ILLEGITIMATE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE JURISPRUDENTIAL PRECEDENTS OF THE ECUADORIAN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT AGAINST THE RIGHT TO LEGAL SECURITY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37135/kai.03.10.02Keywords:
precedent, jurisprudence, legal certainty, mandatory precedentAbstract
The jurisprudential precedent in Ecuadorian law must be analyzed from its scope of application in the judgments of the Constitutional Cost. Therefore, the objective will be to analyze the illegitimate distances between the precedents issued by this high Court. The right to legal security is also analyzed from a jurisprudential and normative perspective, since it can be violated by the unjustified deviation that the Court has sometimes made of its own rulings; without this action being duly motivated, and without manifestly substantiating its change of argument. This unjustified distance causes that there is no certainty of the criteria that the constitutional forum will apply in its decisions, which generates distrust in the constitutional justice system.
Downloads
References
Asamblea Constituyente. (2009). Ley Orgánica de Garantías Jurisdiccionales y Control Constitucional. https://www.defensa.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2020/03/Ley-Organica-de-Garantias-Jurisdiccionales-y-Control-Constitucional_act_marzo_2020.pdf
De Cabo de la Vega, A., & Soto Cordero, F. (2015). Métodos y parámetros de interpretación en tutela contra sentencias. En A. De Cabo de la Vega, M. Carrasco Durán, F. Palacios, & F. Soto Cordero, Investigación Jurídica Comparada (págs. 21-46). Quito: Centro de Estudios y Difusión del Derecho Constitucional.
Charles S. P. (1978). Lecciones sobre el pragmatismo. Buenos Aires: Aguilar.
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador. Sentencia Nro. 001-10-PJO-CC (2010), Caso Nro. 0999-09-JP.
Corte Constitucional, sentencia No. 002-09-SAN -CC de fecha 2 de abril del 2009, Caso 0005-08-AN.
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador, sentencia es la No. 012-09-SEP-CC, dictada el 14 de julio de 2009. http://doc.corteconstitucional.gob.ec:8080/alfresco/d/d/workspace/SpacesStore/4a2f3fa0-1157-4024-aa3d-b39b0b07eebf/0048-08-EP-res.pdf
Corte Constitucional, sentencia No. 0016-13-SEP-CC dictada dentro del caso No. 1000-12-EP http://doc.corteconstitucional.gob.ec:8080/alfresco/d/d/workspace/SpacesStore/52586c09-c0c8-4d4d-97ab-7e855d5481de/1000-12-ep-sen-lcca.pdf?guest=true
Corte Constitucional, sentencia No 045-11-SEP-CC, de 24 de noviembre de 2011. http://doc.corteconstitucional.gob.ec:8080/alfresco/d/d/workspace/SpacesStore/4c543375-bb6d-446d-9cf9-8d989c780f53/0385-11-EP-res.pdf
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador. Sentencia 0001-16-PJO- CC, de fecha 22 de marzo del 2016. http://doc.corteconstitucional.gob.ec:8080/alfresco/d/d/workspace/SpacesStore/559dec35-c4d6-443f-843c-1e12c5f01ca4/SENTENCIA%20-%200530-10-JP.pdf
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador, Sentencia 013-13-SEP-CC. Caso No. 0991-12-EP. Recuperado de: http://doc.corteconstitucional.gob.ec:8080/alfresco/d/d/workspace/SpacesStore/1b364ccb-66b3-437d-8ae5-4dadfc50e842/0991-12-ep-sen-lcca.pdf?guest=true
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador, Sentencia 102-13-SEP-CC, caso 0380-10-EP. Recuperado de: http://doc0.corteconstitucional.gob.ec:8080/alfresco/d/d/workspace/SpacesStore/82d7a67e-1b4b-4c1d-ae4f-2ba36b3c6e7a/0380-10-EP-sen.pdf?guest=true
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador. (2020). Dictamen Nro. 3-20-EE/20.
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador, Sentencia Nro. 0003-09-SEP-CC (2009), Caso Nro. 0064-08-EP
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador. Sentencia Nro. 989-11-EP/19 (2019), caso Nro. 989-11-EP.
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador. Sentencia Nro. 2971-18-EP/20 (2020), caso Nro. 2971-18-EP.
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador. Sentencia Nro. 229-16-SEP-CC (2016), caso Nro. 1906-15-EP
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador, Sentencia No. 020-09-SEP-CC, de 13 de agosto de 2009. R.O. (S) No. 35, de 28 de septiembre de 2009. http://doc.corteconstitucional.gob.ec:8080/alfresco/d/d/workspace/SpacesStore/a716ec44-4670-4d19-9a62-84f83ab2bc0e/0038-09-EP-res.pdf
Díaz García, L. (2015). Diez razones para incorporar el seguimiento del precedente en chile. Revista de derecho (Coquimbo), 22(2), 139-171. https://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-97532015000200005
Ferrajoli, L. (1995). Derecho y razón. Teoría del garantismo penal. Madrid, Trotta.
García López, Luisa Fernanda. (2014). El juez y el precedente: hacia una reinterpretación de la separación de poderes. Vniversitas, (128), 79-120. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0041-90602014000100004&lng=en&tlng=es.
González, M. (2014). Algunas reflexiones sobre la obligatoriedad de los precedentes de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación. Reflexiones sobre Derecho Latinoamericano. Volumen 12, estudios en homenaje al Profesor Raúl Gustavo Ferreyra. José Marco Tayah, Leticia Danielle Romano y Paulo Aragão (Coords.), Livre Expressão Editora, Sao Paulo- Rio de Janeiro-Buenos Aires. http://dspace.uces.edu.ar:8180/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/2501/Algunas_Gonzalez-Tocci.pdf?sequence=1
Rivera, M., y Martínez, C. (2015). Cuando la forma es fondo. Estudios de técnica legislativa y legilingüística. México D.F., México: Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas de la UNAM.
Ratti Mendaña, F. (2021). Dimensiones del precedente judicial: una metodología de estudio de la doctrina del precedente. Revista Perspectivas de las Ciencias Económicas y Jurídicas. 11(1), 75-107. http://dx.doi.org/10.19137/perspectivas-2021-v11n1a05
Santofimio Gamboa, J. (2011). La fuerza de los procedentes administrativos en el sistema jurídico del derecho positivo colombiano. Revista De Derecho, 10(20), 127-154. http://revistas.um.edu.uy/index.php/revistaderecho/article/view/642.
Sierra Sorockinas, D. (2016). El precedente: un concepto. Revista Derecho del Estado, (36), 249–269. https://doi.org/10.18601/01229893.n36.09.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Kairos: Journal of Economy, Law and Administrative Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright
By submitting his work to Kairós, Journal of economic, law and administrative sciences, the author assigns the editor in a non-exclusive manner the rights of reproduction, publication, public communication, distribution and transformation so that it can be published in the journal in electronic version and can be consulted from the magazine's website.
Likewise, the authors authorize their article to be published under a Creative Commons Attribution CC BY-NC-ND license.
The authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
The authors retain the copyright and guarantee the journal the right to be the first publication of the work as well as licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution CC BY-NC-ND license.
Authors may separately establish additional agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in the journal (for example, placing it in an institutional repository or publishing it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are allowed and encouraged to post their work electronically (for example, in institutional repositories or on their own website) after publication, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation. of published works (See The Effect of Open Access).
![Manual de marca](https://i.ibb.co/8mRCcNn/logo-para-manual-de-marca-Kair-s.png"){kind=logo}
