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

Abstract

Abstract: This research addresses the problem of insufficient reasoning in judgments issued by first-level judges in Ecuador, an issue that affects due process and effective judicial protection. The study's general objective is to analyze the quality of judicial reasoning, using the judgment in case 01371-2021-00430 as a case study, evaluating whether it complies with constitutional and jurisprudential standards. The methodology is qualitative, and the discussion shows that these deficiencies coincide with flaws in reasoning described by legal scholars, which affect transparency and the possibility of judicial review. It is concluded that strengthening judicial reasoning is essential to guarantee fair, understandable, and reviewable decisions, and therefore requires processes of training, standardization, and constant updating in legal argumentation.