EL PROCEDIMIENTO DIRECTO Y LA INSTITUCIÓN JURÍDICA DE LA CONCILIACIÓN EN LA SUSTANCIACIÓN PROCESAL PENAL, FRENTE AL RÉGIMEN DEL DEBIDO PROCESO

Our country, by constitutional mandate is considered a "Constitutional State of Rights", is the source of rights possessed by the natural or legal persons in Ecuador, where the state is the guarantor of these rights, which through their guarantees regulatory, judicial and public policy allows the effective implementation of these. Hence, our Constitution is the supreme law of the law, mandatory compliance, so that all standards issued by the National Assembly must maintain consistency with this, otherwise, will have no legal effect. The Organic Code of Criminal Integral (hereinafter COIP) has been prepared and issued punitive and criminal procedural unifying laws into a single legal body, which previously were scattered in the Ecuadorian legal system. In this new legal body, have implemented new offenses, legal institutions and procedures which allow the long-awaited justice is achieved, and within these new implementations have "the direct method", which is analyzed in this investigation. Direct procedure provided for in Article 640 of the COIP, is characterized by gathering all process steps in a single hearing, resolving the legal status of the accused in ten days; therefore, for its origin it is necessary that certain requirements are met: a) the case of a flagrant crime of character; b) That the sanction does not exceed 5 years of imprisonment; and, c) the amount of property crime does not exceed 30 unified basic wage worker in general. It is the Judge of Criminal Guarantees (Criminal Judicial Units) responsible for substantiating sucha procedure, filter legality and ensure strict compliance with due process. Once produced the crime, the mentioned Judge calls the flagrance within twenty-four hours, check the legality of the arrest and file charges against the alleged infringer, expressed such an incident are being carried out by the direct process, indicating that in ten days will take effect the direct judgment where hearing must resolve the legal status of the accused, preventing the procésale subjects up to three days before that hearing, must announce the respective tests in writing. In the course of the investigation board that the mentioned process prevents prepare an adequate defense, for the short time, and consequently within three days before the trial hearing to announce test obstructs administer justice so proba, contrary to the constitutional mandates of due process, and as the criminal procedural law is public, within a positivist regime can not announce test day eight, let alone the ninth, and speaking of "deadlines", run to the days Saturday and Sunday, days lost, restricting the right to conduct a technical defense, for the short time; also omitting to present evidence at the last minute, which has not been announced or incorporated timely (Art. 617 of the COIP), resulting in such proceedings are unconstitutional and inconsistencies. On the other hand we refer to the Settlement and its application in the direct process, as mechanism to make effective restorative justice, so that submitting to the defendant in the direct process does not acquire only speed up and simplify the judicial process, but, that among the procedural subjects (victim-victimizer), facilitate reconciliation, dialogue and compromise on the crime aroused and thuscompensate the victim for damages caused, as ordered by the supreme letter. To this end we believe that the parties involved (victim-offender) must file jointly their request for conciliation by the or the prosecutor handling the case, so this check relevance, and immediately submit your request prompted the Judge of Criminal Guarantees so that by hearing or at the hearing of direct judgment resolved and find the fulfillment of such an agreement, respecting the deadline and rules established in this proceeding, without appearing suspension of direct method, since I be so break his nature. In the development of our research, I shall demonstrate compliance with our hypothesis, by employing methods and techniques, in order to reach conclusions and recommendations set as well as the legal proposal.

• मुख्य लेखक: Valarezo Veintimilla, Alex Ricardo (author)
• स्वरूप: bachelorThesis
• भाषा: spa
• प्रकाशित: 2016
• विषय: DERECHO; PROCEDIMIENTO DIRECTO; CONCILIACION; SUSTANCIACIÓN PROCESAL PENAL
• ऑनलाइन पहुंच: http://dspace.unl.edu.ec/jspui/handle/123456789/17410