Ecuador's Double Standard/ Rule Of LAW

Right now Ecuador is in a dispute with an oil company over some issue that has gone to the World Bank. They say that if the World Bank rules against them, they won't follow the ruling.

This is despite Ecuador urging Honduras to follow the OAS STATEMENTS against Honduras. There has been no judicial ruling against Honduras, but international organizations were against Honduras. Ecuador wanted Honduras to comply with those demands. However, now that an international body could rule against them, there are no signs either way, they say they will not follow it.

The rule of law is the rule of law. Laws are not meant to be broken. When the law tells you to do something, you do it no matter what (unless it violates human rights.) Honduras followed its law, its Constitution, and removed Zelaya and has followed the law regardless of what the world demands.

Ecuador, now facing a legal ruling, will defy the ruling if it is against them.

A lawless world is a dangerous world. Lawless groups are currently trying to take over countries and invent new laws to suit them. When existing laws don't go their way, they either alter their Constitutions or, as Ecuador proves, defy international rulings. This is applicable in Burma's trade with North Korea, or Venezuela's arming of FARC, or Russia's aiding of Iran with its nuclear program.

The nations have sway in global bodies such as the OAS and UN. When they get their majority, such as with the OAS, they can have international groups founded to have worldwide recognition of the law represent the next level of destroying laws. They had the OAS make demands of Honduras regardless of the laws within Honduras.

This is why Obama's statements on changing our U.S. Constitution concerns me. The Constitution does not give him what he wants, and he thinks that is enough to have it changed. (In length, he wants it changed because it doesn't allow the government to give him what he wants: more government control to provide us with things (which the government would have to supply through the taking of other things)).

We must stand with the rule of law. Currently, neither the Republican or Democratic platforms state that the Constitution is the highest law of the land. They should because it is. This explains the Obama and Bush presidency having such Constitutional line crossings without the political parties condemning them harshly.

The Constitution is the highest law of the land.