El Activismo Judicial en la Prueba de Oficio para mejor resolver en el Derecho Procesal Ecuatoriano.
No hay miniatura disponible
Fecha
2023-03
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad de Guayaquil, Facultad de Jurisprudencia Ciencias Sociales y Polìticas
Resumen
El presente trabajo investigativo versa sobre el activismo judicial en la prueba para
mejor resolver; pues, el Código Orgánico General de Procesos confiere al administrador de
justicia la potestad discrecional para disponer medios probatorios que considere oportunos afín
de aclarar hechos controvertidos y he ahí que surge la confrontación con el principio dispositivo
que indica le corresponde únicamente a las partes el anuncio y práctica de pruebas, por
consiguiente, este estudio se orienta en determinar si la o el juzgador a través de esta figura
probatoria toma el control y dirección del proceso y se convierte en un activista judicial; y, si
existe cierta transgresión a las garantías del debido proceso, recordando que, la legislación
procesal interna no regula de manera suficiente la aplicación de la prueba de oficio, es decir,
que no se está limitando el actuar del juzgador y mucho menos la norma resuelve sobre la
complexidad que surge entre la facultad que dispone el COGEP y lo que determina por mandato
constitucional el principio dispositivo. Para efectuar el estudio, se incorpora el análisis de la
normativa jurídica nacional, derecho comparado y la asociación de estas en casos concretos,
mediante el cual se logre identificar las consecuencias sobre la imparcialidad de la o el juzgador
y el principio dispositivo; así como, demostrar aspectos que reviste la normativa internacional
y no prescribe la nuestra y en efecto, con ello plantear una propuesta reformatoria al artículo
168 del Código Orgánico General de Procesos. La metodología que vamos a utilizar es
cualitativa y cuantitativa con los métodos fenológicos lógicos, históricos, deductivos y legales
This research work deals with judicial activism in the test to better resolve; Therefore, the General Organic Code of Processes confers on the administrator of justice the discretionary power to order evidentiary means that it considers appropriate to clarify controversial facts and that is why the confrontation with the operative principle that indicates the it is only for the parties to announce and carry out tests, therefore, this study aims to determine whether the judge through this evidentiary figure takes control and direction of the process and becomes a procedural activist; and, if there is a certain breach of due process guarantees, recalling that domestic procedural law does not sufficiently regulate the application of ex officio evidence, In other words, the actions of the judge are not being limited and much less the rule resolves on the complexity that arises between the power provided by COGEP and what determines by constitutional mandate the operative principle. The study incorporates an analysis of national legal regulations, comparative law and the association of these in specific cases, which will identify the consequences on the impartiality of the judge and the operative principle; as well as, to demonstrate aspects of international law and not prescribed by ours and indeed, to propose a reform proposal to article 168 of the General Organic Code of Processes. The methodology we will use is qualitative and descriptive with phenological, historical, deductive and legal methods.
This research work deals with judicial activism in the test to better resolve; Therefore, the General Organic Code of Processes confers on the administrator of justice the discretionary power to order evidentiary means that it considers appropriate to clarify controversial facts and that is why the confrontation with the operative principle that indicates the it is only for the parties to announce and carry out tests, therefore, this study aims to determine whether the judge through this evidentiary figure takes control and direction of the process and becomes a procedural activist; and, if there is a certain breach of due process guarantees, recalling that domestic procedural law does not sufficiently regulate the application of ex officio evidence, In other words, the actions of the judge are not being limited and much less the rule resolves on the complexity that arises between the power provided by COGEP and what determines by constitutional mandate the operative principle. The study incorporates an analysis of national legal regulations, comparative law and the association of these in specific cases, which will identify the consequences on the impartiality of the judge and the operative principle; as well as, to demonstrate aspects of international law and not prescribed by ours and indeed, to propose a reform proposal to article 168 of the General Organic Code of Processes. The methodology we will use is qualitative and descriptive with phenological, historical, deductive and legal methods.
Descripción
Palabras clave
PRUEBA PARA MEJOR RESOLVER, ACTIVISTA JUDICIAL, POTESTAD DISCRECIONAL, IMPARCIALIDAD, DISPOSITIVO.