Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

https://doi.org/10.62574/wt0yhh45

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems

of Ecuador and Spain

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil

de Ecuador y España

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

patricio.vallejo@utm.edu.ec

Technical University of Manabí, Portoviejo, Manabí, Ecuador

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3248-7864

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

patricio_2871@yahoo.es

Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador, Portoviejo, Manabí, Ecuador

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9039-7061

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

graciela.zambrano@utm.edu.ec

Technical University of Manabí, Portoviejo, Manabí, Ecuador

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2396-3451

Natalia Perez-Rivas

natalia.perez.rivas@usc.es

Universidad Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Galicia, Spain

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1358-2276

ABSTRACT

The objective of this research was to carry out a comparative analysis of the differences between the

restorative justice of the juvenile penal system in Ecuador and Spain. Using the comparative law

method as a methodological strategy. The research examines the structural, procedural and

conceptual differences that characterize both legal systems in terms of restorative juvenile criminal

justice. The results show significant disparities in terms of normative implementation, enforcement

mechanisms and theoretical approaches that underpin each system. The analysis reveals that while

Spain has a consolidated legal framework through Organic Law 5/2000, Ecuador presents an

emerging normative development with characteristics of Andean constitutionalism. The divergences

identified include aspects related to mediation procedures, victim participation, comprehensive

reparation mechanisms and criteria for evaluating restorative effectiveness.

Descriptors: justice; right to justice; comparative law (Source: UNESCO Thesaurus).

RESUMEN

La investigación se planteó como objetivo efectuar un análisis comparativo sobre las diferencias

entre la justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España. Empleando el método

de derecho comparado como estrategia metodológica. La investigación examina las diferencias

estructurales, procedimentales y conceptuales que caracterizan ambos ordenamientos jurídicos en

materia de justicia penal juvenil restaurativa. Los resultados evidencian disparidades significativas

en cuanto a la implementación normativa, los mecanismos de aplicación y los enfoques teóricos que

sustentan cada sistema. El análisis revela que mientras España cuenta con un marco jurídico

consolidado través de la Ley Orgánica 5/2000, Ecuador presenta un desarrollo normativo emergente

con características propias del constitucionalismo andino. Las divergencias identificadas comprenden

aspectos relacionados con los procedimientos de mediación, la participación de las víctimas, los

mecanismos de reparación integral y los criterios de evaluación de la eficacia restaurativa.

Descriptores: justicia; derecho a la justicia; derecho comparado. (Fuente: Tesauro UNESCO).

Received: 02/23/2025. Revised: 03/13/2025. Approved: 04/16/2025. Published: 01/05/2025.

Research articles section

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

INTRODUCTION

The restorative justice paradigm has undergone a substantive transformation in the

field of contemporary juvenile criminal law, configuring itself as a viable alternative

to the traditional punitive model. This evolution responds to the need to develop

specialized approaches that recognize the particularities of the cognitive, emotional

and social development of adolescents in conflict with criminal law. In this context,

the comparative analysis between the legal systems of Ecuador and Spain allows

identifying the particularities that characterize the implementation of restorative

mechanisms in each national system.

Juvenile restorative justice emerges as a transformative paradigm that privileges the

reparation of the harm caused, the active participation of the parties involved and

the restoration of social relations affected by the crime. This approach contrasts

significantly with the traditional punitive model, which focuses on punishment as a

response to criminal behavior. The implementation of restorative mechanisms in the

juvenile setting presents specific particularities that derive from the special condition

of minors in conflict with criminal law, requiring procedural and conceptual

adaptations that consider their evolutionary development (González, 2024).

Considering that juvenile criminal justice requires specialized approaches that

privilege rehabilitation over punishment, the study of the differences between the

two systems acquires significant academic and practical relevance. According to

Calle-Tapia (2023), current trends in restorative juvenile justice demonstrate a

positive impact on society when mechanisms for early intervention and reparation

of harm are properly implemented. This perspective emphasizes the importance of

developing theoretical and practical frameworks that facilitate the understanding

and effective application of restorative justice in juvenile contexts.

The Spanish experience represents a significant benchmark in juvenile criminal

justice, given that Organic Law 5/2000 established a comprehensive normative

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

framework that has been the subject of extensive doctrinal analysis and systematic

empirical evaluation. Spanish legislation has evolved towards the incorporation of

restorative principles that complement the traditional educational approach,

generating a hybrid model that combines retributive and restorative elements.

Likewise, Díaz-Maroto & Villarejo (2023) point out that the criminal responsibility

of minors in Spain is based on principles that prioritize the best interests of the

minor and the educational purpose of judicial measures, aspects that facilitate the

integration of restorative approaches.

In contrast, the Ecuadorian system presents particular characteristics derived from

the constitutionalism that governs the national legal system. This constitutionalism

incorporates elements of the Andean worldview and principles of social justice that

influence the conceptualization and application of restorative juvenile justice. As

Villacreses-Briones (2023) indicates, criminal interpretation in Ecuadorian

constitutionalism incorporates differentiating elements that influence the application

of restorative justice, generating a particular interpretative framework that privileges

comprehensive reparation and community participation.

The justification for this comparative study lies in the need to understand the

different theoretical and practical approaches that characterize the implementation

of restorative justice in diverse legal and cultural contexts. This understanding

facilitates the identification of best practices, the detection of structural limitations

and the development of proposals for improvement that can benefit both systems.

Likewise, the comparative analysis contributes to the development of the theory of

juvenile restorative justice, providing conceptual elements for the improvement of

juvenile criminal justice systems in the Latin American region.

Consequently, this study aims to answer the following research question: What are

the structural, procedural and conceptual differences between the restorative justice

of the juvenile penal system in Ecuador and Spain?

The objective of this study is to carry out a comparative analysis of the differences

between the restorative justice of the juvenile penal system in Ecuador and Spain.

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

Conceptual framework

Restorative justice constitutes an alternative model of justice administration that

privileges the reparation of the damage caused by the crime, the active participation

of the parties involved and the restoration of the affected social relations. This

paradigm represents a fundamental transformation in the understanding of crime

and the state response, moving away from the traditional punitive approach to

privilege the restoration of social relations and the comprehensive repair of the

damage caused. In this sense, Márquez-Cárdenas (2009) states that the social

doctrine of restorative justice is based on principles of solidarity, community

participation and comprehensive reparation of harm, aspects that redefine the role

of the criminal justice system.

The conceptualization of restorative justice incorporates philosophical, sociological

and legal elements that converge in the construction of an alternative model of

criminal conflict resolution. This model is characterized by privileging dialogue

between the parties involved, the understanding of the impact of the crime on the

victim and the community, and the implementation of reparation mechanisms that

transcend the strictly patrimonial dimension. Restorative justice is based on the

premise that crime constitutes a violation of interpersonal and social relationships,

requiring responses that facilitate the healing of these relationships (Rimo, 2024).

Additionally, the application of restorative justice in the juvenile setting presents

specific particularities that derive from the special condition of minors in conflict

with criminal law. These particularities include the consideration of the cognitive and

emotional development of adolescents, the importance of family participation in

restorative processes, and the need to implement measures that facilitate the

integral formation of the minor. Therefore, González (2024) argues that adequate

justice for children and adolescents in conflict with criminal law should be based on

principles and guarantees established in international standards, incorporating

specific elements that recognize their condition as developing subjects.

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

The implementation of juvenile restorative justice requires the adaptation of

traditional criminal justice procedures to incorporate elements that favor the active

participation of minors, the understanding of the impact of their actions and the

development of social and emotional competencies. This adaptation implies the

incorporation of pedagogical methodologies, the participation of multidisciplinary

teams and the implementation of measures that privilege training over punishment,

therefore, Rojas et al. (2020) emphasize that restorative juvenile justice in the

juvenile justice system must consider the specific characteristics of adolescents in

order to develop effective interventions.

