Quote Originally Posted by Gaius Sempronius Gracchus View Post
In terms of an international court, edifice is a very precise term. But, in what way can my suggestion on a forum be dismantling anything?

There is, imo, much wrong with this statement. Is the cornerstone of democracy the supremacy of law enforced by the judicial system? That sounds like a pretty narrow definition of what democracy is, frankly - and I think it highly debatable that what you have put forward would be the basal notion of democracy (consent, surely, has a stronger case as a defining concept of democracy than enforcement, for example)

But.....what democratic consideration underlies this international court? Who decides on the judiciary? The losers of a war? Do Afghans, Iraqis and Libyans from the 'wrong' (losing) side, for example, get the same representation in this 'democratic' institution?
One of the basic tenets of a democratic state is the people's right for justice which is enforced through the system of the courts of law. Perhaps it is not THE cornerstone of democraccy, but it is A cornerstone of democracy.

As for the representation in the international court - that is a different issue which is probably open to discussion and correction. But denying the supremacy of law if some court is inadequate is like closing down all restaurants in the city if a client got poisoned in one of them.