What is the difference between procedural

and substantive law?

Procedural law provides the process that a case will go through (whether it goes to trial or not). The
procedural law determines how a proceeding concerning the enforcement of substantive law will
occur. Substantive law defines how the facts in the case will be handled, as well as how the crime is
to be charged. In essence, it deals with the substance of the matter. Even though both are affected
by Supreme Court opinions and subject to constitutional interpretations, each serves a different
function in the criminal justice system.
Some Basic Rules of Criminal Procedure
Procedural law is exactly what the name implies. It sets out the procedure for how a criminal case
will proceed. Every state has its own set of procedures which are usually written out in a set of rules
called a code of criminal procedure. The basic rules which most jurisdictions follow include:
1. An arrest must be based on probable cause;
2. A state or federal prosecutor files a charging instrument setting out what you are accused of
doing;
3. You are arraigned on the charges;
4. You advise the court whether or not you are seeking court-appointed counsel;
5. A bond amount will be set in your case;
6. You will be sent notice of a court appearance;
7. If you cannot reach a plea bargain agreement, then your case is set for a pre-trial and trial;
8. If you are convicted at trial, you have the right to appeal.
Punishment Systems Differ
How much detail is required for each phase of the criminal procedures will vary depending on the
nature of your charges and what agency is prosecuting you. For example, Texas has a bi-furcated
trial system where first you must be found guilty, and then the jury can hear punishment evidence. A
jury is given a range of punishment to assess in your case. The range of punishment for a first
degree felony is not less than five years and up to ninety-nine years or life. This is in stark contrast to
the federal procedural law. Federal judges assess punishment and are required to utilize federal
sentencing guidelines instead of a wide range system. A federal defendant’s criminal history will be
researched and summarized in a report by a federal probation officer. It’s much easier to predict
what your sentence will be in the federal system because the punishment procedures are based on
a point system.

Substantive Law and Elements

Substantive law, on the other hand, deals with the “substance” of your charges. Every charge is
comprised of elements. Elements are the specific acts needed to complete a crime. Substantive law
requires that the prosecutor prove every element of a crime in order for someone to be convicted of
that crime. What elements are required will depend on the crime with which you are charged and the
state’s substantive laws. For example, for a felony driving while intoxicated charge, most states
require prosecutors to prove that:

1. You were driving or operating a motor vehicle;

 2. On a public roadway;
3. While you were intoxicated;
4. And that you have prior convictions for driving while intoxicated.
In New Mexico, the prosecutor must show that you have previously been convicted three times for
driving while intoxicated, while substantive law in Texas only requires the prosecutor to prove two
prior convictions.

Because substantive law and procedural laws vary by state, and sometimes even by county, make
sure you consult with an experienced criminal law attorney in your jurisdiction if you are charged with
a crime. They will be more familiar with the rules and can help you invoke the protections outlined in
the procedural and substantive laws of your state.
Procedural law provides the process that a case will go through (whether it goes to trial or not). The
procedural law determines how a proceeding concerning the enforcement of substantive law will
occur. Substantive law defines how the facts in the case will be handled, as well as how the crime is
to be charged. In essence, it deals with the substance of the matter. Even though both are affected
by Supreme Court opinions and subject to constitutional interpretations, each serves a different
function in the criminal justice system.
Some Basic Rules of Criminal Procedure
Procedural law is exactly what the name implies. It sets out the procedure for how a criminal case
will proceed. Every state has its own set of procedures which are usually written out in a set of rules
called a code of criminal procedure. The basic rules which most jurisdictions follow include:
1. An arrest must be based on probable cause;
2. A state or federal prosecutor files a charging instrument setting out what you are accused of
doing;
3. You are arraigned on the charges;
4. You advise the court whether or not you are seeking court-appointed counsel;
5. A bond amount will be set in your case;
6. You will be sent notice of a court appearance;
7. If you cannot reach a plea bargain agreement, then your case is set for a pre-trial and trial;
8. If you are convicted at trial, you have the right to appeal.
Punishment Systems Differ
How much detail is required for each phase of the criminal procedures will vary depending on the
nature of your charges and what agency is prosecuting you. For example, Texas has a bi-furcated
trial system where first you must be found guilty, and then the jury can hear punishment evidence. A
jury is given a range of punishment to assess in your case. The range of punishment for a first
degree felony is not less than five years and up to ninety-nine years or life. This is in stark contrast to
the federal procedural law. Federal judges assess punishment and are required to utilize federal
sentencing guidelines instead of a wide range system. A federal defendant’s criminal history will be
researched and summarized in a report by a federal probation officer. It’s much easier to predict
what your sentence will be in the federal system because the punishment procedures are based on
a point system.

