresponde al reclamo concreto que presenta el\r\nrecurrente, sean las inundaciones provocadas por las mareas altas en el sector\r\nde Barrio El Carmen a un costado del \"Muelle Turístico\" en\r\nPuntarenas, pues el estero se sale, se encuentra también una clara y evidente\r\nomisión por parte de las autoridades municipales por lo que de seguido se\r\nexpondrá. De la relación de hechos probados, ha quedado debidamente demostrado\r\nque es del\r\nconocimiento de las autoridades municipales de Puntarenas los problemas de\r\ninundación producto de las mareas altas, que sufren las viviendas localizadas\r\nen el sitio conocido como\r\nEl Crematorio en el Barrio El Carmen de esa ciudad. Tanto las autoridades del Ministerio de Salud, como las del Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes se\r\neximen de responsabilidad y trasladan la solución del problema a otras autoridades. Al\r\nrespecto, esta Sala considera que no le corresponde determinar quien es la\r\nautoridad competente para actuar, ni dentro de qué ámbitos debe hacerse, y por\r\nello no entra a valorar la actuación que debieran tener estas instituciones, o\r\nla responsabilidad de cada una de esas entidades, pero frente a la grave\r\namenaza de derechos fundamentales que se ha puesto en evidencia en este amparo,\r\nconsidera indispensable que se actúe y se dicten las órdenes para que se proceda\r\nde manera inmediata a buscar las soluciones o a adoptar las decisiones que\r\notrora debieron haberse dictado pero que se han ido rezagando en el tiempo.\r\nEntonces, como de conformidad con el artículo 169 constitucional, las\r\nmunicipales son las llamadas a administrar de los intereses y servicios locales\r\nen cada cantón, este Tribunal solamente se enfocará a analizar la actuación\r\nmunicipal, como el ente rector de buscar la solucionar o de buscar entre las\r\ndistintas instancias públicas la coordinación necesaria para solucionar el\r\nproblema. En ese sentido, no puede olvidarse que es\r\nindiscutiblemente necesaria la coordinación entre las dependencias públicas, en\r\naras de garantizar la protección del\r\nmedio ambiente y por ende, la salud pública de la población. En diversas\r\noportunidades, la jurisprudencia constitucional ha indicado que la protección\r\ndel ambiente es una tarea que corresponde a todos por igual, a la vez que\r\nexiste una obligación para el Estado –como un todo- de tomar las medidas\r\nnecesarias para proteger el medio, lo cual necesariamente implica el\r\ninvolucramiento de todos los entes, órganos e instituciones del Estado así como\r\ntambién de los particulares que por una u otra razón, tuvieren que intervenir. La Sala se ha referido a ese principio de coordinación de las dependencias\r\npúblicas, específicamente en la sentencia número 5445-99, de las catorce horas\r\ntreinta minutos del\r\ncatorce de julio de mil novecientos noventa y nueve en la que, para lo que\r\ninteresa, señaló:\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\"De manera\r\nque la coordinación es la ordenación de las relaciones entre estas diversas\r\nactividades independientes, que se hace cargo de esa concurrencia en un mismo\r\nobjeto o entidad, para hacerla útil a un plan público global, sin suprimir la\r\nindependencia recíproca de los sujetos agentes. Como no hay una relación de\r\njerarquía de las instituciones descentralizadas, ni del Estado mismo en\r\nrelación con las municipalidades, no es posible la imposición a éstas de\r\ndeterminadas conductas, con lo cual surge el imprescindible «concierto»\r\ninterinstitucional, en sentido estricto, en cuanto los centros autónomos e\r\nindependientes de acción se ponen de acuerdo sobre ese esquema preventivo y\r\nglobal, en el que cada uno cumple un papel con vista en una misión confiada a\r\nlos otros. Así, las relaciones de las municipalidades con los otros entes\r\npúblicos, sólo pueden llevarse a cabo en un plano de igualdad, que den como\r\nresultado formas pactadas de coordinación, con exclusión de cualquier forma\r\nimperativa en detrimento de su autonomía, que permita sujetar a los entes\r\ncorporativos a un esquema de coordinación sin su voluntad o contra ella; pero\r\nque sí admite la necesaria subordinación de estos entes al Estado y en interés\r\nde éste (a través de la «tutela administrativa» del Estado, y específicamente,\r\nen la función de control la legalidad que a éste compete, con potestades de\r\nvigilancia general sobre todo el sector).”\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nPartiendo de lo dicho, no cabe duda de que cualquier omisión al deber de\r\ncolaboración y coordinación entre instituciones públicas, podría poner en\r\npeligro la protección del ambiente y de la salud\r\npública. Sin duda alguna, en el caso concreto, por tratarse los problemas\r\ndenunciados de situaciones complejas, multifactoriales, que involucra a varios\r\nsectores de la sociedad y del Estado, la solución que se logre dar para cada\r\nuno de los casos y el éxito de ésta, dependerá necesariamente de la\r\ncoordinación y colaboración recíproca que se pueda dar entre las diferentes\r\ninstituciones encargadas y por ende, se impone que sea la Municipalidad\r\naccionada quien asuma la coordinación requerida entre los accionados. \n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nIV.- Siguiendo el\r\nmismo orden de ideas del considerando\r\nanterior, no se consideran válidas, las argumentaciones externadas bajo\r\njuramento por parte del Alcalde recurrido, con las cuales se pretende\r\njustificar las omisiones que se han venido dando para atender la situación en\r\nesa zona del\r\npaís. Por el contrario, la Sala\r\nes del criterio de\r\nque se ha dado una negligencia por parte de la Administración que\r\nestá lesionando derechos fundamentales del\r\nrecurrente y de los vecinos del lugar, que\r\namerita una inmediata intervención del\r\naparato estatal para corregirla. Aunado a lo anterior, estima la Sala que la Municipalidad de\r\naccionada ha tolerado y permitido que se lesione el derecho al ambiente sano y\r\necológicamente equilibrado de la población del Barrio El\r\nCarmen en Puntarenas. En ese sentido, la Municipalidad\r\nrecurrida no puede evadir su deber de velar por los intereses locales de\r\nsu cantón y a pesar de que tal obligación municipal es bastante clara, llama la\r\natención de este Tribunal, la afirmación hecha por el Alcalde de la Municipalidad\r\nrecurrida en el sentido de no es cierto, que no se haya brindado la atención a\r\nla problemática descrita, si el día catorce de junio del año en curso,\r\nautoridades de esa municipalidad realizaron una visita de inspección en el\r\nsitio. Con tales manifestaciones es claro que este\r\ngobierno local no ha asumido con toda responsabilidad la situación denunciada,\r\nporque es claro que hacer una visita, en un tema como el que nos ocupa definitivamente, no\r\nsignifica que se esté actuando, o adoptando medidas para solucionar el\r\nproblema. Además resulta importante, indicarles a las autoridades municipales\r\nque si consideran que muchas de las acciones, que se deben ser adoptadas deben\r\nser realizadas por otras instituciones, ello no\r\nlos exime de responsabilidad, pues hacerlo sería permitirles desentenderse de\r\nlos problemas. Del informe rendido por\r\nsu representante, la Sala\r\nconcluye que la corporación municipal ha incurrido en una clara\r\nomisión y negligencia por parte de las autoridades municipales que ha provocado\r\nse siga deteriorando, reiteradamente, el ambiente, la salud y la seguridad de\r\nlos pobladores del\r\nlugar. En atención a todo lo dicho, se debe ordenar al Alcalde Municipal del\r\nCantón Central de Puntarenas, adoptar medidas dentro del ámbito de sus\r\ncompetencias, para que de manera coordinada con otras instituciones del Estado,\r\ny dentro del plazo máximo de seis meses contado a partir de la notificación de\r\nesta sentencia, se logre dar solución a los problemas denunciados por el\r\nrecurrente.\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\nPor tanto:\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nSe declara con lugar el recurso. Se ordena a Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, en\r\nsu condición de Alcalde Municipal del Cantón Central de Puntarenas, o a quien\r\nen su lugar ejerza el cargo, que inmediatamente realice\r\nlas coordinaciones necesarias con las autoridades pertinentes, para\r\nadoptar las medidas necesarias dentro del ámbito de sus competencias, para que\r\ndentro del plazo máximo de seis meses contado a partir de la notificación de\r\nesta sentencia, se logre dar solución a los problemas denunciados por el\r\nrecurrente en el sitio conocido como El Crematorio en el Barrio El Carmen de\r\nesa ciudad. Se advierte a Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, en su condición de\r\nAlcalde Municipal del Cantón Central de Puntarenas, o a quien en su lugar\r\nejerza el cargo, que de no acatar la orden dicha, incurrirá en el delito\r\nde desobediencia y que, de conformidad con el artículo 71 de la Ley de esta jurisdicción, se\r\nle impondrá prisión de tres meses a dos años, o de veinte a sesenta días multa,\r\na quien recibiere una orden que deba cumplir o hacer cumplir, dictada en un\r\nrecurso de amparo y no la cumpliere o no la hiciere cumplir, siempre que el\r\ndelito no esté más gravemente penado. Se condena a la Municipalidad de\r\nPuntarenas al pago de las costas, daños y perjuicios causados con los hechos\r\nque sirven de base a esta declaratoria, los que se\r\nliquidarán en ejecución de sentencia de lo contencioso administrativo.\r\nNotifíquese esta resolución a Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, en su condición de\r\nAlcalde Municipal del\r\nCantón Central de Puntarenas, o a quien en su lugar ejerza el cargo, en forma\r\npersonal.\n\r\n\r\n\n\r\n\r\n\nGilbert Armijo S. \n\r\n\r\n\nPresidente a.i.\n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n Ernesto\r\nJinesta L.\r\n Fernando\r\nCruz C. \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\nCastillo V.\r\n Roxana\r\nSalazar C. \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n \n\r\n\r\n\n Víctor Ardón A.\r\n José\r\nPaulino Hernández arg/800", "body_en_text": "Exp: 10-002988-0007-CO\n\nRes. No. 2010015777\n\nCONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at nine hours and four minutes on the twenty-fourth of September, two thousand ten.\n\nRecurso de amparo filed by Geovanny Salas Campos, of legal age, bearer of identity card 6-172-331, against the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes.\n\nResultando:\n\n1.- By written brief received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at sixteen hours thirty-five minutes on the twenty-eighth of February, two thousand ten, the petitioner files a recurso de amparo against the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes and states that currently there is the problem that every time there are high tides in the Barrio El Carmen sector next to the \"Tourist Pier\" (\"Muelle Turístico\") in Puntarenas, the estuary overflows, causing flooding in the houses surrounding the place and losses of their belongings. He adds that the respondent authorities do not seek a solution such as building a stone retaining wall with cement like the one on Puntarenas Beach, which would prevent the water from spreading to the houses.\n\n2.- María Luisa Avila Agüero, Minister of Health, reports under oath (folio 9), that in response to the recurso, an inspection was carried out at the site, as recorded in inspection report number 039-F-2010 from nine hours and thirty minutes on the seventh of April, two thousand ten, that at the time of the visit, drainage pipes from the sewer directed toward the estuary were observed. That during the visit it was determined that there is no complaint whatsoever filed by the petitioner in that Region related to this situation, consequently they had no knowledge of the problem. However, because this problem must be addressed jointly by the Ministry of Health, the Instituto de Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados and the Local Government, a memorandum has already been sent to the Cantonal Head of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados and to the Municipal Mayor, granting them a period of 8 days to report on the actions they take, aimed at definitively solving the problem in question, which is why she requests this Court to exempt the Ministry of Health from all liability. She requests that the recurso filed be dismissed.\n\n3.