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

Abstract

Abstract: This curricular integration paper analyzes the reasoning behind the sentence issued by first-level judges in Ecuador in a kidnapping case where the prosecution failed to prove the essential element of the crime. The theoretical framework explains that the crime of kidnapping requires acts of coercion, violence, or intimidation that restrict the victim's freedom. The lack of evidence led to the acquittal, based on the absence of material evidence such as injuries, weapons, or threats. The correct reasoning is reflected in the application of the constitutional principle of in dubio pro reo (presumption of innocence), guaranteeing impartiality and respect for fundamental rights. The doctrinal analysis highlights that the prosecution's case was weakened by relying on the defendant's prior record rather than verifiable facts, thus violating the impartiality required by Ecuadorian law and international standards, the paper's contribution lies in demonstrating the importance of objective and technical investigation, as well as recommending the strengthening of impartiality and evidentiary rigor in crimes against personal liberty.