Análisis sobre el alcance del vicio de incongruencia motivacional dentro de la jurisprudencia ecuatoriana, a partir de la sentencia Nro. 1158-17-EP/21

Abstract

This research analyzes the judicial reasoning guarantee within the Ecuadorian legal system, focusing on the jurisprudential evolution developed by the Constitutional Court beginning with ruling No. 1158-17-EP/21. It examines the origin and transformation of the duty to provide reasoning in public decisions, emphasizing its role within the Constitutional State of Law as a pillar for power control, due process, and the protection of fundamental rights. The study explains how reasoning has evolved from being a mere formal requirement to becoming a true constitutional guarantee. It also addresses the replacement of the former “motivation test” with the new “guiding criterion,” which establishes minimum parameters for sufficient reasoning. Finally, it analyzes ruling No. 117-20-EP/24, where the practical application of the guiding criterion to the defect of motivational inconsistency is examined, consolidating a jurisprudential line that strengthens the role of reasoning as an essential constitutional guarantee.