I understand, but my point was that at some point the system of "law" became simply a system of supplicating the masses and no longer serves justice. When the system of law ceases to be a system of law and becomes of system of corruption I no longer refer to it as law. Important Orwellian distinction. Never let the bastards control the definitions and language.
From "The Road to Surfdom," F.A. Hayek, as quoted from the classical exposition by A. V. Dicey in "The Law of the Constitution" (8th ed.), p. 198, the Rule of Law "means, in the first place the absolute supremacy or
"Nothing distinguishes more clearly conditions in a free country from those in a country under arbitrary government than the observance in the former of the great principles known as the Rule of Law. Stripped of all technicalities, this means that government in all its actions is bound by rules fixed and announced beforehand-rules which make it possible to foresee with fair certainty how the authority will use its coercive powers in given circumstances and to plan one's individual affairs on the basis of this knowledge." predominance of regular law as opposed to the influence of arbitrary power, and excludes the existence of arbitrariness, of prerogative, or even of wide discretionary authority on the part of government." --Steve