Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The general objective of this study is to critically review how the excessive demand, by the prosecutor's office as head of public criminal action, in Ecuador, with respect to the application of the precautionary measure of preventive detention, on the occasion of hearings for the formulation of charges and/or classification of flagrancy, ignores and violates the principle of objectivity, pointing out the excessive use of this measure as a research problem. For this purpose, a qualitative approach methodology is used, under exegetical, analytical and inductive methods, using as a data collection technique the interview with three Ecuadorian prosecutors. As a result, it was found that, in effect, the request for this precautionary measure ignores and violates the principle of objectivity, given that the prosecutors take into account elements such as the prevention of new crimes and the protection of victims to base it, moving away from the criteria stipulated by national regulations, which violates this and other procedural principles and, consequently, violates the accused's right to due process. Keywords:
Pluas-Santana et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: