Standards for the motivation of criminal judgments in Ecuador: an analysis of their application in the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Ecuador

Abstract

This paper analyzes the evolution of case law regarding the guarantee of motivation in Ecuador and its application in criminal judgments based on the criteria developed by the Constitutional Court. Its objective is to identify the most common violations in the ordinary criminal justice system over the past two years and compile them into a single research article that can serve as a reference for comparing these recurring deficiencies with subsequent similar cases. This research takes a qualitative approach, grounded in dogmatic and legal-practical methodology. To this end, the study traces the evolution of case law regarding the guarantee of motivation based on the main precedents established by the Constitutional Court. Building on this contextual framework, it conducts a documentary analysis of the judgments issued by that body between 2024 and 2025 concerning motivation in criminal matters, which constitutes the corpus for the empirical-jurisprudential analysis. The study analyzes the transition from the former test of reasonableness, logic, and comprehensibility toward the current standard of motivational sufficiency, as well as the distinct motivational defects developed by the Court. It concludes that, over the past two years, the most common deficiencies in the motivation of ordinary courts’ judgments have been insufficient reasoning and inconsistency with respect to the parties.