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

Abstract

Abstract: This research paper analyzes the reasoning behind judgments issued by first-level judges in Ecuador, aiming to determine whether judicial decisions meet the standards of sufficiency, coherence, and justification required by the Constitution of the Republic and our Organic Code of the Judiciary. This analysis is conducted using a qualitative approach and an analytical-descriptive method, examining the structural content of the reasoning. This allows us to identify the most common types of deficiencies and their impact on the right to effective judicial protection. Similarly, the application of the principles of reasonableness, proportionality, and legal logic in the analyzed rulings is compared. The study demonstrates that, while there has been progress in the practice of judicial reasoning, inconsistencies persist in the normative and factual justification, affecting the transparency and legitimacy of the decisions. Finally, guidelines are proposed to promote the strengthening of judicial argumentation in our country.