La falta de lineamientos respecto de lo que debe contener la fundamentación del recurso de apelación vulnera la seguridad jurídica

Abstract

This research analyzes the lack of clear regulation in Article 257 of Ecuador's General Code of Procedure (COGEP), specifically with regard to the requirements that must be included in the grounds for appeal. This omission has led to differing interpretations by judges, affecting legal certainty, the right to defense, and the effectiveness of second instance decisions. Using a deductive and theoretical methodological approach, relevant national and comparative legislation, case law, and doctrine were analyzed, with a special focus on the procedural systems of Peru and Colombia. These countries have stricter and more technical regulations, which require the presentation of specific grievances as a requirement for the appeal to be admitted. The paper proposes reforming the COGEP to establish clear parameters on what should be understood by grounds, limiting the assessment of the brief to the higher court. It concludes that this reform would strengthen the right to appeal as part of due process. Finally, it presents regulatory, procedural, and training recommendations that seek to improve Ecuadorian judicial practice and strengthen effective judicial protection in the civil sphere. The purpose of this research is to contribute to the construction of a procedural system that is more protective of rights and consistent with constitutional principles by recommending objective parameters for the grounds for appeal in the COGEP. Its contribution is part of the strengthening of legal certainty by reducing judicial discretion and allowing citizens and justice operators to act with greater predictability and confidence.