Judiciary approves its Institutional Evolution and sets 1992 as its origin

The Plenary of the Judiciary Council unanimously approved Resolution 185-2026, which approves the document “Institutional Evolution of the Judiciary Council,” an annex that reconstructs the historical, legal, and institutional trajectory of the governing body of the Judicial Branch. The decision was adopted during Extraordinary Session No. 131-2026, on September 7, 2026, and was published in the Third Supplement No. 386 of the Official Registry, corresponding to Thursday, October 8, 2026.

The resolution was issued in exercise of the Plenary’s authority provided for in Article 264, number 10, of the Organic Code of the Judicial Branch, which allows it to issue, modify, repeal, and interpret internal regime regulations, manuals, instructions, and resolutions. According to Article 178 of the Constitution and Article 254 of the same Code, the Judiciary Council is the governing, administrative, oversight, and disciplinary body of the Judicial Branch.

The process began in Ordinary Session No. 104-2026, when the Plenary ordered, via Memorandum No. CJ-SG-2026-1243-M, dated July 28, 2026, the preparation of an institutional document to compile and systematize the background of the Council’s creation. On September 1, 2026, the report was signed by the General Directorate, the General Secretariat, the National Directorate of Legal Counsel, the National Directorate of Human Talent, the National Directorate of Innovation, Development, and Continuous Improvement of the Judicial Service, and the National Directorate of Planning. Memoranda CJ-DG-2026-6084-M and CJ-DNJ-2026-1001-M completed the file with the legal report and the draft resolution.

What the resolution provides

• Article 1: approve the document “Institutional Evolution of the Judiciary Council,” an annex to the resolution.
• Article 2: declare December 23, 1992, as the historical date that gave rise to the current Judiciary Council.
• Sole general provision: the National Directorate of Social Communication shall carry out the mass dissemination of the content.
• Final provisions: execution corresponds to the General Directorate, the General Secretariat, and the National Directorate of Social Communication; the resolution is effective from its approval, without prejudice to its publication in the Official Registry.

The content of the annex

The document is structured into six sections: introduction; institutional identification and presentation; historical background of the Council’s creation; constitutional and legal evolution; chronological integration of authorities; and the current status of the Judiciary Council.

Among the milestones it records are:

• The 1992 constitutional reforms, published in the Supplement of the Official Registry No. 93, dated December 23, 1992, which incorporated the figure of the National Council of the Judiciary.
• The Organic Law of the National Council of the Judiciary, published in the Official Registry No. 279, dated March 19, 1998.
• The 2008 Constitution, published in the Official Registry No. 449, dated October 20, 2008.
• The 2009 Organic Code of the Judicial Function and the 2011 constitutional reform, which ordered the Transitional Council of the Judiciary to restructure the justice system within a non-extendable period of eighteen months.
• The institutional transition of 2018-2019 and subsequent reforms to the Code.
• The chronology of organic statutes by processes, the matrix of competencies, and the management models, with their articulation to the Strategic Plan of the Judicial Function 2026-2031.

Unanimity and scope

Resolution 185-2026 was unanimously approved in Extraordinary Session No. 131-2026. It is signed by president Mercedes Johanna Caicedo Aldaz and members Magaly Camila Ruiz Cajas, Alfredo Juvenal Cuadros Añazco, Damián Alberto Larco Guamán, and Fabián Plinio Fabara Gallardo; certified by general secretary Marco Antonio Cárdenas Chum.

Issue number 386 of the Official Registry totals 2,373 pages, of which the annex occupies almost the entirety, making it one of the most extensive institutional documents published by the Judicial Function.

The resolution does not create new competencies nor modify the current structure: its effect is declaratory and of institutional memory. It establishes a single origin date for the body and systematizes the background that explains its current configuration, a relevant resource for judges, judicial servants, and system users who follow the restructuring and modernization processes of justice.

Source: Official Registry, Third Supplement No. 386, October 8, 2026, pp. 1-4 (official reference: Resolution 185-2026).