So you want your country's Supreme Court to stay out of certain affairs that can be inconvenient for them to get into, yes? Guess what. There are issues here where we wished the SC would not get involved, but they did anyway. But that's because we actually practice what we preach. The ability of the Courts to go over inconvenient issues is a sign of a truly democratic country. No issue is above their mandate, and they are free to accept any case they deem worthy. It can include uncomfortable cases that we'd hoped would be swept under the rug, as it were. But we accept this, because for them to take up those cases means that NOTHING is off limits. Religion, racism, apartheid-lite policies, etc are not off limits to OUR SC. And if you want to be seen as a true democracy, and not a country that is currently run on a platform of extreme racism, xenophobia, paranoia, and religious zealotry, you wouldn't DARE limit what your SC can take up.
Hello user Logout | profile
You have watched of 10 articles
Egypt court acquits Mubarak-era premier of graft (AP)
from the article: Israel or Immanuel?