Aplicación de la prueba de oficio o para mejor resolver en la audiencia preliminar.

Abstract

This research work delves into the relevant issue of ex officio evidence in the preliminary hearing, a crucial tool that is exclusive to judges and that they use to clarify the facts and circumstances in dispute in the framework of a judicial process. Ex officio evidence aims to achieve procedural veracity through the objective and impartial determination of the facts. Likewise, an exhaustive analysis is carried out to delineate the inherent distinction between ex officio evidence and evidence for a better resolution, together with a comprehensive exposition of the limitations that circumscribe the first and its judicious application by the judicial body. This academic effort also delves into an exploration of the proposal aimed at the partial repeal of a legal provision in force in the General Organic Code of Processes (COGEP), which previously allows the use of ex officio evidence in the preliminary hearing. Within this contextual domain, it is evidently clear that ex officio evidence assumes a primary role in the legal search for procedural veracity, as long as its implementation remains circumscribed to the limits established by legislative precepts. The proposal for partial repeal of the aforementioned legal provision in the COGEP is motivated by the impulse to make a more precise and delimited regulation of the evidence ex officio during the preliminary hearing, thus aligning its application with the opinions stipulated in Article 168 of the same normative compendium.