The paper investigates the issue of coupling the retroactive effect of procedural laws with objective or formal truth in criminal proceedings. In the context of the ever-increasing amendments introduced to the body of laws, the effect of criminal procedure laws in time is of particular relevance. While a standard principle dictates that criminal procedure law applies prospectively, the issue of making it retroactive continues to be a subject of debate. Based on an analysis of Russian legal authorities, law enforcement practice, and doctrinal positions, it is concluded that the decision on the retroactivity of law directly relates to the time of criminal proceedings. Drawing from the established thesis, the author developed a classification to divide the retroactive effect of procedural law into immanent retroactivity (before the judgement becomes final) and transcendental retroactivity (at the cassation and supervisory appeal stages). The paper proves that immanent retroactivity may be applied regardless of the concept of truth (objective or formal) recognized as the aim of criminal proceedings, subject to the constitutional principle of the inadmissibility of retroactivity of a law that worsens the status of individuals. Still, transcendental retroactivity remains permissible solely if the objective truth is recognized as the aim of legal proceedings. If the proceedings is aimed only at finding formal truth, there are no grounds for reviewing the case in light of the new law after the judgement becomes final.
Pavel S. Zapotylko (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: