Q COSTA RICA — The Universidad de Costa Rica (UCR)—University of Costa Rica—has acquired its first 3D bioprinter, expanding the country’s ability to research human-tissue regeneration, biomaterials, and personalized medicine.

The equipment, manufactured by Tissuelabs, was purchased in November 2025 by the university’s Nanobiosystems Laboratory, part of the Center for Research in Atomic, Nuclear and Molecular Sciences within UCR’s Faculty of Sciences. The university says the system will allow researchers to build biological models that reproduce some of the characteristics of real human tissue.

The development does not mean that Costa Rica is ready to print transplantable organs or offer bioprinted treatments to patients. Its immediate purpose is research: creating controlled three-dimensional structures that can be used to study how materials, cells and tissues interact.

According to the report, the technology could strengthen work involving bone regeneration, tissue engineering, biophysics, microfluidics and biomaterials.

From materials to tissue-like systems

Conventional 3D printers manufacture objects from materials such as plastic or resin. Bioprinters are designed to deposit biocompatible substances and, depending on the project, living cells in precise patterns. This makes it possible to construct models that more closely resemble the organization and behavior of biological tissue.

That distinction is important. Researchers can learn a great deal by studying a material on its own, but biological systems are more complicated. Cells respond to their surroundings, interact with neighboring cells, and react differently when exposed to mechanical forces, chemicals, or changes in structure.

Leonardo Lesser Rojas, a researcher at UCR’s Center for Research in Atomic, Nuclear and Molecular Sciences, said the new equipment will help researchers move beyond examining materials in isolation and toward studying systems that more closely reflect the conditions found in actual tissue.

The initial focus includes bone regeneration. Damaged bone can sometimes repair itself, but serious injuries, disease, and large defects may require grafts or other interventions. Researchers hope that engineered structures could eventually support the repair of damaged tissue or provide alternatives to existing grafting techniques.

International research is also exploring bioprinted skin substitutes, cartilage structures and bone grafts. These applications remain at different stages of laboratory and clinical development, and their success depends on factors such as the material’s strength, compatibility with the body, vascularization and the ability of living cells to function properly after implantation.

A broader platform for biomedical research

UCR has registered a pilot project called “Development of an Integrated 3D Bioprinting and Organ-on-Chip Platform.” The project will combine three-dimensional biological models with organ-on-chip systems—small devices designed to reproduce selected functions and conditions of human organs.

Together, these tools could help scientists study disease, observe cellular behavior and test how tissues respond to different stimuli. They may also offer a way to conduct certain experiments in models that are more biologically relevant than a flat cell culture, while reducing reliance on less representative laboratory systems.

The university also envisions using the platform for academic training, applied research and specialized services for companies and other institutions. Students are already receiving training in the operation and potential applications of the bioprinter, including senior physics students Estefany García and María José Víquez.

This educational dimension may be just as significant as the machine itself. Advanced biomedical equipment is valuable only when researchers know how to use it, maintain it and connect it to meaningful scientific questions. By training students and bringing together specialists in physics, engineering, biology and materials science, UCR can build expertise that lasts beyond a single project.

Why the development matters

Costa Rica’s achievement is less about owning a sophisticated printer than about building a national research capacity around it. A shared platform could allow different university groups, hospitals, public institutions and companies to collaborate on projects that would otherwise require access to laboratories abroad.

It may also help Costa Rican researchers develop models suited to local research priorities rather than relying entirely on imported technologies. Over time, that could strengthen the country’s position in biomaterials, regenerative medicine and biomedical engineering.

Still, the path from a printed tissue model to a medical treatment is long. Researchers must demonstrate that a structure is safe, stable and effective. They must understand how the body will respond to it, determine whether it can receive a blood supply, and meet strict regulatory requirements before clinical use. Personalized tissue engineering introduces additional challenges involving the patient’s cells, manufacturing consistency and cost.

For that reason, the most accurate description of the UCR initiative is not that Costa Rica is about to print human organs. It is that the country has acquired a tool that may allow its scientists to study human biology with greater precision and develop the foundations for future regenerative therapies.

