The judicial activism of the courts that ensure respect for the Constitution: Limits and Possibilities in Ecuador

Abstract

This research addresses the role of Constitutional Courts and Tribunals in contexts where the functions of the State fail to respond to social problems. It begins with a general reflection on the origin and meaning of Constitutional Courts and Tribunals as the highest bodies charged with enforcing constitutional supremacy within a state of rights. Thus, the article focuses on questioning the extent to which it is acceptable and appropriate for these Courts to assume functions appropriate to other branches of government, especially when these fail to guarantee rights or address social demands. The research methodology was developed using a qualitative approach, utilizing bibliographic review techniques and doctrinal, legal, and jurisprudential analysis. The results seek to provide a critical reflection on the limits, scope, and legitimacy of judicial activism within the framework of constitutionalism, especially in the Ecuadorian context. It concludes that the intervention of Constitutional Courts and Tribunals can be acceptable and appropriate as long as it is carried out within the limits of their function as interpreters and guardians of the Constitution.