La imparcialidad del juez en delitos sometidos a procedimiento directo en la ciudad de Quito.
This research critically analyzes judicial impartiality in crimes subject to direct procedure in Ecuador, focusing on Quito but applicable nationwide. The main objective is to demonstrate potential violations of the impartiality principle in this special procedure, which is based on celerity and pro...
সংরক্ষণ করুন:
| প্রধান লেখক: | |
|---|---|
| বিন্যাস: | bachelorThesis |
| প্রকাশিত: |
2024
|
| অনলাইন ব্যবহার করুন: | https://dspace.ueb.edu.ec/handle/123456789/7434 |
| ট্যাগগুলো: |
ট্যাগ যুক্ত করুন
কোনো ট্যাগ নেই, প্রথমজন হিসাবে ট্যাগ করুন!
|
| সংক্ষিপ্ত: | This research critically analyzes judicial impartiality in crimes subject to direct procedure in Ecuador, focusing on Quito but applicable nationwide. The main objective is to demonstrate potential violations of the impartiality principle in this special procedure, which is based on celerity and procedural economy principles to expedite criminal processes. Direct procedure, established by the Comprehensive Organic Criminal Code (COIP), applies to flagrant crimes with sentences up to five years and certain property crimes. While aiming for procedural efficiency, its application raises questions about judges' ability to maintain impartiality within a reduced timeframe. Using a qualitative approach with correlational scope, this study employs documentary analysis and interviews. It examines national legislation, including Ecuador's Constitution and COIP, and international instruments like the American Convention on Human Rights. The goal is to comprehensively understand judicial impartiality in direct procedures, analyzing how brief deadlines and concentrated procedural stages may affect judges' impartiality during the process and sentencing. The research explores the tension between procedural celerity and due process guarantees, particularly the right to an independent and impartial tribunal as established in Article 8 of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article 76 of Ecuador's Constitution. It aims to contribute to the debate on direct procedure's effectiveness and implications in Ecuador's justice system, assessing whether its application compromises judicial impartiality and, consequently, the right to a fair trial. The findings are expected to inform potential reforms or adjustments in implementing this procedure to ensure full respect for defendants' fundamental rights. |
|---|