The project’s success will depend on what comes next: sustained funding, interdisciplinary collaboration, rigorous validation and partnerships capable of moving promising laboratory results toward clinical research. If those conditions are met, the new bioprinter could become more than an isolated piece of equipment. It could serve as the center of a broader biomedical ecosystem in Costa Rica—one that trains researchers, supports local science and explores new ways to repair damaged tissue.

Q COSTA RICA — His tenure is now secure following his unanimous reelection for the next four years as the country’s Attorney General. So, it can also be a time to take off the gloves, so to speak.

On Monday, all 21 magistrates of the Full Court reelected Carlo Díaz to head the Fiscalía (Prosecutor’s Office), entrusting him to continue his fight against corruption in government and organized crime.

Díaz was one of the members of the Judiciary who did not attend the opening of the Centro de Alta Contención del Crimen Organizado (Cacco)—Center for the High Containment of Organized Crime—Costa Rica’s new high-security prison.

Days after the event, President Laura Fernández was critical of Díaz and the other members of the Judiciary who had kept quiet until yesterday, when Díaz broke the silence to defend his decision not to attend.

Díaz offered two explanations, mainly for what he described as a hostile political environment at the Cacco ceremony.

“Would you attend an event or a dinner where you know you are going to be insulted or hear things like those expressed there?” Díaz said, according to CR Hoy. “I would not go to a house where I am going to be offended, where I will not even be able to respond or express myself about what is being said to me.”

Díaz called the president’s remarks “very serious” and unacceptable. He also framed the dispute as part of a broader concern about the use of political power and the treatment of independent institutions.

The headline of the CR Hoy report reflects the central point of his response: “The one who abuses power is just as much a criminal as the one who steals.”

The statement does not equate every form of political disagreement with a criminal offense. Rather, it signals Díaz’s argument that corruption and abuses of authority can damage the state just as severely as conventional crimes.

A dispute larger than one missed ceremony

At first glance, the controversy concerns a single official’s absence from a prison-infrastructure event. The deeper conflict is institutional.

The Cacco project is closely associated with the government’s public-security agenda. A ceremony celebrating new high-containment facilities offered the administration an opportunity to project control over organized crime and to rally political support around tougher prison measures. Díaz’s absence disrupted that message, especially because the Public Prosecutor’s Office plays a central role in investigating and prosecuting the criminal networks the facilities are intended to contain.

The president’s criticism appears to have turned a scheduling issue into a public confrontation between the executive branch and the country’s chief prosecutor. Díaz’s response, in turn, recast the absence as a matter of institutional dignity and independence.

That distinction matters. Government officials may expect cooperation from judicial authorities at events tied to national security, but cooperation is not the same as political alignment. A prosecutor who appears beside the executive at a high-profile ceremony can be seen as endorsing the government’s policies. A prosecutor who stays away may be accused of disrespect or obstruction. Either choice carries political consequences.

Díaz’s explanation seeks to establish that his absence was neither indifference toward public safety nor hostility toward the prison project. He was engaged in an international meeting focused on organized crime, he said, and he deliberately avoided an event where he believed he would be publicly attacked without a fair chance to respond.

The significance of the power-abuse warning

Díaz’s language also points to a familiar democratic tension: the danger that the fight against crime becomes a justification for weakening institutional checks.

Prison expansion and tougher security policies can respond to genuine public concerns, particularly when organized crime places pressure on courts, communities, and law-enforcement agencies. Yet those policies still require oversight. The executive branch controls government policy and administration; prosecutors and courts are expected to apply the law independently.

When officials accuse one another of criminality, the public debate can quickly become personal. That may energize supporters, but it can also obscure the more important question: are public institutions operating within their legal authority, and are they able to criticize one another without retaliation?

Q COSTA RICA — Attorney General Carlo Díaz will remain at the helm of the Fiscalía (Public Prosecutor’s Office) for another four years. All 21 magistrates present at Monday’s plenary session voted to keep Díaz in office.

His new term will run until October 2030, extending his leadership of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which he has headed since October 2022.

The vote provides Díaz with a clear institutional mandate. It also places the prosecutor at the center of a broader struggle over the limits of political power in Costa Rica, where investigations involving senior officials have sharpened tensions between the executive branch and the country’s judicial institutions.

Díaz has drawn criticism from the administrations of President Laura Fernández and her predecessor, Rodrigo Chaves, particularly after prosecutors opened cases involving alleged campaign-finance violations and the possible misuse of public funds. Chaves, who later became a government minister, publicly attacked Díaz and at one point led supporters in a march demanding his resignation.

