La práctica procesal constitucional y la tutela judicial efectiva en Tungurahua

Abstract

The guarantee of compliance with constitutional principles and rights does not depend, for the most part, on the criteria issued by the Constitutional Court, but on the professional application of the instruments developed for the protection of rights. That is, a constitutional procedural practice, through which it is possible to effectively protect the rights of people, with the confidence and sufficient guarantee that the desire for justice is fulfilled. That is why, leaving this problem unnoticed without trying to provide a possible solution, will contribute by omission to the weakening of the constitutional block and the loss of legitimacy of constitutional justice. For a better understanding, effective judicial protection allows citizens, through the jurisdictional function, to exercise their rights and legitimate interests and obtain a resolution based on law. For example, in the constitutional sphere, the jurisdictional function acts within the well-known “constitutional guarantees”. In other words, security institutions created in favor of the people, so that they have the means to protect their subjective rights. However, that becomes mere constitutional lyric in practice, since the number of unmotivated sentences and lack of preparation of the judges that lead to the violation, mainly, of the right to effective judicial protection of citizens is evident. Also, it is necessary to emphasize the role of the judge within constitutional law. Most of all, when in recent times it has been possible to verify and experience a politicized justice. This means that beyond guaranteeing human rights, judges decide on the basis of their political interests, increasingly distancing the long-awaited judicial independence that democratic nations struggle with. From this investigative work, an analytical study will be developed to controversy the mythological view that judges are merely "the mouth of the law"; and, guarantee that the exercise of their jurisdictional functions is not influenced in any way by their personal, political, ideological, religious or any other kind of sympathy.