The extraordinary protection action as a remedy against prosecutorial abstention opinions

Abstract

This study analyzes prosecutorial abstention opinions and the pressing need for a legal remedy not currently contemplated within Ecuador's legal framework, which renders these decisions isolated acts, despite being human determinations prone to error and potential rights violations. The research adopts a qualitative approach, combining bibliographic review and analysis of Constitutional Court rulings. The inductive-deductive method was employed to examine the legal norms that recognize the standing of crime victims, and how these norms fail to address abstention opinions that refrain from bringing charges. It has been determined that the absence of an effective appeal mechanism sacrifices the right to effective judicial protection and fails to meet the standards set by the conventionality control, which obligates States to ensure access to effective remedies against acts that may violate constitutional rights. The study concludes that the extraordinary protection action represents a viable constitutional remedy against abstention opinions, which should not be excluded from the scope of constitutional safeguards. Furthermore, it underscores the need to adapt the national legal system to effectively ensure judicial protection, safeguard victims’ rights, and uphold the public interest.