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

Abstract

Abstract: This paper reviews the reasoning behind Judgment No. 01610-2023-00254, issued by the Multicompetent Judicial Unit of Sígsig, in a case of extraordinary adverse possession. To evaluate the quality of the argumentation, we used two checklists (standard of sufficiency and of correct motivation) that compare facts, evidence, and legal norms. Therefore, the ruling respects due process and presents no flaws in its motivation; there are no contradictions, discrepancies with the request, or arguments outside the subject matter. Furthermore, the analysis shows that clear, complete, and reasoned motivation strengthens public trust in the justice system. Moreover, providing sound reasoning for a judgment is not only a constitutional guarantee but also a key tool for a more transparent, accessible, and socially justified judicial system.