Every procedural criminal system aims to guaranty the right of a state in punishing offenders and protecting the innocents, because the aim of this system is to reveal the truth using simplified and quick procedures, which is always surrounded by dangers concerning the rights of innocents. These dangers mostly found in the procedural oppression and the deviation from the social aims of rights. Thus, we are concerned with preventing the oppression of procedural right holder by guarantying legitimate means in the procedural criminal system. It is worth mentioning, that the criminal procedural law regulates all the stages of a criminal suit including investigation, legal reasoning, preliminary investigation, final investigation and final enforceable judgement. Moreover, every stage has rules to guaranty preventing oppression in the procedures of a criminal suit if procedural right holder utilizes the stages with goodwill. However, in the real- world applications there are many oppression in all the stages of a suit. These oppressions causes lose confidence in law, hence, lead to impunity of the offender and charging innocents with a crime they did not commit. As a result, there is the oppression in procedural right theory in the jurisprudence to overcome procrastination, deviation on law, and using the criminal procedures against their original aim, which causes a severe damage in criminal justice. So the aim of utilizing procedures is to prevent deviation and oppression in others’ rights, and to find appropriateness between the resulting benefit and damage of applying the criminal suit procedures.
Al-Dulaimi et al. (2022) studied this question.