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

Abstract

Abstract: This paper analyzes the reasoning in judgments issued by first-level judges in Ecuador, as an essential element of due process and a guarantee of constitutional rights. The study of case No. 09572-2020-00417 examines compliance with the standards of sufficient and correct reasoning, in terms of the Constitution, jurisprudence, and international human rights treaties. The decision examined is based on the pro homine principle, which applies in contexts of projecting the power of the State against restrictive criteria of the Administration. That is, it applies to the constitutional framework which, according to the Court, in principle protects in case of conflict between the Constitution and other normative orders at all levels. Consequently, it is reinforced in practice that the proper reasoning of judicial powers strengthens the transparency, legitimacy, and citizen oversight of rulings, preventing arbitrariness and, at the same time, guaranteeing effective judicial protection. This paper reflects on the need to improve the argumentative quality of court rulings in Ecuador, where judges argue based on a set of reasons. This program seeks to contribute to the development of a constitutional state of rights and justice.