Well before commenting on that we should understand the Basic Jurisprudence
Procedural laws, unlike substantive laws, can generally be applied retrospectively. This means that new procedural rules can apply to cases arising from past events.
The rationale behind this is that procedural laws don't affect a person's rights or obligations, but rather the way legal proceedings are conducted.
These changes are usually seen as beneficial as they aim to improve the efficiency and fairness of the legal system.
There can be some exceptions to this rule, however.
For instance, if a new procedural law would significantly prejudice a party's rights in a pending case, it might not be applied retrospectively.
What Thinkers Say!!
John Locke (Empiricist philosopher): Locke believed in the idea of natural rights and that laws should be clear and promulgated beforehand. He might have been skeptical of applying procedural changes retroactively, as it could create uncertainty and potentially infringe on pre-existing rights.
Montesquieu (Enlightenment thinker): Montesquieu emphasized the separation of powers and the importance of checks and balances within a legal system. He likely would have supported the idea of procedural reforms being applied retrospectively if they improved the fairness and impartiality of the judicial process.
Jeremy Bentham (Utilitarian philosopher): Bentham's focus on the greatest good for the greatest number might lead him to endorse the retrospective application of procedural laws that promote efficiency and justice in the legal system.
These are just a few examples, and there's ongoing debate about the appropriate limits of retroactivity in procedural law.
An advocate can certainly argue for their case to be tried under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). This may be debatable in higher courts, as some senior advocates possess deep knowledge of older procedural laws and extensive experience in applying them to cases.
The Basics:
Substantive law and procedural law
Both are two essential components of any legal system.
Substantive law defines the rights and duties of individuals and entities. It outlines what is legal or illegal and the corresponding penalties for violations.
Examples of substantive law include criminal law, contract law, and property law.
Procedural law, on the other hand, establishes the rules and procedures for enforcing substantive law. It dictates how disputes are settled in courts, from filing a lawsuit to presenting evidence and appeals.
Examples of procedural law include rules of civil procedure and criminal procedure.
In simpler terms, substantive law tells you what the law is, while procedural law tells you how the law is applied.
Thanks for Visiting!!
(Blog is still under thought process, I will update it with time)
Comments