Motivación en las sentencias emitidas por los jueces de primer nivel en Ecuado

Abstract

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to analyze whether the motivation of the decision issued by the first instance judge in Ecuador is adequate. To this end, the motivation test will be applied to identify potential flaws in the argument, such as inconsistencies, incongruities, inconsistencies, incomprehensibility, as well as motivational deficiencies or deficits, such as the absence, insufficiency, or appearance of motivation. The judgment under analysis corresponds to a protection action, in which a violation of the rights to psychological integrity and work was evident. These rights were duly redressed through a sound judicial decision, which guaranteed adequate reparation and ensured an effective judicial process. Consequently, it is concluded that the decision meets the standards of motivational sufficiency, falling within the parameters of proper motivation. These results demonstrate the importance of adequately substantiating judicial decisions in order to ensure respect for due process. This involves making sound value judgments, correctly identifying the causes of the dispute, and ensuring adequate redress. All of this must be reflected in duly reasoned resolutions, in accordance with the parameters established by the motivation test.