Remedies are means provided by the law by which the State, through the Public Ministry, and the persons designated by law promote a judicial control in which criminal judgments are verified in order to abolish those judgments which contain factual and legal errors and replacing them with judgements compliant with law and truth.

Remedies against court decisions, both ordinary and extraordinary, are based on the need to control the work of the courts. Following the exercise of judicial control, possible errors in the judicial process can be avoided, either in terms of establishing the facts or as regards the enforcement of the law. Starting from the lato sensu definition, a criminal procedural law must take into account certain principles when regulating the appeal system, whether ordinary or extraordinary. Thus, the Criminal Procedural Law must take into account the principle of necessity (preventing the continued validity of an unlawful and ungrounded decision), the principle of operability (the judgment of conviction being enforced as soon as possible, and therefore a reasonable duration of the criminal proceedings), the principle of res judicata (in essence, this principle ensures the prestige of the final judgments under the legal presumption that they are in accordance with the truth and the law). Too many extraordinary remedies would inevitably result in distrust of justice, uncertainty about the way in which the courts have been finally ruled in criminal cases. The principle of operability and res judicata must be used by the legislator in a rational and balanced way. The length of the criminal proceedings can not be shortened to the detriment of a legal and thoroughly decision, the stability of the court judgment invested with res judicata does not justify maintaining a judgment with serious errors of fact and law, even if it is final.