The reelection therefore carries significance beyond the personnel decision itself. By retaining Díaz unanimously, the Supreme Court signaled that the Public Prosecutor’s Office should be allowed to pursue politically sensitive cases without direct executive approval.

That does not settle the conflict between the prosecutor and the government, but it does make the court’s position difficult to portray as narrowly divided or procedurally fragile.

During the session, Díaz used his presentation before the magistrates to defend the independence of the institution. He said the Public Prosecutor’s Office must remain a pillar of the rule of law and warned against political efforts that could weaken the separation of powers. He also reaffirmed his commitment to investigating organized crime, corruption and drug trafficking while respecting the rights of defendants and victims.

During his appearance, he presented a report on his first term and answered questions about criminal prosecutions, cooperation with international agencies and the backlog of cases. Several magistrates cited his work against organized crime and his defense of prosecutorial autonomy when explaining their votes.

Over the next four years, Díaz will have to manage pressure from the executive branch while pursuing cases that may affect powerful political actors. He will also face demands for measurable results against organized crime, which has become one of Costa Rica’s most urgent security concerns, alongside expectations that prosecutors handle sensitive investigations with greater transparency and procedural discipline.

For the Chaves-Fernández government, the reelection is a setback, as its objective was to replace a prosecutor it considered confrontational. For the opposition and judicial-sector defenders, it is evidence that the country’s institutional checks remain capable of resisting political pressure. The sharper question is whether that institutional confidence can survive sustained conflict once new investigations reach the courts.

Díaz’s second term begins with unusually strong backing from the magistrates but little guarantee of political calm.

His reelection gives him security of tenure until 2030. It also gives the executive branch and the public a clear benchmark: whether the prosecutor can turn that mandate into effective, impartial enforcement without allowing the office to become another front in Costa Rica’s increasingly polarized politics.

Lawyer with a 28-year judicial career

Carlo Díaz has a judicial career spanning more than 28 years, four of which he has spent at the helm of the Public Prosecutor’s Office.

Díaz joined the Judiciary in 1998 and has since held various positions, including assistant prosecutor, staff prosecutor, and deputy prosecutor. He also headed regional prosecutor’s offices in Limón, Pavas, Desamparados, Heredia, Alajuela, and Cartago, and served as deputy prosecutor for Indigenous Affairs, the Office for the Execution of Sentences, and the Prosecutor’s Office Management Unit.

He holds a law degree from the University of Costa Rica and a master’s degree in Law with an emphasis on Criminal Law, in addition to studies in Criminology. On a personal level, he is a father, a grandfather, and an avid cyclist.

DEA supported the reelection of Carlo Díaz

Díaz revealed that officials from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) expressed their support for him to remain at the helm of the Public Prosecutor’s Office—and to continue their collaborative work—ahead of today’s vote.

Díaz said that the head of the DEA in Costa Rica, whose identity is not being disclosed for security reasons, told him directly that he hoped he would be re-elected, citing the trust they have built and the various projects they are working on side by side.

Chaves on Carlo Díaz’s reelection: “It doesn’t surprise me”

Crhoy.com reports that former President and currently the Minister of the Presidency and Finance, Rodrigo Chaves, reacted to the reelection of Carlo Díaz. Ahead of a meeting with the President of Congress, Yara Jiménez, Chaves told the Trivisión that the reelection did not surprise him.

“I am not the least bit surprised (by the reelection); he is an individual who faces serious questions and clearly lacks the capacity, the character—everything required—to be an effective Prosecutor General,” Chaves stated.

Chaves has consistently voiced strong criticism of Díaz, who has investigated alleged corruption cases both during Chaves’s administration and under the current administration of Chaves—Fernández.

Q COSTA RICA — A 22-year-old woman surnamed Ortiz remains at large as the primary suspect in the homicide of American Mark Walter Fleming, which took place on September 27 in Playas del Coco, Guanacaste.

On Friday, October 16, the Organismo de Investigación Judicial (OIJ) arrested another woman in Desamparados for her alleged role in transporting Ortiz to San José following the crime.

