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

Abstract

Abstract: This research analyzes the reasoning behind judgments issued by first-level judges in Ecuador, based on a study of criminal case No. 09267-2018-00129, processed in the Criminal Guarantees Court of the Durán canton, Guayas province. The general objective was to evaluate the sufficiency and correctness of the judicial reasoning in accordance with constitutional standards. The sample consisted of a criminal judgment concerning the case of Galo Eduardo Pacheco Paredes, initially prosecuted for alleged complicity in the crime of robbery. A qualitative approach was employed, using the analytical method of decomposing the judicial decision. The techniques applied were document review and argumentative analysis of the judgment; the instruments consisted of the questionnaire on the standard of sufficiency of reasoning and the questionnaire on correct reasoning. The analysis identified deficiencies in the evaluation of evidence and in the structuring of the legal justification. In conclusion, it was evident that the ruling did not fully meet the required standards of judicial reasoning, which reinforces the need to strengthen the training of judges in legal argumentation techniques to guarantee decisions that are properly reasoned, transparent and respectful of due process.