El procedimiento abreviado en contraposición al principio de no autoincriminación en el sistema penal ecuatoriano.
The present research work refers to the problem generated in the abbreviated procedure established as a special procedure, regarding the principle of non-self-incrimination according to articles 634 and following of the Comprehensive Criminal Organic Code; whenever, as a requirement for the applicat...
| Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | master thesis |
| Status: | Published version |
| Publication Date: | 2022 |
| Country: | Ecuador |
| Institution: | Universidad de Otavalo |
| Repository: | Repositorio Universidad de Otavalo |
| Language: | Spanish |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.uotavalo.edu.ec:52000/779 |
| Online Access: | http://repositorio.uotavalo.edu.ec/handle/52000/779 |
| Access Level: | Open access |
| Keyword: | Derecho Penal Procedimiento abreviado Autoincriminación Responsabilidad |
| Summary: | The present research work refers to the problem generated in the abbreviated procedure established as a special procedure, regarding the principle of non-self-incrimination according to articles 634 and following of the Comprehensive Criminal Organic Code; whenever, as a requirement for the application of this procedure, it is required that the person investigated or prosecuted admit the fact that is imputed to him, constituting a kind of negotiation with the Prosecutor's Office. The analysis is derived from general aspects of the principle of non-self-incrimination and the abbreviated procedure with the support of the doctrine and national and international regulatory bodies that contain this figure. In the same way, the content of other minimum guarantees that must be observed in all types of procedures can be ascertained. In addition, this research work contains a proactive section, by which the authors indicate that the abbreviated procedure is adequate as long as the right to defense and other minimum guarantees are guaranteed. Specifically, in the abbreviated procedure, it must be required that the defendant acknowledge his participation in the act attributed to him, but not his responsibility or guilt, in this way the Prosecutor's Office is not deprived of its task of investigating and, on the other hand, the The judge will have the obligation to analyze the participation of the defendant in said fact under investigation, since the statement would not constitute the only element to convict the defendant, there will be the possibility that said sentence may also be acquittal. |
|---|