- Francisco Jiménez Reyes reports, in his capacity as Minister of Obras Públicas y Transportes, (folio 27), that in accordance with the provisions of Law 4071, which dates from the month of January, 1968, the city of Puntarenas was declared an urban zone, taking into account the zone particularly generating the aforementioned problem, and it was left under the exclusive competence and responsibility of the Municipality of Puntarenas. For this reason, this Ministry is prevented from carrying out initiatives, actions, or works in the Puntarenas zone and within it, in the zone where the flooding occurs. He indicates that this is a problem regarding which this Ministry has no direct relationship, nor obligation or responsibility. It must be addressed and defined by the Municipalidad de Puntarenas. He requests that the recurso be dismissed with respect to this Ministry.\n\n4.- Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado reports under oath, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, (folio 30 and 36), that according to information provided by Eng. Oscar Brenes Quirós, Director of the Unidad Técnica de Gestión Vial of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, through memorandum UTGV-0415-2010 dated June 30, 2010, there is a problem at the site resulting from a series of factors that are beyond the scope of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, given the effect produced by the melting of the polar ice caps as an effect of global warming, which generates a rise in the water levels of the oceans and this condition results in, at least twice a year when maximum tides occur, the dwellings located in the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city suffering flooding problems. In addition to the above, he indicates that the stormwater and sanitary evacuation system of the city of Puntarenas discharges into the sector of the Estero de Puntarenas, which is why when the tide is high and it rains, an obstruction effect of the water discharge is generated, in turn causing flooding in the mentioned zone; a situation that is reversed when the tide begins to go down, as it allows the waters to flow out to the indicated sites. That it is not true that this municipality does not address the problem because on June 14 of the current year, before this amparo was notified to them, an inspection was made of the problem site jointly with the Departmento de Obras Pluviales of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes and as part of the solution the authorities of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes will work on a gabion wall (muro de gaviones), lined with concrete to stop the tide flow toward the dwellings located in El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of Puntarenas. He requests that the recurso filed be dismissed.\n\n5.- In the proceedings followed, the legal prescriptions have been observed.\n\nMagistrate Salazar Cambronero writes; and,\n\nConsiderando:\n\nI.- Proven facts. Of importance for the decision in this matter, the following facts are deemed duly demonstrated: a) through memorandum UTGV-0415-2010 dated June 30, 2010, signed by Eng. Oscar Brenes Quirós, Director of the Unidad Técnica de Gestión Vial of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, there is a problem at the site resulting from a series of factors that are beyond the scope of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, given the effect produced by the melting of the polar ice caps as an effect of global warming, which generates a rise in the water levels of the oceans and this condition results in, at least twice a year when maximum tides occur, the dwellings located in the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city suffering flooding problems, (report at folio 36 and folio 40); b) on June 14 of the current year, an inspection was made of the problem site jointly with the Departmento de Obras Pluviales of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes and as part of the solution the authorities of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes will work on a gabion wall (muro de gaviones), lined with concrete to stop the tide flow toward the dwellings located in El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of Puntarenas, (report at folio 37).\n\nII.- On the merits. Given the relevance it has for the analysis of the specific case, it is necessary to note that the problems generated by the sewer system of the city of Puntarenas have already been analyzed by this Court in judgments numbers 2008-010662, at sixteen hours and forty-eight minutes on the twenty-sixth of June, two thousand eight, 2008-013311 at thirteen hours and fourteen minutes on the twenty-ninth of August, two thousand eight, 2008-13638 at eleven hours and thirty-eight minutes on the fifth of September, two thousand eight, 2009-13161 at ten hours and forty-seven minutes on the twenty-first of August, two thousand nine, 2009-16065 at twelve hours and fifty-three minutes on the sixteenth of October, two thousand nine, and 2010-004595, at ten hours and eleven minutes on the fifth of March, two thousand ten. On the issue in question, in this last ruling, it was indicated with respect to what is relevant:\n\n“V.- On the merits: In the report rendered by the Mayoress and by the President of the Municipal Council of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, the respondents confirm the existence of the problem reported by the petitioner, and it is that indeed there is an overflow of stormwater that is not contained by the public sewer system. However, by way of discharge, they cite that regarding the obstruction of the sewer system, the city council has made several efforts to resolve the reported problem, for which reason its cleaning was carried out and even a rebar-cleaning machine was acquired to clean and unclog any obstruction that existed in them. In relation to the evacuation of stormwater, it is said that this city council is studying possible alternatives to solve said problem. Based on the foregoing, in the opinion of this Chamber, the steps carried out by the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, although they have been taken, have not been sufficient to solve the problems that afflict the residents of Barrio El Carmen, since the stormwater problem continues to occur and continues to invade the sidewalks and premises located along the edge of said sewer. In this vein, this municipal corporation has failed in its duty of protecting the local interests entrusted to it, as it is not verified in the case file that they have used all the powers that the legal system confers upon it to broadly ensure the preservation of local interests and services, in accordance with the provisions of Article 169 of the Political Constitution and the development of said norm established by the Municipal Code. This Court considers that it is clear that despite the fact that the respondent municipality has prior knowledge of the problems afflicting the residents of Barrio El Carmen in Puntarenas, they have not yet adopted the sufficient measures required to definitively solve the problem. As for the stormwater outflow, the report states that this council has cleaned the sewers of solid waste, that it even bought a rebar-cleaning machine, and that it is studying possible alternatives to solve this problem in the future with foreign donations, which reflects that the work carried out to date has not been sufficient, and the Stormwater Sewer System (Sistema de Alcantarillado Pluvial) continues to present serious problems, which affects the interests and rights of the petitioner, since it is evident, as confirmed by the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, that the stormwater sewer system collapses during the rainy season, being unable to retain all the waters (folio 86). Regarding the obstruction of the sewer system, this Court is not clear if the \"rebar-cleaning machine\" has even been used, since the city council verifies its purchase but not its use, and in the photos it attaches, only some men are seen collecting solid waste from some culverts and manholes, which does not guarantee that there are no obstructions along the Stormwater Sewer System. Nor is it evident from the case file whether the cleaning carried out by the Municipality was performed on the stormwater or sanitary sewer system, nor that apart from this, coordination actions have been carried out with other State institutions responsible for addressing these types of problems, except for the steps taken before the Ministry of Health, or the inspection carried out by the Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, which indicates that the Sanitary Sewer Network is in perfect condition and that it is the stormwater sewer network that is collapsed (See folio 86), and that even though the Municipality supposedly cleaned the sewers of solid waste, such actions do not seem to have produced any positive result, since the overflow of stormwater continues to occur, flooding the sidewalks and the premises located next to them. Thus, despite the fact that the municipality has known of the water problem questioned here for months, it has still not been able to resolve the problem.”\n\nIV.- From the reading of the transcribed precedent, it follows that in the city of Puntarenas there is a problem in the stormwater sewer system, which generates flooding and water stagnation. In view of the foregoing, it is deemed appropriate to analyze the actions of each of the respondent institutions, in order to determine whether or not they have incurred in violations of the provisions of constitutional numeral 50.\n\nV.- On the actions of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas. Even though in her report, the Municipal Mayoress of Puntarenas argues that in order to address the problem described by the petitioner, the respondent Corporation has carried out cleaning and repair work on the sewers and culverts (tragantes), in order to mitigate the effects of the mentioned situation, from the report rendered by the Ministry of Health, it follows that as of December fourth, two thousand nine, - the date on which an inspection was carried out -, said authority had not performed work on streets 9, 11, and 13 of Puntarenas, since the culverts (tragantes) were found full of solid waste and some even with stagnant water. In this sense, it is worth indicating that although the Chamber verifies that the respondents have taken various steps to provide a definitive solution to the problem analyzed in this case file, the truth is that the situation not only persists, but is aggravated by the lack of action by the respondent Municipality, in failing to carry out the cleaning work that would reduce the negative effects that may be generated for the population. Likewise, it must be indicated that already in previous judgments, this Court has made it clear that the respondent authorities are obliged to establish coordination channels and mutual commitments in order to solve the problem with the stormwater sewer system of the city of Puntarenas, hence the failure to comply with what was ordered leads to nothing other than aggravating the situation, to the clear detriment of the rights to health and to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the inhabitants of the place.\n\nVI.- On the actions of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados. In his report rendered under oath, the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados argues that addressing the problem afflicting the petitioner is the exclusive competence of the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, in view of what is indicated by Title IV of the Municipal Code, since said authority is the body that collects the respective amounts for maintenance and proper functioning of the stormwater network. Regarding the above, it must be stated that although the respondent Head is correct in pointing out the Municipality's responsibility in addressing the cited problem, the truth is that the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is also obliged to address the mentioned problem, since, in accordance with the provisions of Article 2, subsections a), d), and g) of the Constitutive Law of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, Law 2726 of April fourteenth, nineteen sixty-one, the following corresponds to said institution:\n\na) To direct and supervise everything concerning providing the inhabitants of the republic with a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste, and of stormwater in urban areas;\n\n(...)