Spanish Spanish

Abstract

The Constitution and international human rights instruments establish the right to liberty as universal. Therefore, in the Ecuadorian criminal process, there are mechanisms to challenge judicial decisions that restrict this right, such as the imposition of pretrial detention. However, it is not permitted to appeal decisions that deny the substitution of pretrial detention for another precautionary measure or to determine whether such a measure is legitimate. This limits access to justice and leaves the decision on the restriction of a person's liberty in the hands of a single judge. Instead, these decisions should be allowed to be appealed, so that a higher court can analyze whether the restriction is legitimate and in accordance with the constitutional and legal precepts governing pretrial detention as an exceptional measure and last resort. By limiting that only the decision that denies or accepts pretrial detention (the one requested by the prosecution) can be appealed, it implicitly makes the right to appeal impossible, hence a doubt arises as to the constitutionality of the rule that regulates the inadmissibility of filing an appeal in this specific case. The objective of the research was to determine whether the rules of the COIP reflect the constitutional provisions and guarantee the right to liberty. The research had a qualitative and theoretical-descriptive approach. It was concluded that there are contradictions in the criminal laws that regulate the criminal process, especially in relation to the rights of due process established in the Constitution of Ecuador and in international human rights instruments.

Key words: Right to appeal, Appeal, Right to liberty, Pretrial detention, Precautionary measures.