Los criterios de ilegalidad, ilegitimidad y arbitrariedad en la aplicación del habeas corpus
Cargando...
Fecha
2024-08
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad de Guayaquil. Facultad de Jurisprudencia Ciencias Sociales y Políticas
Resumen
El presente trabajo de investigación surge a raíz de un “vacío legal” que detectamos en el ámbito de lo que determina el articulo 43 numeral 1 de La Ley Orgánica de Garantías Jurisdiccionales y Control Constitucional referente a la figura del Habeas Corpus, que en su parte medular expresa que el Habeas Corpus procede en los casos que una persona a haya sido privada de libertad de forma ilegal, arbitraria e ilegítima; empero de ello, nuestra legislación ecuatoriana no cuenta con una definición que establezca claramente el alcance de cada una de estas formas de privación de la libertad. Por lo tanto, se debe recurrir a lo que establece la jurisprudencia convencional y constitucional para aclarar estos conceptos. En virtud de ello, nuestro objetivo es plantear una reforma a la Ley Orgánica de Garantías Jurisdiccionales y Control Constitucional para que dentro de la referida Ley exista una definición especifica de los mencionados criterios, para esto, se analizan los pronunciamientos de la Corte Constitucional a través de sus sentencias No. 247- 17-SEP-CC y No. 207-11-JH/20.
The present research work arises from a "legal void" that we detected in the scope of what is determined by article 43 numeral 1 of the Organic Law of Jurisdictional Guarantees and Constitutional Control regarding the figure of Habeas Corpus, which in its core part expresses that Habeas Corpus proceeds in cases where a person has been deprived of liberty in an illegal, arbitrary and illegitimate manner; however, our Ecuadorian legislation does not have a definition that clearly establishes the scope of each of these forms of deprivation of liberty. Therefore, we must resort to what is established in conventional and constitutional jurisprudence to clarify these concepts. By virtue of this, our objective is to propose a reform to the Organic Law of Jurisdictional Guarantees and Constitutional Control so that within the referred Law there is a specific definition of the mentioned criteria, for this, the pronouncements of the Constitutional Court are analyzed through its sentences No. 247-17-SEP-CC and No. 207-11-JH/20.
The present research work arises from a "legal void" that we detected in the scope of what is determined by article 43 numeral 1 of the Organic Law of Jurisdictional Guarantees and Constitutional Control regarding the figure of Habeas Corpus, which in its core part expresses that Habeas Corpus proceeds in cases where a person has been deprived of liberty in an illegal, arbitrary and illegitimate manner; however, our Ecuadorian legislation does not have a definition that clearly establishes the scope of each of these forms of deprivation of liberty. Therefore, we must resort to what is established in conventional and constitutional jurisprudence to clarify these concepts. By virtue of this, our objective is to propose a reform to the Organic Law of Jurisdictional Guarantees and Constitutional Control so that within the referred Law there is a specific definition of the mentioned criteria, for this, the pronouncements of the Constitutional Court are analyzed through its sentences No. 247-17-SEP-CC and No. 207-11-JH/20.
Descripción
BDER-TPrG 021-2025
Palabras clave
ILEGAL, ARBITRARIA, ILEGÍTIMA, HABEAS CORPUS, GARANTÍA JURISDICCIONAL., ARBITRARIA, ILEGÍTIMA, HABEAS CORPUS, GARANTÍA JURISDICCIONAL.