\n\nd) To advise the other State bodies and coordinate public and private activities in all matters related to the establishment of water supply and sewer systems and control of the contamination of water resources, its consultation being mandatory in all cases, and compliance with its recommendations inexcusable;\n\n(...)\n\ng) To directly administer and operate the water supply and sewer systems throughout the country, which shall be taken on taking into account convenience and availability of resources. The systems that are currently administered and operated by municipal corporations may continue to be under their charge, as long as they provide efficient service. (...) The institution is empowered to agree with local bodies on the administration of such services or to administer them through administrative boards of mixed integration between the Institute and the respective communities, provided that this is agreed upon for the better provision of services and in accordance with the respective regulations. For the same reasons and with the same characteristics, regional administrative boards involving several municipalities may also be created;\n\nVII.- As deduced from the reading of the cited norms, the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados has a residual obligation in the management of sewer systems that are under the administration of the municipalities, since it must intervene when said corporations do not effectively provide said service, in view of its obligation to guarantee the inhabitants of the country a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste, and of stormwater in urban areas, as indicated in subsection a) of Article 2 of Law 2726. By virtue of the foregoing, the argument of the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is unacceptable, since said authority cannot shirk the duties that have been legally granted to it, especially considering that we are in the presence of a situation that implies a violation of the provisions of Articles 21 and 50 of the Constitution. In this sense, although the Court verifies that the respondent Institute has provided recommendations to the respondent Municipality regarding the management of the stormwater sewer system problem in the city of Puntarenas, the truth is that this is insufficient, because the institution must also directly intervene in the solution of said problem, since its action cannot be limited to indirect intervention in addressing the facts mentioned by the petitioner. Therefore, the recurso must also be granted with respect to said authority, as is hereby done.\n\nVIII.- On the actions of the Ministry of Health. The Chamber considers that the Ministry of Health has not incurred any omission that violates the fundamental rights of the petitioner, since it is deemed demonstrated that it has taken actions within the scope of its competences to provide a solution to the problem described in the filing brief, hence the recurso must be dismissed with respect to this authority.\n\nIX.- Thus, by virtue of the foregoing, it is appropriate to grant the recurso filed with respect to the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados and the Municipalidad de Puntarenas, making the respondents aware that Article 71 of the Law of the Constitutional Jurisdiction (Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional) establishes imprisonment from three months to two years or a fine of twenty to sixty days, for those persons who fail to comply with what is ordered by this Chamber, hence the respondents are warned that they must proceed to resolve the problem analyzed in this matter, because otherwise, pieces may be sent to the Public Prosecutor's Office for the crime of disobedience…(judgment 2010-004595)”\n\nIII.- On the specific case.- Now, with regard to the specific claim presented by the petitioner, being the flooding caused by high tides in the Barrio El Carmen sector next to the \"Tourist Pier\" (\"Muelle Turístico\") in Puntarenas, because the estuary overflows, a clear and evident omission by the municipal authorities is also found, as will be explained below. From the account of proven facts, it has been duly demonstrated that the municipal authorities of Puntarenas are aware of the flooding problems resulting from high tides suffered by the dwellings located in the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city. Both the authorities of the Ministry of Health and those of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes exempt themselves from liability and transfer the solution of the problem to other authorities. In this regard, this Chamber considers that it is not its role to determine which authority is competent to act, nor within what scopes it must be done, and therefore it does not proceed to assess the action that these institutions should have, or the responsibility of each of these entities, but given the serious threat to fundamental rights that has been brought to light in this amparo, it considers it essential that action be taken and orders be issued so that immediate steps are taken to seek solutions or to adopt decisions that should have been taken previously but have been lagging over time. Therefore, as in accordance with Article 169 of the Constitution, municipalities are called upon to administer local interests and services in each canton, this Court will only focus on analyzing the municipal action, as the governing body for seeking the solution or for seeking among the different public instances the necessary coordination to solve the problem. In this sense, it cannot be forgotten that coordination among public agencies is indisputably necessary, in order to guarantee the protection of the environment and therefore, the public health of the population. On various occasions, constitutional jurisprudence has indicated that environmental protection is a task that corresponds to everyone equally, while there is an obligation for the State – as a whole – to take the necessary measures to protect the environment, which necessarily implies the involvement of all State entities, bodies, and institutions as well as private parties that, for one reason or another, have to intervene. The Chamber has referred to this principle of coordination of public agencies, specifically in judgment number 5445-99, at fourteen hours thirty minutes on the fourteenth of July, nineteen ninety-nine, in which, with respect to what is relevant, it stated:\n\n\"In such a way that coordination is the ordering of relations among these diverse independent activities, which takes charge of that concurrence in a same object or entity, to make it useful for a global public plan, without suppressing the reciprocal independence of the acting subjects. Since there is no hierarchical relationship of the decentralized institutions, nor of the State itself in relation to the municipalities, it is not possible to impose certain conducts on them, with which the essential inter-institutional «concert» arises, in the strict sense, insofar as the autonomous and independent centers of action agree on that preventive and global scheme, in which each one plays a role with a view to a mission entrusted to the others. Thus, the relations of the municipalities with the other public entities can only be carried out on a level of equality, resulting in agreed forms of coordination, with the exclusion of any imperative form to the detriment of their autonomy, which would allow subjecting the corporate entities to a coordination scheme without their will or against it; but which does admit the necessary subordination of these entities to the State and in the interest of the latter (through the «administrative supervision» of the State, and specifically, in the legality control function that falls to it, with general oversight powers over the entire sector).”\n\nBased on the foregoing, there is no doubt that any omission in the duty of collaboration and coordination among public institutions could endanger the protection of the environment and public health. Without a doubt, in the specific case, because the reported problems are complex, multifactorial situations, involving several sectors of society and the State, the solution that can be provided for each of the cases and its success will necessarily depend on the coordination and reciprocal collaboration that can occur among the different responsible institutions, and therefore, it is imperative that the respondent Municipality assumes the required coordination among the respondents.\n\nIV.- Following the same line of thought as the previous considerando, the arguments expressed under oath by the respondent Mayor, with which it is intended to justify the omissions that have been occurring to address the situation in that area of the country, are not considered valid. On the contrary, the Chamber is of the opinion that there has been negligence on the part of the Administration that is violating the fundamental rights of the petitioner and the residents of the place, which merits immediate intervention by the state apparatus to correct it. In addition to the above, the Chamber considers that the respondent Municipalidad has tolerated and allowed the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the population of Barrio El Carmen in Puntarenas to be violated. In this sense, the respondent Municipality cannot evade its duty to ensure the local interests of its canton and despite the fact that such municipal obligation is quite clear, this Court is struck by the statement made by the Mayor of the respondent Municipality to the effect that it is not true that attention has not been given to the described problem, if on the fourteenth of June of the current year, authorities of that municipality carried out an inspection visit to the site. With such statements, it is clear that this local government has not assumed the reported situation with full responsibility, because it is clear that making a visit, on an issue such as the one before us, definitively does not mean that action is being taken, or measures are being adopted to solve the problem. Furthermore, it is important to indicate to the municipal authorities that if they consider that many of the actions that must be adopted should be carried out by other institutions, this does not exempt them from liability, because doing so would allow them to disregard the problems. From the report rendered by its representative, the Chamber concludes that the municipal corporation has incurred a clear omission and negligence on the part of the municipal authorities that has caused the continued, repeated deterioration of the environment, health, and safety of the inhabitants of the place. In view of all the foregoing, the Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas must be ordered to adopt measures within the scope of his competences, so that in a coordinated manner with other State institutions, and within a maximum period of six months counted from the notification of this judgment, a solution to the problems reported by the petitioner can be achieved.\n\nPor tanto:\n\nThe recurso is declared with merit.\n\nIt is ordered that Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, or whoever exercises the office in his place, immediately carry out the necessary coordination with the pertinent authorities to adopt the necessary measures within the scope of their powers, so that within a maximum period of six months from the notification of this judgment, a solution may be achieved to the problems denounced by the petitioner at the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city. Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, or whoever exercises the office in his place, is warned that failure to comply with the said order will result in the crime of disobedience and that, in accordance with Article 71 of the Law of this Jurisdiction, imprisonment of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, shall be imposed on whomever receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in an amparo proceeding, and does not comply with it or does not have it enforced, provided that the crime is not more severely punished. The Municipality of Puntarenas is ordered to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts that serve as the basis for this declaration, which shall be liquidated in the execution of the judgment of the contentious-administrative jurisdiction. Let this resolution be personally notified to Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, or to whoever exercises the office in his place.\n\nGilbert Armijo S.\n\nActing President\n\nErnesto Jinesta L. Fernando Cruz C.