Council of the Judiciary approves merit-based methodology to elect 21 national judges

The Plenary of the Judiciary Council approved the methodology that will govern the merits phase of the public competition for the selection and appointment of the 21 judges of the National Court of Justice. The decision is contained in Resolution 222-2026, adopted unanimously on October 21, 2026, and published in the Fourth Supplement of the Official Registry No. 395, on Thursday, October 22, 2026.

The instrument is issued under article 181 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador and article 264, number 10, of the Organic Code of the Judicial Function, which empower the Plenary to approve the methodologies, manuals, and procedures of the competition. The methodology, identified with the code DNH-SAT-ME-004 in its version 1.0, was prepared by the National Directorate of Human Talent and validated by the General Directorate through Memorandum No. CJ-DG-2026-7472-M, dated October 19, 2026, based on Technical Report No. CJ-DNTH-SA-2026-1383.

The framework of the process is the Regulation for the Public Competition of Merits and Opposition, Citizen Challenge, and Social Control, issued via Resolution 109-2026, dated July 3, 2026, published in the Fifth Supplement of the Official Registry No. 322, dated July 9, 2026, and corrected by Errata in the Official Registry No. 343, dated August 7, 2026. To this is added the personal data protection protocol approved via Resolution 197-2026, dated September 22, 2026.

A phase of 50 points out of one hundred

The merits phase is worth 50 of the 100 total points of the competition, according to article 36 of the Organic Code of the Judicial Function. The approved distribution is as follows:

• Academic training: 20 points.
• Labor and professional experience: 24 points.
• Training received: 1 point.
• Training provided: 2 points.
• Publications: 3 points.

In academic training, only one degree—the one of highest hierarchy—will be valued, without summation, and the registration certificate issued by the Ministry of Education, Sport, and Culture (MINEDEC) will be required. In experience, up to six sentences or resolutions and up to six lawsuits, answers, pleadings, or fiscal opinions will be graded, with a maximum of four points per document; university teaching with an evaluation equal to or greater than 90 out of 100 contributes two points per document. In publications, up to four books and up to two articles in indexed journals are admitted, with 0.50 points per work and a cap of three points.

Expert committee, commissions, and platform

The Plenary will form and appoint three technical bodies: the Merit Review Expert Committee, the Merit Rating Commission, and the Merit Re-rating Commission. The committee issues a non-binding technical report on validity and relevance and develops the evaluation rubrics for judgments, fiscal opinions, and sponsorship briefs, which must be approved by the Plenary.

The assignment of scores corresponds exclusively to the Merit Rating Commission, which will have the support of a multidisciplinary technical team composed of leadership and supervision staff from the National Directorate of Human Talent. All actions will be recorded in the Judicial Function Integrated Human Talent System (SITHFUJ) platform, with traceability and a prior confidentiality agreement. Staff members involved in the rating process may not participate in the re-rating.

Re-rating in three days and 30-point threshold

Those who are not satisfied with their rating will have three days, counting from the day following the email notification, to submit a reasoned request for re-rating through the platform. The request shall not serve to correct information omitted or incorrectly uploaded during the application, and the commission’s decision is not subject to any appeal.

The minimum score to pass this phase is 30 points. The final report will include the list of applicants, the rating and re-rating scores, and those who do or do not exceed that threshold; the Plenary will arrange for the notification, the exclusion of those who do not reach it, and the opening of the next phase.

Affirmative actions and additional points

Additional points total up to three points and include integration into the pool of eligible candidates, recognition of best practices, a second master’s degree or specialty, performance in academic authority positions, and a case resolution rate equal to or greater than 80%, accredited with data from the SATJE system.

Affirmative actions also have a cap of three points and cover being a woman, belonging to indigenous peoples and nationalities, being Afro-Ecuadorian or Montubio, being in poverty quintiles 1 and 2, having a disability, suffering from a rare or catastrophic disease, human mobility, and residing in a rural area. Verification will be conducted through the Civil Registry, the National Directorate of Public Records (DINARP), the Social Registry, the National Council for the Equality of Peoples and Nationalities, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Human Mobility, and SOLCA, and this information will not be published.

The resolution is effective from its approval, and its execution is the responsibility of the General Directorate and the national directorates of Human Talent, Information and Communication Technologies, Social Communication, and Jurimetric Studies and Judicial Statistics. The regulation is important because it defines, for the first time in this competition, how the 50 points that will decide the renewal of the judicial leadership are distributed: applicants know in advance which documents are valid and their value, and the country obtains a verifiable rule for an appointment that renews the National Court of Justice by thirds every three years, for a period of nine years and without reelection.

Source: Official Registry, Fourth Supplement No. 395, Thursday, October 22, 2026, Judicial Function and Indigenous Justice, pp. 1-6 (official reference: Resolution 222-2026).