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

Abstract

Abstract: An analysis is conducted of the motivation behind the first-instance ruling in Protection Action No. 09209-2024-06393, which criticized the alleged violation of the right to health due to referral to a clinic in the case of surgical intervention, suspected sterilization failure, and progression to osteomyelitis after surgery. The formal structure of the ruling is clear: identification of the process and parties, jurisdiction, procedural validity, hearing extract, grounds for admissibility, and decision; and it declares the right partially violated and orders certain reparative measures. For the analysis, the "EL SER" method is applied, along with questionnaires on sufficiency standards and correct motivation. The results demonstrate a minimum level of normative and factual motivation sufficient to justify the core of the ruling. However, a procedural flaw is apparent, given the factual inconsistency in the decision, which attributes the violation solely to the IESS Durán Hospital without sufficient grounds to exclude other potential responsible parties. Consequently, it is concluded that the deficiency can be remedied on appeal by confirmation with modification, without the need to annul the ruling.