FIASCO OF THE FORFEITURE OF OWNERSHIP

So flawed is the Law on Extinction of Ownership, promoted by some notoriety-obsessed assembly members, that the Constitutional Court has had to ratify the constitutional objections raised by President Moreno. In Opinion No. 1-21-OP/21, the constitutional judges state that both the imprescriptibility of the offenses and the retroactive application of the sanctions are legal absurdities that openly violate the constitutional rights to legal certainty and due process.

The promoters of the Law deceived Ecuadorians into believing that the legal framework was perfect and would allow corrupt officials to return what they had stolen. Many poorly informed journalists believed them and amplified their message so much that anyone who opposed the Law on Extinction of Ownership was considered a defender of those who stole from the public treasury. Amid suffocating public pressure, the Law was approved. Very few legislators, a handful, especially those with solid legal training, had the courage to question the content of the monstrosity. From Tungurahua, one assembly member protested loudly against the legislative package.

The misguided assembly members, who boasted of having promoted this legislative monstrosity, went so far as to say that "any activity contrary to the current legal order" should be considered an illicit activity, punishable by the loss of the perpetrator's assets. With this indeterminate and imprecise definition, the Constitutional Court warns that asset forfeiture could be applied to someone who donates land without judicial or notarial authorization, or to those who receive assets through a will executed without witnesses. A true absurdity.

With the imprescriptibility and retroactive application of the law, the Extinction of Ownership Law would have become a weapon at the service of persecution, without time limits, and with a predominantly civil procedure handled by criminal judges.

None of the law's proponents have come forward after the Constitutional Court's ruling. They have hidden themselves away in shame. Nor have the assembly members who staged spectacles of support for this monstrosity had the courage to speak out. And the media figures who crucified those who questioned the law remain silent.

Laws constitute the highest expression of public power. They establish the rules of conduct for those who are on the field as players and spectators. An abusive, flawed law destroys rights and, generally, gives the referee absolute power over people's property.