Spanish juvenile criminal justice system

The Spanish legal system has developed a specialized regulatory framework for

juvenile criminal justice through Organic Law 5/2000 of January 12, 2000,

regulating the criminal responsibility of minors. This regulation represents a

significant milestone in the evolution of Spanish juvenile criminal law, establishing

a differentiated system that recognizes the particularities of minors in conflict with

the criminal law. Consequently, Lázaro-Pérez (2001) indicates that this regulation

establishes a differentiated system of criminal responsibility that incorporates

measures of an educational and social reinsertion nature, moving away from the

traditional punitive model applied to adults.

Organic Law 5/2000 has undergone multiple reforms that have strengthened the

incorporation of restorative principles in the Spanish juvenile criminal justice system.

These reforms have responded to the need to adapt the regulatory framework to

social demands and to theoretical and empirical advances in juvenile justice. The

regulatory evolution has favored the implementation of alternative measures to the

deprivation of liberty, the strengthening of rehabilitation programs and the

incorporation of mechanisms for the reparation of harm. In this sense, Curbelo-

Hernández (2021) analyzes two decades since the entry into force of Organic Law

5/2000, highlighting the importance of forensic social work from a rights

perspective.

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

Similarly, the Spanish system has evolved towards the incorporation of restorative

mechanisms in the processing of juvenile cases, developing specialized programs

that show significant preventive effects. Thus, Corrales (2022) demonstrates that

the restorative approach in juvenile criminal justice in Spain has shown significant

preventive effects in the reduction of criminal recidivism, empirically validating the

effectiveness of restorative interventions in the Spanish juvenile context. This

empirical evidence has strengthened the legitimacy of restorative approaches and

has facilitated their expansion within the juvenile criminal justice system.

The Spanish experience in restorative justice has incorporated specialized

instruments for the assessment and management of the risk of recidivism,

developing technical tools that facilitate informed judicial decision-making.

Therefore, Horcajo-Gil et al. (2019) argue that the assessment of the risk of criminal

recidivism in juvenile offenders requires specialized technical instruments that allow

for differentiated intervention, emphasizing the importance of multidisciplinary

assessment in determining the most appropriate measures for each case.

The Spanish system has also developed specialized mechanisms for the treatment

of specific problems in the field of juvenile criminal justice, in this order, Arroyo

(2023) analyzes child-parental violence in juvenile criminal proceedings, identifying

the need to develop specialized responses that consider the complexity of these

situations. Likewise, the system has incorporated gender perspectives in the

treatment of juvenile violence, as evidenced by Seara (2024) in her analysis of

Spanish criminal justice in the face of gender-based violence by minors.

Ecuadorian juvenile criminal justice system

The Ecuadorian juvenile criminal justice system is characterized by the incorporation

of constitutional guarantee principles that significantly influence the application of

restorative mechanisms. This system is based on the 2008 Constitution, which

establishes a framework of fundamental rights and procedural guarantees that

influence the interpretation and application of juvenile criminal law. In this context,

Cabrera-Cabrera & Maldonado-Ordoñez (2023) analyze the juvenile penal system

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

in Ecuadorian legislation and identify the emergence of a new paradigm of

restorative justice that incorporates elements of Latin American transformative

constitutionalism.

Ecuadorian constitutionalism presents particular characteristics that derive from the

influence of the Andean cosmovision, the principles of social justice and the

conception of nature as a subject of rights. These elements generate a specific

interpretative framework that influences the conceptualization of juvenile restorative

justice. Consequently, Alvaracín-Jarrín (2023) presents a critical perspective on

punitive irrationality in Ecuador from the perspective of criminal guaranties,

evidencing the need for alternative approaches in juvenile justice that transcend the

traditional punitive paradigm.

Restorative justice in Ecuador has been configured as an alternative means for the

treatment of juvenile delinquency, incorporating elements of integral reparation that

transcend the strictly legal dimension. This comprehensive approach considers

social, cultural, economic and symbolic aspects in the conceptualization of harm and

reparation. Thus, Suárez-Jácome & Moreno-Martínez (2024) argue that restorative

justice represents an effective tool to address the problem of juvenile delinquency

in the Ecuadorian context, emphasizing the importance of developing culturally

relevant approaches.

The Ecuadorian system presents specific challenges related to the effective

implementation of juvenile restorative justice, Lorona-González & Gende-Ruperti

(2025) identify the need to redefine minority of age in the Ecuadorian adolescent

criminal justice system, evidencing an ongoing process of normative transformation

that seeks to adapt the legal framework to the social and cultural realities of the

country, this transformation includes the incorporation of elements of indigenous

justice and alternative conflict resolution mechanisms.

The sociological perspective of Ecuadorian juvenile criminal law provides critical

elements for the understanding of the limitations and potentialities of the system,

in this order, Monar-Machoa (2024) analyzes critical perspectives on rehabilitation

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

and restorative justice from the sociology of juvenile criminal law, identifying

tensions between normative discourses and institutional practices. This critical

perspective evidences the need to develop more holistic approaches that consider

the social and structural conditions that influence juvenile delinquency.

Comparative Perspectives on Juvenile Criminal Justice

The comparative analysis of juvenile criminal justice systems makes it possible to

identify differentiated models of state intervention in juvenile delinquency,

facilitating the understanding of the different theoretical and practical approaches

that characterize each legal system. In this regard, Gonzáles-Laurino (2016)

presents the juvenile criminal justice models under debate at the beginning of the

21st century, evidencing the diversity of approaches adopted by different legal

systems and the influence of cultural, political and social factors in their

configuration.

The comparative perspective facilitates the understanding of regional particularities

in the implementation of restorative justice, making it possible to identify common

elements and specific differences that characterize each system. Consequently,

Bernal-Sánchez & Lescano-Galeas (2021) develop a comparative analysis between

the practices of Ecuador and Mexico in terms of the resignification of criminal justice,

evidencing the importance of considering cultural and social contexts in the

implementation of penal reforms.

The comparative analysis also makes it possible to identify global trends in the

evolution of juvenile criminal justice and to evaluate the effectiveness of different

approaches in reducing recidivism and promoting social reinsertion. Agudelo et al.

(2022) analyze juvenile criminal justice in human rights courts from a European

perspective, providing elements for understanding international standards in

juvenile justice.

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

METHOD

From a methodological context, the comparative law method was used as a

methodological strategy for the analysis of the differences between the restorative

justice systems applied in the juvenile criminal jurisdiction of Ecuador and Spain.

The comparative method in law allowed the systematic identification of similarities

and differences between different legal systems, facilitating the understanding of

the normative, procedural and conceptual particularities of each system. This

methodological approach is based on the premise that the comparison between

different legal systems allows the identification of common and particular elements

that enrich the understanding of the legal phenomena studied.

In this order, the implementation of the comparative method requires the definition

of comparison criteria that allow the systematic analysis of the differences identified.

In this study, the criteria for comparison are structured in three fundamental

dimensions: (1) normative and institutional framework, (2) application procedures

and mechanisms, and (3) theoretical and philosophical principles underpinning each

system.

The selection of sources was made by reviewing 40 specialized bibliographic

references that include: legal norms, academic doctrine, jurisprudence and empirical

studies on restorative justice in both countries. The documentary corpus includes

refereed academic publications, specialized books, doctoral theses and institutional

reports published between 2001 and 2025. The temporal selection responds to

the need to incorporate both the historical background of the development of

juvenile restorative justice and the most recent trends in both systems.

Therefore, the source selection criteria prioritized academic quality, thematic

relevance and representativeness of the different doctrinal perspectives existing in

each country. Primary sources (legal regulations, jurisprudence), secondary sources

(academic doctrine, empirical studies) and tertiary sources (systematic reviews,

comparative analyses) were included; therefore, the diversity of sources guarantees

the comprehensiveness of the analysis and the validity of the conclusions derived.

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

In this sense, the comparative analysis is structured in three fundamental dimensions

that allow a comprehensive understanding of the differences between the two

systems:

1. The first dimension, normative and institutional framework, examines the

differences in the legal structure, constitutional principles, responsible

institutions and implementation mechanisms.

2. The second dimension, procedures and implementation mechanisms,

analyzes differences in mediation processes, eligibility criteria, victim

participation and follow-up mechanisms.