Raids began at 5:00 a.m. in the areas of La Capri and San Miguel, in Desamparados. The woman arrested has been identified as Roxana Zeledón; she remains in police custody while authorities determine her legal status, according to reports from Teletica.

The investigation indicates that Ortiz, known by the alias “Panterita” and who allegedly works as an escort and is the primary suspect, had direct contact with Fleming inside an apartment belonging to the victim, located in a beachside condominium complex in Playas del Coco. Investigators hypothesize that the woman left the property alone and departed in a light vehicle.

The financial trail between Guanacaste and San José

Fleming’s credit cards were used after his death to make purchases and pay for lodging at various locations throughout Guanacaste. These transactions helped reconstruct part of the route taken by the two individuals under investigation.

The journey began in Playas del Coco, where charges were recorded following the homicide.

The suspects allegedly spent the night in Flamingo, and the last recorded transaction took place near Abangares, before they traveled toward San José.

Investigators located a vehicle of interest at the condominium complex where Zeledón resides, in Desamparados. They suspect it was used to pick up Ortiz in Guanacaste and transport her to San José.

Fleming was 74 years old, originally from California, and lived in a condominium in Playas del Coco. The OIJ ruled the death a homicide after determining that Fleming sustained multiple blows to the head with the glass jar of a blender.

The businessman had founded Fleming Metal Fabricators and served as vice president of the company—based in San Clemente, California—which specializes in the manufacturing of vehicle bodies and trailers. His social media posts also indicated an interest in sport fishing.

Authorities are investigating whether the women frequented tourist areas in Guanacaste to make contact with foreigners, and whether those interactions are related to the case. This line of inquiry emerged from sources close to the investigation.

International coverage of the homicide in Costa Rica

The murder of Fleming was also covered by Fox News, the New York Post, and the British tabloid, the Daily Mail, which published images of the primary suspect—released by the OIJ—as well as photographs of the area where the crime took place.

The British tabloid used the term “bikini killer” to refer to Ortiz.

The search remains focused on locating the suspect.

If you have any relevant information or recognize the primary suspect still at large, Costa Rican authorities urge the public to contact the OIJ’s confidential tip line at 800-800-0645.

Q COSTA RICA — Costa Rica’s government is seeking to shift public attention away from unanswered questions about the apparent proximity of businessman Guobin Tam Zhang to senior figures in the ruling party, the Partido Pueblo Soberano (PPSO).

Tam, whom Costa Rican authorities have described as a suspected drug-trafficking money launderer, was arrested in October during a joint operation involving the Organismo de Investigación Judicial (OIJ), the Policia Constrol de Drogas (PCD) and the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

The arrest brought renewed scrutiny to photographs showing Tam at two private events attended by prominent government supporters. One image placed him among guests at a February electoral celebration for the ruling Chavista movement at San José’s Aurola Hotel. Another showed him seated near then-President Rodrigo Chaves, President-elect Laura Fernández and several PPSO legislators during an April event in the Cristo Rey neighborhood.

The April gathering was held to inaugurate a building connected to Obras del Espíritu Santo, a charitable organization led by Catholic priest Sergio Valverde, and to mark Costa Rica’s National Cooperative Day. The event also included Freddy González, secretary-general of the PPSO and one of the country’s most visible cooperative movement leaders.

Neither the government nor the ruling party has provided a clear explanation of how Tam gained access to the events, who invited him or why he was permitted to sit near senior political figures. Mayuli Ortega, president of PPSO, said the party was examining how Tam attended the February celebration. Ten days later, there was still no public account of the findings.

The government has offered no comparable investigation into the April event. Obras del Espíritu Santo said it did not know in what capacity Tam attended and denied responsibility for organizing the gathering. González has not publicly explained his contact with Tam or the businessman’s presence at the event.

Fernández addressed the issue at a news conference on October 7, after several days of public criticism. She denied having any relationship with Tam and argued that a photograph or brief encounter could not establish a connection to criminal activity. She also said it would have been impossible for her to know the businessman’s alleged criminal background.

Yet one of her statements was later challenged by the available record. Fernández said Tam had not been the subject of a criminal investigation in February, when the Aurola photograph was taken. The article reports that a judicial case involving him had already been active since January.

