La figura de error inexcusable en el Ecuador: Análisis de la Sentencia No. 3-19- CN/20 de la Corte Constitucional

Abstract

This thesis provides an in-depth analysis of the concept of "inexcusable error" in Ecuador, focusing on the ruling No. 3-19-CN/20 issued by the Constitutional Court. It is observed that the inexcusable error is not explicitly defined in Ecuadorian legislation, leading to a lack of clarity regarding its scope. Nevertheless, it is recognized that public officials, including judges, prosecutors, and public defenders, are accountable for their performance in their roles. The responsibility for inexcusable error is primarily addressed from an administrative and civil perspective, without direct criminal implications unless there is an intentional favoring of one party. The Council of the Judiciary plays a significant role in disciplining judicial officials, but there is a lack of clear regulation defining which errors can be considered inexcusable. The ruling 3-19-CN/20 and the Ecuadorian reality highlight the need for the concept of inexcusable error within the legal context. Although the explicit responsibility of judges, prosecutors, and public defenders for such errors is not established, there are administrative, civil, and potentially criminal implications in their performance. It is crucial to differentiate between inexcusable error and the offense of prevarication. The State assumes direct responsibility for judicial errors, but the ruling 3 - 19-CN/20 introduces an additional requirement before initiating disciplinary proceedings for inexcusable error, which could affect internal judicial independence. While this measure aims to protect the magistrates by including an additional review stage, it may also create external pressures that undermine their autonomy and freedom in exercising their functions.