3. The third dimension, theoretical and philosophical principles, examines the

conceptual differences underpinning each system and their influence on

judicial practice.

On the other hand, the information was processed through qualitative content

analysis, identifying emerging analytical categories that allow the systematization of

the differences identified. Consequently; the content analysis was structured in three

phases:

1. Descriptive analysis of each system,

2. Identification of similarities and differences,

3. Interpretation of the differences identified. The validity of the analysis was

ensured through the triangulation of sources and the contrasting of diverse

doctrinal perspectives.

Therefore, the triangulation of sources was implemented through the confrontation

of information from different types of sources (normative, doctrinal, empirical) and

the verification of the consistency of information between different sources. The

contrasting of doctrinal perspectives was carried out by incorporating authors with

different theoretical approaches, guaranteeing the representativeness of the

different currents of thought existing in each country.

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS

The results of the research are described in a comparative legal context:

Table 1.

Classification of the 40 bibliographic references by type of source.

Legal regulations (4 references)

Reference

Country

Type

Year

Organic Law 5/2000, of January 12, 2000, regulating the criminal

responsibility of minors

Spain

Organic Law

2000

Childhood and Adolescence Code. Law 100. Official Register 737

of 03-Jan.-2003. Last modification: 07-Jul.-2014.

Ecuador

Specialized Code

2003

Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador

Ecuador

Constitutional

Norm

2008

Integral Organic Penal Code, COIP. Official Gazette Supplement

180 of 10-Feb.-2014. Last amendment: 17-Feb.-2021.

Ecuador

Organic Code

2014

Academic doctrine - refereed publications (24 references)

Author(s)

Country/Focus

Year

Type of Publication

Agudelo et al.

Europe/International

2022

Refereed academic article

Alvaracín-Jarrín

Ecuador

2023

Refereed academic article

Arroyo

Spain

2023

Refereed academic article

Bernal-Sánchez and Lescano-Galeas

Ecuador-Mexico

2021

Refereed academic article

Blanca

Spain

2022

Refereed academic article

Cabrera-Cabrera and Maldonado-Ordoñez

Ecuador

2023

Refereed academic article

Calle-Tapia

General/Theoretical

2023

Refereed academic article

Centelles et al.

Spain

2021

Refereed academic article

Corrales

Spain

2022

Refereed academic article

Cortés-Torres

International

2022

Refereed academic article

Curbelo-Hernandez

Spain

2021

Refereed academic article

Díaz-Maroto and Villarejo

Spain

2023

Refereed academic article

Fernández

Spain

2022

Refereed academic article

González

General/Theoretical

2024

Refereed academic article

Gonzáles-Laurino

International

2016

Refereed academic article

Horcajo-Gil et al.

Spain

2019

Refereed academic article

Lanzas-Iniesta

Spain

2023

Refereed academic article

Lorona-González and Gende-Ruperti

Ecuador

2025

Refereed academic article

Luzón-Peña

Spain

2022

Refereed academic article

Márquez-Cárdenas

General/Theoretical

2009

Refereed academic article

Mendoza-Tello et al.

Ecuador

2024

Refereed academic article

Monar-Machoa

Ecuador

2024

Refereed academic article

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

Author(s)

Country/Focus

Year

Type of Publication

Perdigones y del Prato

Spain

2024

Refereed academic article

Rimo

General/Theoretical

2024

Refereed academic article

Specialized books (7 references)

Author(s)

Country/Focus

Year

Type of work

Lázaro-Pérez

Spain

2001

Specialized book

Rojas et al.

General/Theoretical

2020

Specialized book

Salazar

Ecuador

2020

Specialized book

Seara

Spain

2024

Specialized book

Soto

Spain

2021

Specialized book

Suárez-Jácome and Moreno-Martínez

Ecuador

2024

Specialized book

Vidal-Herrero-Vior

Spain

2015

Specialized book

Doctoral theses and institutional reports (5 references)

Author(s)

Country/Focus

Year

Type

Vallejo-Valdivieso et al.

Ecuador

2022

Doctoral thesis/Institutional report

Villacreses-Briones

Ecuador

2023

Doctoral thesis

Villamar et al.

Latin America

2024

Institutional Report

Vidal-Herrero-Vior

Spain

2015

Doctoral thesis

Cortés-Torres

International

2022

Institutional Report

Source: Own elaboration.

The analysis of the 40 bibliographic references presented in Table 1 shows a

heterogeneous documentary architecture that supports the research from various

academic and legal perspectives. In this sense, academic doctrine forms the central

pillar of the theoretical framework with 24 references (60% of the total), composed

primarily of scientific articles with academic arbitration published between 2019

and 2025, which proves the contemporaneity and relevance of the doctrinal debate

on the subject under investigation.

The significant presence of Spanish and Ecuadorian studies stands out, projecting

an Ibero-American comparative approach that enhances the legal-criminal analysis

from a comparative law perspective. The normative order, with 4 strategically chosen

references, ranges from the Ecuadorian Magna Carta to specialized normative

bodies and organic laws of both legal systems, providing the essential legal support

for the normative-dogmatic analysis.

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

The 7 specialized books contribute with theoretical and doctrinal depth, while the

5 doctoral theses and institutional reports incorporate empirical research and

institutional analysis that complement the scientific substrate of the study. This

proportionate distribution between primary normative sources, contemporary

academic doctrine and specialized legal literature ensures a comprehensive and

methodologically rigorous approach to the legal institution examined, in line with

the parameters of Ecuadorian legal research.

Table 2.

Geographical and temporal distribution.

By Country/Region (40 references)

Category

Quantity

Percentage

Spain

37,5%

Ecuador

35,0%

General/Theoretical/International

27,5%

TOTAL

100%

By Time Period

Period

Quantity

References Included

2001-

2010

Ley Orgánica 5/2000, Lázaro-Pérez (2001), Código Niñez Ecuador (2003),

Constitución Ecuador (2008), Márquez-Cárdenas (2009)

2011-

2020

COIP Ecuador (2014), Gonzáles-Laurino (2016), Vidal-Herrero-Vior (2015),

Horcajo-Gil et al. (2019), Rojas et al. (2020), Salazar (2020)

2021-

2025

Remaining references (67.5% of total).

Source: Own elaboration.

Examination of the geographical and temporal distribution of the 40 bibliographic

references presented in Table 2 shows a balanced and strategic configuration that

strengthens the scientific validity of the study. From the geographical perspective,

an almost symmetrical distribution is observed between Spanish (15 references,

37.5%) and Ecuadorian (14 references, 35.0%) sources, which evidences a solid

comparative approach between both Ibero-American legal systems. The 11

references of a general, theoretical and international nature (27.5%) provide a

universal dimension that enriches the analysis with broader doctrinal perspectives

and global conceptual frameworks.

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

As for the temporal distribution, there is a marked concentration in the

contemporary period, with 27 references (67.5%) corresponding to the five-year

period 2021-2025, which proves the timeliness and validity of the research. The

foundational period 2001-2010 incorporates 4 strategic references that include

fundamental constitutional and legal norms, establishing the legal foundations of

the analysis. The 9 references of the intermediate period 2011-2020 consolidate

the doctrinal and normative development of the subject. This temporal architecture

demonstrates that the research privileges the most recent scientific contributions,

maintaining the support in the consolidated normative bases, which guarantees an

updated treatment of the legal problem addressed in accordance with the

methodological standards of contemporary legal research.

Table 3.

Quantitative analysis by categories.

Distribution by type of source

Type of source

Quantity

Percentage

Academic Doctrine (Refereed articles)

60,0%

Specialized Books

17,5%

Doctoral Theses and Reports

12,5%

Legal Regulations

10,0%

TOTAL

100%

Distribution by type of source

National Focus

Articles

Books

Thesis/Reports

Regulations

Total

Spain

Ecuador

General/International

Source: Own elaboration.

