El avance del narcotráfico sobre el tráfico de vida silvestre en Costa Rica representa una preocupación creciente para las autoridades. El fiscal adjunto de la Fiscalía Ambiental, José Pablo González, advirtió que las redes que capturan, trasladan y venden animales en el país ya muestran esquemas similares a los del crimen organizado, lo que podría dar lugar a una convergencia entre ambos delitos si no se fortalecen la legislación y los controles.

Durante un seminario sobre criminalidad organizada en delitos ambientales, González indicó que, aunque actualmente no se puede afirmar que el narcotráfico haya tomado el control de las estructuras de delincuencia ambiental en Costa Rica, esa posibilidad está próxima. Según datos de Interpol, el comercio ilegal de vida silvestre genera cerca de USD 20,000 millones al año. La alerta fue difundida por El Observador.

Las organizaciones dedicadas al tráfico de animales presentan una estructura dividida en funciones: una persona recolecta, otra transporta y una tercera comercializa los ejemplares. González expresó que, en algunos casos, las rutas empleadas para movilizar animales coinciden con las utilizadas para el tráfico de drogas, lo que genera impacto sobre manglares, esteros y canales. Además, existe presunta colaboración con administradores de ciertos alojamientos turísticos, donde se ofrecen animales y rutas de traslado.

Las bandas buscan especialmente monos tití, mariposas morpho, ranas de cristal, serpientes y escarabajos. Andrea Borel, vocera de Humane World for Animals, señaló que se han detectado operaciones que abarcan desde insectos hasta mamíferos. Los monos tití, cuya población se limita a Costa Rica y Panamá, son demandados principalmente por mercados de Norteamérica, Nicaragua y Honduras, según explicó González.

En marzo de este año, la Fiscalía Adjunta Ambiental realizó un operativo en la Zona Norte que permitió rescatar cinco perezosos —tres adultos y dos crías—, seis serpientes, varias ranas de cristal y una danta. Estas acciones incluyeron seis allanamientos en distintos puntos, entre ellos centros turísticos. Los datos refuerzan la preocupación sobre la influencia de un turismo que promueve la interacción con fauna silvestre, sumando presión sobre los hábitats.

La demanda tanto interna como externa sostiene el tráfico de vida silvestre. Borel explicó que existen compradores interesados en conservar animales como trofeos, adornos o piezas de colección. Aunque no hay una cifra exacta sobre el tamaño del mercado en Costa Rica, la extracción de ejemplares afecta los ecosistemas y la supervivencia de especies, según la representante de Humane World for Animals.

La extracción selectiva de individuos clave genera desequilibrios en la biodiversidad, afectando los ecosistemas donde habitan. Borel consideró que aún se requiere mayor investigación para comprender cómo operan estas redes y de qué manera reciben y mantienen los animales. Además, recomendó a la población “mantener los ojos y los oídos abiertos” para detectar este tipo de situaciones.

En Costa Rica, la Ley de Conservación de la Vida Silvestre establece sanciones para el comercio, tráfico y traslado de animales silvestres sin permisos, lo que incluye el decomiso de los ejemplares y sus derivados. González resaltó la importancia de actualizar la legislación y aumentar la conciencia social para evitar que las similitudes operativas entre el tráfico de fauna y el narcotráfico deriven en una sola organización criminal.

En el país, la ausencia de controles más estrictos y de investigaciones orientadas al funcionamiento de las redes de tráfico facilita la existencia de un mercado dedicado a la extracción y comercialización de fauna silvestre. Este contexto ha sido señalado en reiteradas ocasiones por autoridades y organizaciones, según informó El Observador, que han solicitado a la ciudadanía informar sobre actividades vinculadas para contribuir a su detección.

La Sala de lo Constitucional de la Corte Suprema de Justicia (CSJ) resolvió por unanimidad otorgar un recurso de amparo penal a favor de Marco Antonio Vallecillo Banegas, quien enfrenta un proceso por la presunta comisión del delito de extorsión en perjuicio de un testigo protegido, al concluir que existieron deficiencias en la resolución emitida por la Corte de Apelaciones Penal.