\n\nFernando Castillo V. Roxana Salazar C.\n\nVíctor Ardón A. José Paulino Hernández arg/800\n\nIn light of the foregoing, it is deemed appropriate to analyze\nthe actions of each of the respondent institutions, in order to\ndetermine whether they have incurred in violations of\nthe provisions of constitutional article 50.\n\n     V.- Regarding the actions of the Municipality of Puntarenas.\nAlthough in her report, the Municipal Mayor of Puntarenas argues that in\norder to address the problem described by the petitioner, the respondent\nCorporation has carried out cleaning and repair work on the sewers and\ndrains, with the aim of mitigating the effects of the aforementioned situation,\nbased on the report issued by the Ministry of Health, it is clear that as of\nDecember 4, 2009, —the date on which an inspection was carried out—, said\nauthority had not performed work on streets 9, 11, and 13 of Puntarenas,\nsince the drains were full of solid waste and some even had stagnant water.\nIn that regard, it should be noted that although this Chamber verifies\nthat the respondents have undertaken various efforts to\nprovide a definitive solution to the problem analyzed in this case file,\nthe truth is that the situation not only persists but is aggravated by the lack\nof action by the respondent Municipality, by failing to carry out the\ncleaning work that would reduce the negative effects that may be generated for\nthe population. Likewise, it must be stated that in previous rulings, this\nCourt has made it clear that the respondent authorities are obligated\nto establish coordination channels and mutual commitments in order to\nresolve the problem with the stormwater drainage system of the city of\nPuntarenas; hence, the failure to comply with what was ordered can only\nfurther aggravate the situation, to the clear detriment of the rights to\nhealth and to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment for the inhabitants\nof the area.\n\n      VI.- Regarding the actions of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers.\nIn its report rendered under oath, the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers\nargues that addressing the problem afflicting the petitioner is the exclusive competence\nof the Municipality of Puntarenas, in accordance with the provisions of\nTitle IV of the Municipal Code, since said authority is the body that collects\nthe respective amounts for the maintenance and proper functioning of the stormwater\nnetwork. Regarding the foregoing, it must be stated that although the respondent\nHead is correct in pointing out the responsibility of the Municipality in\naddressing the cited problem, the truth is that the Costa Rican Institute of\nAqueducts and Sewers is also obligated to provide attention to\nthe aforementioned problem, because, in accordance with the provisions of\nArticle 2, subsections a), d), and g) of the Constitutive Law of the Costa Rican\nInstitute of Aqueducts and Sewers, law 2726 of April 14,\n1961, it is the responsibility of said institution:\n\na) To direct and oversee everything related to providing the inhabitants of\nthe republic with a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of\nblack waters and liquid industrial waste, and of stormwater in urban\nareas;\n\n(…)\n\nd) To advise other State agencies and coordinate public\nand private activities in all matters relating to the establishment of\naqueducts and sewers and the control of contamination of water\nresources, its consultation being mandatory in all cases, and compliance\nwith its recommendations being inexcusable;\n\n(…)\n\ng) To directly administer and operate the aqueduct and sewer\nsystems throughout the country, which shall be gradually taken over taking into account\nconvenience and availability of resources. The systems that are currently\nadministered and operated by municipal corporations may continue to be\nmanaged by them, as long as they provide an efficient service. (…) The institution is empowered\nto agree with local bodies on the administration of such services or to administer them through\nadministrative boards of mixed integration between the Institute and the\nrespective communities, whenever it is convenient for the better provision of\nservices and in accordance with the respective regulations. For the same\nreasons and with the same characteristics, regional administrative\nboards may also be created involving several\nmunicipalities.\n\n           VII.-\nAs can be deduced from reading the cited norms, the Costa Rican Institute\nof Aqueducts and Sewers has a residual obligation in the management\nof sewer systems that are under the administration of\nmunicipalities, since it must intervene when such corporations do not\neffectively provide said service, in consideration of its obligation to\nguarantee the inhabitants of the country a service of potable water,\ncollection and evacuation of black waters and liquid industrial waste and\nstormwater in urban areas, as indicated by subsection a) of\nArticle 2 of Law\n2726. By virtue of the foregoing, the argument of the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers is not admissible, as\nsaid authority cannot shirk the duties that have been legally\nassigned to it, especially considering that we are in the presence of\na situation that implies a violation of the provisions of Articles 21 and 50\nof the Constitution. In this regard, although the Court verifies that the respondent\nInstitute has provided recommendations to the respondent Municipality\nregarding the management of the stormwater drainage problem in the\ncity of Puntarenas, the truth is that this is insufficient, because the\ninstitution must also intervene directly in the solution of said\nproblem, since its action cannot be limited to an indirect\nintervention in addressing the facts mentioned by the petitioner. For the\nforegoing reasons, the petition must also be granted against said authority, as\nit is hereby done.\n\n           VIII.- Regarding\nthe actions of the Ministry of Health.\nThis Chamber considers that the\nMinistry of Health has not incurred in any omission that violates the\nfundamental rights of the petitioner, as it has been demonstrated that it has taken\nactions within the scope of its competencies to provide a solution to the\nproblem described in the petition, hence the petition must be\ndismissed against this authority.\n\n           IX.-\nThus, based on the foregoing, the appropriate course is to grant the\npetition against the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and\nSewers and the Municipality\nof Puntarenas, making the respondents aware that\nArticle 71 of the Law of\nthe Constitutional Jurisdiction establishes imprisonment of three months to\ntwo years or a fine of twenty to sixty days, for those persons who fail to comply\nwith what is ordered by this Chamber; hence, the respondents are warned\nthat they must proceed to resolve the problem analyzed in the\npresent matter, as otherwise, certified copies of the records may be sent to the Public\nProsecutor's Office for the crime of disobedience…(ruling 2010-004595)”\n\nIII.- Regarding the specific case.-\nHaving said that, regarding the specific claim presented by the\npetitioner, namely the floods caused by high tides in the sector\nof Barrio El Carmen next to the \"Muelle Turístico\" (Tourism Pier) in\nPuntarenas, because the estuary overflows, there is also a clear and evident\nomission by the municipal authorities, as will be explained below.\nFrom the list of proven facts, it has been duly demonstrated\nthat the municipal authorities of Puntarenas are aware of the\nflooding problems caused by high tides suffered by the homes located\nin the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city.\nBoth the authorities of the Ministry of Health and those of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport\ndisclaim responsibility and transfer the solution of the problem to other authorities.\nIn this regard, this Chamber considers that it is not its role to determine who is the\ncompetent authority to act, or within what scopes it should be done, and\ntherefore it does not evaluate the actions that these institutions should have taken,\nor the responsibility of each of those entities, but in the face of the grave\nthreat to fundamental rights that has been exposed in this amparo,\nit considers it essential that action be taken and orders be issued to proceed\nimmediately to seek solutions or to adopt the decisions that\nshould have been made previously but have been lagging over time.\nTherefore, as in accordance with Article 169 of the Constitution,\nmunicipalities are called to administer the local interests and services\nin each canton, this Court will only focus on analyzing the municipal\naction, as the governing body for seeking the solution or the necessary coordination among\nthe various public entities to solve the\nproblem. In that sense, it cannot be forgotten that coordination among public agencies is\nindisputably necessary, in order\nto guarantee the protection of the environment and thus, the public health of the population. On various\noccasions, constitutional jurisprudence has indicated that the protection\nof the environment is a task that corresponds to everyone equally, while\nthere is an obligation for the State –as a whole– to take the measures\nnecessary to protect the environment, which necessarily implies the\ninvolvement of all State entities, bodies, and institutions as well as\nprivate parties that, for one reason or another, must intervene. This Chamber has referred to this principle of coordination among public\nagencies, specifically in ruling number 5445-99, of fourteen hours\nthirty minutes of July\nfourteen, nineteen ninety-nine in which, for what is relevant, it stated:\n\n\"Thus, coordination is the ordering of the relationships among these diverse\nindependent activities, which takes charge of that concurrence on a same\nobject or entity, to make it useful for a global public plan, without suppressing the\nreciprocal independence of the acting subjects. Since there is no hierarchical\nrelationship between decentralized institutions, nor of the State itself in\nrelation to municipalities, it is not possible to impose\ncertain behaviors upon them, hence the essential inter-institutional\n'concert' arises, in the strict sense, as the autonomous and\nindependent centers of action agree on that preventive and\nglobal scheme, in which each one plays a role with a view to a mission entrusted to\nthe others. Thus, the relationships of municipalities with other public\nentities can only be carried out on a level of equality, resulting in\nagreed forms of coordination, excluding any\nimperative form to the detriment of their autonomy, which would allow the\ncorporate entities to be subjected to a coordination scheme without their consent or against it;\nbut which does admit the necessary subordination of these entities to the State and in the interest\nthereof (through the 'administrative supervision' of the State, and specifically,\nin the function of legality control that corresponds to it, with powers of\ngeneral oversight over the entire sector).”\n\nBased on the foregoing, there is no doubt that any omission of the duty\nof collaboration and coordination among public institutions could endanger\nthe protection of the environment and public health.\nWithout a doubt, in this specific case, since the reported\nproblems are complex, multifactorial situations that involve various\nsectors of society and the State, the solution that can be provided for each\nof the cases and its success will necessarily depend on the\nreciprocal coordination and collaboration that can occur among the different\nresponsible institutions, and therefore, it is imperative that the respondent\nMunicipality assume the required coordination among the respondents.\n\nIV.