The quantitative analysis by categories represented in Table 3 shows a hierarchical

bibliographic structure that privileges contemporary scientific production and

academic rigor. The academic doctrine, represented by 24 refereed articles (60%),

constitutes the predominant nucleus of the critical apparatus, reflecting the

prioritization of sources with scientific validation and thematic actuality. Specialized

books, with 7 references (17.5%), provide the necessary doctrinal depth, while

doctoral theses and institutional reports, with 5 references (12.5%), incorporate

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

original empirical research that enrich the scientific substrate. Legal regulations,

although quantitatively smaller with 4 references (10%), maintain a fundamental

strategic presence by providing the positive normative framework indispensable for

dogmatic analysis.

The breakdown by national approach reveals a balanced distribution that

strengthens the comparative perspective of the study. Spain concentrates 19 total

references, standing out for its robust production in refereed articles (12) and

specialized books (4), which reflects the maturity of its academic legal tradition.

Ecuador contributes 16 references with a more homogeneous distribution among

categories, showing a comprehensive scientific development ranging from

normative production (3) to specialized academic research. The 5 general and

international references provide universal theoretical frameworks that transcend

national particularities. This bibliographic configuration guarantees a comprehensive

approach that articulates national normative specificity with international scientific

standards, fulfilling the methodological requirements of comparative legal research.

Differences in the normative and institutional framework

The comparative analysis evidences substantive differences in the normative

structure that regulates juvenile restorative justice in both countries, reflecting

different legal traditions and conceptual approaches. First, Spain has a consolidated

legal framework through Organic Law 5/2000, which according to Vidal-Herrero-

Vior (2015) requires an evolution towards a "social model of responsibility" of the

juvenile offender that more effectively incorporates restorative principles. This

regulation has undergone multiple reforms that have strengthened the

incorporation of restorative principles, generating a hybrid system that combines

retributive and restorative elements.

Organic Law 5/2000 establishes a specific procedural framework that regulates the

application of restorative measures in the juvenile field, defining eligibility criteria,

implementation procedures and evaluation mechanisms. This regulatory structure

has facilitated the development of specialized programs and the training of

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

professionals specialized in juvenile restorative justice. Thus, Luzón-Peña (2022)

analyzes the right to correction of minors in the context of juvenile criminal

responsibility, showing the complexity of the Spanish normative regulation.

In contrast, Ecuador presents an emerging normative development characterized by

the influence of constitutionalism and the incorporation of principles of integral

reparation. In this sense, Lorona-González & Gende-Ruperti (2025) identify the need

to redefine the age of minority in the Ecuadorian adolescent criminal justice system,

which is evidence of an ongoing process of normative transformation that seeks to

adapt the legal framework to the social and cultural realities of the country.

Ecuadorian constitutionalism incorporates elements of the Andean worldview that

influence the conceptualization of juvenile restorative justice. These elements

include the conception of justice as community balance, the importance of symbolic

and ritual reparation, and community participation in conflict resolution processes.

Thus, Villacreses-Briones (2023) analyzes penal interpretation and Ecuadorian

constitutionalism, showing the influence of these elements in the application of

criminal justice.

Additionally, institutional differences are manifested in the implementation

mechanisms of restorative justice and in the institutions responsible for its

application. The Spanish system has developed specialized institutions and

professionals trained specifically in juvenile restorative justice, while the Ecuadorian

system is characterized by a more comprehensive approach that incorporates

community institutions and indigenous justice mechanisms. Thus, Fernandez (2022)

analyzes the risks to the safety and health of minors in the context of new

technologies, highlighting the need for institutional adaptation to new challenges.

Regulatory differences are also reflected in the principles underlying each system.

While the Spanish system privileges legal security and proportionality of measures,

the Ecuadorian system emphasizes integral reparation and social justice. These

differences influence the interpretation of restorative principles and their practical

application. Thus, Perdigones and del Prato (2024) analyze the civil liability of

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

parents in the context of juvenile justice, showing the complexity of the normative

regulation.

Differences in procedures and enforcement mechanisms

The procedures for the application of restorative justice present significant

variations between the two systems, reflecting different methodological and

conceptual approaches. In Spain, Corrales (2022) shows that the restorative

approach has been institutionalized through specialized programs that demonstrate

preventive effects on juvenile recidivism, developing specific methodologies for the

implementation of restorative processes in the juvenile setting.

The Spanish system has developed specific protocols for the implementation of

juvenile criminal mediation, establishing eligibility criteria, referral procedures and

follow-up mechanisms. These protocols include the initial evaluation of the case, the

preparation of the parties for the restorative process, the conduct of the mediation

process and the monitoring of compliance with the agreements. The

institutionalization of these procedures has facilitated the systematization of

restorative practice and the evaluation of its effectiveness.

In contrast, in Ecuador the mechanisms of application are characterized by the

incorporation of elements of integral reparation that transcend the strictly legal

dimension, including social, cultural and symbolic aspects. In this way, Monar-

Machoa (2024) analyzes critical perspectives on rehabilitation and restorative

justice from the sociology of juvenile criminal law, evidencing the complexity of

restorative processes in the Ecuadorian context.

Comprehensive reparation in the Ecuadorian system includes material, moral,

symbolic dimensions and guarantees of non-repetition, requiring the

implementation of measures that transcend traditional economic compensation. This

comprehensive approach considers the impact of the crime in multiple dimensions

and seeks the holistic restoration of the affected relationships. Thus, Mendoza-Tello

et al. (2024) analyze fiscal remission and comprehensive reparation of the aggrieved

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

in accordance with restorative justice, showing the complexity of the implementation

of comprehensive reparation.

Similarly, procedural differences are evident in the role assigned to victims in each

system, while Spain has developed specialized statistics on victims in juvenile

criminal proceedings (Soto, 2021), Ecuador emphasizes conciliation mechanisms

that prioritize the restoration of affected social relations. The Spanish system has

developed specific protocols for the participation of victims in restorative processes,

guaranteeing their safety and avoiding revictimization.

The Ecuadorian system, on the other hand, incorporates conciliation mechanisms

that privilege intercultural dialogue and community participation; thus, Salazar

(2020) analyzes conciliations in juvenile criminal justice from the socio-institutional

and legal sensitivities, showing the complexity of these processes in the Ecuadorian

context. These mechanisms incorporate elements of traditional community justice

and seek reconciliation between the parties and the community.

The evaluation of the effectiveness of restorative processes also presents significant

differences between the two systems. The Spanish system has developed evaluation

instruments that prioritize the measurement of recidivism and the satisfaction of the

parties, while the Ecuadorian system incorporates broader criteria that include the

restoration of social relations and community strengthening. Thus, Centelles et al.

(2021) analyze family acceptance and prosocial behavior in minors with judicial

internment measures, showing the importance of considering multiple factors in the

evaluation of effectiveness.

Differences in theoretical and philosophical principles

The theoretical differences between the two systems reflect different legal and

philosophical traditions that influence the conceptualization and application of

juvenile restorative justice. The Spanish system is based on principles of continental

European law that privilege legal security, proportionality of measures and

normative systematization. Therefore, Blanca (2022) analyzes the sentencing system

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

in the Spanish penal codification as an expression of these principles, evidencing

the influence of the continental legal tradition in the structuring of the penal system.

The Spanish legal tradition emphasizes the importance of legal certainty and the

predictability of legal consequences, aspects that influence the configuration of

restorative processes. This approach privileges the systematization of procedures

and uniformity in the application of restorative measures. The influence of

continental European law is evident in the formal structure of the processes, the

importance assigned to the documentation of the agreements and the judicial

supervision of the restorative processes.

In contrast, the Ecuadorian system incorporates elements of Latin American

transformational constitutionalism that emphasizes social justice, integral reparation

and community participation. Consequently, penal interpretation in Ecuadorian

constitutionalism presents particular characteristics that influence the application of

restorative justice (Villacreses-Briones, 2023), generating a conceptual framework

that privileges social transformation and the eradication of the structural conditions

that generate crime.

Ecuadorian transformative constitutionalism incorporates elements of Latin

American political philosophy that emphasize the importance of social justice and

the eradication of structural inequalities. This approach considers juvenile

delinquency as a manifestation of broader social problems that require

comprehensive responses that transcend the strictly penal dimension. The influence

of the Andean cosmovision is evident in the importance assigned to the restoration

of community equilibrium and community participation in conflict resolution

processes.