El portavoz del Poder Judicial, Melvin Duarte, informó que la decisión del máximo órgano constitucional ordena al tribunal de segunda instancia emitir una nueva resolución debidamente motivada, conforme a los parámetros establecidos por la Constitución y sin pronunciarse sobre la responsabilidad penal del imputado.

“La Sala de lo Constitucional de la Corte Suprema de Justicia resolvió por unanimidad otorgar el recurso de amparo penal interpuesto a favor del señor Marco Antonio Vallecillo Banegas dentro del proceso que se le sigue por la presunta comisión del delito de extorsión en perjuicio de testigo protegido”, declaró Duarte.

El funcionario explicó que el recurso fue presentado por la defensa de Vallecillo contra la sentencia emitida el 8 de octubre de 2024 por la Corte de Apelaciones Penal con competencia nacional en materia de criminalidad organizada y medioambiente, la cual confirmó el auto de formal procesamiento y la medida de prisión preventivadictada en su contra.

Según Duarte, la Sala Constitucional determinó que el tribunal de alzada incurrió en una vulneración al debido proceso y a la tutela judicial efectiva, al no realizar un análisis suficiente sobre la procedencia del antejuicio, uno de los argumentos expuestos por la defensa durante la apelación.

Asimismo, el portavoz señaló que los magistrados advirtieron que la Corte de Apelaciones omitió pronunciarse sobre el agravio relacionado con el ofrecimiento de una caución económica como medida sustitutiva a la prisión preventiva, aspecto que, a criterio de la Sala, representa un defecto de motivación que afecta el derecho a la libertad personal del procesado.

“La Sala Constitucional señaló que la Corte de Apelaciones omitió pronunciarse sobre el agravio relativo al ofrecimiento de una caución económica como medida sustitutiva a la prisión preventiva, lo que constituyó un defecto de motivación que afectó el derecho a la libertad personal”, detalló Duarte.

En consecuencia, la resolución establece que la Corte de Apelaciones deberá emitir un nuevo fallo debidamente fundamentado, atendiendo los aspectos que fueron omitidos en la resolución anterior y respetando las garantías constitucionales invocadas por la defensa.

No obstante, la Sala dejó claro que la concesión del amparo no implica un pronunciamiento sobre la procedencia de la fianza ofrecida ni sobre el fondo del proceso penal, por lo que la investigación contra Vallecillo continúa su curso conforme al procedimiento establecido por la ley.

La decisión se limita a corregir los vicios de motivación identificados en la resolución apelada y obliga al tribunal competente a emitir un nuevo análisis que responda a todos los planteamientos formulados por las partes dentro del proceso judicial.

La resolución de la Sala de lo Constitucional no modifica de manera automática las medidas cautelares impuestas a Marco Antonio Vallecillo, sino que obliga a la Corte de Apelaciones a revisar nuevamente el caso y emitir un fallo que responda de forma expresa a todos los argumentos planteados por la defensa, conforme a los estándares de motivación exigidos por la Constitución.

El amparo constitucional constituye un mecanismo jurídico destinado a proteger los derechos fundamentales cuando estos han sido vulnerados durante un proceso judicial.

En este caso, la Sala concluyó que la decisión impugnada presentaba deficiencias en su fundamentación, razón por la cual consideró procedente ordenar la emisión de una nueva resolución por parte del tribunal competente.

As the United States prepares to celebrate its 250th anniversary, historians are looking back at the founding-era documents that helped define the nation’s earliest ideals. 

Among them is a little-known 1790 exchange between John Carroll, the first Catholic bishop in the United States, and President George Washington — a correspondence that helped answer a fundamental question facing the young republic: Could Catholics, long viewed with suspicion under British rule, truly become equal American citizens?

The answer still rests today inside the Library of Congress.

RARE, HISTORIC US DOCUMENTS TRAVELING COUNTRY ON ‘FREEDOM PLANE’ AHEAD OF AMERICA’S 250TH ANNIVERSARY

About 50 feet from Dr. Kevin Butterfield’s office in the Library’s Manuscript Division sits the original letter Carroll sent to Washington, preserved among the George Washington Papers.

