The Evaluation of Prior Testimony and Its Impact on Judicial Processes in Ecuador

Abstract

The research analyzed the impact of prior testimony in Ecuadorian judicial processes, focusing on how it affects the principles of immediacy and contradiction. The study used the "Metástasis" case as a reference, where inconsistencies in the application of this evidentiary mechanism were identified. The main objective was to determine how prior testimony influences the fairness of criminal proceedings and to propose alternatives to improve its implementation. A qualitative-quantitative methodology was used, combining documentary analysis with the CRITIC method to assess evaluation criteria for potential solutions. A SWOT analysis was conducted to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the judicial system concerning prior testimony. The results indicated that while this mechanism protects vulnerable victims and ensures the preservation of key evidence, it also creates risks of bias and limits the possibility of effective contradiction. It was found that distrust in the judicial system and the lack of clear regulations affect its legitimacy. As recommendations, priority was given to designing awareness campaigns to build public trust, creating multidisciplinary teams to improve the quality of testimonies, and providing continuous training for judges and prosecutors in specialized interview techniques. It was concluded that it is essential to balance evidentiary effectiveness with the protection of procedural rights and to strengthen judicial ethics to minimize the influence of external factors in the administration of justice.