- Following\nthe same line of thought as the preceding recital, the\narguments presented under oath by the respondent Mayor, with which he intends\nto justify the omissions that have been occurring in addressing the situation in that\narea of the country, are not considered valid. On the contrary, this Chamber\nis of the opinion that there has been negligence on the part of the Administration\nthat is harming the fundamental rights of the\npetitioner and the neighbors of the place, which warrants an immediate intervention by the\nstate apparatus to correct it. Added to the foregoing, this Chamber considers that the respondent\nMunicipality has tolerated and allowed the right to a healthy and\necologically balanced environment of the population of Barrio El\nCarmen in Puntarenas to be harmed. In that sense, the respondent\nMunicipality cannot evade its duty to watch over the local interests of\nits canton, and despite such municipal obligation being quite clear, this Court is struck by\nthe statement made by the Mayor of the respondent\nMunicipality to the effect that it is not true that attention has not been provided to\nthe described problem, because on June 14th of the current year,\nauthorities of that municipality conducted an inspection visit at the\nsite. With such statements, it is clear that this\nlocal government has not assumed the denounced situation with full\nresponsibility, because it is obvious that making a visit, in a matter\nsuch as the one before us, definitively does not\nmean that action is being taken, or measures are being adopted to solve the\nproblem. Furthermore, it is important to indicate to the municipal authorities\nthat if they consider that many of the actions that must be adopted must\nbe carried out by other institutions, this\ndoes not exempt them from responsibility, because doing so would be to allow them to disregard\nthe problems. From the report rendered by\nits representative, this Chamber\nconcludes that the municipal corporation has incurred in a clear\nomission and negligence on the part of the municipal authorities that has caused\nthe repeated, ongoing deterioration of the environment, health, and safety of the\ninhabitants of the place. In consideration of all the foregoing, the Municipal Mayor of the\nCentral Canton of Puntarenas must be ordered to adopt measures within the scope of\nhis competencies, so that in a coordinated manner with other State institutions,\nand within the maximum period of six months counted from the notification of\nthis ruling, a solution to the problems denounced by the\npetitioner can be achieved.\n\nTherefore:\n\nThe petition is granted. Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his\ncapacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, or whoever\nholds the position in his stead, is ordered to immediately\ncarry out the necessary coordination with the pertinent authorities,\nto adopt the necessary measures within the scope of his competencies, so that\nwithin the maximum period of six months counted from the notification of\nthis ruling, a solution to the problems denounced by the\npetitioner in the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of\nthat city can be achieved. Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his condition\nas Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, or whoever\nholds the position in his stead, is warned that if he fails to comply with the ordered measure, he will incur the crime\nof disobedience and that, in accordance with\nArticle 71 of the Law of this jurisdiction, a prison term of three months\nto two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days,\nwill be imposed on anyone who receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in an\namparo proceeding, and fails to comply with it or enforce it, provided the\ncrime is not more severely punished. The Municipality of\nPuntarenas is ordered to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts\nthat serve as the basis for this declaration, which shall be\nliquidated in the execution of the judgment of contentious-administrative proceedings.\nThis decision shall be personally notified to Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his\ncapacity as Municipal Mayor of the\nCentral Canton of Puntarenas, or to whoever\nholds the position in his stead.\n\nGilbert Armijo S.\n\nActing Presiding Judge\n\n Ernesto\nJinesta L.\n                                            Fernando\nCruz C.\n\nFernando\nCastillo V.\n                                         Roxana\nSalazar C.\n\n**II.- On the merits.** Given the relevance for the analysis of the specific case, it is necessary to note that the problems generated by the sewer system of the city of Puntarenas have already been analyzed by this Court in judgments numbers 2008-010662, at sixteen hours and forty-eight minutes of June twenty-sixth, two thousand eight, 2008-013311 at thirteen hours and fourteen minutes of August twenty-ninth, two thousand eight, 2008-13638 at eleven hours and thirty-eight minutes of September fifth, two thousand eight, 2009-13161 at ten hours and forty-seven minutes of August twenty-first, two thousand nine, 2009-16065 at twelve hours and fifty-three minutes of October sixteenth, two thousand nine, and 2010-004595, at ten hours and eleven minutes of March fifth, two thousand ten. On the matter in question, in this last pronouncement, it was indicated as relevant:\n\n**“V.- On the merits:** In the report rendered by the Mayor and by the President of the Municipal Council of the Municipality of Puntarenas, the respondents confirm the existence of the problem reported by the petitioner, which is that there is indeed an overflow of stormwater that is not contained by the public sewer system. However, by way of discharge, they state that regarding the obstruction of the sewer system, the municipal corporation has made several efforts to resolve the reported problem, for which reason it proceeded to clean it and even acquired a rod-unclogging machine to clean and unclog any obstruction that existed in them. Regarding stormwater drainage, it is said that the municipal corporation is studying possible alternatives to solve said problem. Based on the foregoing, in the opinion of this Chamber, the steps taken by the Municipality of Puntarenas, while they have occurred, have not been sufficient to solve the problems afflicting the residents of Barrio El Carmen, since the stormwater problem continues to occur and continues to invade the sidewalks and premises located along the edge of said sewer system. In this regard, this municipal corporation has failed in its duty of guardianship of the local interests that have been entrusted to it, since it is not verified in the case file that they have used all the powers that the legal system confers on them to broadly ensure the preservation of local interests and services, in accordance with the provisions of Article 169 of the Political Constitution and the development that the Municipal Code makes of said norm. This Court considers it is clear that despite the respondent municipality having previously been aware of the problems afflicting the residents of Barrio El Carmen in Puntarenas, they have still not adopted the sufficient measures required to definitively solve the problem. Regarding stormwater drainage, the report states that the municipal corporation has cleaned solid waste from the sewers, that it even bought a rod-unclogging machine, and that it is studying possible alternatives to solve said problem in the future with foreign donations, which reflects that the work done so far has not been sufficient, and the Stormwater Sewer System continues to present serious problems, which affects the interests and rights of the petitioner, since it is evident, as confirmed by the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, that the stormwater sewer system collapses during the rainy season, unable to retain all the water (folio 86). Regarding the obstruction of the sewer system, it is not clear to this Court whether the 'rod-unclogging machine' has even been used, since the municipal corporation verifies its purchase but not its use, and in the photos attached, only some men can be seen collecting solid waste from some storm drains and manholes, which does not guarantee that there are no obstructions along the Stormwater Sewer System. Nor can it be deduced from the case file whether the cleaning carried out by the Municipality was done in the stormwater or sanitary sewer system, nor that apart from this, coordination actions have been carried out with other State institutions responsible for addressing this type of problem, except for the efforts before the Ministry of Health, or the inspection carried out by the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, which indicates that the Sanitary Sewer network is perfectly fine and that it is the stormwater sewer network that is collapsed (See folio 86), and that despite the Municipality supposedly cleaning the sewers of solid waste, such actions do not appear to have yielded any positive results, since the overflow of stormwater continues, flooding the sidewalks and the premises located alongside them. Thus, even though the municipality has known about the water problem questioned here for months, it has still not been able to solve the problem.”\n\n**IV.-** From reading the transcribed precedent, it can be deduced that in the city of Puntarenas there is a problem with the stormwater sewer system, which generates flooding and water stagnation. In light of the foregoing, it is deemed appropriate to analyze the actions of each of the respondent institutions, in order to determine whether or not they have violated the provisions of constitutional numeral 50.\n\n**V.- Regarding the actions of the Municipality of Puntarenas.** Although in her report, the Municipal Mayor of Puntarenas argues that in order to address the problem described by the petitioner, the respondent Corporation has carried out cleaning and repair work on the sewers and storm drains, in order to mitigate the effects of the aforementioned situation, it is evident from the report rendered by the Ministry of Health, that as of December fourth, two thousand nine—the date on which an inspection was carried out—said authority had not performed work on 9th, 11th, and 13th Streets in Puntarenas, since the storm drains were full of solid waste and some even had stagnant water. In that sense, it should be noted that although the Chamber verifies that the respondents have made various efforts to provide a definitive solution to the problem analyzed in this case file, the truth is that the situation not only persists but is aggravated by the lack of action on the part of the respondent Municipality, in failing to perform the cleaning tasks that would reduce the negative effects that may be generated for the population. Likewise, it should be noted that in previous judgments, this Court has made it clear that the respondent authorities are obliged to establish coordination channels and mutual commitments in order to solve the problem with the stormwater sewer system of the city of Puntarenas, hence the failure to comply with what was ordered leads to nothing other than aggravating the situation, to the clear detriment of the rights to health and to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the inhabitants of the place.\n\n**VI.- Regarding the actions of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers.** In his report rendered under oath, the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers argues that addressing the problem afflicting the petitioner is the exclusive competence of the Municipality of Puntarenas, in accordance with the provisions of Title IV of the Municipal Code, since said authority is the body that collects the respective amounts for the maintenance and proper functioning of the stormwater network.\n\nRegarding the above, it must be noted that while the respondent Chief is correct in pointing out the responsibility of the Municipality in addressing the cited problem, the fact is that the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is also obligated to provide attention to the mentioned issue, since, in accordance with the provisions of Article 2, subsections a), d), and g) of the Constitutive Law of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, Law 2726 of April fourteenth, nineteen sixty-one, it is incumbent upon said institution to:\n\na) Direct and oversee everything concerning the provision to the inhabitants of the republic of a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste and of stormwater (aguas pluviales) in urban areas;\n\n(...)\n\nd) Advise other State bodies and coordinate public and private activities in all matters related to the establishment of aqueducts and sewer systems (alcantarillados) and the control of water resource contamination, its consultation being mandatory in all cases, and compliance with its recommendations being inexcusable;\n\n(...)