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

Abstract

Abstract: This research project from the Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja evaluated the correct and sufficient reasoning in the rulings of first-level judges in Ecuador. The methodology was based on the analysis of the reasoning in rulings, derived from the analytical method, applying questionnaires on sufficiency and correctness. The unit of analysis was Ruling No. 16201-2020-00498, a Protection Action filed against a local government (GAD) for the unilateral termination of the contract of a public servant with a disability. The results demonstrated that the ruling fully complies with the standard of reasoning, showing complete normative and factual grounding, without any motivational deficiencies or flaws, and therefore should not be annulled or corrected. The main contribution of the study lies in the validation of the methodology for measuring argumentative quality. Furthermore, it provides a model of good jurisdictional practice, recommending ongoing training for lower court judges to replicate this rights-based approach, ensuring the protection of the fundamental rights of priority groups.