South Koreas Constitutional Court Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

South Koreas Constitutional Court - Essay Example As such, the judicial court systems operate independently despite the profile of the case or the people involved. The constitution in the US caters for the restriction of gun and marijuana. The national fire arm act (1934), the gun control act and the Brady bill among others stated the rules and set regulation of ownership. However, in 2009, the US begun considering a review of these regulations just like in South Korea. The motive behind the gun control, however, is more political and elite influenced than neutrally viewed. For instance, Chicago mayor Daley’s protection is catered for by the taxpayer’s money in hiring the bodyguards, but the citizens are denied by law to defend themselves using guns. The drug controls on the other side in the US traffickers are hunted down more than the users. It is evident that the elites who take part in most court cases have political motives rather than the quest for justice. As for this issue, a politician may decide to pick on a case in court for the purpose of gaining political ground or fame. Cases in Korea of such kinds arise when there is disagreement between different parties or individuals in the line of politics (Dae & Tae-gyu, 1990, p. 138). As such, the constitution is often defied by the political systems. In the US, this is not the case. The influence of â€Å"parties† is not let in any way except for the amicus curiae in common terms â€Å"friend of the court† This requires filing. Court is viewed as an option in the effect that the political influence is hindered. When the political strong holders cannot have any influence in achieving their interest, the court can be used in ensuring balanced justice. In the case of varied opinion on issues under controversy, the political influence and interest may overpower any other option. Taking an example of the gun ownership and marijuana use in the US, the political sides have always been against them thus influencing most cases in court.