\n\ng) Directly administer and operate the aqueduct and sewer systems nationwide, which shall be gradually assumed taking into account convenience and availability of resources. Systems that are currently administered and operated by municipal corporations may remain under their charge, as long as they provide an efficient service. (...) The institution is empowered to agree with local bodies on the administration of such services or to administer them through administrative boards of mixed integration between the Institute and the respective communities, whenever this is conducive to the better provision of services and in accordance with the respective regulations. For the same reasons and with the same characteristics, regional administrative boards involving several municipalities may also be created;\n\nVII.- As can be deduced from a reading of the cited regulations, the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados has a residual obligation in the management of sewer systems that are under the administration of municipalities, as it must intervene when said corporations do not effectively provide said service, in accordance with its obligation to guarantee the country's inhabitants a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste and of stormwater in urban areas, as indicated in subsection a) of Article 2 of Law 2726. By virtue of the foregoing, the argument of the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is not acceptable, as said authority cannot evade the duties legally conferred upon it, especially considering that we are faced with a situation that implies an injury to the provisions of Articles 21 and 50 of the Constitution. In that sense, although the Court verifies that the respondent Institute has provided recommendations to the respondent Municipality regarding the management of the stormwater sewer (alcantarillado pluvial) problem in the city of Puntarenas, the fact is that this is insufficient, because the institution must also intervene directly in the solution of said problematic, since its action cannot be limited to indirect intervention in addressing the facts mentioned by the petitioner. Therefore, the appeal must also be granted with respect to said authority, as is hereby done.\n\nVIII.- Regarding the actions of the Ministerio de Salud. The Chamber considers that the Ministerio de Salud has not incurred in any omission that injures the fundamental rights of the petitioner, as it has been demonstrated that it has carried out actions within the scope of its competencies to provide a solution to the problematic described in the petition, hence the appeal must be dismissed with respect to this authority.\n\nIX.- Thus, by reason of the foregoing, it is appropriate to grant the filed appeal with respect to the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados and the Municipality of Puntarenas, cautioning the respondents that Article 71 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional establishes imprisonment of three months to two years or a fine of twenty to sixty days, for those persons who fail to comply with what is ordered by this Chamber, hence the warning is given to the respondents that they must proceed to resolve the problematic analyzed in this matter, as otherwise pieces may be certified to the Public Prosecutor's Office for the crime of disobedience…(judgment 2010-004595)”\n\nIII.- Regarding the specific case.- Now then, regarding the specific claim presented by the petitioner, i.e., the floods caused by high tides in the sector of Barrio El Carmen, next to the \"Tourist Pier\" in Puntarenas, because the estuary overflows, there is also a clear and evident omission on the part of the municipal authorities, as will be set forth below. From the recital of proven facts, it has been duly demonstrated that the municipal authorities of Puntarenas are aware of the flood problems resulting from high tides suffered by the dwellings located in the site known as El Crematorio in the Barrio El Carmen of that city. Both the authorities of the Ministerio de Salud and those of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes exempt themselves from responsibility and shift the solution of the problem to other authorities. In this regard, this Chamber considers that it does not correspond to it to determine who the competent authority to act is, nor within what spheres this must be done, and therefore it does not assess the action that these institutions should have taken, or the responsibility of each of those entities, but in the face of the serious threat to fundamental rights that has been evidenced in this amparo, it considers it essential to act and to issue the orders to proceed immediately to seek solutions or to adopt decisions that should have been dictated previously but have been lagging over time. So, as in accordance with Article 169 of the Constitution, municipalities are called upon to administer the local interests and services in each canton, this Court shall only focus on analyzing the municipal action, as the governing body for seeking the solution or for seeking among the different public instances the necessary coordination to solve the problem. In that sense, it must not be forgotten that coordination among public dependencies is indisputably necessary, in order to guarantee the protection of the environment and, therefore, the public health of the population. On various occasions, constitutional jurisprudence has indicated that the protection of the environment is a task that corresponds to all equally, while there exists an obligation for the State –as a whole– to take the necessary measures to protect the environment, which necessarily implies the involvement of all entities, bodies, and institutions of the State as well as private parties that, for one reason or another, must intervene. The Chamber has referred to this principle of coordination of public dependencies, specifically in judgment number 5445-99, at fourteen hours thirty minutes on July fourteenth, nineteen ninety-nine, in which, for what is of interest, it stated:\n\n\"So that coordination is the ordering of relations between these various independent activities, which addresses this concurrence on a single object or entity, to make it useful to an overall public plan, without suppressing the reciprocal independence of the acting subjects. As there is no hierarchical relationship between decentralized institutions, nor between the State itself in relation to municipalities, it is not possible to impose certain conducts on them, hence the essential inter-institutional 'concert' arises, in the strict sense, insofar as the autonomous and independent centers of action agree upon that preventive and global scheme, in which each one fulfills a role in view of a mission entrusted to the others. Thus, the relations of municipalities with other public entities can only be carried out on a level of equality, resulting in agreed forms of coordination, excluding any imperative form to the detriment of their autonomy, which would permit subjecting corporate entities to a coordination scheme without or against their will; but which does admit the necessary subordination of these entities to the State and in the interest of the latter (through the 'administrative tutelage' of the State, and specifically, in the function of legality control that corresponds to it, with general oversight powers over the entire sector).”\n\nBased on the foregoing, there is no doubt that any omission of the duty of collaboration and coordination between public institutions could endanger the protection of the environment and public health. Without a doubt, in the specific case, because the reported problems involve complex, multifactorial situations involving various sectors of society and the State, the solution that can be achieved for each of the cases and its success will necessarily depend on the reciprocal coordination and collaboration that may occur among the different responsible institutions and, therefore, it is imperative that the respondent Municipality assume the required coordination among the respondents.\n\nIV.- Following the same line of thought as in the preceding recital, the arguments expressed under oath by the respondent Mayor, with which it is attempted to justify the omissions that have been occurring in addressing the situation in that area of the country, are not considered valid. On the contrary, the Chamber is of the opinion that there has been negligence on the part of the Administration that is injuring fundamental rights of the petitioner and the neighbors of the place, which merits an immediate intervention of the state apparatus to correct it. In addition to the above, the Chamber considers that the respondent Municipality has tolerated and permitted the violation of the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the population of Barrio El Carmen in Puntarenas. In that sense, the respondent Municipality cannot evade its duty to oversee the local interests of its canton, and even though such municipal obligation is quite clear, the assertion made by the Mayor of the respondent Municipality to the effect that it is not true that attention has not been provided to the described problematic, because on June fourteenth of the current year, authorities of that municipality conducted an inspection visit at the site, draws the attention of this Court. By such statements, it is clear that this local government has not assumed with full responsibility the denounced situation, because it is clear that making a visit, in an issue such as the one before us, definitively does not mean that one is acting, or adopting measures to solve the problem. Furthermore, it is important to indicate to the municipal authorities that if they consider that many of the actions that must be adopted should be carried out by other institutions, this does not exempt them from responsibility, as doing so would allow them to disengage themselves from the problems. From the report rendered by its representative, the Chamber concludes that the municipal corporation has incurred in a clear omission and negligence on the part of the municipal authorities that has caused the environment, health, and safety of the inhabitants of the place to continue deteriorating, repeatedly. In view of all that has been stated, it must be ordered that the Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas adopt measures within the scope of its competencies, so that, in a coordinated manner with other State institutions, and within a maximum period of six months counted from the notification of this judgment, a solution to the problems denounced by the petitioner may be achieved.”\n\nNº \n2010015777\n\nCONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE. San José, at nine hours and four minutes on the twenty-fourth of September of two thousand ten.\n\nAppeal for amparo filed by Geovanny Salas Campos, of legal age, bearer of identity card 6-172-331, against the Ministry of Public Works and Transport.\n\n**Resultando:**\n\n**1.**- By document received at the Secretariat of the Chamber at sixteen hours thirty-five minutes on the twenty-eighth of February of two thousand ten, the appellant files an appeal for amparo against the Ministry of Public Works and Transport and states that currently there is a problem in that every time there are high tides in the sector of Barrio El Carmen alongside the \"Muelle Turístico\" in Puntarenas, the estuary overflows, causing flooding in the houses adjacent to the place and loss of their belongings. He adds that the respondent authorities do not seek a solution such as building a stone retaining wall with cement like the one on Playa de Puntarenas, which would prevent the water from spreading into the houses.\n\n**2.**- María Luisa Avila Agüero, Minister of Health, reports under oath (folio 9), that in response to the appeal, an inspection was carried out at the site, as recorded in inspection report number 039-F-2010 at nine hours and thirty minutes on the seventh day of April of two thousand ten, that at the time of the visit, drainage pipes from the sewer directed toward the estuary were observed. That during the visit it was determined that there is no complaint filed by the appellant in that Region related to this situation, consequently they had no knowledge of the problem. However, given that this problem must be addressed jointly by the Ministry of Health, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, and the Local Government, a communication was already sent to the Cantonal Head of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers and to the Municipal Mayor, granting them a period of 8 days to report on the actions they take aimed at definitively solving the aforementioned problem, for which reason she requests that this Tribunal exempt the Ministry of Health from all responsibility. She requests that the appeal filed be dismissed.