Análisis de la responsabilidad estatal derivada del error judicial en el Ecuador
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2023
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
PUCE - Ibarra
Abstract
El presente trabajo de investigación se realizó con la finalidad de analizar la presencia del error judicial en el juzgamiento de procesos del juez por medio del estudio teórico y jurídico, identificando que el error judicial se encuentra inmerso en la labor judicial, en las actuaciones de los jueces, tribunales, fiscales y defensores públicos, quienes tienen responsabilidades en razón del cargo que ejercen. El error llega a conocimiento en primer momento por la vía administrativa, en el Régimen Disciplinario del Consejo de la Judicatura, en donde se realiza la respectiva investigación sobre el caso y se determina el tipo de error del que se trata y la sanción correspondiente, sin embargo, en la Resolución No. 12-2020 consta que al presumirse dolo, negligencia manifiesta o error inexcusable, se deberá presentar esta queja ante la autoridad jurisdiccional competente que es el tribunal jerárquicamente superior, pero en el caso que no tuviere previsto un medio de impugnación se aplicará un recurso vertical, esta acción requiere que la autoridad que tenga competencia haya emitido la declaratoria previa, por ejemplo, para los jueces y tribunales de primer nivel, fiscales y defensores públicos, será competente tribunal de la respectiva especialidad de la Corte Provincial de Justicia del distrito territorial que le corresponda. Para efectuar este estudio se aplicó el enfoque mixto, es decir cualitativo y cuantitativo, con enfoque descriptivo, aplicando los métodos normativista, hermenéutico e inductivo-deductivo. Teniendo como resultado que el error judicial conlleva a la responsabilidad estatal, la cual realiza el pago de las medidas reparatorias económicas en favor de las personas afectadas por este error, y el Estado tiene el derecho de repetición frente al responsable del error.
The present research work was carried out with the purpose of analyzing the presence of judicial error in the judging of the judge's processes through the theoretical and legal study, identifying that the judicial error is immersed in the judicial work, in the actions of the judges, courts, prosecutors and public defenders, who have responsibilities due to the position they hold. The error first becomes known through administrative channels, in the Disciplinary Regime of the Council of the Judiciary, where the respective investigation is carried out on the case and the type of error in question and the corresponding sanction are determined, without However, Resolution No. 12-2020 states that when presuming fraud, gross negligence or inexcusable error, this complaint must be filed with the competent jurisdictional authority, which is the hierarchically superior court, but in the case that no means of challenge, a vertical appeal will be applied, this action requires that the competent authority has issued the prior declaration, for example, for first level judges and courts, prosecutors and public defenders, the respective specialty court of the Provincial Court will be competent of Justice of the corresponding territorial district. To carry out this study, the mixed approach was applied, that is, qualitative and quantitative, with a descriptive approach, applying the normative, hermeneutic and inductive-deductive methods. Having as a result that the judicial error leads to state responsibility, which makes the payment of economic reparatory measures in favor of the people affected by this error, and the State has the right of repetition against the person responsible for the error.
The present research work was carried out with the purpose of analyzing the presence of judicial error in the judging of the judge's processes through the theoretical and legal study, identifying that the judicial error is immersed in the judicial work, in the actions of the judges, courts, prosecutors and public defenders, who have responsibilities due to the position they hold. The error first becomes known through administrative channels, in the Disciplinary Regime of the Council of the Judiciary, where the respective investigation is carried out on the case and the type of error in question and the corresponding sanction are determined, without However, Resolution No. 12-2020 states that when presuming fraud, gross negligence or inexcusable error, this complaint must be filed with the competent jurisdictional authority, which is the hierarchically superior court, but in the case that no means of challenge, a vertical appeal will be applied, this action requires that the competent authority has issued the prior declaration, for example, for first level judges and courts, prosecutors and public defenders, the respective specialty court of the Provincial Court will be competent of Justice of the corresponding territorial district. To carry out this study, the mixed approach was applied, that is, qualitative and quantitative, with a descriptive approach, applying the normative, hermeneutic and inductive-deductive methods. Having as a result that the judicial error leads to state responsibility, which makes the payment of economic reparatory measures in favor of the people affected by this error, and the State has the right of repetition against the person responsible for the error.
Description
Keywords
Error judicial, Responsabilidad estatal, Derechos, Procedimiento, Debido proceso