Washington «was spending the entire year of 1790, more or less, connecting with the entire nation,» said Butterfield, acting chief of the Library of Congress Manuscript Division. «He connected with the people because he believed that it was important as the new president that they interact directly with him and have a chance to see the new government in action.»

As Washington traveled through the states during his first year in office, letters poured in from religious congregations, civic organizations and local communities seeking reassurance about their place in the new federal government. Among them was a March 1790 address from John Carroll, who became the first Catholic bishop in the United States after the Vatican established the nation’s first diocese in Baltimore in 1789, and other Catholic leaders asking whether Catholics — long viewed with suspicion under British rule — would be fully included in the new republic.

Michael Breidenbach, dean of the Honors College at Ave Maria University, said the exchange also reminds Americans that Catholics were not merely beneficiaries of the nation’s founding — they helped shape it.

«As America approaches its 250th anniversary, there is a heated debate about whether the nation’s foundation had Protestant, secular or other roots,» he said. «Often missing from these conversations are the Catholic contributions to the American founding.»

Carroll’s letter, Butterfield said, stood out because it sought reassurance that Catholics would be fully included in the new republic.

«They were sharing their thoughts about religious liberty and the importance of having a nation where they were included as full citizens,» he said.

Catholic priests had ministered in the American colonies for generations, but until the Vatican established the Diocese of Baltimore in 1789, there had been no Catholic bishop in the United States. Carroll was consecrated the following year, becoming the country’s first bishop.

FINAL RESPECTS PAID TO FORGOTTEN CATHOLICS OF 300 YEARS AGO WHO VALUED RELIGIOUS LIBERTY: SEE THE PHOTOS

Engraving of Bishop John Carroll, the Archbishop of Baltimore. (Getty Images)

Reading from the original manuscript, Butterfield pointed to the passage that captured the Catholics’ appeal:

«Whilst our country preserves her freedom and independence, we shall have a well-founded title to claim from her justice equal rights of citizenship as the price of our blood spilt under your eyes and of our common exertions for her defense.»

The words reminded Washington that Catholics had fought beside him throughout the Revolutionary War.

«Carroll’s remembering eight years of George Washington’s service as commander in chief through the bloody war for independence and saying, as Washington fully knew, Catholics were a part of that battle from the start and served under his leadership to win independence,» Butterfield said.

For centuries before the American Revolution, Catholics in England and many of its colonies faced sweeping restrictions.

«It’s important to understand that many English people and colonists mistrusted Catholics,» said Catherine O’Donnell, a historian at Arizona State University. «They were thought to be loyal to Rome rather than to their countrymen, and to lack independence of mind.»

HISTORIC MARYLAND CHURCH OPENS DOORS TO VISITORS 320 YEARS AFTER CLOSING DOWN

The March 15, 1790, letter from Bishop John Carroll and other Catholic leaders to President George Washington, preserved in the Library of Congress’s George Washington Papers, appealed for «equal rights of citizenship» for Catholics in the new American republic. Washington’s reply affirmed their place as full citizens. (Library of Congress)

Catholics were barred from holding office in many places, prevented from voting, required to swear oaths rejecting papal authority and, in some colonies, prohibited from openly practicing their faith.

Carroll experienced that discrimination firsthand. As a child, he was sent to Europe for a Catholic education because such schooling was unavailable to him in Maryland. He later joined the Jesuits, a Catholic religious order known for education, missionary work and scholarship. While Jesuits later became deeply rooted in American Catholic life, Carroll’s formation had to take place overseas because Catholic institutions in the colonies were still sharply limited.

Yet rather than seeking a return to an established Catholic state, Carroll believed the new American republic offered something better.

«He thought the separation of church and state was a good thing,» O’Donnell said.

The letter to Washington was sincere, she said, but also carefully calculated.

«Carroll admired Washington throughout Washington’s life,» O’Donnell said. «This letter was sincere and also in a way strategic: Carroll wanted Washington to publicly affirm Catholics’ welcome place in the new nation.»