\n\n**3.-** Francisco Jiménez Reyes, in his capacity as Minister of Public Works and Transport, reports (folio 27), that in accordance with the provisions of Law 4071, which dates from the month of January 1968, the city of Puntarenas was declared an urban zone, including the area that specifically generates the problem described above, and it was left under the exclusive competence and responsibility of the Municipality of Puntarenas. For this reason, that Ministry is prevented from carrying out initiatives, actions, or works in the area of Puntarenas and within it, in the area where the floods occur. He indicates that this is a problem regarding which that Ministry has no direct relationship, nor obligation or responsibility. Which must be addressed and defined by the Municipality of Puntarenas. He requests that the appeal be dismissed with respect to that Ministry.\n\n**4.-** Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Central Canton of Puntarenas, reports under oath (folio 30 and 36), that according to the information provided by Eng. Oscar Brenes Quirós, Director of the Unidad Técnica de Gestión Vial of the Municipality of Puntarenas, through communication UTGV-0415-2010 dated June 30, 2010, there is a problem at the site that is due to a series of factors that are beyond the reach of the Municipality of Puntarenas, given the effect produced by the melting of the polar ice caps as a result of global warming, which generates an increase in the water level of the oceans, and this condition results in at least twice a year, when maximum tides occur, the homes located at the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city suffering flooding problems. In addition to the above, he indicates that the stormwater and sanitary drainage system of the city of Puntarenas discharges into the sector of the Estero de Puntarenas, which is why when the tide is high and it rains, an obstruction effect of the water discharge is generated, in turn causing floods in the mentioned area; a situation that reverses at the moment the tide begins to go out, as it allows the water to exit toward the indicated sites. That it is not true that this municipality does not provide attention to the problem because on June 14 of the current year, before this amparo was notified, an inspection was made of the problem site jointly with the Department of Stormwater Works of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport, and as part of the solution, the authorities of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport will work on a gabion wall, faced with concrete, to stop the flow of the tide toward the homes located in El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of Puntarenas. He requests that the appeal filed be dismissed.\n\n**5.-** In the proceedings followed, the legal requirements have been observed.\n\nRedacted by Magistrate Salazar Cambronero; and,\n\n**Considerando:**\n\n**I.- Proven facts.** Of importance for the decision of this matter, the following facts are deemed duly proven: **a)** through communication UTGV-0415-2010 dated June 30, 2010, signed by Eng. Oscar Brenes Quirós, Director of the Unidad Técnica de Gestión Vial of the Municipality of Puntarenas, there is a problem at the site that is due to a series of factors that are beyond the reach of the Municipality of Puntarenas, given the effect produced by the melting of the polar ice caps as a result of global warming, which generates an increase in the water level of the oceans, and this condition results in at least twice a year, when maximum tides occur, the homes located at the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city suffering flooding problems, (report at folio 36 and folio 40); **b)** on June 14 of the current year, an inspection was made of the problem site jointly with the Department of Stormwater Works of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport, and as part of the solution, the authorities of the Ministry of Public Works and Transport will work on a gabion wall, faced with concrete, to stop the flow of the tide toward the homes located in El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of Puntarenas, (report at folio 37).\n\n**II.- On the merits.** Given the relevance it has for the analysis of the specific case, it is necessary to note that the problems generated by the sewer system of the city of Puntarenas have already been analyzed by this Tribunal in decisions numbers 2008-010662, at sixteen hours and forty-eight minutes on the twenty-sixth of June of two thousand eight, 2008-013311 at thirteen hours and fourteen minutes on the twenty-ninth of August of two thousand eight, 2008-13638 at eleven hours and thirty-eight minutes on the fifth of September of two thousand eight, 2009-13161 at ten hours and forty-seven minutes on the twenty-first of August of two thousand nine, 2009-16065 at twelve hours and fifty-three minutes on the sixteenth of October of two thousand nine, and 2010-004595, at ten hours and eleven minutes on the fifth of March of two thousand ten. On the subject in question, in this last pronouncement, it was stated, as relevant:\n\n**“V.- On the merits:** In the report rendered by the Mayor and by the President of the Municipal Council of the Municipality of Puntarenas, the respondents confirm the existence of the problem denounced by the appellant, and it is that effectively there is an overflow of stormwater that is not contained by the public sewer system. However, by way of discharge, they cite that regarding the obstruction of the sewer, the local government has made several efforts to resolve the reported problem, for which reason it proceeded to clean it and even acquired a rod-cleaning machine to clean and unclog any obstruction that might exist in them. Regarding the evacuation of stormwater, it is said that that local government is studying possible alternatives to solve said problem. Based on the foregoing, in the opinion of this Chamber, the steps carried out by the Municipality of Puntarenas, although they have occurred, have not been sufficient to solve the problems that afflict the residents of Barrio El Carmen, since the stormwater problem continues occurring and continues invading the sidewalks and premises that are located at the edge of said sewer. In this context, this municipal corporation has failed in its function of protecting the local interests that have been entrusted to it, since it is not verified in the file that they have used all the powers that the legal system confers upon them to broadly ensure the preservation of local interests and services, in accordance with the provisions of Article 169 of the Political Constitution and the development that the Municipal Code makes of said norm. This Tribunal considers that it is clear that despite the respondent municipality having known previously of the problems that afflict the residents of Barrio El Carmen of Puntarenas, they have not yet adopted the sufficient measures required to definitively solve the problem. Regarding the discharge of stormwater, the report says that this local government has cleaned solid waste from the sewers, that it even bought a rod-cleaning machine, and that it is studying possible alternatives to solve said problem in the future with foreign donations, which reflects that the work carried out so far has not been sufficient, and the Stormwater Sewer System continues to present serious problems, which affects the interests and rights of the appellant, since it is evident, as confirmed by the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, that the stormwater sewer collapses in the rainy season, being unable to retain all the water (folio 86). Regarding the obstruction of the sewer, this Tribunal is not clear if the “rod-cleaning machine” has even been used, since it verifies the local government's purchase but not its use, and in the photos it attaches, only some men are seen collecting solid waste from some storm drains and manholes, which does not guarantee that there are no obstructions along the Stormwater Sewer System. It is also not extracted from the file whether the cleaning that was carried out by the Municipality was carried out on the stormwater or sanitary sewer, nor that apart from this, coordination actions have been carried out with the other State institutions responsible for addressing this type of problem, except for the steps taken with the Ministry of Health, or the inspection carried out by the Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, which indicates that the Sanitary Sewer network is perfectly fine and that it is the stormwater sewer network that is collapsed (See folio 86), and that despite the fact that the Municipality supposedly cleaned the sewers of solid waste, such actions do not seem to have produced any positive result, since the overflow of stormwater continues to occur, flooding the sidewalks and the premises located next to them. Thus, despite the municipality knowing about the water problem questioned here for months ago, it has still not been able to solve the problem.”\n\n**IV.-** From the reading of the transcribed precedent, it is deduced that in the city of Puntarenas there is a problem with the stormwater sewer, which generates floods and water stagnation. In view of the foregoing, it is deemed appropriate to analyze the actions of each of the respondent institutions, in order to determine whether they have incurred or not in violations of the provisions of Article 50 of the Constitution.\n\n**V.- On the action of the Municipality of Puntarenas.** Although in her report, the Municipal Mayor of Puntarenas argues that in order to address the problem described by the appellant, the respondent Corporation has carried out cleaning and repair work on the sewers and storm drains, in order to mitigate the effects of the mentioned situation, from the report rendered by the Ministry of Health, it is evident that as of December fourth, two thousand nine—date on which an inspection was carried out—said authority had not carried out work on streets 9, 11, and 13 of Puntarenas, since the storm drains were full of solid waste and some even with stagnant water. In that sense, it is worth noting that although the Chamber verifies that the respondents have carried out various steps in order to provide a definitive solution to the problem analyzed in this file, the truth is that the situation not only persists but is aggravated by the lack of action by the respondent Municipality, by not carrying out the cleaning work that would allow reducing the negative effects that may be generated for the population. Likewise, it must be noted that in previous rulings, this Tribunal has made it clear that the respondent authorities are obliged to establish channels of coordination and mutual commitments in order to solve the problem with the stormwater sewer of the city of Puntarenas, hence the failure to comply with what was ordered leads to nothing other than aggravating the situation, in clear detriment of the rights to health and to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the inhabitants of the place.\n\n**VI.- On the action of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers.** In his report rendered under oath, the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers argues that addressing the problem that afflicts the appellant is the exclusive competence of the Municipality of Puntarenas, in accordance with the provisions of Title IV of the Municipal Code, since said authority is the body that collects the respective amounts for maintenance and proper functioning of the stormwater network. With respect to the foregoing, it must be noted that although the respondent Head is correct in pointing out the responsibility of the Municipality in addressing the cited problem, the truth is that the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers is also obliged to address the mentioned problem, since, in accordance with the provisions of Article 2, subsections a), d), and g) of the Constitutive Law of the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers, Law 2726 of the fourteenth of April of nineteen sixty-one, it is the responsibility of said institution:\n\na) To direct and supervise everything concerning providing the inhabitants of the republic with a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste and stormwater in urban areas;\n\n(...)