Substantive Law and Elements

Substantive law, on the other hand, deals with the “substance” of your charges. Every charge is
comprised of elements. Elements are the specific acts needed to complete a crime. Substantive law
requires that the prosecutor prove every element of a crime in order for someone to be convicted of
that crime. What elements are required will depend on the crime with which you are charged and the
state’s substantive laws. For example, for a felony driving while intoxicated charge, most states
require prosecutors to prove that:

1. You were driving or operating a motor vehicle;

2. On a public roadway;
3. While you were intoxicated;
4. And that you have prior convictions for driving while intoxicated.
In New Mexico, the prosecutor must show that you have previously been convicted three times for
driving while intoxicated, while substantive law in Texas only requires the prosecutor to prove two
prior convictions.

Because substantive law and procedural laws vary by state, and sometimes even by county, make
sure you consult with an experienced criminal law attorney in your jurisdiction if you are charged with
a crime. They will be more familiar with the rules and can help you invoke the protections outlined in
the procedural and substantive laws of your state.
Procedural law provides the process that a case will go through (whether it goes to trial or not). The
procedural law determines how a proceeding concerning the enforcement of substantive law will
occur. Substantive law defines how the facts in the case will be handled, as well as how the crime is
to be charged. In essence, it deals with the substance of the matter. Even though both are affected
by Supreme Court opinions and subject to constitutional interpretations, each serves a different
function in the criminal justice system.
Some Basic Rules of Criminal Procedure
Procedural law is exactly what the name implies. It sets out the procedure for how a criminal case
will proceed. Every state has its own set of procedures which are usually written out in a set of rules
called a code of criminal procedure. The basic rules which most jurisdictions follow include:
1. An arrest must be based on probable cause;
2. A state or federal prosecutor files a charging instrument setting out what you are accused of
doing;
3. You are arraigned on the charges;
4. You advise the court whether or not you are seeking court-appointed counsel;
5. A bond amount will be set in your case;
6. You will be sent notice of a court appearance;
7. If you cannot reach a plea bargain agreement, then your case is set for a pre-trial and trial;
8. If you are convicted at trial, you have the right to appeal.
Punishment Systems Differ
How much detail is required for each phase of the criminal procedures will vary depending on the
nature of your charges and what agency is prosecuting you. For example, Texas has a bi-furcated
trial system where first you must be found guilty, and then the jury can hear punishment evidence. A
jury is given a range of punishment to assess in your case. The range of punishment for a first
degree felony is not less than five years and up to ninety-nine years or life. This is in stark contrast to
the federal procedural law. Federal judges assess punishment and are required to utilize federal
sentencing guidelines instead of a wide range system. A federal defendant’s criminal history will be
researched and summarized in a report by a federal probation officer. It’s much easier to predict
what your sentence will be in the federal system because the punishment procedures are based on
a point system.

Substantive Law and Elements

Substantive law, on the other hand, deals with the “substance” of your charges. Every charge is
comprised of elements. Elements are the specific acts needed to complete a crime. Substantive law
requires that the prosecutor prove every element of a crime in order for someone to be convicted of
that crime. What elements are required will depend on the crime with which you are charged and the
state’s substantive laws. For example, for a felony driving while intoxicated charge, most states
require prosecutors to prove that:

1. You were driving or operating a motor vehicle;

2. On a public roadway;
3. While you were intoxicated;
4. And that you have prior convictions for driving while intoxicated.
In New Mexico, the prosecutor must show that you have previously been convicted three times for
driving while intoxicated, while substantive law in Texas only requires the prosecutor to prove two
prior convictions.

