of course i'm not saying it doesn't happen, but to say it is "routinely manipulated" suggests there is some sort of corruption or collusion going on, which i just do not think is conceivably true. it sounds almost conspiratorial. are there sometimes a conflict of interests? of course. are some judges unsuitable to preside over certain cases? of course. this is no different in the us supreme court, for example, where a high-profile judge known to be a strict judicial constitutionalist will rule on a case of importance (with predictable results, if his style of judicial interpretation is anything to go by). it's a human system so it has its faults; a perfect justice system is impossible. as already discussed earlier, though, keeping that imperfect and flawed human element is vitally important. i just wouldn't go as far to say or make out really that there is an endemic or systematic problem.
also, yes most law is laid out in statutes. the point is that common law and cases ruled on statutes by judges w/ attending ratio decidendi and obiter dicta slightly modifies that law and gives a corpus of existing cases to consult for future rulings. it constantly shifts and evolves.
also, yes most law is laid out in statutes. the point is that common law and cases ruled on statutes by judges w/ attending ratio decidendi and obiter dicta slightly modifies that law and gives a corpus of existing cases to consult for future rulings. it constantly shifts and evolves.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
