The Due Process also is intended to make people feel that the government is fair in the way it treats citizens in the legal process by listening to both sides of the story (Cornell University Law School, 1992).
In Procedural Due Process, the government has to do more than just act in accordance with the law, by observing and granting citizens far procedures, whether or not the procedures are provided for within the law. It would be unconstitutional for the government to deny citizens the due process. The Procedural Due Process is intended to guarantee basic fairness to all citizens regardless of the crimes purported to be committed. Fairness entails a variety of aspects including a chance to be heard in a timely and meaningful manner, the making of a decision based on substantial evidence and the right to even appeal the decision if need be. Due process also puts in focus the importance of individual rights and interests in question, so that the more important the interests are, the more reason why the due process must be afforded to a citizen.
The Procedural Due Process entails three main steps, which begin by asking whether there has been a deprivation of rights. Secondly, it has to be established whether the deprivation is of life, liberty or property, and thirdly, there needs to be established what procedures to follow to ensure justice (Chemerinsky, n.d.). The first step determines whether the court would go through the due process, because if there has been a deprivation then it is important to undertake a procedural due process analysis. By undertaking the process, the court must determine the right procedures to follow, and consequently if the government procedures available are inadequate, this will constitute a deprivation of the due process.
In these three steps, the Constitution advocates for a fair hearing, before a tribunal or court.