Application of the Principle of Proportionality in the Imposition of Precautionary Measures in the Coercive Procedure established in the Administrative Organic Code
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The objective of this study is to analyze the impact of the application of the principle of proportionality in the imposition of precautionary measures within the coercive procedure regulated by the Administrative Organic Code (COA) in Ecuador. A qualitative research methodology will be used, using the theoretical methods including the systemic, inductive and deductive, exegetical and historical; within the techniques for data collection, the documentary compilation of legal and doctrinal sources will be carried out. Although the COA establishes the principle of proportionality as the central axis for the imposition of precautionary measures, in practice, the discretion of the administrative authorities can lead to disproportionate decisions that violate the rights of the debtor, the limitations imposed by the lack of prior notification and judicial intervention as guarantees of due process will also be addressed, this study seeks to provide recommendations that allow improving the effectiveness of the coercive procedure, ensuring an adequate balance between the protection of the public interest and the rights of the managed, in accordance with the principle of proportionality and the standards of administrative law.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
1. Derechos de autor
Las obras que se publican en 593 Digital Publisher CEIT están sujetas a los siguientes términos:
1.1. 593 Digital Publisher CEIT, conserva los derechos patrimoniales (copyright) de las obras publicadas, favorece y permite la reutilización de las mismas bajo la licencia Licencia Creative Commons 4.0 de Reconocimiento-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0, por lo cual se pueden copiar, usar, difundir, transmitir y exponer públicamente, siempre que:
1.1.a. Se cite la autoría y fuente original de su publicación (revista, editorial, URL).
1.1.b. No se usen para fines comerciales u onerosos.
1.1.c. Se mencione la existencia y especificaciones de esta licencia de uso.
Bryan Alexander Tapia-Tapia , Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador - Ecuador
https://orcid.org/0009-0008-4871-9555
Bryan Alexander Tapia Tapia is a lawyer and financial administration technologist, specializing in the field of Coactive Law. Throughout his career, he has focused his research on the study and analysis of coactive procedures, particularly in their application and effectiveness within the legal and financial sectors. His work addresses the mechanisms of forced execution in debt collection and the relationship between financial entities and administrative procedures. He has also been involved in various projects aimed at optimizing legal systems in this field.
Carlos Henry Carrillo-León , Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador - Ecuador
https://orcid.org/0009-0007-4904-9242
Carlos Henry Carrillo León is a lawyer and specialist in Coactive Law. His research focuses primarily on the study of forced execution processes, with an emphasis on the effectiveness of administrative and legal procedures in the financial sector. Throughout his career, he has worked on improving coactive systems, proposing solutions for optimizing debt collection and resolving conflicts between financial entities and their clients. His professional experience has allowed him to contribute significantly to the analysis and modernization of these processes within the legal framework.
Holger Geovanny García-Segarra , Universidad Bolivariana del Ecuador - Ecuador
I am a lawyer authorized to practice before the Courts and Tribunals of the Republic of Ecuador and hold a Master's degree in Procedural Law. I am currently a professor at the Bolivarian University of Ecuador. I have worked as a lawyer in the public sector and in private practice, specializing in criminal procedural law and defending clients in cases related to public defense conflicts.
References
Cabezas Ponce, C. L. (2016). Análisis jurídico de la coactiva en Ecuador ¿Juicio o trámite administrativo?. http://repositorio.ucsg.edu.ec/handle/3317/7103
Neyra, G. E. B. (2010). Derecho procesal administrativo: Ley N° 27444, Ley N° 29060, y D. Leg. N° 1029. FECAT.
Piori, G. (2002). COMENTARIOS A LA LEY DEL PROCESO CONTENCIOSO ADMINISTRATIVO.docx. Google Docs, 350.
Base legal
Código Orgánico Administrativo. (2017). Segundo Suplemento Registro Oficial 31,7-VII-2017.
Constitución de la República del Ecuador. (2008). Registro Oficial No. 449, 20 de Octubre 2008.
De Procedimiento Administrativo, C. (2011). de lo Contencioso Administrativo. Recuperado de: http: www. secretariasenado. gov. co.
Ley, N. 26979. Ley de Procedimiento de Ejecución Coactiva.(22 de marzo de 2016).[DS Nº 018-2008-JUS.] Obtenido de: https://www. sat. gob. pe/websitev9/Portals/0/Docs/TributosMultas/InfrTransitoTrans porte/Legislacion/Normas% 20y% 20Disposiciones/Decreto% 20Supremo% 20N.% C, 2, B0.
Cueva, M. A. (2008). Código tributario. Instituto de Investigación El Pacífico.
General, L. D. P. A. (2001). LEY Nº 27444. Diario Oficial “El Peruano”, Lima, 11.
Ley 19.880, de 22 de mayo de 2003. (2008, 20 de agosto). Establece bases de los procedimientos administrativos que rigen los actos de los órganos de la administración del Estado. Ministerio Secretaría General de la Presidencia. http://www.leychile.cl/N?i=210676&f=2008-08-20&p=
Gozaíni, O. A. Código procesal civil y comercial de la nación: comentado y anotado. Tomo 3, artículos 499 a 784.
Corte Constitucional del Ecuador: 27 de enero del 2022. Sentencia No. 8-19-CN/22