La constitucionalización de los criterios de ilegalidad arbitrariedad e ilegitimidad y la acción de hábeas corpus en la jurisprudencia constitucional

Abstract

Ecuador's Constitutional Court and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, through their jurisprudence, they have contained three vital criteria when resolving the judicial guarantee habeas corpus: illegality, arbitrariness, and illegitimacy. These criteria must be applied by constitutional judges at the time of resolving habeas corpus. However, within the administration of constitutional justice, these are used as synonyms, this research seeks to analyze how these criteria are being applied, whether constitutional judges are taking into account the content that both the Constitutional Court has developed such as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to resolve habeas corpus actions brought to its knowledge. On the contrary, they are resolved without taking into account the development established in the jurisprudence to provide content of illegality, arbitrariness, and illegitimacy. To accomplish this objective, the habeas corpus resolutions issued in 2019 by the Provincial Court of Tungurahua has been analyzed, evidencing the lack of application of homogeneous criteria on the legality, arbitrariness, and illegitimacy that the Constitutional Court and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, have provided content through their jurisprudence, which, in the last term affects the constitutional justice.