Philosophical differences are also evident in the conception of juvenile criminal

responsibility. While Spain maintains an approach centered on the individual

responsibility of the minor, Ecuador develops perspectives that incorporate

elements of social and community responsibility in the treatment of juvenile

delinquency. Thus, González (2024) analyzes minority of age, unimputability and

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

criminal responsibility, showing the complexity of these concepts in the juvenile

sphere.

The conception of juvenile criminal responsibility in the Spanish system is based on

the individual capacity of the minor to understand the unlawfulness of his or her

acts and to act in accordance with this understanding. This approach favors the

individual evaluation of the capacity for guilt and the determination of measures

proportional to the seriousness of the crime and the characteristics of the minor.

Responsibility is conceptualized as an individual attribute that can be graduated

according to the cognitive and emotional development of the adolescent.

In contrast, the Ecuadorian system develops a conception of juvenile criminal

responsibility that incorporates elements of social and community responsibility.

This approach considers that individual responsibility must be complemented by the

recognition of the social, family and community conditions that influence the

adolescent's criminal behavior. Responsibility is conceptualized as a complex

phenomenon that requires comprehensive responses that address both individual

circumstances and structural conditions.

Differences in the conception of harm also reflect philosophical differences between

the two systems. The Spanish system conceptualizes harm primarily in terms of

injury to protected legal assets, emphasizing the objective dimension of the harm

caused. The Ecuadorian system, on the other hand, develops a broader conception

of harm that includes material, moral, symbolic and collective dimensions,

recognizing that the crime affects not only the direct victim but also the community

and the social fabric.

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

Table 4.

Comparison of Juvenile Restorative Justice Systems.

Dimension

Spain

Ecuador

Regulatory

Framework

Organic Law 5/2000

consolidated with multiple

reforms.

Emerging normative framework influenced by

constitutionalism and the guaranteeing of

constitutional rights

Constitutional

Principles

European continental law,

legal certainty, proportionality

Transformative constitutionalism, Andean

cosmovision, social justice.

Responsible

Institutions

Specialized institutions,

specifically trained

professionals

Integral approach, community institutions,

indigenous justice

Mediation

Procedures

Institutionalized protocols,

standardized methodologies

Integral processes, ritual and symbolic elements

Eligibility criteria

Technical criteria, risk

assessment, proportionality

Comprehensive criteria, consideration of socio-

cultural context

Victim

participation

Safety protocols, avoidance of

re-victimization

Community approach, intercultural dialogue

Reparation

Mechanisms

Patrimonial reparation,

community services

Integral reparation: material, moral, symbolic

Concept of

Responsibility

Graduated individual

responsibility

Complementary individual and social

responsibility

Effectiveness

evaluation

Measurement of recidivism,

parties' satisfaction

Restoration of social relations, community

strengthening

Community Role

Limited participation,

professionalized approach

Active participation, central element of the

process

Assessment tools

Specialized technical risk tools

Comprehensive multidisciplinary assessment

Follow-up

Formal judicial supervision

Community and family accompaniment

Source: Prepared by the authors.

From Table 4, it is evident that the systems of juvenile restorative justice in Spain

and Ecuador present two different legal paradigms that reflect different

philosophical and methodological conceptions of the treatment of adolescent

criminal responsibility:

The Spanish model is characterized by its technocratic and professionalized

orientation, based on continental European law and structured on principles of legal

security and proportionality. Its regulatory framework, consolidated through Organic

Law 5/2000 and its successive reforms, establishes an institutionalized system with

standardized protocols, technical eligibility criteria based on risk assessment, and

formal judicial follow-up mechanisms that prioritize the measurement of recidivism

as an indicator of effectiveness.

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

In contrast, the Ecuadorian system evidences a holistic and intercultural approach

that transcends the traditional parameters of Western juvenile criminal law, based

on transformational constitutionalism and the Andean cosmovision, this model

integrates ritual and symbolic elements in its mediation procedures, privileges

integral criteria that consider the sociocultural context of the adolescent, and

conceives reparation from a multidimensional perspective that encompasses

material, moral and symbolic aspects. Community participation constitutes a central

element of the restorative process, configuring a paradigm of shared responsibility

between the individual and the community.

The fundamental divergence lies in the conception of the community: while the

Spanish model limits its participation in favor of a professionalized approach, the

Ecuadorian model positions it as a leading actor in the restorative process. This

differentiation reflects different legal conceptions about the nature of juvenile

criminal conflict and the most effective mechanisms for its resolution, evidencing the

influence of cultural and constitutional contexts in the configuration of contemporary

restorative justice systems.

Emerging Theoretical Contributions

From the comparative analysis generated, emerging theoretical aspects are

proposed with the purpose of enriching the state of the question on the basis of

the comparative, thus; it is presented:

Hybrid model of juvenile restorative justice

The comparative analysis made it possible to identify the emergence of a hybrid

model that incorporates elements of both legal systems, suggesting the possibility

of developing integrated approaches that combine the strengths of each system.

This model is characterized by the combination of the normative systematization of

European continental law with the principles of integral reparation of Latin American

constitutionalism. Hybridization makes it possible to overcome the limitations of

each individual system, incorporating elements of legal certainty and procedural

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

effectiveness of the Spanish system with elements of social justice and integral

reparation of the Ecuadorian system.

The proposed hybrid model is based on the premise that juvenile restorative justice

can benefit from the incorporation of specialized technical evaluation mechanisms,

while simultaneously maintaining comprehensive approaches to reparation that

consider the socio-cultural particularities of each context. This approach recognizes

that the effectiveness of restorative justice depends as much on the technical rigor

of the processes as on their cultural and social relevance.

The implementation of the hybrid model requires the adaptation of existing

normative frameworks to incorporate elements of flexibility that allow for the

consideration of the particularities of each case. This implies the development of

protocols that combine procedural systematization with cultural sensitivity, allowing

the adaptation of restorative processes to the specific characteristics of each

community and cultural context.

From the above; we have the vision of Cortés-Torres (2022) who conducted a

bibliometric analysis on trends in legal and educational frameworks of the juvenile

penal system, evidencing the convergence towards more comprehensive models

that incorporate elements from different legal traditions; this convergence suggests

the possibility of developing theoretical and practical frameworks that transcend the

limitations of traditional approaches.

Principle of restorative proportionality

The comparison between the two systems evidences the need to develop a principle

of restorative proportionality that balances the seriousness of the crime with the

reparation measures implemented, overcoming the limitations of the traditional

proportionality principle that focuses exclusively on the relationship between crime

and sanction. This principle would allow overcoming the limitations of the traditional

punitive approach, incorporating criteria of restorative effectiveness in the

determination of judicial measures.

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

Restorative proportionality implies the simultaneous consideration of multiple

factors that include the seriousness of the crime, the reparative capacity of the

juvenile offender, the specific needs of the victim, the social impact of the crime and

the real possibilities of restoring the relationships affected by the criminal conflict;

this multifactorial approach requires the development of evaluation instruments that

allow for the comprehensive consideration of these factors.

The development of the principle of restorative proportionality also implies the

redefinition of the criteria for success in juvenile criminal justice; while the traditional

approach privileges the absence of recidivism as the main indicator of success,

restorative proportionality incorporates additional criteria such as the satisfaction

of the victims, the restoration of social relationships, the development of prosocial

competencies in the juvenile and the strengthening of community support networks.

In this way; Lanzas-Iniesta (2023) analyzes the adequacy and specialty of restorative

justice in sexual crimes, evidencing the complexity of the application of the principle

of proportionality in cases of special gravity, this complexity suggests the need to

develop differentiated criteria that consider the specific characteristics of each type

of crime and the particularities of the victims.

Differentiated juvenile criminal responsibility theory

The comparative analysis supports the development of a theory of differentiated

juvenile criminal responsibility that recognizes the particularities of the cognitive,

emotional and social development of adolescents in conflict with the criminal law.

This theory is based on the understanding that juvenile criminal responsibility

requires specialized approaches that favor the integral formation of the minor over

criminal retribution, incorporating elements of the sciences of human development

and developmental psychology.

