Habeas corpus against an oral decision granting preventive detention with a deficient motivation

Abstract

Introduction: the right to freedom of movement may be restricted by means of an oral resolution that grants the precautionary measure of preventive detention. Pretrial detention is based on constitutional and legal provisions, and the oral resolution must justify compliance with these standards, in accordance with the guarantee of motivation. Habeas corpus exercises constitutional control over the oral resolution of pretrial detention and evaluates that it has been granted in accordance with the provisions of the legal system. Objectives: the guiding criterion of the guarantee of motivation makes it possible to evaluate the sufficiency of a judicial decision, and failure to comply with the criterion in the decision implies the existence of one of the deficits of motivation: Nonexistence, insufficiency, and appearance. Methodology: the methodology used the qualitative research model, and recourse was made to publications, research repositories, jurisprudence, and habeas corpus rulings. Relevant material was identified and selected for processing. Results: the results pointed to the admissibility of habeas corpus against oral resolutions that grant preventive detention that have some of the deficiencies of motivation due to non-compliance with the guiding criterion of the guarantee of motivation. Conclusions: habeas corpus is admissible when the oral decision granting preventive detention does not comply with the guiding criterion of the guarantee of motivation, due to non-compliance with a constitutional parameter of mandatory compliance.