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

Abstract

Abstract: This study aims to analyze the reasoning provided in judgments issued by trial-level judges in Ecuador, based on a specific case involving the deprivation of parental authority. To this end, standards regarding sufficient and correct reasoning were applied, evaluating the legal and factual grounds of the judicial decision. A qualitative methodology was employed, involving a legal analysis of the judgment that broke down its argumentative elements and verified the coherence between the proven facts, the applicable legal norms, and the decision reached. The results show that the judgment meets the minimum requirements for reasoning by presenting a clear and understandable rationale; however, a slight deficiency was identified regarding the detailed assessment of the evidence. It is concluded that the ruling is valid within the Ecuadorian legal system, although its argumentative development could be improved. This study contributes to strengthening the critical analysis of judicial decisions and to understanding judicial reasoning as a guarantee of due process.