Differentiated juvenile criminal responsibility implies the implementation of

multidisciplinary evaluation mechanisms that consider biopsychosocial, family and

community factors in determining the most appropriate restorative measures for

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

each particular case. This assessment should consider the level of cognitive

development of the adolescent, his or her capacity to understand the consequences

of his or her actions, the influences of the social and family environment, and the

possibilities of developing prosocial competencies.

The theory of differentiated juvenile criminal responsibility recognizes that the

capacity for responsibility develops gradually during adolescence, requiring

differentiated responses according to the level of development reached by each

minor. This developmental approach implies the consideration of neurobiological,

psychological and social factors that influence adolescents' capacity for self-

regulation and decision-making.

Therefore, Vallejo-Valdivieso et al. (2022) analyze the relationship between child

abuse and delinquent behavior in male adolescents deprived of liberty, evidencing

the importance of considering traumatic experiences in the assessment of juvenile

criminal responsibility, this empirical evidence supports the need to develop

differentiated approaches that consider the particularities of each case.

Culturally relevant model of comprehensive reparations

The comparative analysis suggests the need to develop a comprehensive reparation

model that incorporates elements of cultural relevance, recognizing that conceptions

of harm and reparation vary according to specific cultural contexts. This model

should consider the particularities of each cultural community, incorporating

elements of traditional justice and community conflict resolution mechanisms.

Culturally relevant comprehensive reparation implies adapting reparation

mechanisms to the specific conceptions of justice of each community, considering

symbolic, ritual and ceremonial elements that facilitate the restoration of social

relations. This approach recognizes that the effectiveness of reparations depends

on their cultural and social meaning for the parties involved.

The development of this model requires collaboration between the formal justice

system and traditional authorities, generating spaces for intercultural dialogue that

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

facilitate the integration of different conceptions of justice. Therefore, Villamar et al.

(2024) analyze the impact of resocialization programs in Latin American women's

prisons, showing the importance of considering cultural particularities in the design

of interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

The comparative analysis between the restorative justice systems of juvenile criminal

law in Ecuador and Spain shows substantive differences that reflect diverse legal,

philosophical and cultural traditions. These differences are manifested in three main

dimensions: normative and institutional framework, application procedures and

mechanisms, and theoretical and philosophical principles that underpin each system.

Understanding these differences contributes to the development of the theory of

juvenile restorative justice and provides conceptual elements for the improvement

of both systems.

First, Spain presents a consolidated normative framework through Organic Law

5/2000, which has allowed the development of specialized technical instruments

and institutionalized restorative justice programs. This normative consolidation has

resulted in the systematization of procedures, the training of specialized

professionals and the development of evaluation instruments that facilitate informed

decision making. The Spanish experience demonstrates the importance of having a

clear normative framework that facilitates the systematic implementation of

restorative justice (Corrales, 2022; Horcajo-Gil et al., 2019).

In contrast, Ecuador is in a process of normative transformation characterized by

the influence of guarantor constitutionalism and the incorporation of elements of

comprehensive reparation. This transformation process reflects the search for a

justice model that transcends the traditional punitive paradigm, incorporating

elements of the Andean worldview and principles of social justice. The Ecuadorian

experience evidences the possibility of developing alternative approaches that

privilege integral restoration over criminal retribution (Cabrera-Cabrera &

Maldonado-Ordoñez, 2023; Suárez-Jácome & Moreno-Martínez, 2024).

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

Second, implementation procedures differ significantly in terms of the role assigned

to victims, conciliation mechanisms and criteria for evaluating restorative

effectiveness. While Spain has developed specialized statistics and recidivism

prevention programs, Ecuador emphasizes comprehensive approaches that

incorporate elements of Andean cosmovision and community responsibility. These

differences reflect different conceptions about the nature of harm, reparation

mechanisms and the role of the community in restorative processes (Soto, 2021;

Salazar, 2020).

The participation of victims in restorative processes presents differentiated

characteristics in both systems. The Spanish system has developed specific

protocols that prioritize victim safety and the avoidance of revictimization, while the

Ecuadorian system emphasizes intercultural dialogue and community participation

as central elements of the restorative process. These differences suggest the need

to develop flexible approaches that consider the particularities of each cultural and

social context.

Third, theoretical and philosophical differences reflect the influence of continental

European law in the Spanish system and Latin American transformational

constitutionalism in the Ecuadorian system. These differences are manifested in the

conception of juvenile criminal responsibility, the principles of proportionality and

the objectives of state intervention in juvenile delinquency. The influence of different

philosophical traditions generates different interpretative frameworks that influence

the practical application of restorative justice (Blanca, 2022; Villacreses-Briones,

2023).

The conception of juvenile criminal responsibility presents fundamental differences

between the two systems. While the Spanish system maintains an approach centered

on the individual responsibility of the juvenile, the Ecuadorian system develops

perspectives that incorporate elements of social and community responsibility.

These differences reflect different conceptions of the causes of juvenile delinquency

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

and the most effective mechanisms for its prevention and treatment (González,

2024).

The theoretical contributions emerging from the comparative analysis suggest the

possibility of developing hybrid models of juvenile restorative justice that

incorporate elements of both systems, while maintaining the normative

systematization of European continental law and the principles of integral reparation

of Latin American constitutionalism. The development of these hybrid models

requires the adaptation of existing normative frameworks and the training of

professionals capable of implementing comprehensive and culturally relevant

approaches.

The principle of restorative proportionality emerges as a significant theoretical

contribution that allows balancing the seriousness of the crime with the reparation

measures implemented, overcoming the limitations of the traditional punitive

approach. This principle requires the development of multifactorial assessment tools

that consider not only the seriousness of the crime but also the needs of the victims,

the reparative capacity of the juvenile and the possibilities of restoring social

relations.

The theory of differentiated juvenile criminal responsibility provides conceptual

elements for the development of specialized approaches that recognize the

particularities of adolescent development. This theory implies the implementation of

multidisciplinary evaluation mechanisms that consider biopsychosocial, family and

community factors in determining the most appropriate measures for each case.

FUNDING

Non-monetary

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

There is no conflict of interest with persons or institutions involved in the research.

 Verdad y Derecho   
Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales  
Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025 
Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España 
Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain 
Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso  
Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua 
Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay 
Natalia Pérez-Rivas 
 
