The intentional omission in embezzlement and impact on public administration in Ecuador

Abstract

The objective set forth here is, following a legal analysis of intentional omission in the context of the crime of Embezzlement in Ecuador: To argue the need to implement a reform in Article 28 of the Comprehensive Organic Criminal Code, so that it clearly describes the possibility of timely and effective sanctioning of public officials who engage in this conduct concerning the crime of Embezzlement. Within Ecuadorian legislation, there is an issue regarding the ability to sanction public officials who, despite holding specific positions of responsibility, fail to fulfill their legal obligation to prevent and avoid the commission of Embezzlement, engaging in intentional omission. This form of typicity is not classified as a crime in Ecuador, and that's fine, as it acts as a general rule and, therefore, would apply to the entire criminal process and to all criminal offenses if the need arises. However, it is necessary to expand the article that foresees it, so that it is clear what it consists of and how it can be technically treated. To do this, a qualitative approach is employed using scientific methods such as analytical, inductive, and exegetic.