-i- TO THE SUBROGATE PRESIDENT OF THE ... - Chevron

which, according to Santiago Andrade Ubidia, give “a new role to the judge, as
guarantor of . . . the rights and guarantees established in the Constitution.” 306 In this
trial, each and every one of these basic guarantees has been violated or ignored
throughout this lawsuit, as shown and summarized below.
As discussed here, Chevron has been denied its right to due process through a
pattern of unlawful, improper, and unfair orders that should be declared null and void.
These orders lack the necessary reasoning and have deprived Chevron of its basic
entitlement to defend itself before independent and impartial judges. Among the most
egregious of these orders was that of August 2, 2010, at 9:00 a.m., in which the judge,
using the ploy of ruling sua sponte, arbitrarily and without stating the reasons for his
decision, ordered the parties to file an unlawful "legal brief" on the economic criteria and
the economic valuation for repairing the (alleged) "damage." The provisions of that
order not only indisputably constituted malfeasance of office by the judge, which cannot
be covered up, through which a priori, and before issuing a judgment, he not only took
for granted the very existence of the alleged damage that were supposed to be
evaluated, but also, through the supposed, poorly defined "legal brief" he created ad
hoc a new procedural step, which is not provided for in the law, through which not only
has an attempt has been made to cover up and dismiss the plaintiffs' malfeasance, bad
faith and fraud and the nullities that remove any weight from the evidence produced by
the plaintiffs through the judicial inspections and the global expert assessment, but that
order also validated, with the judge's active participation, the plaintiffs' attempt to
surreptitiously reintroduce their fabricated evidence, to “paper over” the procedural fraud
they had committed through expert reports that were falsified and the supposedly
independent expert, Mr. Cabrera, whose “independent” report they secretly authored.
In doing so, the judge cemented the constitutional violations my client has suffered as a
result of the fraud that has permeated this trial, as discussed in Chapter II, supra. In
addition to denying my client the right to be tried in accordance with the rule of law,
these serial violations of due process constitute nullities that require the entire
proceeding to be declared null and void. See infra Chapter IV.
3.1 The August 2, 2010 Providencia at 9:00 a.m. and the Submissions It
Authorized Violate Due Process and Aggravate the Fraud That Has
Pervaded These Proceedings
In response to the evidence of the plaintiffs' malfeasance and procedural fraud
detailed above, supra §§ 2.1, 2.2, which was reported to this Court in numerous
motions requesting action, Judge Ordóñez not only failed to terminate this action or
sanction the plaintiffs in any way for their evident and egregious misconduct intended
to deceive this Court in the manner that would be proper in this case, nor has he sent
copies of the record to the Prosecutor so that these crimes can be investigated and
punished; rather, he unexpectedly accepted the plaintiffs’ petition to invent a novel
306 ANDRADE UBIDIA, Santiago, The Judicial Branch in the current Constitution of the Republic,
published in The New Constitution of Ecuador: The State, Rights, and Institutions, Editorial Corporación
Editora Nacional, Quito, 2009, p. 240.
CERT. INTERMARK VER: JD
- 77 -