Momento procesal oportuno para la intervención de terceristas en la etapa de ejecución, seguridad jurídica y derecho a la defensa

Abstract

The thesis analyzes the ambiguity present in the last two paragraphs of Article 48 of the Código Orgánico General de Procesos (COGEP), which regulates the appropriate procedural moment for filing third-party interventions during the enforcement stage. The lack of precision in this provision has led to divergent judicial interpretations, affecting legal certainty and the constitutional right to defense for both parties and third parties. The objective is to propose a reform that clearly defines the deadlines and conditions for admitting third-party claims, distinguishing between exclusionary claims, aimed at protecting property rights, and supporting claims, which seek to participate in the distribution of auction proceeds. A qualitative methodology is employed, with a descriptive and critical approach, based on doctrinal, legal, jurisprudential, comparative analysis and the study of a specific case. The research demonstrates how an exclusionary third-party claim was admitted by one judge and later annulled by another, highlighting the negative effects of legal ambiguity: contradictory rulings, procedural delays, and violations of rights. Furthermore, through a comparative analysis of the legal systems of Peru and Paraguay, it is shown that these jurisdictions clearly define the timeframes for each type of third party claim, thereby reducing judicial discretion and reinforcing the need for legal differentiation. The study concludes with a proposed reform to Article 48 of the COGEP, allowing, in exceptional cases, the admission of exclusionary third-party claims up until the adjudication order becomes final, thereby ensuring greater consistency, legal certainty, and respect for the right to defense.