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

Abstract

Abstract:This study offers a reflective and analytical perspective on the difficulties arising from inadequate reasoning in judgments issued by courts of first instance in Ecuador. It focuses on the analysis of a criminal judgment regarding the illicit trafficking of controlled substances specifically within case file 17283-2018-01478 demonstrating that the judge s decision meets the reasoning criteria necessary to verify its legality, coherence, and clarity, as stipulated and required by the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador and other applicable laws. Furthermore, no reasoning defects such as incoherence, inconsistency, irrelevance, or incomprehensibility were detected; the judge correctly applied the legal standards and substantiated the proven facts. The logical connection between the final ruling and the decision as well as the relationship between the facts, legal provisions, and the conclusion demonstrates that the judgment is properly reasoned. This ensures the procedural validity of the decision, facilitates its review by higher courts, and reinforces the effectiveness of the jurisdictional guarantees established by the constitutional legal framework.