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

Abstract

Abstract: The constitutional guarantee of reasoned judgment (motivación) constitutes the fundamental pillar that ensures procedural rationality in jurisdictional and administrative acts, preventing resolutions from being configured as acts of mere will. The non-observance of this guarantee results in a direct violation of due process and legal certainty, undermining the legitimacy of the judicial system. The objective of this research is the rigorous analysis of the guiding criterion established by the Constitutional Court of Ecuador in Sentence No. 1158-17-EP/21, with the purpose of determining the parameters for the correct evaluation of a motivational deficit. Methodologically, the study is part of the qualitative approach, employing documentary research for the analysis of jurisprudential and normative sources, and specialized doctrine on constitutional procedural law. The results demonstrate that the Court's guiding criterion demands a double justification: factual (exposition of the proven and pertinent facts) and normative (application and reasoned interpretation of the law). It is concluded that the non-compliance with this standard generates a severe motivational deficit, classifiable in the categories of non-existence, insufficiency, or appearance of motivation. This analysis constitutes an essential tool for the prevention of arbitrariness and the nullity of judicial decisions, strengthening effective judicial protection in the country.