La prueba para mejor resolver en el Código Orgánico General de Procesos: límites, motivación judicial y conflictos constitucionales

Abstract

Abstract: This study analyzes the evidentiary measure "for better resolution" (*prueba para mejor resolver*) provided for in Article 168 of the General Organic Code of Procedure, adopting a critical procedural perspective aimed at determining its constitutional limits. It argues that the provision's lack of normative detail creates tensions with judicial impartiality, procedural equality, the *dispositivo* principle (party autonomy), the right to free access to justice, and the requirement for reasoned decisions. The study begins by examining two Ecuadorian court cases in which the *ex officio* ordering of evidence lacked sufficient justification; it then contrasts these cases with how this mechanism is handled in the legal systems of Peru, Colombia, Argentina, Spain, and Panama, as well as with constitutional and Inter-American case law regarding reasoned decisions and due process. Based on this comparison, the study proposes criteria for application that uphold procedural guarantees centered on the concepts of exceptionality, necessity, and heightened justification and puts forward a legislative reform proposal to clarify the prerequisites, limits, and appeal mechanisms applicable to evidence ordered *ex officio*.