Democracy, Constitutional Justice, and Judges: A Democratic Review of the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court’s Power to Impose Sanctions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26441/RD1126-26Keywords:
Constitutional Court, Constitutional Justice, Democracy, Democratic Legitimacy, Right to VoteAbstract
This study is situated within the context of two compliance verifying orders of decisions issued by the Constitutional Court of Ecuador. Through these rulings, the Court removed the members of the Council for Citizen Participation and Social Control—the governing body of the Branch of Transparency and Social Control—from office. Following the 2018 referendum and popular consultation, the citizenry determined that these council members should be democratically elected via universal, direct, free, and secret suffrage; consequently, these public officials derived enhanced legitimacy from their popular election. Accordingly, this paper analyzes a deliberative objection regarding how the Constitutional Court's power to sanction popularly elected officials—up to and including their removal from office—constitutes an infringement on the right to active and passive suffrage and examines the implications of this for the conventional standards established in the Pact of San José.
Downloads
References
Bobbio, N. (2009). Teoría general de la política (3.ª ed.). Editorial Trotta.
Cadena Alcalá, J. y Ramírez Moguel, K. (2021). El voto activo en la jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. ¿Derecho o deber ciudadano? Revista Justicia Electoral, 28, [17-41].
Gargarella, R. (2021). El derecho como conversación entre iguales. Siglo Veintiuno Editores.
Garzón Valdés, E. ([1990]). Consenso, racionalidad y legitimidad. Isegoría: Revista de filosofía moral y política, 2, 26.
Gomes, R. (2019). Democracia y mayorías. La democracia ante el poder de la mayoría. [Una mirada liberal], 5(7), 20.
Gómez, N. (1992). Sucesivos escolios a un texto implícito. Instituto Caro y Cuervo.
Greppi, A. (2012). La democracia y su contrario. Representación, separación de poderes y opinión pública. Editorial Trotta.
Kelsen, H. (2015). Esencia y valor de la democracia (2.ª ed.). Ediciones Coyoacán.
Newman, S. y Isaacs, D. (2004). Historical Overview of the Judicial Selection Process in the United States: Is the Electoral System in Pennsylvania Unjustified. Villanova Law Review, 49, 1.
Post, R. y Siegel, R. (2013). Constitucionalismo democrático: Por una reconciliación entre constitución y pueblo. Siglo Veintiuno Editores.
Shapiro, R. (1987). Polyphonic Federalism: State Constitutions in the Federal Courts. California Law Review, 87(6), 1438. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3481049
Waldron, J. (2005). Derecho y desacuerdos. Marcial Pons.
Waldron, J. (2018). Contra el gobierno de los jueces. Siglo Veintiuno Editores.
Zúñiga, F. (2006). Control de constitucionalidad de la reforma constitucional. Estudios Constitucionales, 4(2), [415-434].
NORMAS
Ecuador. Constitución de la República del Ecuador. Asamblea Constituyente, Montecristi, 2008.
Ecuador. Presidencia de la República. Decreto No. 229. Quito, 29 de noviembre de 2019.
JURISPRUDENCIA
Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Caso Petro Urrego vs. Colombia. Excepciones Preliminares, Fondo, Reparaciones y Costas. San José de Costa Rica, 2022.
Ecuador. Quito: Corte Constitucional. Dictamen No. 7-19-RC/19, 2019.
Ecuador. Quito: Corte Constitucional. Sentencia No. 4-22-RC/22, 2022.
Ecuador. Quito: Corte Constitucional. Sentencia No. 6-22-RC/22, 2022.
Ecuador. Quito: Corte Constitucional. Auto de verificación de cumplimiento de dictamen No. 2-19-IC/23, 2023.
Ecuador. Quito: Corte Constitucional. Sentencia No. 11-18-IN/24, 2024.
Ecuador. Quito: Corte Constitucional. Sentencia No. 20-24-CN/25, 2025.
Ecuador. Quito: Corte Constitucional. Sentencia No. 23-25-IN/25, 2025.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
This jounal and its articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license, whereby the user is free to: share, copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, as long as: give credit appropriately, provide a link to the license and indicate if changes have been made; do not use our content for commercial purposes; and / or remix or transform the material.
