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

Abstract

Abstract: This study addresses the importance of the reasoning provided in judicial rulings issued by trial-level judges in Ecuador, focusing on a detailed analysis of Case No. 09209-2025-00115 a child-related matter concerning a claim for child support. The research examines two fundamental criteria: sufficient reasoning and correct reasoning. Judicial reasoning stands as an essential pillar of the justice system; it not only satisfies a formal requirement but also ensures transparency, coherence, and a clear justification for judicial decisions. In cases involving the fundamental rights of minors such as the right to child support the reasoning must adhere to the principle of the best interests of the child, ensuring that judicial rulings are geared toward their holistic well-being. The study demonstrates that deficient reasoning characterized by insufficiency, incoherence, or contradiction can violate essential rights, undermine confidence in the judicial system, and hinder effective access to justice. Consequently, the study highlights the need to enhance the quality of judicial reasoning through continuous training for judges.