\n\nd) To advise the other State bodies and coordinate public and private activities in all matters related to the establishment of aqueducts and sewers and the control of contamination of water resources, its consultation being mandatory in all cases, and compliance with its recommendations inexcusable;\n\n(...)\n\ng) To directly administer and operate the aqueduct and sewer systems throughout the country, which shall be assumed gradually taking into account convenience and availability of resources. The systems that are currently administered and operated by municipal corporations may continue to be in charge of the latter, as long as they provide efficient service. (…) The institution is empowered to agree with local bodies on the administration of such services or to administer them through administrative boards of mixed integration between the Institute and the respective communities, whenever this is appropriate for the better provision of services and in accordance with the respective regulations. For the same reasons and with the same characteristics, regional administrative boards that involve several municipalities may also be created;\n\n**VII.-** As deduced from the reading of the cited norms, the Costa Rican Institute of Aqueducts and Sewers has a residual obligation in the management of sewer systems that are under the administration of municipalities, since it must intervene when said corporations do not effectively provide said service, in accordance with its obligation to guarantee the inhabitants of the country a service of potable water, collection and evacuation of black water and liquid industrial waste and stormwater in urban areas, as indicated by subsection a) of Article 2 of Law 2726.\n\nIn view of the foregoing, the argument of the Head of the Central Pacific Region of the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados is not acceptable, since that authority cannot shirk the duties legally conferred upon it, especially considering that this is a situation that entails an injury to the provisions of constitutional articles 21 and 50. In this regard, although the Tribunal notes that the respondent Institute has provided recommendations to the respondent Municipalidad regarding the management of the storm sewer problem in the city of Puntarenas, the truth is that this is insufficient, since the institution must also intervene directly in solving said problem, as its action cannot be limited to indirect intervention in addressing the facts mentioned by the petitioner. Therefore, the recourse must also be granted with respect to said authority, as is hereby done.\n\nVIII.- On the action of the Ministerio de Salud. La Sala considers that the Ministerio de Salud has not incurred in any omission that injures the fundamental rights of the petitioner, since it has been demonstrated that it has carried out actions within the scope of its powers to provide a solution to the problem described in the petition, hence the recourse must be dismissed with respect to this authority.\n\nIX.- Thus, based on the foregoing, it is appropriate to grant the recourse filed with respect to the Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados and the Municipalidad of Puntarenas, reminding the respondents that article 71 of the Ley de la Jurisdicción Constitucional establishes imprisonment of three months to two years or a fine of twenty to sixty days, for those who fail to comply with what is ordered by this Sala, therefore the respondents are warned that they must proceed to resolve the problem analyzed in this matter, otherwise pieces may be certified to the Ministerio Público for the crime of disobedience…(sentencia 2010-004595)”\n\nIII.- On the specific case.- With respect to the specific claim presented by the petitioner, namely the flooding caused by high tides in the area of Barrio El Carmen adjacent to the \"Muelle Turístico\" in Puntarenas, since the estuary overflows, a clear and evident omission by the municipal authorities is also found, as will be set forth below. From the statement of proven facts, it has been duly demonstrated that the existence of flooding problems resulting from high tides, affecting the dwellings located at the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city, is known to the municipal authorities of Puntarenas. Both the authorities of the Ministerio de Salud and those of the Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes exempt themselves from liability and transfer the solution of the problem to other authorities. In this regard, this Sala considers that it is not its place to determine which is the competent authority to act, or within what spheres action should be taken, and therefore it does not assess the action these institutions should have taken, or the responsibility of each of those entities, but given the serious threat to fundamental rights that has been evidenced in this amparo, it considers it essential that action be taken and orders issued so that an immediate proceeding is undertaken to seek the solutions or adopt the decisions that should have been made before but have been delayed over time. Therefore, as in accordance with constitutional article 169, municipalities are those called to administer local interests and services in each canton, this Tribunal will only focus on analyzing municipal action, as the governing body for seeking a solution or seeking among the various public instances the necessary coordination to solve the problem. In that sense, it cannot be forgotten that coordination between public agencies is indisputably necessary, in order to guarantee the protection of the environment and, therefore, the public health of the population. On various occasions, constitutional jurisprudence has indicated that environmental protection is a task that belongs to everyone equally, while there exists an obligation for the State –as a whole– to take the necessary measures to protect the environment, which necessarily implies the involvement of all state entities, organs, and institutions as well as individuals who, for one reason or another, must intervene. La Sala has referred to that principle of coordination of public agencies, specifically in judgment number 5445-99, of fourteen hours thirty minutes of July fourteenth, nineteen hundred ninety-nine, in which it stated, for pertinent purposes:\n\n\"Thus, coordination is the arrangement of the relations among these various independent activities, which addresses that concurrence in a single object or entity, to make it useful to a global public plan, without suppressing the reciprocal independence of the acting subjects. Since there is no hierarchical relationship of decentralized institutions, nor of the State itself in relation to municipalities, the imposition of certain behaviors on them is not possible, from which arises the essential inter-institutional ‘agreement’ (concierto), in the strict sense, as the autonomous and independent centers of action agree on that preventive and global scheme, in which each fulfills a role in view of a mission entrusted to the others. Thus, the relations of municipalities with other public entities can only be carried out on a plane of equality, resulting in agreed forms of coordination, excluding any imperative form to the detriment of their autonomy, which would allow subjecting corporate entities to a coordination scheme without their will or against it; but which does admit the necessary subordination of these entities to the State and in the interest of the latter (through the ‘administrative tutelage’ (tutela administrativa) of the State, and specifically, in the function of legality control that corresponds to it, with powers of general oversight over the entire sector).”\n\nBased on the above, there is no doubt that any omission in the duty of collaboration and coordination among public institutions could endanger the protection of the environment and public health. Without a doubt, in the specific case, since the denounced problems are complex, multifactorial situations involving various sectors of society and the State, the solution that can be provided for each case and its success will necessarily depend on the reciprocal coordination and collaboration that can occur among the different responsible institutions and, therefore, it is imperative that the respondent Municipalidad assumes the required coordination among the respondents.\n\nIV.- Following the same line of thought as the preceding recital (Considerando), the arguments stated under oath by the respondent Mayor attempting to justify the omissions that have been occurring in addressing the situation in that area of the country are not considered valid. On the contrary, la Sala is of the opinion that there has been negligence on the part of the Administration that is injuring fundamental rights of the petitioner and the residents of the area, requiring immediate state intervention to correct it. In addition to the above, la Sala considers that the respondent Municipalidad has tolerated and allowed the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment of the population of Barrio El Carmen in Puntarenas to be injured. In that sense, the respondent Municipalidad cannot evade its duty to watch over the local interests of its canton and, despite the fact that this municipal obligation is quite clear, the assertion made by the Mayor of the respondent Municipalidad to the effect that it is not true that attention has not been provided to the problem described, given that on June fourteenth of the current year, authorities of that municipality conducted an inspection visit to the site, calls this Tribunal's attention. With such statements, it is clear that this local government has not assumed full responsibility for the denounced situation, because clearly a single visit, in a matter such as the one definitively at hand, does not mean that action is being taken or measures adopted to solve the problem. Furthermore, it is important to indicate to the municipal authorities that if they consider that many of the actions that must be adopted are to be carried out by other institutions, this does not exempt them from liability, as doing so would be allowing them to disengage from the problems. From the report rendered by its representative, la Sala concludes that the municipal corporation has incurred in a clear omission and negligence by the municipal authorities that has caused the environment, health, and safety of the inhabitants of the area to continue deteriorating, repeatedly. In consideration of all that has been said, it must be ordered that the Municipal Mayor of the Cantón Central de Puntarenas adopt measures within the scope of his powers, so that, in coordination with other State institutions, and within a maximum period of six months counted from the notification of this judgment, a solution to the problems denounced by the petitioner may be achieved.\n\nPor tanto:\n\nThis recourse is granted. Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Cantón Central de Puntarenas, or whomever exercises the office in his stead, is ordered to immediately carry out the necessary coordination with the pertinent authorities, to adopt the necessary measures within the scope of his powers, so that, within a maximum period of six months counted from the notification of this judgment, a solution to the problems denounced by the petitioner at the site known as El Crematorio in Barrio El Carmen of that city may be achieved. Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Cantón Central de Puntarenas, or whomever exercises the office in his stead, is warned that failure to comply with said order will result in incurring the crime of disobedience and that, in accordance with article 71 of the Ley of this jurisdiction, imprisonment of three months to two years, or a fine of twenty to sixty days, will be imposed on anyone who receives an order that must be complied with or enforced, issued in an amparo recourse, and does not comply with or enforce it, provided that the crime is not more severely punished. The Municipalidad of Puntarenas is ordered to pay the costs, damages, and losses caused by the facts serving as the basis for this declaration, which shall be liquidated in enforcement of judgment in contencioso administrativo proceedings. Let this resolution be notified personally to Juan Luis Bolaños Alvarado, in his capacity as Municipal Mayor of the Cantón Central de Puntarenas, or whomever exercises the office in his stead.\n\nGilbert Armijo S.\n\nActing President (Presidente a.i.)\n\nErnesto Jinesta L. Fernando Cruz C.\n\nFernando Castillo V. Roxana Salazar C.\n\nVíctor Ardón A. José Paulino Hernández arg/800" }