EL Spanish
Abstract
The problem occurs because in Art. 86.1 of the Constitution, reference is made to jurisdictional guarantees, while Art. 439 ibidem, refers to constitutional actions, in this way, it is important to verify if the jurisdictional guarantees would enter in constitutional actions, considering that in the final part of the first article cited it extends the term to “actions provided for in the Constitution”. This is also referred to in Art. 86.1 ibidem, that any person can propose actions provided for in the Constitution, while Art. 439 ibidem, restricts that constitutional actions can be presented by any "citizen". The objective of this work is configured in: Determine under objective parameters the reality of the principle of formal equality in foreigners and access to constitutional actions. The methodology that is applied to this scientific document, is prosecuted in the application of the systematic interpretation of the norm, which is referred to in Art. 3.5 of the Organic Law of Jurisdictional Guarantees and Constitutional Control, thus the method will also be applied. for the rules of solution of antinomies, regulated in numeral 1 ibidem. By virtue of the first method stated, the constitutional norm will be interpreted from the general context of the normative text, to understand the coexistence, correspondence and harmony between them, these being the indicators that will lead to the solution of the problem raised. The results are aimed at clarifying the panorama on the following issues: The power to propose constitutional actions by foreigners and the principle of formal equality, as a constitutional right.Downloads
References
Atienza, M. (2016). Cómo evaluar las argumentaciones judiciales. Departamento de Filosofía Del Derecho, 67(noviembre), 113–134.
Bachof, O. (2010). ¿Normas constitucionales inconstitucionales?
Clérico, L. (2017). Hacia la reconstrucción de las tendencias jurisprudenciales en América Latina y el Caribe en materia de igualdad: sobre la no-discriminación, la no-dominación y la redistribución y el reconocimiento. Revista Direito GV, 9(1), 115–170. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1808-24322013000100006
Emilio, V., & Paredes, A. (2017). Métodos de interpretación jurídica. 33–58.
Galarza, C. (2021). El modelo de MacCormick como esquema de motivación para la aplicación de los estándares de la CIDH en la fijación de la prisión preventiva. Ciencia Unemi, 14(37), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.29076/issn.2528-7737vol14iss37.2021pp1-14p
Nino, S. (2020). Justicia. Convención de Ciencias Política.
Paredes, F. I. P. (2019). Justicia constitucional y democracia: Sello de constitucionalidad en el control preventivo obligatorio (Tribunal Constitucional). Revista de Derecho, 24(1), 165–172. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09502011000100009
Peña, A. (2017). Sobre las normas de competencia: Algunas observaciones a las tesis de Jordi Ferrer. Dialnet.
Prieto Sanchís, L. (1995). Los derechos sociales y el principio de igualdad sustancial. Revista Del Centro de Estudios Constitucionales, 22, 9–57.
Puente, M. (2016). El Neoconstitucionalismo: Corriente Doctrinal Impulsora Del Activismo Judicial ?
Rodrigo, B. (2016). Principio de igualdad y DerechoPrivado. Dialnet.
Sánchez, M. (2020). El Principio De Igualdad. In Derecho Penal Constitucional. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv13qfww7.10
Base Legal
Constitución de la República del Ecuador, Registro Oficial 449 de 20 de octubre de 2008
Ley Orgánica de Garantías Jurisdiccionales y Control Constitucional, Registro Oficial Suplemento 52 de 22 de octubre de 2009
Código Civil Ecuatoriano, Registro Oficial Suplemento 46, Códificación No. 2005-010 de 24 de junio de 2005
Copyright (c) 2022 Science Magazine Unemi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors can keep the copyright, granting the journal right of first publication. Alternatively, authors can transfer copyright to the journal, which allow authors non-commercial use of the work, including the right to place it in a file open access.
