Solanda Goyes, a former member of Ecuador's Consejo de la Judicatura (Judiciary Council), will appear at a hearing on Monday, September 14, starting at 14:00, where prosecutors will formally charge her with influence trafficking.
The request was filed on August 24 by Cristian Camacho Ortiz, a prosecutor with the Fe Pública Prosecutor's Office No. 6, almost a year after Goyes left her post as a member of the body that governs, administers, oversees and disciplines Ecuador's judicial branch.
Judge Viviana Campaña Terán of Pichincha province will preside over the case, in which Goyes is, for now, the only person facing prosecution. She and the lawyers who will represent her have already been notified.
According to Pichincha's Prosecutor's Office, a prior investigation had already been opened against Goyes and Margarita Carranco. Prosecutors said elements that emerged during that investigation point to Goyes' participation, as either perpetrator or accomplice, in the alleged influence trafficking.
Who is Solanda Goyes
Goyes served as national director of Access to Justice Services within the Judiciary Council from 2019 until February 2024, when she resigned that post to become a full member of the council. She took over the seat left vacant by Xavier Muñoz, who resigned after being charged in the Independencia Judicial case for obstruction of justice. Goyes held her seat on the council until September 2025.
Political trial that fell short
On August 12, 2025, a censure and removal motion against Goyes, then still a sitting council member, failed to gather enough votes to pass. It received 75 votes in favor, short of the 101 needed for the qualified majority required in Ecuador's National Assembly.
The impeachment effort was driven by assembly member Fernando Jaramillo, who argued that Goyes had failed to fulfil her duties by missing, without justification, a key Judiciary Council session. According to Jaramillo, that session was meant to approve regulations creating specialized courts and judges for constitutional matters, intended to curb the misuse of constitutional guarantees, particularly in cases tied to organized crime.
Jaramillo said Goyes also failed to attend four consecutive calls to reconvene the session, which he said delayed a high-impact ruling for the judicial system.
23 disciplinary cases lapsed
Separately, the current Judiciary Council plenary voted unanimously in July to send the National Assembly, the Comptroller General's Office and the Prosecutor's Office certified copies of 23 disciplinary files that lapsed due to a lack of quorum on the council, caused by the absences of Goyes while she was still a member. The lapsed cases are allegedly linked to corruption and organized crime, including the Metástasis and Purga criminal cases.
The decision was taken during an ordinary session on July 16, after the council adopted a recommendation from its General Directorate and its Legal Advisory Directorate. It agreed to send copies of the lapsed files to the three institutions so they could carry out their own investigations and political oversight, determine responsibility and prevent a repeat.
Santiago Peñaherrera, the Judiciary Council's director of Legal Advisory, said the Legal Advisory Directorate had recommended notifying the National Assembly that 23 disciplinary files had lapsed, so the legislature could act according to its constitutional and legal obligations. He said the information had also been sent to the Prosecutor's Office so it could investigate, within its own powers, the certificate submitted by Goyes, adding that the council itself had no legal authority to analyze that document since the criminal investigation fell to the Prosecutor's Office.
Concerns over lost cases
Council members also discussed the damage caused by the lapses. They noted that administrative sanctioning law serves two purposes: correcting the conduct of public servants, and making the principle of accountability effective by imposing sanctions so that wrongdoing does not go unpunished.
Peñaherrera said that among the 23 cases, one lapsed on July 10, 2025, and involved a Judiciary Council staff member accused of managing hiring and personnel access in coordination with a provincial council director. He said the lapse meant the merits of the case, which could have led to a removal sanction had wrongdoing been proven, could not be examined.
