Criminal justice system refers to the organization of practices and institutions of state that are put in place to uphold social control, help deter and mitigate crime as well as sanction those who violate established laws of the land. The Supreme Court of the US applies the rules contained in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure pursuant to the rights and guarantees enshrined in the US Constitution Bill of Rights. Most important of these procedures include investigatory and police accusation process, pre- trial procedures and, criminal trial procedures and sentencing.

The Substantive due process of the criminal law stipulates that the police make criminal defendants well aware of the rights guaranteed to them before the defendants can make statements that the state intends to use as evidence to incriminate them. This has the importance of ensuring that the defendant is not induced or coerced into yielding the required information that can be used against him (Richards, 1993). The investigatory procedures also work well to protect the defendants from unlawful and intimidating searches or seizure of personal property by stating that that the law enforcer shows probable cause of the search that is supported by affirmation of oath describing the specific location of the search and the items to be held.

Richards (1993) asserts that fair and speedy trial is well catered for in the existing legal procedures especially in the Sixth Amendment which gives the defendant a chance to be tried in public by an impartial jury. Before the trial is begun the defendant must be given a chance to call their preferred witnesses while the prosecution scrutinizes the available evidence as well as ensuring a pre-trial access to the prosecution witnesses.  This ensures that all the facts relevant to the case are presented during the trial. The criminal trial procedures extend further protection to the defendants by ensuring that the prosecution only defeats the presumption of innocence if evidence exists beyond any reasonable doubt to prove guilt. This is greatly enhancing the canons of natural justice in the criminal trials in our justice system.

The stages involved in the criminal trial are very systematic to ensure that no legal flaws are encountered in administration of justice and that the defendant gets a fair trial. The judge begins by setting an initial bail which gives the defendant an option to get out of incarceration after the initial arrest. This sum is refundable and reduces the chances of an innocent suspect staying unfairly in jail. When the suspect is arraigned in court, the judge reads out the charges leveled against the accused to make him aware of his defense and inform him of the dates of future proceedings. It is usually the responsibility of the presiding judge to determine whether sufficient evidence exists to press charges against the accused or order further investigations (Israel, et. al, 2003). It is also during this stage that the judge can decide to amend the bail depending on the evidence tabled before court. A pre-trial hearing then follows this where the prosecution and the defense team present motions before a judge advising the court whether to restrain certain evidence, call certain individuals to testify, or whether the judge should terminate all charges for lack of evidence. The defendant then faces a full trial where all the facts and relevant evidence are presented before court. This then followed by sentencing if the defendant is found guilty.

Although the existing criminal justice procedures have various inherent loopholes, I strongly believe in the system’s  adequacy  to  protect the fundamental rights of all the accused and that any amendments to come should  be consistent with the above rights in order to uphold the benefits of the rule of natural justice.