The Federal Chamber of Comodoro Rivadavia overturned the precautionary measure that had suspended the implementation of the reform of the Glacier Law in the province of Santa Cruz. With this decision, the regulation regains its full validity while the discussion on its constitutionality continues, which could reach the Supreme Court.
The court accepted the arguments of the National Treasury Attorney’s Office and nullified the precautionary measure issued in the first instance by the federal judge of Río Gallegos. According to the judges, the original resolution lacked sufficient grounds and was based on hypothetical scenarios without demonstrating a concrete and imminent danger to the environment.
The Chamber’s Arguments
The judges emphasized that:
- The appealed ruling was constructed “within the field of potentiality,” without identifying immediate threats to the glaciers.
- The first instance ruling did not explain what modifications were introduced by Law 27.804 or why they would imply an environmental setback.
- The new legislation does not automatically allow prohibited activities nor does it eliminate existing protections.
- Any future modification will require technical studies, involvement of specialized agencies, public hearings, and judicial oversight.
In the words of the court: “No activity that was previously prohibited has become permitted as a result of the enactment of the new regulatory framework”.
Context of the Case
The action had been promoted by local leaders from El Calafate, including the mayor Javier Belloni, the president of the Deliberative Council Celia Barría, provincial deputy Carlos Alegría, and national deputy Ana María Ianni. They all questioned the constitutionality of the reform and requested to suspend its effects.
In the first instance, the judge of Río Gallegos had ordered the National State to refrain from applying the new regulations in Santa Cruz. However, the Chamber overturned that decision and severely criticized the way the case was processed, pointing out that the collective nature of the process was not correctly defined nor were the rules set by the Supreme Court for this type of case applied.
Current Protection in Santa Cruz
The court recalled that much of the involved areas already have multiple levels of legal protection:
- National parks and reserves where economic activities are prohibited or limited.
- The provincial glacier protection law, which maintains restrictions similar to those provided by the previous national regulations.
Therefore, it considered it “legally inappropriate” to argue that the reform immediately enables polluting activities.
Implications of the Ruling
The decision of the Federal Chamber has several consequences:
- Full validity of the reform while its constitutionality is discussed.
- Recognition of the plaintiffs’ standing as affected by the environmental issue.
- Order to the originating court to adjust the process to the rules of collective processes set by the Supreme Court.
The ruling marks a turning point in the dispute over the Glacier Law, by restoring the validity of the reform and moving the substantive discussion to higher instances.
Meanwhile, environmental protection in Santa Cruz continues to be supported by national and provincial regulations, in a scenario where the tension between economic development and the preservation of strategic ecosystems remains central in public debate.