The president also explained a separate encounter with another man suspected of money laundering, identified as Hugo Barboza, detained earlier this month. She said the conversation took place during a March concert after event organizers extended a courtesy to her. Fernández did not offer a similar explanation for Tam’s presence at the party gathering.

After a second photograph of Tam was published by La Nación, the government again declined to provide detailed answers. Nogui Acosta, the PPSO’s legislative leader, defended the official position, saying that attending a public event or appearing in a photograph with someone does not prove a relationship with that person’s activities or knowledge of possible wrongdoing.

That response addresses the narrowest question—whether a photograph proves criminal complicity—but leaves broader institutional questions unanswered. Political parties and government officials routinely vet guests, donors, organizers and participants at restricted events. The issue is not simply that Tam appeared in a picture. It is whether anyone responsible for organizing or securing those gatherings knew who he was, whether he had political or financial ties to the ruling movement, and whether officials took reasonable steps to identify such risks.

Fernández has not announced an inquiry into whether Tam contributed money to electoral activities outside official campaign accounts or supported mobilizations associated with the governing movement. The PPSO has opposed creating a legislative commission focused specifically on Tam’s activities. Instead, its lawmakers backed a broader investigation into campaign financing in 2022 and 2026—a proposal that could examine more actors but may also dilute attention on the immediate questions raised by the photographs.

The government has also emphasized its record on combating organized crime. Fernández said the “Tam case” was already before the courts and expressed support for the continued presence of the DEA in Costa Rica. That statement was presented as evidence of the administration’s commitment to cooperation against drug trafficking, though the article notes that the DEA has operated in Costa Rica since 1985, rather than having arrived during Chaves’s presidency.

At the same time, the administration has promoted the opening of the High-Containment Center Against Organized Crime, known as Cacco. The facility has become a centerpiece of the government’s security messaging. Its inauguration was promoted days before the ceremony through government-produced audiovisual material, helping the administration redirect public discussion toward its anti-crime agenda while questions about Tam remained unresolved.

Analysis: The problem is political access, not just photographic proximity

The government’s defense rests on a technically plausible claim: being photographed near a suspect does not, by itself, establish criminal conduct. That point is difficult to dispute. Public events create accidental encounters, and political figures cannot know the full background of every person who appears in a crowd.

But the government’s response is incomplete because it treats the controversy as though the only question were whether Fernández or other officials personally knew Tam’s alleged activities. The more consequential issue concerns access.

Tam was not photographed once in an anonymous public crowd. He appeared at two politically significant events, including one where he was seated near high-ranking officials and lawmakers. Those repeated appearances raise questions about invitations, accreditation, introductions and relationships. They also call for a basic institutional review, even if that review ultimately finds no illegal conduct.

The administration’s refusal to pursue that review creates a credibility problem. Saying that “a photograph proves nothing” may be legally correct, but it does not explain why the same individual appeared in multiple settings connected to the governing movement. Nor does it clarify whether party officials, political intermediaries or event organizers knew him before his arrest.

The choice of a broad campaign-finance investigation produces a similar ambiguity. A wide-ranging inquiry could uncover useful information, but it can also make accountability less direct. By placing the Tam questions inside a much larger review of the financing of multiple campaigns and parties, legislators avoid giving the public a focused answer about the people and institutions that gave him access.

The government’s communications strategy has been more decisive than its fact-finding. Public attention has been directed toward the newly inaugurated prison, the Centro de Alta Contención contra el Crimen Organizado (CACCO)—High-Security Center for Combating Organized Crime, cooperation with the DEA and the administration’s broader anti-narcotics message. Those are politically useful subjects, particularly for a government that has made security a central part of its identity. They do not resolve the unanswered questions about political proximity.

The ongoing judicial and extradition proceedings may eventually clarify Tam’s alleged financial and criminal networks. Authorities are investigating suspected links to drug-trafficking organizations in Colombia and Mexico and alleged efforts to legitimize proceeds from the drug trade. Those proceedings should be allowed to run their course without political interference.

Still, judicial proceedings are not a substitute for political accountability. Courts determine criminal liability. Parties and public institutions must also explain whom they invite, how they vet access to restricted events and what they do when a person connected to their circles is arrested on serious charges.

For now, the government appears to be betting that the controversy will fade as other headlines take over. That may work as a short-term communications tactic. It does not answer the central questions.

