“程序正义”是指裁判过程（相对于裁判结果而言）的公平和法律程序（相对于实体结论而言）的正义。即“看得见的正义”，是英美法系国家的一种法律文化传统和观念。这源于一句人所共知的法律格言“正义不仅应得到实现，而且要以人们看得见的方式加以实现”（Justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done.）。用最通俗的语言解释，就是案件不仅要判得正确、公平，并完全符合实体法的规定和精神，而且还应当使人感受到判决过程的公平性和合理性。换句话说，司法机构对一个案件的判决，即使非常公正、合理、合法，也还是不够的；要使裁判结论得到人们的普遍认可，裁判者必须确保判决过程符合公正、正义的要求。

“程序正义”对应的英文为“Procedural justice”，其英文释义如下：Procedural justice is the idea of fairness in the processes that resolve disputes and allocate resources. One aspect of procedural justice is related to discussions of the administration of justice and legal proceedings. This sense of procedural justice is connected to due process (U.S.), fundamental justice (Canada), procedural fairness (Australia), and natural justice (other Common law jurisdictions), but the idea of procedural justice can also be applied to nonlegal contexts in which some process is employed to resolve conflict or divide benefits or burdens. Other aspects of procedural justice can also be found in social psychology and sociology issues and organizational psychology.

“实体正义”意味着正义的终极状态必须实现。也就是善人(或善行)应该得到善报，恶人(或恶行)必须得到恶报。具体包括三个方面的内容：1.犯罪的人受到刑罚；2.无罪的人不被定罪；3.罪刑相适应。大陆法系国家刑事诉讼对实体正义较为偏爱和注重。

“实体正义”对应的英文为“Substantive justice”。Substantive justice focuses on how the legal system uses laws to constrain and direct human behavior, specifically focusing on the function and the structure of a law. This is concerned with the content of the law. The legal principles created by Parliament and the courts need to be regarded as ‘just’. The moral and cultural values of the society in which the law is created are especially influential in determining whether the law is regarded as just. For instance, whether the laws on abortion or drugs are regarded as just will largely depend on the attitudes that are prevalent in that society.

以下为相关双语示例，供参考：

同时我们也应当清醒地认识到，法院虽在防止错杀上是有功的，但客观而言在错判上是有过的，毕竟这种留有余地的判决，不仅严重违背罪刑法定、程序正义原则，而且经不起事实与法律的检验，最终将会使法院陷入十分被动的境地。冤假错案一旦坐实，法院几乎面临千夫所指，此时任何的解释和说明都是苍白无力、无济于事的。

At the same time, we should also become more aware that although the courts have made contributions to prevent people from being wrongly killed, objectively they are at fault for the miscarriage of justice. After all, such judgement that allows for unforeseen circumstances not only seriously violate the principles of no penalty without a law and procedural justice, but also cannot stand the test of facts and laws and will ultimately put the courts at a passive position. Once cases are found wrongly convicted, the courts will take all the blame and no explanation will work.

强调程序正义优先，不是说程序正义比实体正义更重要，而是说要高度重视程序正义的独立价值。从一个案件的处理过程看，客观上程序正义是先于实体正义而存在的，更为重要的是，程序正义作为一种“看得见的正义”，对于人格尊严的保障，诉讼的公开、透明、民主以及裁判的终局性和可接受性等方面，都具有更深层次的意义。

Stressing the priority of procedural justice doesn’t mean that procedural justice is more important than substantive justice, but that its independent value requires higher attention. From the process of handling a case, procedural justice objectively precedes substantive justice. More importantly, as the kind of justice that can be seen to be done, procedural justice is of more profound and deeper significance for the protection of human dignity, open, transparent, democratic litigations as well as final and acceptable judgments.