Insufficient law coverage of measures regarding the use of service dogs for persons with disabilities

Constitutionality review as per a citizen ´s request (Paula Andrea Cerón Arboleda & others) of Article 117- Paragraph 1^st of Act 1801 of 2016

Date:  12/02/2020

Judge-Rapporteur:  Gloria Stella Ortiz Delgado

Concurrence:  Alejandro Linares Cantillo

The reviewed provisions.  The challenged regulation, part of the National Code for Citizen´s Security and Coexistence, authorized service dogs to owners or holders who need them as guides.

The plaintiff´s arguments.  The plaintiffs claimed that the provision violated the principle of equality since it excluded from benefit people with disabilities other than visual who also require the company of an assistant canine to enter public places. They reach such conclusion because in their opinion, the use of the expression “… as guides…” refers only to canines accompanying people with the mentioned specific disability.

Issue: Do people with disabilities other than visual require protection of their right to enter certain public spaces accompanied by service dogs?

Ruling and reasoning.  Yes.  The Court decided that the challenged provision was in accordance to the constitution, provided that it also includes the assistance canines to any person with any type of disability who so requires. The Forum concluded that the Legislator had incurred in a relative legislative omission, by not considering the universe of people with disabilities, ignoring the special protection envisaged by the law in favor of any member of that population. It also clarified that the legislature had neglected the duty to promote positive actions in favor of all the members of this population. The omission had generated: (i) a situation of discrimination against those who were not considered as beneficiaries of the regulations; and (ii) the breach of the purpose of the demanded regulation, that is, to allow the accessibility of people with disabilities to places open to the public.