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

Abstract

Abstract: This research analyzes the constitutional guarantee regarding the requirement to provide reasons for judicial decisions (the duty to state grounds) in rulings issued by trial-level judges in Ecuador. It does so by examining a constitutional protection action (*acción de protección*) concerning administrative resolutions from the IESS (Ecuadorian Social Security Institute), adjudicated by the Multicompetent Criminal Judicial Unit based in the Santa Rosa canton, El Oro province. The objective was to determine whether these decisions upheld due process and legal certainty. A qualitative, descriptive, and analytical methodology was employed, based on a review of legal norms, legal doctrine, and case law, as well as a case study. The results revealed that the violation did not stem from a total absence of reasoning, but rather from insufficient substantiation resulting from the automatic application of administrative criteria without a comprehensive assessment of the facts. Furthermore, it was found that the judicial ruling met standards of reasonableness, coherence, and constitutional grounding. The research s main contribution lies in demonstrating that the requirement to state grounds acts as a check on the arbitrary exercise of public power. Finally, it is recommended that the quality of argumentation in administrative and judicial acts be strengthened to consolidate legal certainty and public trust.