By Amanda Roberson
Tico Times Staff | aroberson@ticotimes.net

The Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court (Sala IV) yesterday announced that it has found nothing unconstitutional about the Central American Free-Trade Agreement with the United States (CAFTA), essentially giving the green light for a referendum on this controversial trade pact scheduled for Oct. 7.

The Sala IV reviewed CAFTA at the request of a group of legislators and Ombudswoman Lisbeth Quesada. Five of the seven judges voted that the pact contains no unconstitutional elements while two voted to the contrary, according to a statement from the Judicial Branch.

The court's decision means there's nothing stopping the referendum from proceeding as planned, said Supreme Elections Tribunal (TSE) spokesman Cedric Solano.

Now that the Sala IV has ruled comes the “most important decision Costa Ricans will make about (CAFTA) – deciding whether or not it suits the interests of the country,” said TSE interim president Luis Antonio Sobrado.

Both pro- and anti-CAFTA groups scrambled to release their reactions to the court's decision on this heated issue. The Chamber of Industries even beat the Judicial Branch to the punch, sending out a statement expressing its “satisfaction” minutes before the court notified the press of its decision.

President Oscar Arias, perhaps CAFTA's biggest supporter, expressed his “tremendous joy” over the ruling, which he said “clears up any doubt about unconstitutionality and means we can go very calmly and with great peace to voting places to decide the future of this small country we love so much,” according to a statement from Casa Presidencial.

Ottón Solís, leader of the Citizen Action Party (PAC) and a vocal CAFTA opponent, was less than thrilled by the decision. Legislators from his party were among those who filed the complaint of unconstitutionality before the Sala IV.

Solís told the wire service ACAN-EFE he was “surprised” at the court's decision since “university professors had identified constitutional violations in the treaty.”

“The fact that CAFTA is not unconstitutional doesn't mean it's good. The Sala IV didn't give its opinion on the implications of CAFTA... so our arguments against it remain,” Solís said.