The burden of proof in labor proceedings: an evaluation from the constitutional perspective in Bolivia (2019-2024)

Abstract

This article presents a comprehensive analysis of the distribution of the burden of proof in labor proceedings in Bolivia, with a particular focus on its influence on the protection of workers’ fundamental rights. It begins with an examination of the principle of proportionality as a key parameter in evaluating procedural fairness between parties, arguing that an unfair allocation of the burden of proof can result in a disproportionate restriction on the right to defense and effective access to justice.

The study reveals that the Bolivian judiciary still faces significant deficiencies in applying this principle, often placing an excessive evidentiary burden on workers, especially when employers hold exclusive control over relevant labor documentation. It argues that probative subrogation should be understood not merely as a procedural exception, but as a constitutional mandate derived from the State’s duty to ensure substantive equality before the law.

The article also emphasizes the employer’s active role in the production of evidence, suggesting that the omission or refusal to submit relevant records should be interpreted against them. Several proposals are offered to promote procedural equity: strengthening judicial training in fundamental rights, updating regulatory frameworks in accordance with international standards, and implementing evidentiary protocols grounded in a rights-based approach.

The article concludes that achieving a balanced redistribution of the burden of proof is essential to building a constitutionally guided labor justice system—one that is genuinely protective of workers’ rights and consistent with the principles of social justice and due process.