Snooks, I'm not interested in arguing about the world court. That's a horse of a different colour for another day.
The parallel you raise re mandatory sentencing is a good one. This is a perfect example of knee jerk politicians attempting to capitalise on individual events to reduce the power of the judiciary. The job of judges is to match sentencing with the conditions of the crime. Something that should be wholly in the domain of the judges who are in a position to evaluate individual circumstances. Governments make laws, judges interpret them and sentence on the basis of their wide experience. The moment you allow politicians to make ajustments to laws and prescribe penalties on the basis of expediency and the screams of a vocal mob (minority) you are on a slippery slide away from true democracy. This is what our very own, lovable John Howard is doing when, for example, he excises bits of Australia so that he can stop legitimate asylum seekers from reaching our shores.
You will no doubt recall that I placed a question mark when I posted initially on the decision of the Israeli High Court and expressed a hope that the decision they made would be adhered to. You have often espoused the strength of the Israeli democracy and I have never argued against that point, however it will be very interesting to see what Sharon does now about his own judges who have done exactly what they were meant to do and that is interpret an exisiting set of laws.....
