La insuficiencia probatoria frente al criterio de los jueces en casos en los que existe vulneración a derechos

Abstract

Abstract: The work titled "The Insufficiency of Evidence in the Judges' Criteria in Cases of Rights Violations" examines the crucial role of judges in evaluating evidence to guarantee fundamental rights. Through an analysis of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Ecuador, it argues that insufficiency of evidence should not be an obstacle to accessing jurisdictional guarantees, especially in cases of vulnerability. The importance of sound criticism and the standard of greater probability in the evaluation of evidence is highlighted, suggesting that judges should adopt an active and flexible approach. The essay also emphasizes that the burden of proof is reversed in cases where public entities do not demonstrate otherwise. The conclusions stress that judicial decisions must be motivated and based on logical reasoning, avoiding arbitrariness to prevent double violations of rights. Ultimately, it posits that respect for jurisdictional guarantees is essential for the constitutional state of rights.