Because substantive law and procedural laws vary by state, and sometimes even by county, make
sure you consult with an experienced criminal law attorney in your jurisdiction if you are charged with
a crime. They will be more familiar with the rules and can help you invoke the protections outlined in
the procedural and substantive laws of your state.

Substantive law is the set of laws that governs how members of a society are to behave.[1] It is
contrasted with procedural law, which is the set of procedures for making, administering, and
enforcing substantive law.[1] Substantive law defines rights and responsibilities in civil law,
and crimes and punishments in criminal law.[1] It may be codified in statutes or exist
through precedent in common law.

Procedural law, adjective law, in some jurisdictions referred to as remedial law, or rules of

court comprises the rules by which a court hears and determines what happens
in civil, lawsuit, criminal or administrative proceedings. The rules are designed to ensure a fair and
consistent application of due process (in the U.S.) or fundamental justice (in other common
law countries) to all cases that come before a court.
Substantive law, which refers to the actual claim and defense whose validity is tested through the
procedures of procedural law, is different from procedural law.
In the context of procedural law, procedural rights may also refer not exhaustively to rights to
information, access to justice, and rights to public participation, with those rights encompassing,
general civil and political rights. In environmental law, these procedural Rights have been reflected
within the UNECE Convention on "Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making
and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters" known as the Aarhus Convention (1998).
Legal procedure[edit]
Although different legal processes aim to resolve many kinds of legal disputes, the legal procedures
share some common features. All legal procedure, for example, is concerned with due process.
Absent very special conditions, a court can not impose a penalty - civil or criminal - against an
individual who has not received notice of a lawsuit being brought against them, or who has not
received a fair opportunity to present evidence for themselves.
The standardization for the means by which cases are brought, parties are informed, evidence is
presented, and facts are determined is intended to maximize the fairness of any proceeding.
Nevertheless, strict procedural rules have certain drawbacks. For example, they impose specific
time limitations upon the parties that may either hasten or (more frequently) slow down the pace of
proceedings. Furthermore, a party who is unfamiliar with procedural rules may run afoul of
guidelines that have nothing to do with the merits of the case, and yet the failure to follow these
guidelines may severely damage the party's chances. Procedural systems are constantly torn
between arguments that judges should have greater discretion in order to avoid the rigidity of the
rules, and arguments that judges should have less discretion in order to avoid an outcome based
more on the personal preferences of the judge than on the law or the facts.
Legal procedure, in a larger sense, is also designed to effect the best distribution of judicial
resources. For example, in most courts of general jurisdiction in the United States, criminal cases
are given priority over civil cases, because criminal defendants stand to lose their freedom, and
should therefore be accorded the first opportunity to have their case heard.

Legal procedure[edit]
Although different legal processes aim to resolve many kinds of legal disputes, the legal procedures
share some common features. All legal procedure, for example, is concerned with due process.
Absent very special conditions, a court can not impose a penalty - civil or criminal - against an
individual who has not received notice of a lawsuit being brought against them, or who has not
received a fair opportunity to present evidence for themselves.
The standardization for the means by which cases are brought, parties are informed, evidence is
presented, and facts are determined is intended to maximize the fairness of any proceeding.
Nevertheless, strict procedural rules have certain drawbacks. For example, they impose specific
time limitations upon the parties that may either hasten or (more frequently) slow down the pace of
proceedings. Furthermore, a party who is unfamiliar with procedural rules may run afoul of
guidelines that have nothing to do with the merits of the case, and yet the failure to follow these
guidelines may severely damage the party's chances. Procedural systems are constantly torn
between arguments that judges should have greater discretion in order to avoid the rigidity of the
rules, and arguments that judges should have less discretion in order to avoid an outcome based
more on the personal preferences of the judge than on the law or the facts.
Legal procedure, in a larger sense, is also designed to effect the best distribution of judicial
resources. For example, in most courts of general jurisdiction in the United States, criminal cases
are given priority over civil cases, because criminal defendants stand to lose their freedom, and
should therefore be accorded the first opportunity to have their case heard.

