Informe Jurídico sobre la Resolución del Tribunal de Fiscalización Ambiental de la Primera Sala Especializada Permanente Competente en las materias de Minería y Energía Nº 021-2014-OEFA/TFA-SEP1
Date
2024-08-08
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract
El presente informe sobre la resolución Nº 021-2014-OEFA/TFA-SEP1 busca
analizar la posible vulneración de los principios de legalidad y tipicidad de la
Resolución Ministerial Nº 353-2000-EM-VMM, norma con la que el Organismo
de Evaluación y Fiscalización Ambiental – OEFA sancionó a la Empresa
Administradora Chungar S.A.C por un incumplimiento ambiental contenido en el
artículo 5º Decreto Supremo Nº 016-93-EM.
En ese sentido, se realiza un análisis de legalidad y tipicidad de la norma que
contiene la obligación ambiental y, también, de la norma con la que se le
sancionó a la empresa antes señalada. Asimismo, se realiza una crítica al
análisis de la obligación ambiental del titular minero de cara a la resolución antes
mencionada, ya que realizó el Tribunal de Fiscalización Ambiental del OEFA
sostuvo que que el artículo 5 Decreto Supremo Nº 016-93-EM contiene 2
obligaciones ambientales. Y, demás, se identifican las obligaciones ambientales
que le corresponde cumplir al titular minero por las actividades que desarrolla.
Finalmente, se analiza la posibilidad de aplicar la retroactividad benigna sobre la
sanción que se le impuso al titular minero, Empresa Administradora Chungar
S.A.C .
This report on resolution No. 021-2014-OEFA/TFA-SEP1 seeks to analyze the possible violation of the principles of legality and typicality of Ministerial Resolution No. 353-2000-EM-VMM, a rule with which the Evaluation and Evaluation Body Environmental Enforcement – OEFA sanctioned the Administrative Company Chungar S.A.C for an environmental non-compliance contained in article 5 of Supreme Decree No. 016-93-EM. In this sense, an analysis of the legality and typicality of the norm that contains the environmental obligation and, also, of the norm with which the aforementioned company was sanctioned, is carried out. Likewise, a criticism is made of the analysis of the environmental obligation of the mining owner in view of the aforementioned resolution, since the Environmental Supervision Court of the OEFA held that article 5 of Supreme Decree No. 016-93-EM contains 2 obligations environmental. And, furthermore, the environmental obligations that the mining owner must comply with for the activities it carries out are identified. Finally, the possibility of applying benign retroactivity to the sanction imposed on the mining owner, Empresa Administradora Chungar S.A.C, is analyzed.
This report on resolution No. 021-2014-OEFA/TFA-SEP1 seeks to analyze the possible violation of the principles of legality and typicality of Ministerial Resolution No. 353-2000-EM-VMM, a rule with which the Evaluation and Evaluation Body Environmental Enforcement – OEFA sanctioned the Administrative Company Chungar S.A.C for an environmental non-compliance contained in article 5 of Supreme Decree No. 016-93-EM. In this sense, an analysis of the legality and typicality of the norm that contains the environmental obligation and, also, of the norm with which the aforementioned company was sanctioned, is carried out. Likewise, a criticism is made of the analysis of the environmental obligation of the mining owner in view of the aforementioned resolution, since the Environmental Supervision Court of the OEFA held that article 5 of Supreme Decree No. 016-93-EM contains 2 obligations environmental. And, furthermore, the environmental obligations that the mining owner must comply with for the activities it carries out are identified. Finally, the possibility of applying benign retroactivity to the sanction imposed on the mining owner, Empresa Administradora Chungar S.A.C, is analyzed.
Description
Keywords
Control ambiental--Perú, Derecho ambiental--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Sanciones administrativas--Jurisprudencia--Perú