Ecuadorian Constitutional Jurisprudence in the Face of the Security Crisis and the Use of the State’s Punitive Power

Abstract

The study examines how the Ecuadorian State has responded to the security crisis through an intensified use of punitive power, highlighting the tension between the pursuit of effectiveness in public security and the obligation to respect fundamental rights. In this context, constitutional jurisprudence plays a key role as a mechanism for controlling and delimiting the exercise of ius puniendi, preventing the normalization of exceptional measures and preserving the balance between citizen security and the constitutional State. The research follows a qualitative approach with a documentary–jurisprudential design, supported by an analytical–hermeneutic method and systematization matrices, which made it possible to identify recurring criteria and standards in Constitutional Court decisions on criminal policy and the protection of rights. The findings show that constitutional review is essential to legitimize the State’s response to insecurity, demonstrating that sustainable security can only be achieved when it is aligned with guarantees and democratic constitutionalism.