Due process of law tested by neurolaw

It is not by chance that neuroscience’s recent developments have influenced several fields of human knowledge. Over the last few decades, the “neuro” suffix has begun to precede scientific areas with different epistemological statuses (i.e., neuro-esthetics, neuro-economics, neuro-ethics). Among these, there is also, undoubtedly, neurolaw. Neuroscience affects legal issues in several respects, which are, for the most part, attributable to criminal law and criminal trials. This work focuses on possible neurolaw “threats” on principles regarding due process of law. On the one hand, certain constitutional guarantees might seem to be under attack: for example, the concept of “moral freedom” of some “individuals” during the due process of law, such as the witness, the victim, and the defendant. On the other hand, neuroscientific techniques could enhance the ability of the trial to produce a substantial truth finally. This ambivalence of neurolaw will be tested within the scope of case law to identify an index of neuro-compatibility. This index will be established regarding some constitutional guarantees in “procedural natural law” pertaining to the criminal trial, as, for example, the due process principle. The paper will also evaluate to what extent the application of neuroscience in the courtroom could violate or increase the force of constitutional guarantees.