Legal procedure[edit]
Although different legal processes aim to resolve many kinds of legal disputes, the legal procedures
share some common features. All legal procedure, for example, is concerned with due process.
Absent very special conditions, a court can not impose a penalty - civil or criminal - against an
individual who has not received notice of a lawsuit being brought against them, or who has not
received a fair opportunity to present evidence for themselves.
The standardization for the means by which cases are brought, parties are informed, evidence is
presented, and facts are determined is intended to maximize the fairness of any proceeding.
Nevertheless, strict procedural rules have certain drawbacks. For example, they impose specific
time limitations upon the parties that may either hasten or (more frequently) slow down the pace of
proceedings. Furthermore, a party who is unfamiliar with procedural rules may run afoul of
guidelines that have nothing to do with the merits of the case, and yet the failure to follow these
guidelines may severely damage the party's chances. Procedural systems are constantly torn
between arguments that judges should have greater discretion in order to avoid the rigidity of the
rules, and arguments that judges should have less discretion in order to avoid an outcome based
more on the personal preferences of the judge than on the law or the facts.
Legal procedure, in a larger sense, is also designed to effect the best distribution of judicial
resources. For example, in most courts of general jurisdiction in the United States, criminal cases
are given priority over civil cases, because criminal defendants stand to lose their freedom, and
should therefore be accorded the first opportunity to have their case heard.

Procedural law consists of the set of rules that govern the proceedings

of the court in criminal lawsuits as well as civil and administrative
proceedings. The court needs to conform to the standards setup by
procedural law, while during the proceedings. These rules ensure fair
practice and consistency in the "due process".
Substantive law is a statutory law that deals with the legal relationship
between people or the people and the state. Therefore, substantive law
defines the rights and duties of the people, but procedural law lays
down the rules with the help of which they are enforced. The
differences between the two need to be studied in greater detail, for
better understanding.
Comparison chart

Procedural Law versus Substantive Law comparison chart

Procedural Law Substantive Law

Definition Deals with and lays down the ways and Deals with those areas of law which establish the
means by which substantive law can be rights and obligations of individuals , what
enforced individuals may or may not do

Powers No independent powers Independent powers to decide the fate of a case

Application Can be applied in non legal contexts Cannot be applied in non legal contexts

Regulation By statutory law By Act of Parliament or goverment implemation

 Contents: Procedural Law vs Substantive Law
 1 Differences in Structure and Content
 2 Powers of Substantive vs. Procedural Laws
 3 Differences in Application
 4 Example
 5 References

Differences in Structure and Content

In order to understand the differences between the structure and content of
substantative and procedural law, let's use an example. If a person is accused
and undergoing a trial, substantive law prescribes the punishment that the
under-trial will face if convicted. Substantative law also defines the types of
crimes and the severity depending upon factors such as whether the person is a
repeat offender, whether it is a hate crime, whether it was self-defense etc. It
also defines the responsibilities and rights of the accused.
Procedural law, on the other hand, provides the state with the machinery to
enforce the substantive laws on the people. Procedural law comprises the rules
by which a court hears and determines what happens
in civil or criminal proceedings. Procedural law deals with the method and
means by which substantive law is made and administered. In other words,
substantive law deals with the substance of the case, how the charges are to be
handled and how the facts are to be dealt with; while procedural law will give a
step by step action plan on how the case is supposed to proceed in order to
achieve the desired goals. Therefore its procedural law that helps decide
whether the case requires trial or otherwise.

Powers of Substantive vs. Procedural Laws

Substantive law is an independent set of laws that decide the fate of a case. It
can actually decide the fate of the under-trial, whether he wins or loses and even
the compensation amounts etc. Procedural laws on the other hand, have no
independent existence. Therefore, procedural laws only tell us how the legal
process is to be executed, whereas substantive laws have the power to offer
legal solution.

Differences in Application
Another important difference lies in the applications of the two. Procedural laws
are applicable in non legal contexts, whereas substantive laws are not. So,
basically the essential substance of a trial is underlined by substantive law,
whereas procedural law chalks out the steps to get there.
Example
An example of substantive law is how degrees of murder are defined.
Depending upon the circumstances and whether the muderer had the intent to
commit the crime, the same act of homicide can fall under different levels of
punishment. This is defined in the statute and is substantive law.
Examples of procedural laws include the time allowed for one party to sue
another and the rules governing the process of the lawsuit.