Until the PPSO and the executive branch identify how Tam entered those events, who facilitated his access and whether any money or political assistance passed through those relationships, the photographs will remain more than isolated images. They will stand as evidence of an unresolved failure of transparency.

Adapted from “Gobierno intenta dejar atrás cuestionamientos por cercanía con sospechoso de narcotráfico seguido por la DEA” at SemanarioUniversidad.com. Read the original in Spanish here.

Q COSTA RICA — Legislator Antonio Trejos Mazariegos has filed a criminal complaint against President Laura Fernández and former President Rodrigo Chaves over the appointment of Pablo Esteban Martínez Bertozzi as director of the country’s intelligence service, the Dirección de Inteligencia y Seguridad Nacional (DIS).

The complaint, submitted on October 15 by the Frente Amplio (FA) party legislator, asks the Attorney General’s Office to determine whether the appointment violated legal requirements for senior police positions. Martínez Bertozzi took office on June 1, 2026.

The dispute centers on a requirement in Article 65 of Costa Rica’s General Police Law. The provision states that directors of certain police bodies must hold at least the rank of commissioner. According to a response issued by the Presidential Office, Martínez Bertozzi does not hold a police rank.

Trejos argues that the appointment could constitute the crime of illegal appointments under Article 344 of the Penal Code. He is asking prosecutors to investigate the roles played by Fernández, Chaves, and other officials involved in preparing, reviewing and approving the appointment documents, as well as whether they knew the candidate did not meet the statutory requirement.

Government defends the appointment

The government has acknowledged that Martínez Bertozzi has no police rank but maintains that his appointment was lawful. The executive branch has cited Article 62 of the General Police Law and Article 4 of the DIS’s organizational regulations.

Those provisions allow the agency’s directorate to be occupied by a professional in a relevant field or by someone whose technical experience and suitability in security qualify them for the position, according to the administration’s argument. Martínez Bertozzi is a lawyer and previously served as a presidential adviser during Chaves’s administration. Infobae

Trejos disputes that interpretation. His central argument is that an administrative regulation cannot eliminate or replace a condition established by statute. The complaint therefore asks prosecutors to establish whether the legal provisions cited by the government can support the appointment and whether legal opinions or technical reports were prepared before the decision was approved.

Records raise additional questions

The complaint also refers to a September 4 document from the Ministry of Public Security listing officials who hold at least the ranks of commissioner or commander. Martínez Bertozzi reportedly does not appear on that list.

Trejos is asking the Attorney General’s Office to obtain an official certification clarifying whether Martínez Bertozzi held the rank of commissioner when he assumed the DIS position. If such a rank was granted or recognized, prosecutors are also being asked to determine when it occurred, which authority approved it and what legal reasoning supported the decision.

The lawmaker has not asserted that a police rank was granted to Martínez Bertozzi through a special procedure. He has asked prosecutors to investigate whether that happened.

Analysis: a legal test for executive discretion

The case presents a narrow but important question: how far can the executive branch rely on professional experience and regulatory language when a statute appears to impose a formal qualification?

The government’s position rests on the distinction between a political appointment and a technical eligibility requirement. Directors of government agencies may be appointed and removed at the president’s discretion, but that discretion normally operates within the limits imposed by law. The fact that a position is one of free appointment does not automatically mean that every candidate is legally eligible.

That distinction is likely to shape the investigation. If Article 65 is interpreted as an absolute requirement, the absence of a commissioner’s rank could undermine the appointment regardless of Martínez Bertozzi’s professional background. If the government’s interpretation of Article 62 and the DIS regulations prevails, prosecutors may conclude that the law permits a qualified civilian professional to lead the agency.

The 2024 decree adds another layer. If officials formally granted Martínez Bertozzi a qualifying rank, the legality of that action could become as important as the original appointment. Prosecutors would have to examine whether the decree was consistent with the General Police Law, whether the required technical recommendations existed and whether the executive authorities acted within their legal powers.

At this stage, the complaint is an allegation, not a finding of criminal responsibility. The Attorney General’s Office must still decide what investigative steps to take and whether the available documents justify further proceedings. The case will turn on the wording of the relevant laws, the administrative record and any evidence showing what Fernández, Chaves and other officials knew when the appointment was approved.

