Neutrosophic assessment of evidence in cases of divorce due to adultery: An application of the OWA-TOPSIS model to the evidentiary obstacle in the Ecuadorian legal system

The current research resolves an internal issue of the Ecuadorian legal system: the assessment of evidence for divorce by adultery, an unjust approach since it cannot always be evidenced properly. Thus, when judges have the power to rule, their authority is compromised since one of the most crucial elements of adjudicatory due process is equity, and equity stems from objectivity. Unfortunately, we see subjectivity here stemming from the uncertainty and indeterminacy relative to such evidence. While much literature exists relative to the analysis of judicial determination, little evolution occurs relative to a solid approach that incorporates such uncertainty and indeterminacy relative to evidence used within judicial family matters. Thus, we propose an approach via neutrosophic OWA-TOPSIS model parameters. This is a novel contribution to family justice jurisdiction as it allows all ambiguity and uncertainty to be assessed objectively via wafts or evincing legitimizing explanations. For example, we use a case study where we fuzzify the evidence—chats, behavior, testimonials—and convert them to levels of truth, indeterminacy, and falsity. Then, following this neutrosophic approach, we assess competing hypotheses for adultery based on neutrosophic evidence and provide a distinct ranking of options. We contribute to the literature both theoretically and practically. Theoretically, we provide a multi-criteria judicial investigatory measure where none existed before; practically, we provide the judge/lawyer an unimpeachable solution with which complicated assessments can be calculated with greater judicial efficiency and effectiveness in less time and converted into assessment criteria that lessen the evidentiary threshold which for years has caused too much debate in Ecuadorian family justice.