Legal Science Re-invented

Admitted, I live in country where I practice the legal profession. I am somewhat aged professionally, in the sense that I have acquired all my legal education back in the 90ies. The reason why I am mentioning this is because from a today's angle it seems that that legal education that I got is extremely outdated. Though it was structured on what we call in the legal profession on "legal thinking" and a minimum denominator of "common sense" it did provide some certainty and a small degree of predictability about the prospects of any given legal case. And then came 2010 and the first Memorandum in Greece. A turning point in all legal knowledge acquired through extensive studies in Greece and abroad. Laws which were unconstitutional did perfectly alright in surviving even through in a faulty form, laws one after the other were passed with retrospective effect and all was thrown into a legal laundry machine, yet what came out of it was far less than clean. I believe, if one were to dismantle a society and hinder its smooth operation, he does it by taking apart the legal apparatus of that society. Taking that out of the equation opens up a wide door to chaos and arbitrary and poor legislation. In addition, if the driver in producing legislation is not linked to the creation of legal balance but to the fulfillment of budgetary targets not much hope is left. If the legal communities are the keepers of the legislative balance in a society, and your political agenda still is to take this society apart, then you need to neutralize the legal communities. And this agenda is infinite. But what is more alarming is what happened to me yesterday. In a high profile case that I was coordinating in a far more advanced European country the ruling that was issued, resembled shockingly the modern reasoning of producing rulings in legally tormented and dismantled Greece. All legally material aspects were thrown into the trash bin and the obvious features of the ruling had strong underlying budgetary characteristics. Common sense was deducted in the production of the ruling and facts were provocatively ignored. This was an iconic display of either willful disregard for all legal conception or a display of immense ignorance in the production of legal rulings. Either way, this decision was too Greek even for my taste...