Failed hearings erode trust in Ecuador’s justice system

The Covid-19 Tests case has spent six years without an oral resolution, exposing one of the Ecuadorian justice system’s most sensitive weaknesses: its difficulty in bringing complex criminal proceedings to a conclusion within a reasonable time.

Public attention again focused on the absence of Abdalá Bucaram from the hearing scheduled to announce the tribunal’s decision. But the article warns against reducing the entire delay to Bucaram’s absences. The case has accumulated more than 12 postponements caused by a combination of nullities, health problems, absences by judges, defense lawyers and an expert witness, as well as requests from the defense. Six of the most recent failed hearings involved attempts to announce the oral ruling between July and September 2026.

Ecuadorian law requires the accused to attend the trial hearing. The Organic Comprehensive Criminal Code generally prevents the hearing from taking place without the defendant, except in constitutional circumstances. It also permits remote participation when physical attendance is impossible.

That option has limits. A camera placed in front of a hospitalized person is not enough, the article says. Communication must be real, direct and simultaneous. The defendant must understand what is happening and communicate privately with a lawyer. If a medical condition prevents that understanding, a remote connection cannot guarantee due process.

The article argues that justice cannot sacrifice rights to accelerate a sentence. At the same time, a case cannot remain stalled indefinitely through a chain of obstacles that gradually weakens institutional credibility. When an absence lacks justification, judges can order police to bring the person to court. That measure does not amount to a conviction or preventive detention. Its purpose is to secure attendance and allow the proceedings to continue.

In this case, the tribunal ordered police surveillance and directed that Bucaram be apprehended when he is discharged from hospital, exclusively to bring him to the hearing. The measure shows that the system has tools to address the problem, the article says, but raises the question of why they appeared so late. It presents the wider issue as the accumulation of suspensions, nullities, judicial scheduling problems, changes of lawyers and difficulties ensuring the presence of all parties.