Aplicación de la consulta a un superior en los casos de dictamen abstentivo fuero de Corte Nacional

Abstract

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The present research work was divided into four chapters substantially complementary to the research topic; its objective is to elaborate a document of constitutional legal analysis on the application of the consultation to a superior in the cases of abstentive opinion with national court jurisdiction. Due process has always had a broad evolution in history and has been recognized as one of the primordial rights that allow respect for the rights of individuals, through a set of rules that seek to ensure their effective protection. In addition to the above, it is of absolute importance that such guarantees are enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic which, being the hierarchically superior norm, means that such rights are directly applied. Then the international conventions and treaties have not been left aside, as can be seen, in Ecuador there is a fiscal monopoly, a situation where the only provider of a good or service is the State. Thus, the government seeks to obtain income and dominate a sector that may be strategic for it. In this study, the methodology is qualitative, an analysis was made of the application of the different cases of abstentive opinion with national court jurisdiction, procedural subjects in the different hearings of Formulation of Charges, which showed the qualities that affect when applying the consultation to a superior, and in the quantitative part, the abstentive opinion with national court jurisdiction was counted; likewise, the xvii Inductive-Deductive, Analytical-Synthetic, Historical-Logical methods were used. Therefore, the expected result is to know to what extent the abstentive opinion of the Attorney General in cases of National Court jurisdiction affects the right to appeal, nowadays, in the Constitutional State of rights and justice, causing a violation of the principle of Procedural Challenge, since the operators of justice of the National Court, upon learning of an Abstentive Opinion by the Attorney General of the State being its highest authority, have no one to whom to raise the opinion for consultation, in order to revoke or ratify it.