BISHOP ROBERT BARRON: MY YEAR WITH DOJ’S RELIGIOUS LIBERTY COMMISSION: WHY I SAID YES

Page two of John Carroll’s March 15, 1790 letter to President George Washington, in which American Catholics appealed for «equal rights of citizenship» in the new republic. Courtesy of the Library of Congress. (The Library of Congress)

If the letter was a test, she added, it was one Carroll expected Washington to pass.

Carroll was joined by several of the young nation’s most prominent Catholic leaders. The address was signed by his cousin Charles Carroll of Carrollton — the only Catholic signer of the Declaration of Independence — as well as his relative Daniel Carroll, a signer of the U.S. Constitution, and Congressman Thomas FitzSimons of Pennsylvania. Together, they argued that American Catholics had earned the same rights of citizenship through their contributions to the Revolutionary War and the nation’s founding.

«American Catholics’ remarkable transformation — from being suspected subjects of a king to being trusted citizens of a new republic — is wonderfully illustrated in Bishop John Carroll’s 1790 letter to George Washington,» said Breidenbach, who is also the author of the book «Our Dear-Bought Liberty: Catholics and Religious Toleration in Early America».

Washington’s reply left little doubt where he stood.

He thanked Catholics for the «patriotic part» they had played during the Revolution and wrote that they were already «realizing, instead of anticipating, the benefits of the general Government.»

Butterfield said the response reflected Washington’s broader vision for the country.

«As long as you demean yourself as a good citizen and follow the laws, it doesn’t matter what your religious beliefs are,» Butterfield said, summarizing Washington’s message. «You’re fully a part of the nation.»

Washington, Butterfield said, recognized that every public word he spoke helped define the new republic.

«He is fully aware that he is a symbol of the nation, that the words that he speaks have consequences, that every word that he says matters.»

Washington expressed the same principle in his correspondence with other minority religious communities, including the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island.

«Washington makes clear that he’s not asserting ‘toleration,’ which would imply that a group of people are being given some kind of special permission to exist and worship,» she said. «Rather, all good citizens have the same rights regardless of religion.»

Although several states continued to maintain religious restrictions for decades, the new federal government charted a different course.

COLONIAL WILLIAMSBURG GEARS UP FOR AMERICA 250 BIRTHDAY TO REMEMBER

The closing page of John Carroll’s 1790 address to President George Washington includes the signatures of the Catholic leaders who appealed for equal rights of citizenship in the new American republic. Courtesy of the Library of Congress. (The Library of Congress.)

Even before the First Amendment was ratified, Article VI of the Constitution prohibited religious tests for federal office. Washington, who had presided over the Constitutional Convention, consistently defended that principle throughout his presidency.

«At the national level from day one, this was an experiment in religious freedom,» Butterfield said.

The correspondence itself survived because Washington understood that his papers would matter to future generations.

According to Butterfield, Washington preserved the collection, leaving it to his nephew, Supreme Court Justice Bushrod Washington. Congress purchased the papers in 1834, and they were later transferred from the State Department to the Library of Congress, where they remain today.

The Carroll letter is now one of roughly 77,000 items in the George Washington Papers. While researchers around the world can consult digitized versions, the original manuscript is only brought out in rare circumstances to preserve it.

O’Donnell believes the lesson extends beyond Catholic history.

«I think that it’s valuable for Americans to understand that the history of the founding period contains just about everything: ideals such as religious liberty and prejudices, such as those against Catholics,» she said.

She also believes the correspondence demonstrates the importance of public leadership.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Gen. George Washington parades through Lower Manhattan on Evacuation Day, Nov. 25, 1783. (Library of Congress/Getty Images)

Washington’s belief that good citizenship did not require any particular religious views «seems timely,» O’Donnell said, as does Carroll’s belief that «public exchanges about important matters can help make ideals part of people’s sense of their community, rather than just a theoretical set of rights.»

More than two centuries later, the exchange remains more than a forgotten piece of correspondence. It captures an early moment when one of America’s smallest religious minorities asked whether the promises of the Revolution truly applied to them — and when the nation’s first president answered that they did.