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

Abstract

Abstract: The objective of this research is to analyze and evaluate the correctness and sufficiency of the reasoning in judgments issued by first-level judges in Ecuador. The methodology used is the analysis of judicial reasoning, derived from the analytical method, with the purpose of breaking down the judgment into its fundamental parts to assess the arguments presented by first-level judges. The instruments used are the standard questionnaire on the sufficiency of reasoning and the questionnaire on correct reasoning, which will be applied to various first-level judges from the Criminal Judicial Unit and the Criminal Guarantees Court of the canton of Tulcán, Carchi province. The results indicate that in judgment 04334-2016-00271, the first-level judges, regarding the inexistence or insufficiency of factual and normative reasoning, comply with these requirements; therefore, sufficient reasoning exists, since the evidence presented in the process, its analysis, and considerations are consistent with the decision made. On the other hand, defects such as incoherence or irrelevance were not present in the specific case analyzed.