Preferencias académicas de los estudiantes de la carrera de Derecho y su vinculación con los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS) a través del estudio de sentencias

Abstract

Abstract: This thesis analyzes the quality of the reasoning provided in judgments issued by trial-level judges in Ecuador, using a constitutional protection action (*acción de protección*) linked to the Organic Law on Humanitarian Support as a case study. The research examines whether judges adhere to the standards of reasonableness, logic, and clarity required by the Constitution and the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court. Through a doctrinal and case-based analysis, the author identifies that an adequate legal and factual basis is crucial for ensuring legal certainty and preventing judicial arbitrariness. The study s primary contribution lies in systematizing the technical criteria used to evaluate the validity of legal argumentation in constitutional protection proceedings, concluding that the proper application of reasoning standards strengthens the constitutional state based on rights and justice. This study serves as a methodological guide for professionals and academics interested in improving judicial reasoning within the Ecuadorian justice system.