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

Abstract

Abstract: This curricular integration project evaluates the reasoning provided in judgments issued by trial-level judges in Ecuador. The general objective was to analyze and assess whether the reasoning in judgments issued by trial-level judges in Ecuador is correct and sufficient. Judgment No. 01333-2022-XXXXX, concerning a constitutional matter, was selected for analysis. An analytical method and standardized questionnaires were employed to evaluate the quality of the ruling, utilizing techniques for mapping the argumentation. Based on this analysis, it can be concluded that the judgment meets the minimum constitutional standard for sufficient reasoning; however, the legal depth and logical coherence are limited resulting in imprecise reasoning and thus it falls short of the ideal of argumentative excellence. It is concluded that, while valid, the judgment could be strengthened regarding its legal argumentation through procedural remedies filed by the parties, thereby ensuring high-quality decisions within the framework of the Rule of Law as enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador.