Rebellion in Guatemalan Labor Law

Rebellion

• Origins trace back to Roman Law, presenting characteristics distinct from contemporary Guatemalan law yet sharing similar effects in Procedural Labor Law.
• In Roman Law, rebellion equaled condemnation, leading the judge to grant the plaintiff the object of the dispute and order the defendant to pay additional compensation for being declared rebellious.
• Roman Law required that the judicial citation reached the interested party and their non-appearance was voluntary, viewing the defendant's absence as an attempt to evade trial due to lack of defense.
• Guillermo Cabanellas defines rebellion as "The deliberate absence of one of the parties from the judicial process to undermine its contradictory nature, assuming consequences for the absent party against whom the trial proceeds, and the sentence is dictated without allowing any intervention after being declared rebellious."
• In Guatemalan Labor Law, rebellion is defined as the attitude of the defendant against their obligation to appear in court to respond to the lawsuit against them, by not appearing on the day and time set for the oral trial, despite being warned that their non-appearance will be detrimental.

Legal Nature of Rebellion

• Rebellion represents one of the possible attitudes a defendant may adopt towards the obligation to appear in court to answer the lawsuit.
• As a procedural institution, it can arise during the process and cause legal consequences for the parties.
• Therefore, its legal nature is eminently procedural.
• For rebellion to be consummated, the defendant must have been notified according to law, observing the notification regulations established in Articles 327 to 329 of the Labor Code, ensuring the minimum period between notification and the first appearance for oral trial, as per Article 337.
• Furthermore, the defendant must not appear on the day and time set for the oral trial, thus failing to comply with the warning that imposes the obligation to appear in court, even against their will.
• The defendant must not present justification for not attending the oral trial, as stipulated in Article 336 of the Labor Code, justifying their absence in the manner expressly prescribed by law.
• Failure to legally justify the absence will lead to a declaration of rebellion in the trial.
• When these three conditions converge, rebellion is considered complete, leading to serious and generally irreversible consequences for the defendant.

Effects of Rebellion

• The effect of rebellion is outlined in Article 358 of the Labor Code, resulting in the termination of the process through a ruling by the labor and social welfare judge within forty-eight hours after the deadline for the defendant to justify their absence.
• The defendant is declared rebellious and ordered to comply with the plaintiff's claims.
• The effect observed in Roman Law parallels the institution of rebellion.
• Labor Law, the consequences extend beyond immediate termination, ensuring the defendant complies with the plaintiff's demands.
• It is important to analyze how burdensome it is for the defendant to be declared rebellious and convicted, because although they retain the right to appeal the sentence, the consequences are almost always irreversible.
• By not appearing at the first hearing, the defendant loses the ability to respond to the lawsuit and to present evidence to support their arguments.
• If the defendant were to oppose the plaintiff's claims, failing to appear would mean losing the chance to respond negatively and to offer counter-evidence, since both procedural actions take place within the first hearing.
• Although the defendant retains the appeal right, it would focus on procedural matters without substantial grounds for review due to the defendant's non-participation in the first instance.
• The only way to revert the effects of a sentence dictated in the defendant's rebellion involves the introduction of an exception that arose after the lawsuit response, which by its nature, can be asserted in the second instance to extinguish the rights claimed by the plaintiff, for the revision of the stated sentence will be permitted.
• This requires the existence of exceptions like payment, statute of limitations, or res judicata, which, due to their privileged nature, can be promoted as arising after the lawsuit is answered and can reverse the sentence dictated by rebellion.
• Still, for the defendant in default is difficult since in most cases the defendant failed to appear at the hearing because they wanted to and not because they were truly unable to do so.

Ficta Confessio

• Ficta confessio originates from judicial confession evidence, compelling the confessing party to answer positions directed at them, without consulting or using related documents.
• The fictitious nature lies in the assumption of the confessing party's admission due to not appearing on the day and time designated by the judge to provide judicial confession.
• Ficta confessio can thus be defined as the consequence of the defendant's refusal to appear for judicial confession, fictitiously assuming the defendant has admitted or acknowledged the truth of the facts that are the object of the litigation against them.
• As one of the possible attitudes a defendant can adopt towards the obligation to appear in court and answer the lawsuit, ficta confessio is a procedural institution that can arise during the process and cause legal consequences for the parties.
• Its legal nature is entirely procedural.

Legal Nature of Rebellion

• The procedural concept implies disobedience or non-appearance by a party in a judicial process, despite being duly cited.
• Rebellion has significant effects on the development of the process and the decisions of the court, mainly affecting civil and criminal processes.
• Determining the legal nature of rebellion involves establishing the essence of this figure, derived if from an obligation or duty to attend court, or a fine or special type of sanction is involved.
• For some, it is disobedience, a failure to heed or comply with a burden, rather than a breach of duty.
• Regardless, rebellion should be regarded as a procedural intuition, aimed at preventing the process from stalling due to the passivity or inactivity of the procedural subjects in the trial.
• Rebellion has a procedural nature as a phenomenon occurring within the scope of judicial procedure, not constituting a criminal act or infraction but a breach of the procedural obligations of a party in a trial.
• The breach relates to the obligation to appear before the court or present an adequate defense within the process.
• The civil procedural code adopts an intermediate position, not considering answering the claim an obligation but a procedural burden.
• Failure to answer leads to a declaration of rebellion.
• Rebellion serves as a formal recognition that flight obstructs criminal prosecution, resulting in an arrest warrant and measures to prevent the person from leaving the country.
• Personal data of the rebel can be published in the media to aid apprehension.

More on Rebellion

• Rebellion is studied in legal theory regarding the burdens and duties of the parties with emphasis on the procedural burden of appearance that falls solely on the defendant.
• Absence leads to the immediate consequence of being declared in default.
• Relating to the principle of audience and contradiction, it prevents halting the process.
• It protects the judicial protection of the actor, by giving the possibility for the defendant to be heard.
• It was created as an answer to the damages that the contradiction principle may cause, being necessary to listen to the parties to avoid being unable to keep going in the trial.
• The protection of the one who was not located would lead to the sacrifice of the judicial protection of the one who was acting in good faith.
• The defendant is given the opportunity to be defended; it is not considered that the defendant did not wish to fulfill the obligation, because it gave the opportunity for them to defend themselves.
• Despite not being present, the defendant will be part of the process, and everything that happens falls under this part.
• The rebellion does not go beyond being a situation of a legal nature and can only be generated when the defendant doesn't show up.

Rebellion and Ficta Confessio

• Rebellion is the attitude of the defendant to not attack legal requests, and it is present when they do not show up or does not manifest acceptance.
• Guillermo Cabanellas defines rebellion as: "The deliberate absence of one of the parties to undermine its contradictory nature assuming the effects."
• For rebellion to be complete, it must be consummated. The following requirements must be met:
• The defendant had to be legally notified.
• Despite being notified, the defendant does not show up or arrives late to the hearing.
• The defendant does not present an excuse that the law establishes, for his absence before the hearing.
• Rebellion and fictitious confession are not the same because the first one results from non-appearance and the second consists in the recognition of the events by the plaintiff, like with absolution positions offered by the other party. The judge must value the evasiveness of the defendant; it is not a premise, but an attitude assumed by the defendant.

Confessio Ficta (Continued):

• Confessio ficta occurs when the defendant is obliged to plead or acquit positions personally and not through an agent and does not appear and the same assumptions of rebellion occur.
• Landelino Franco López states that the effects of confessio ficta is even serious, because it assumed guilt in all aspects in which he would be interrogated when acquitting the positions, losing the right to offer evidence.
• Article 358 of the Labor Code states: "When the defendant does notappear and he has been legally called to say judicial confession".
• Requirements of confessio ficta include:
• The judge has set a day and time for the hearing and an interrogation has been presented within the process.
• The resolution where the hearing was set has notified the defendant.
• The defendant has been legally notified but does not show up it refuses to respond without justifying the cause.
• effects of confessio ficta are dictated by the 335 article of the Labor Code, stating that when a defendant does not show up, the Trial will continue in rebellion without stating or hearing; giving sense to consequence of the statement. The plaintiff will have to propose test of judicial confession.

Effects of Rebellion

• Rebellion can have different legal effects and negative consequences depending on the environment.
• A judge is the one who rules in the indicated time. According to the subject the effects can be the following:
  • The judge can declare the defendant confess in court.
• In a criminal case, the benefits of freedom that had been granted to the accused are revoked. The accused also has the obligation to pay cost.
• Also, the defendant can be raided to secure that will show up to the trial.
• Ordinary work cases:
• It is impossible for the rebel to propose evidence.
• The process will continue, without contacting the rebel.
• In case that the actor has judicial confession evidence, the confession will be dictated.
• The time to dictate the sentence goes for 48 hours. Economic sanctions can be imposed.
• Claims can be made to the Minister of Labour.

Justification of Non-Appearance

• Justification: from Latin Iustificatio, action and effect of justifying.
• In-Appearance: absence to a place that must be present. For example, there is a legal excuse to bad or damage caused. A person can show innocence by showing founded right.
• In the Labor environment we can see that there is justification based on two points: relation with without attending to the job without a valid justification, and how those situations have legal implications for the employee.
• According Labor Code of Guatelama, in-appearance can be considered as a work fault can that can lead to sanctions.
• Can just cause the in- appearance some of these include:
  • Illness: a temporary illness that causes a worker to attend the job. Is required a medical certificate.
  • Accident: Labor accident or personal.
• Family obligations: Situations like family death.
• Major events: Imprevist events such as natural disasters.
• For an unjustified in-absence can follow certain procedures:
  • Notification: the worker must notify of their not showing up as soon as possible, preferring before the work day begins.
• Documentation: the present or documented situation must be presentable or credible.

Conclusion

• Plazo: Is important that the justification present must be reasonable.
• The unjustified in-appearance has diverse consequences:
  • Sanctions: Can vary from admonition to dismissal.
  • Loss of rights.
• The reason can be external or because of the defendant, the defendant must just provide it to the judge two hours before. It must justified.
• The fact that the in-appearance happens in Guatemala, means that a part will not attend because either the defendant or the authoritative competent did not attend.
• It is stipulated that the party the does not show up must justify themself not to affect their rights, which implies that there are justified reasons, such as sickness, accidents, and the force.
• An accepted justification cause be that sickness or another reasonable justification to the judgment's value.
• The right to defense is constitutional. Lack of justification or not attendance may compromise the rights of the missing part. Which leads to limited evidence to make claims and limited hearing.
• Non-presence is that generating against the not attended, affecting its defense opportunity.
• The judge has the value to show presence in the case.
• Showing causes in its value and impact that may cause that absence. Since a case depends on several perspectives and the discretional way is what will show if justified or note.