For the government, the dispute is a challenge to its interpretation of executive appointment powers. For the opposition, it is a test of whether statutory requirements can be bypassed through regulations or executive action. The outcome could affect not only Martínez Bertozzi’s tenure but also the rules governing who may lead Costa Rica’s intelligence and security institutions.

Q COSTA RICA — Costa Rica is debating legislation that would prohibit minors under 15 from creating and maintaining accounts on certain social media platforms, intensifying a regional debate over how governments should protect minors online.

The proposal, identified as legislative file 25.805, comes amid growing concern about cyberbullying, grooming, harmful content, social pressure, and excessive digital use. Supporters argue that younger children may not yet have the maturity to recognize or manage these risks, and that social media companies should bear greater responsibility for protecting them.

Yet experts warn that establishing a minimum age would not, by itself, guarantee children’s safety. The Fundación La Casa de los Niños argues that many of the same dangers exist outside conventional social media. Children can encounter strangers, harassment, manipulative content and inappropriate material through video games, websites, messaging services and audiovisual platforms, including spaces that do not require users to create an account.

That observation goes to the heart of the debate. A ban may close one door, but it does not necessarily remove the risks on the other side.

Two legislative approaches

Costa Rica’s lawmakers are considering more than one approach to digital protection. The proposal establishing a minimum age of 15 would restrict access to accounts on designated social networks. A separate initiative, previously discussed in the Legislative Assembly, would prohibit social media accounts for children under 14 while imposing additional obligations on platforms and families.

That second proposal would require parental controls for younger users, prohibit personalized advertising aimed at minors and demand stronger age-verification systems for adolescents between 14 and 18. It would also seek to disable features associated with compulsive use, including infinite scrolling, autoplay and recommendation systems driven primarily by user engagement, according to Infobae.

These details reveal an important shift in the policy discussion. The question is no longer only whether children should be allowed to access social media. It is also whether platforms should be required to change the systems that keep users online, target them with advertising and recommend content.

The enforcement problem

The practical challenge is age verification. Any law based on a fixed age threshold would need a reliable way to determine who is using a service. Requiring official identification could create new privacy concerns, while weaker systems could be easily bypassed.

Young users may also turn to false birth dates, shared accounts, virtual private networks or less-regulated services. If access is pushed underground, parents and guardians may have less visibility into what their children are doing online.

That concern has appeared in international discussions. Experts cited by Infobae have warned that prohibition can make risks less visible rather than eliminating them. Adolescents who are blocked from mainstream platforms may seek alternative services or use devices without adult supervision.

The issue is especially difficult because digital spaces are not neatly separated. A child may move from a social network to a multiplayer game, a private messaging group, a livestreaming service or a website with embedded social features. A law aimed at a list of named platforms could quickly become outdated as companies adjust their products or users migrate elsewhere.

Protection requires more than a ban

The Fundación La Casa de los Niños has called for a broader strategy combining regulation, digital education, family support and corporate accountability. That approach recognizes that children need more than an access restriction. They need help identifying manipulation, misinformation, scams and abusive behavior, as well as clear ways to report harm and obtain assistance.

Families also need support. Parents are often expected to monitor online activity even though platforms change rapidly and their safety tools vary widely. Effective policy would need to give caregivers practical guidance while respecting adolescents’ privacy and growing independence.

The responsibility of technology companies is another central issue. Platforms design the recommendation systems, notifications and advertising models that shape how minors experience the internet. Age limits may restrict who enters, but they do not automatically make the environment safer for those who remain.

A broader regional forum held in Costa Rica reached a similar conclusion. Experts from Panama, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic and Ecuador called for an inclusive debate involving children and adolescents, families, governments and technology companies. They also emphasized that rules should account for differences in users’ circumstances, abilities and access to support.

A measure that may help—but cannot solve the whole problem

A minimum-age rule could still have value. It might delay children’s entry into platforms designed around engagement and provide a legal basis for demanding stronger safeguards from companies. It could also give parents and schools a clearer standard to follow.

But its success would depend on how it is implemented, enforced and combined with other measures. Restrictions that are easy to evade may create a false sense of security. Rules that rely on intrusive identification systems could threaten privacy. Policies that focus only on access may leave untouched the algorithms, business models and forms of abuse that create many of the dangers in the first place.

