The credibility and valuation of expert evidence in the Ecuadorian criminal system

Abstract

The general objective of this scientific article is to analyze in an argued manner, which are the dogmatic elements that should govern the evidentiary evaluation of the expert evidence according to the system of free appreciation or sound criticism, within the Ecuadorian criminal process. To achieve this, a qualitative methodological approach is used, with the application of scientific methods such as analytical-synthetic, bibliographical review, exegetical and inductive. This leads to the conclusion that, based on the principles that govern the system of free evaluation of evidence or sound criticism, applying it also to the practice and evaluation of the expert evidence, it must be analyzed with scientific and practical objectivity, both by the procedural parties and by the judge. Indeed, there is a large number of cases in which the expert reports are characterized by their precariousness in terms of content and do not conform to the scientific protocols approved for their development. In spite of this, the expert evidence continues to be valued as a queen or appraised evidence in the Ecuadorian criminal process, contrary to the provisions of the Organic Integral Criminal Code.