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

Abstract

Abstract: The research of this work analyzes the reasoning in rulings issued by first-level judges in Ecuador as a constitutional guarantee of due process and as an essential element of effective judicial protection. It examines the concepts of sufficient en correct reasoning, the standards required by Constitutional Court of Ecuador, and the types of motivational deficiencies such as nonexistence, superficiality, incoherence, and inconsistency. Through the study of the judgment analyzed work, based on a constitutional protection action filed by the mother of a minor who was a victim of sexual abuse, it is shown how proper judicial reasoning enables and guarantees the protection of fundamental rights. The study also addresses the civil, administrative, and criminal liability that may be incurred by judges who issue rulings without adequate reasoning, as well as the procedural mechanisms available to challenge and remedy such decisions. Therefore, this research emphasizes the importance of issuing well-founded and coherent rulings as a safeguard against arbitrariness. Finally, it proposes structural improvements in judicial training and institutional oversight mechanisms.