The presumption of innocence in the revocation of conditional sentence suspension due to a new investigation

Abstract

Many beneficiaries of conditional sentence suspension in Ecuador lose this penitentiary benefit due to poorly drafted penal provisions, which violate the presumption of innocence by revoking the granted measures solely because the individual is involved as a procedural subject in a criminal proceeding. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether revoking conditional sentence suspension due to involvement in a new criminal investigation violates the principle of the presumption of innocence. This academic effort employed a non-experimental research design with a qualitative approach, utilizing scientific database articles, bibliographic sources, and theoretical foundations. The study adopted a descriptive level of analysis and applied the following methods: inductive-deductive reasoning to move from general knowledge to specific insights, comparative analysis to contrast Ecuadorian legislation with legal frameworks in other countries, and the dogmatic-legal method to incorporate doctrinal and legal interpretations in addressing the problem. The findings reveal that while the National Court of Justice has upheld the legislative text, comparative law and doctrinal principles suggest that the principle of the presumption of innocence is indeed being violated by revoking conditional sentence suspension solely based on involvement in a new criminal investigation. Consequently, it is concluded that the Ecuadorian Criminal Code (COIP) requires reform, particularly concerning Article 631, numeral 10, as its current wording severely infringes upon the presumption of innocence for beneficiaries.