Vulneración del principio de preclusión por los jueces en el recurso de Casación.

Abstract

The present issue lies in the violation of the principle of preclusion within the stages or phases of the cassation appeal. According to the General Organic Code of Proceedings (Código Orgánico General de Procesos, in spanish), the co-judges of the National Court of Justice must only examine that the appeal has been filed within the legal term and that its grounds comply with the requirements established for the same; for which a ruling is issued (order admitting or not admitting the appeal). Meanwhile, the judges of the National Court of Justice carry out an analysis on the merits of the appeal according to the cause for which the same has been filed; here a judicial decision is issued, which is the sentence. However, the work between the judges and co-judges of the National Court of Justice is often interchanged, and the latter usually pronounce on the admissibility of the appeal when this stage has already concluded. This infringement of the adjective norm results in the violation of the principle of preclusion. In turn, the fact that the cassation appeal must first be reviewed by a CoJudge (in its admissibility) and then heard by a Judge (of the substance and resolution) extends and prolongs the process, without observing the principle of celerity that should be inherent to the administration of justice.