 
39 
 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  
To the jurists who work in favor of restorative justice with emphasis on the juvenile 
penal system.    
REFERENCES  
Agudelo, G. G., et al. (2022). Juvenile criminal justice in human rights courts. La situación europea 
[Juvenile  criminal  justice  in  human  rights  courts:  The  European  situation].  In  J.  Llobet 
Rodríguez & L. R. Ruiz Rodríguez (Eds.), 
Principios y garantías penales y procesales en la 
doctrina de la CIDH y el TEDH 
[Principles and procedural guarantees in the doctrine of the 
IACHR  and  the  ECHR]  (1st  ed.,  pp.  323-368).  J.M  Bosch. 
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv31jm8k0.12 
Alvaracín-Jarrín,  A.  A.  (2023).  Irracionalidad  punitiva  en  Ecuador:  Una  mirada  crítica  desde  el 
garantismo  penal [Punitive irrationality  in Ecuador: A  critical view  from  penal garantism]. 
Andares:  Revista  de  Derechos  Humanos  y  de  la  Naturaleza,  4
(2),  14-22. 
https://doi.org/10.32719/29536782.2023.2.2 
Arroyo,  S.  J.  (2023).  Juvenile  criminal  justice  [Juvenile  criminal  justice].  In 
Violencia  filio-parental. 
Aspectos  penales,  procesales  y  criminológicos 
[Child-to-parent  violence:  Criminal, 
procedural,  and  criminological  aspects]  (1st  ed.,  pp.  181-214).  Dykinson,  S.L. 
http://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.13286140.10 
Arroyo,  S.  J.  (2023).  La  violencia  filio-parental  en  el  proceso  penal  de  menores  [Child-to-parent 
violence  in  the  juvenile  criminal  process].  In 
Violencia  filio-parental.  Aspectos  penales, 
procesales  y  criminológicos 
[Child-to-parent  violence:  Criminal,  procedural,  and 
criminological  aspects]  (1st  ed.,  pp.  217-344).  Dykinson,  S.L. 
http://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.13286140.11 
Bernal-Sánchez, N. B., & Lescano-Galeas, N. (2021). Resignifying criminal justice: An analysis between 
the practices of Ecuador and Mexico [Resignifying criminal justice: An analysis between the 
practices  of  Ecuador  and  Mexico]. 
Boletín  mexicano  de  derecho  comparado,  54
(162), 
e17072. https://doi.org/10.22201/iij.24484873e.2021.162.17072 
Blanca, M. J. C. (2022). Penalty determination system in Spanish criminal codification [Sistema de 
determinación  de  la  pena  en  la  codificación  penal  en  la  codificación  penal  española].  In 
Determinación y aplicación de la pena de prisión en sentido estricto. Teoría y práctica judicial 
[Determination and application of strict imprisonment: Theory and judicial practice] (1st ed., 
pp. 25-30). Dykinson, S.L. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2zp4t1q.6 
Cabrera-Cabrera, S. V., & Maldonado-Ordoñez, J. A. (2023). Análisis del sistema penal juvenil en la 
legislación de Ecuador y el nuevo paradigma de justicia restaurativa [Analysis of the juvenile 
criminal  system  in  Ecuadorian  legislation  and  the  new  paradigm  of  restorative  justice]. 
Revista de Derecho, 8
(2), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.47712/rd.2023.v8i2.227 
Calle-Tapia,  M.  D.  (2023).  Restorative  juvenile  justice:  Current  trends  and  its  impact  on  society 
[Restorative  juvenile  justice:  Tendencias  actuales  y  su  impacto  en  la  sociedad]. 
Andares: 
Journal  of  Human  and  Nature  Rights,  4
(2),  4-13. 
https://doi.org/10.32719/29536782.2023.2.1. 
https://doi.org/10.32719/29536782.2023.2.1 
Centelles, O., Castillo, I., & Buelga, S. (2021). La aceptación familiar y la conducta prosocial: El rol de 
los  factores  de  personalidad  en  menores  con  medidas  de  internamiento  judicial  [Family 
acceptance and prosocial behavior: The role of personality factors in minors under judicial 
internment  measures]. 
Anuario  de  Psicología  Jurídica,  31
(1),  91-99. 
https://doi.org/10.5093/apj2021a14. https://doi.org/10.5093/apj2021a14 

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

Childhood and Adolescence Code. Law 100. Registro Oficial, No. 737, January 3, 2003. Last

amendment: July 7, 2014.

Código Orgánico Integral Penal (COIP). Official Gazette Supplement No. 180 of February 10, 2014.

Last amendment: February 17, 2021.

Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador. Official Gazette, No. 449, October 20, 2008.

Corrales, L. M. (2022). Una aproximación al enfoque restaurativo en la justicia penal juvenil en España

y su efecto preventivo en la recicidencia [An approach to the restorative focus in juvenile

criminal justice in Spain and its preventive effect on recidivism]. In C. T. Fernández, W. J.

Rivero, & J. M. de la Serna Tuya (Eds.),

Claves y retos de una justicia del siglo XXI: Derechos,

garantías

y procedimientos

[Keys and challenges of 21st-century justice: Rights, guarantees,

and procedures] (1st ed., pp. 221-240). Dykinson, S.L.

https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2s0jcwk.14

Cortés-Torres, J. E. (2022). Bibliometric analysis of trends in legal and educational frameworks of the

juvenile criminal system [Análisis bibliométrico sobre las tendencias en marcos legales y

educativos del sistema penal juvenil [Bibliometric analysis of trends in legal and educational

frameworks of the juvenile criminal system].

Religación, 7

(34), e210970.

https://doi.org/10.46652/rgn.v7i34.970

Curbelo-Hernández, E. A. (2021). Dos décadas desde la entrada en vigor de la entrada en vigor de

la Ley Orgánica 5/2000: Una mirada al trabajo social forense desde una perspectiva o un

enfoque de derechos [Two decades since the entry into force of Organic Law 5/2000: A

look at forensic social work from a rights-based perspective].

Acciones e Investigaciones

Sociales, 41.

https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_ais/ais.2020415122

Díaz-Maroto, & Villarejo, J. (2023). La responsabilidad penal de los menores en España [Criminal

responsibility of minors in Spain].

Nuevo Foro Penal, 19

(101), 12-55.

https://doi.org/10.17230/nfp19.101.1

Fernández, C. F. (2022). El fenómeno de las redes sociales, los riesgos para la seguridad y la salud

de los menores y la nueva ley orgánica de protección integral de la infancia y adolescencia

frente la violencia [The phenomenon of social networks, risks to the safety and health of

minors, and the new organic law for the comprehensive protection of children and

adolescents against violence]. In

Los menores e internet. Risks and rights: Special

consideration of the new Organic Law 8/2021, of 4 June for the Comprehensive Protection

of Children and Adolescents against Violence

[Minors and the internet: Risks and rights.

Special consideration of the new Organic Law 8/2021, of June 4, for the Comprehensive

Protection of Children and Adolescents against Violence] (1st ed., pp. 21-48). J.M Bosch.

https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2zp4s0q.4

Gonzáles-Laurino, C. (2016). Modelos de justicia penal juvenil en debate a inicios del siglo XXI

[Models of juvenile criminal justice in debate at the beginning of the 21st century].

Revista

Quaestio Iuris, 9

(2), 652-669. https://doi.org/10.12957/rqi.2016.18008

González, C. V. (2024). Minority, non-imputability, and criminal responsibility [Minoría de edad,

inimputabilidad y responsabilidad penal]. In E. P. González & P. G. Seara (Eds.),

Violencia de

género en el ámbito de la justicia penal juvenil. Una visión iberoamericana

[Gender violence

in the field of juvenile criminal justice: An Ibero-American perspective] (1st ed., pp. 51-94).

Dykinson, S.L. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.22246987.5

González, E. P. (2024). Una justicia adecuada para los niños, niñas y adolescentes en conflicto con

la ley penal: Principios y garantías a la vista de la normativa internacional [An adequate

justice for children and adolescents in conflict with criminal law: Principles and guarantees

in light of international regulations]. In E. P. González & P. G. Seara (Eds.),

Violencia de

género en el ámbito de la justicia penal juvenil. Una visión iberoamericana

[Gender violence

 Verdad y Derecho   
Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales  
Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025 
Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España 
Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain 
Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso  
Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua 
Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay 
Natalia Pérez-Rivas 
 
