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

Abstract

Abstract: The right to a defense in judicial proceedings constitutes a fundamental and inalienable guarantee that ensures a fair trial and equality of opportunity between the parties. In a constitutional state based on rights and justice, the reasoning behind judicial decisions stands as an essential element not merely a formal requirement, but a substantive guarantee that allows for verification that rulings are grounded in clear, logical, and legally valid reasons. The Constitution of Ecuador mandates that every judicial decision be duly reasoned. This study analyzes a specific judgment to determine whether the standard for adequate reasoning has been met. To this end, historical-logical and bibliographic methods are employed to identify potential deficiencies in the legal reasoning and their impact on the right to a defense. The research demonstrates that the absence or insufficiency of reasoning undermines due process, legal certainty, and public confidence in the administration of justice. Consequently, a decision lacking reasoning becomes arbitrary and may be rendered void, as it precludes effective oversight and the challenging of judicial rulings.