Infringement of the rights of the defendant in the ratification of administrative protection measures in Ecuador.

Abstract

The general objective of this research is to verify the violation of the rights of the defendant in the ratification of administrative measures of immediate protection (hereinafter MAPI) in Ecuador, regulated in the comprehensive organic law to prevent and eradicate violence against women. A qualitative method of a descriptive nature was used, since a bibliographic review was carried out to examine the minimum constitutional guarantees of any process. This was contrasted with the current procedure used for the granting of the MAPI.

Similarly, correlational research was used to carry out a comparative analysis at the regional level: Peru, Colombia, Argentina and Venezuela. The analytical-synthetic method was used in the analysis of case studies in the Judicial Unit specialized in Violence against Women and Family Members of the Canton Rumiñahui, province of Pichincha, analyzing both the procedure used and the motivation of the judges at the time of resolving the legal situation of the accused. Consequently, ratifying or not the MAPI, confirming in the procedural reality that in all cases there is a violation of the rights of the defendant because the effective judicial protection of the alleged aggressor is not guaranteed.

These files go to the judge who, at his discretion, can ratify, revoke or modify the measure, normally without a hearing. The only evidence in these files is the complaint filed by the alleged victim and the documents relating to the granting of the MAPI requested. Thus, the right to defense and the right to contradiction of the alleged aggressor are violated.

In this way, the need for a reform in the law that does not constitute a violation of the rights of any of the parties in the procedures to ratify the MAPI is evident.