 
41 
 
in the field of juvenile criminal justice: An Ibero-American perspective] (1st ed., pp. 17-50). 
Dykinson, S.L. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.22246987.4 
Horcajo-Gil, P. J., Dujo-López, V., Andreu-Rodríguez, J. M., & Marín-Rullán, M. (2019). Valoración y 
gestión  del  riesgo  de  reincidencia  delictiva  en  menores  infractores:  Una  revisión  de 
instrumentos [Assessment and management of recidivism risk in juvenile offenders: A review 
of  instruments]. 
Anuario  de  Psicología  Jurídica,  29
,  41-53. 
https://doi.org/10.5093/apj2018a15 
Lanzas-Iniesta, M. (2023). Adequacy and specialty of restorative justice in sexual crimes [Adequacy 
and specialty of restorative justice in sexual crimes]. In H. Soleto (Ed.), 
El sistema de justicia 
ante la victimización sexual 
[The justice system in the face of sexual victimization] (1st ed., 
pp. 1515-1564). Dykinson, S.L. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.5076291.37 
Lázaro-Pérez, M. del C. (2001). Análisis de la Ley Orgánica 5/2000, reguladora de la responsabilidad 
penal del menor [Analysis of Organic Law 5/2000, regulating the criminal responsibility of 
minors]. 
Anuario de Psicología Jurídica, 11
, 99-117. 
Organic Law 5/2000, of January 12, 2000, regulating the criminal responsibility of minors. Official 
State Bulletin (BOE), No. 11, January 13, 2000. 
Lobo, J. M. R. (2023). La protección de los menores en internet y redes sociales [The protection of 
minors on the internet and social networks]. In J. H. C. Suntura & V. S. Ortega (Eds.), 
La 
protección del menor: Un análisis desde las ciencias jurídicas 
[The protection of minors: An 
analysis  from  legal  sciences]  (1st  ed.,  pp.  237-254).  J.M  Bosch. 
https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.11786252.14 
Lorona-González, P., & Gende-Ruperti, C. (2025). Análisis del sistema de justicia penal adolescente 
en Ecuador: La necesidad de redefinir la minoría de edad [Analysis of the adolescent criminal 
justice system in Ecuador: The need to redefine the age of minority]. 
593 Digital Publisher 
CEIT, 10
(1), 18-28. https://doi.org/10.33386/593dp.2025.1.2888 
Luzón-Peña, D. M. (2022). Derecho de corrección a menores [Right of correction for minors]. 
Nuevo 
Foro Penal, 18
(99), 11-36. https://doi.org/10.17230/nfp18.99.1 
Márquez-Cárdenas, A. E. (2009). La doctrina social sobre la justicia restaurativa [The social doctrine 
on restorative justice]. 
Prolegomena. Derechos y Valores, XII
(24), 59-75. 
Mendoza-Tello, Z., Rojas-Lujan, V. W., & Tello-Yance, F. (2024). Fiscal remission and comprehensive 
reparation of the aggrieved under restorative justice. Revisión sistemática [Fiscal remission 
and comprehensive reparation of the victim according to restorative justice: A systematic 
review]. 
Cienciamatria.  Revista  Interdisciplinaria  de  Humanidades,  Educación,  Ciencia  y 
Tecnología, 10
(18), 89-102. https://doi.org/10.35381/cm.v10i18.1235 
Monar-Machoa, L. P. (2024). Sociology of juvenile criminal law: Critical perspectives on rehabilitation 
and restorative justice [Sociología del derecho penal juvenil: Perspectivas críticas sobre la 
rehabilitación y la justicia restaurativa]. 
Truth and Law. Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas 
y Sociales, 3
(2), 48-59. https://doi.org/10.62574/hbsamg92 
Perdigones,  J.  C.  V.,  &  del  Prato,  E.  (2024).  Civil  liability  of  parents:  State  of  jurisprudence 
[Responsabilidad  civil  de  los  progenitores:  Estado  de  la  jurisprudencia].  In  Progressive 
autonomy and civil liability of minors [Progressive autonomy and civil liability of minors] (1st 
ed., pp. 59-114). Dykinson, S.L. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.17381633.7 
Rimo, A. A. (2024). La justicia restaurativa en el ordenamiento jurídico español [Restorative justice 
in  the  Spanish  legal  system].  In 
El  diálogo  como  derecho.  Bases  para  la  concepción 
y 
aplicación de un modelo extensivo de justicia restaurativa 
[Dialogue as a right: Foundations 
for the conception and application of an extensive model of restorative justice] (1st ed., pp. 
91-122). Dykinson, S.L. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.13286092.9 

 Verdad y Derecho   
Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales  
Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025 
Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España 
Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain 
Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso  
Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua 
Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay 
Natalia Pérez-Rivas 
 
 
42 
 
Rojas,  C.  M.,  et  al.  (2020). Restorative  juvenile  justice  in  the  juvenile  justice  system  [Restorative 
juvenile justice in the juvenile justice system]. In 
Temas actuales en Derecho Penal 
[Current 
topics  in  criminal  law]  (1st  ed.,  pp.  269-304).  Universidad  del  Externado. 
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1rcdzpq.6 
Salazar, M. N. (2020). Conciliations in juvenile criminal justice: Socio-institutional frameworks and 
legal  sensitivities  [Conciliations  in  juvenile  criminal  justice: Tramas  socio-institucionales  y 
sensibilidades  legales]. 
Revista  nuestrAmérica,  8
(15),  75-100. 
https://www.jstor.org/stable/48697817. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48697817 
Seara,  P.  G.  (2024). La justicia penal  española ante  la violencia  de género ejercida  por menores 
[Spanish criminal justice in the face of gender violence perpetrated by minors]. In P. G. Seara 
& E. P. González (Eds.), 
Violencia de género en el ámbito de la justicia penal juvenil. Una 
visión  iberoamericana 
[Gender violence  in  the  field  of  juvenile  criminal  justice:  An  Ibero-
American  perspective]  (1st  ed.,  pp.  95-160).  Dykinson,  S.L. 
http://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.22246987.6 
Soto, T. M. (2021). Statistics on victims in the juvenile criminal process [Estadística sobre víctimas 
en el proceso penal de menores]. In E. P. González & T. F. Piay (Eds.), 
La víctima en el proceso 
penal  de menores. Tratamiento procesal  e intervención  socioeducativa 
[The victim  in  the 
juvenile criminal process: Procedural treatment and socio-educational intervention] (1st ed., 
pp. 39-64). Dykinson, S.L. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv2gz3wsm.5 
Suárez-Jácome, W. H., & Moreno-Martínez, J. A. (2024). La justicia restaurativa, un medio para tratar 
la  delincuencia  juvenil  en  Ecuador  [Restorative  justice:  A  means  to  address  juvenile 
delinquency  in  Ecuador]. 
MQRInvestigar,  8
(3),  2552-2590. 
https://doi.org/10.56048/MQR20225.8.3.2024.2552-2590. 
https://doi.org/10.56048/MQR20225.8.3.2024.2552-2590 
Vallejo-Valdivieso, P. A., Zambrano-Pincay, G.  H., Beltran-Aroca, C. M., & Girela-Lopez, E. (2022). 
Relationship between child abuse and delinquent behavior in male adolescents deprived of 
liberty. 
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19
(24), 16666. 
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192416666. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192416666. 
Vergara, J. P., & Fernández, A. M. (2024). La protección de la sexualidad de los menores de dieciséis 
años en el Código Penal español [The protection of the sexuality of minors under sixteen in 
the Spanish Penal Code]. In 
El delito de agresiones sexuales a menores de dieciséis años 
(Art. 181 CP) 
[The crime of sexual assaults on minors under sixteen (Art. 181 CP)] (1st ed., 
pp. 27-72). J.M Bosch. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.20522953.5 
Vidal-Herrero-Vior, M. S. (2015). Crítica al modelo de responsabilidad penal del menor en la Ley 
Orgánica 5/2000, de 12 de enero, reguladora de la responsabilidad penal de los menores: 
Hacia un "modelo social de responsabilidad" del menor infractor [Criticism of the juvenile 
criminal responsibility model in Organic Law 5/2000, of January 12, regulating the criminal 
responsibility  of  minors:  Towards  a  "social  responsibility  model"  for  juvenile  offenders] 
(Doctoral dissertation). Complutense University of Madrid, Spain. 
Villacreses-Briones,  T.  G.  (2023).  Interpretación  penal  y  constitucionalismo  ecuatoriano  [Criminal 
interpretation  and  Ecuadorian  constitutionalism]. 
Nuevo  Foro  Penal,  19
(101),  147-175. 
https://doi.org/10.17230/nfp19.101.4 
Villamar, R. M., Román, A. M. B., Sangama, Z. O., & Joo, A. A. R. (2024). Impacto de los programas 
de  resocialización  de  centros  penitenciarios  femeninos  latinoamericanos:  Una  revisión 
sistemática  de  literatura  [Impact  of  resocialization  programs  in  Latin  American  women's 
penitentiary centers: A systematic literature review]. 
Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 30
(3), 527-
552. 
 
 
 

Verdad y Derecho

Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Vol. 4(2), 11-43, 2025

Análisis comparativo sobre justicia restaurativa del sistema penal juvenil de Ecuador y España

Comparative analysis of restorative justice in the juvenile justice systems of Ecuador and Spain

Patricio Alfredo Vallejo-Valdivieso

Patricio Yosué Vallejo-Pilligua

Graciela Hernestina Zambrano-Pincay

Natalia Pérez-Rivas

the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) license.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/