Research suggests that restrictions can reduce certain harms while displacing others. Some young people may move toward more private or difficult-to-monitor spaces, while children with stronger family support and better digital skills may benefit more than those without them.

Costa Rica’s debate therefore reflects a larger policy choice. Legislators can present a ban as a clear response to public anxiety, but protecting minors requires a system that is harder to summarize: age-appropriate design, enforceable corporate duties, privacy safeguards, digital education, family guidance and accessible support when abuse occurs.

The proposed age limit may become one part of that system. It is unlikely to be enough on its own.

Q COSTA RICA — Costa Rica’s geology places a natural limit on the size of earthquakes the country can generate, according to seismologist Marino Protti of the Observatorio Vulcanológico y Sismológico de Costa Rica (Ovsicori)—Costa Rican Volcanological and Seismological Observatory.

An earthquake measuring magnitude 8.0 would generally require a fault capable of rupturing across an area roughly 200 kilometers long and 50 to 60 kilometers wide. No known geological structure within Costa Rica reaches those dimensions, Protti told El Observador.

The country’s largest identified fault lies beneath the Nicoya Peninsula. It extends for about 100 kilometers and is approximately 60 kilometers wide—substantial enough to produce a major earthquake, but not large enough to generate a magnitude-8.0 event under the estimates cited in the report.

That does not mean Costa Rica is protected from powerful earthquakes. Regions including Guanacaste, the southern Pacific coast and the southern Caribbean could experience earthquakes above magnitude 7.0. The potential depends on the length and width of the rupture zone, as well as the amount of energy accumulated beneath the surface.

Smaller faults can still cause serious damage

The faults beneath the Central Valley and around Cartago are considerably smaller. Many measure between five and 10 kilometers, although some extend to roughly 15 kilometers. Their estimated maximum magnitudes generally fall between 6.0 and 6.5.

Those numbers should not be mistaken for a measure of safety. A magnitude-6 earthquake occurring near a city and at shallow depth can cause severe damage, particularly when buildings are vulnerable or local soils amplify the shaking.

This is one of the most important points in Costa Rica’s earthquake risk. Magnitude measures the energy released by an earthquake, but it does not describe the full extent of its consequences. Depth, distance from populated areas, ground conditions and construction quality can all determine whether an earthquake becomes a disaster.

A smaller rupture close to an urban center may therefore be more destructive locally than a larger, deeper earthquake farther away.

Osa Peninsula remains a closely watched area

The Osa Peninsula is among the regions receiving particular attention from seismologists. Geodetic measurements have identified a section beneath the peninsula that appears to be accumulating strain. The area should be moving, but remains largely locked.

Based on scientific research, that zone could produce an earthquake between magnitude 7.2 and 7.4. Ovsicori uses satellite-based monitoring stations to measure ground movement, map areas of deformation and estimate the size of a possible rupture.

Read more: Panama records over 350 aftershocks following the 7.7 earthquake

The findings can indicate where energy is accumulating and how large an earthquake might be. They cannot determine the date or time of the event.

That distinction matters. Seismologists may identify a zone with elevated earthquake potential, but no monitoring system can currently provide an exact prediction of when a particular earthquake will occur.

The lesson from Nicoya

The 2012 Nicoya earthquake reached magnitude 7.6 but caused no deaths, according to the report. Protti attributed that outcome in part to local soil conditions and Costa Rica’s earthquake-resistant construction practices.

The event illustrates why magnitude alone is a poor measure of human impact. The same numerical magnitude can produce very different results depending on where the rupture occurs, how deep it is, how close it lies to populated areas and how well buildings withstand shaking.

Costa Rica’s apparent inability to generate a magnitude-8.0 earthquake should therefore not be interpreted as an absence of seismic danger. The country’s geological structures may limit the maximum size of an earthquake, but the faults that do exist are capable of producing destructive events—especially shallow earthquakes near communities.

The practical implication is straightforward: earthquake preparedness should focus less on the pursuit of a single headline number and more on local exposure. Monitoring active faults, enforcing resilient construction standards and preparing communities in areas such as Osa, Nicoya, Guanacaste and the Central Valley remain essential.

Costa Rica may not possess a fault large enough to produce a magnitude-8.0 earthquake. It still has more than enough seismic activity to demand serious preparation.