Judicial Reasoning Regarding Procedural Risk in Pretrial Detention in Ecuador

Abstract

Pretrial detention constitutes one of the precautionary measures with the greatest impact on personal liberty within criminal proceedings; therefore, its application requires enhanced judicial justification to establish the existence of a specific procedural risk and to rule out the suitability of less restrictive measures. Within this context, the research problem focuses on determining the elements that judicial reasoning must contain to individually justify the imposition of pretrial detention in Ecuador. The objective of this study was to analyze the legal standards underpinning judicial reasoning regarding procedural risk in decisions ordering pretrial detention. The research was conducted using a qualitative, legal-documentary approach, applying dogmatic-legal, hermeneutic, and jurisprudential methods. The corpus of analysis comprised provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador and the Comprehensive Organic Criminal Code, case law of the Constitutional Court of Ecuador, criteria established by the National Court of Justice, standards developed by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and relevant scientific literature. The analysis identified six essential components for assessing the adequacy of judicial reasoning: specific identification of procedural risk, factual and evidentiary support, individualized assessment of the circumstances of the accused, an argumentative link between the facts and the alleged risk, examination of less restrictive precautionary measures, and the overall sufficiency of the judicial justification. It is concluded that the legitimacy of pretrial detention does not depend solely on formal compliance with statutory requirements, but rather on individualized judicial reasoning capable of demonstrating, on the basis of verifiable circumstances, the necessity and proportionality of the precautionary measure.