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

Abstract

Abstract: This research aims to analyze the constitutional guarantee of reasoned judgments issued by first-level judges in Ecuador, with special emphasis on its application in cases of wrongful dismissal due to pregnancy. The research is based on the premise that judicial reasoning is not merely a formal requirement, but a structural element of due process and effective judicial protection, the observance of which is crucial for the protection of fundamental rights. Using a qualitative approach and the dogmatic-legal method, the first-level judgment issued in case No. 01371-2016-00377 is examined to assess whether the decision meets the constitutional standards of sufficient reasoning, in accordance with the current jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Ecuador. The analysis is based on the doctrinal study of judicial reasoning, the jurisprudential evolution of the constitutional standard, and the application of methodological tools aimed at deconstructing the argumentative structure of the judgment. The results show that the analyzed judicial decision presents significant deficiencies in its reasoning, particularly in the assessment of the facts and in the application of the principles of equality and enhanced protection for pregnant women. These shortcomings compromise the legitimacy of the decision and highlight the need to strengthen the argumentative quality of first-level judgments in labor matters.