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

Abstract

Abstract: The analysis of Judge Henny Ximena Barragan del Pozo's reasoning in case 17203-2021-00193 (apparently the referenced case, from the Family, Women, Children and Adolescents Judicial Unit in Quito) reveals a rigorous and constitutionally sound justification. The judge structures her decision in clear sections: qualification of the Action for Protection claim, notifications, hearing, and, crucially, precautionary measures. In this last section, she provides exhaustive justification, citing Article 87 of the Constitution, Articles 26, 27, and 33 of the Organic Law of Jurisdictional Guarantees, the doctrine of Luis Cueva Carrión, and jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court (judgments 0034-13-SCN-CC, 66-15-JC/19). It identifies four requirements: plausibility of the facts, imminence, gravity, and impact on rights such as legal certainty and democracy, given the lack of clarity in the process of renewing the National Electoral Council (CNE) by the Council for Citizen Participation and Social Control (CPCCS). It grants the provisional suspension of the selection process, demonstrating proportionality and objectivity to avoid irreparable harm. This approach contributes to guaranteeing due process, avoiding formalistic motivations and ensuring reasonableness, logic, and comprehensibility, aligned with the standards of the Constitutional Court.