The following is a statement about Ecuador. What similarities or differences do you find between this example and the judicial system in India? “It would be helpful if a body of common law, or judicial precedent, existed that could clarify a journalist’s rights. Unfortunately, Ecuador’s courts don’t work that way. Judges are not forced to respect the rulings of higher courts in previous cases. Unlike the US, an appellate judge in Ecuador (or elsewhere in South America, for that matter) need not provide a written decision explaining the legal basis of a ruling. A judge may rule one way today and the opposite way, in a similar case, tomorrow, without explaining why.”

No similarity is found in this example between Ecuador and India because:
 In India, judicial decisions play an important role in the form of sources of lawmaking.
 The judges give their own interpretations to decide the cases to expand or modify
laws.
 The rulings of the Supreme Court and high courts are often quoted by lawyers with
effect and authority.
 In the example given above, it would be helpful if a body of common or judicial
precedent existed to clarify a journalist’s right.In Ecuador, the judiciary does not work in the same manner, hence judicial decisions do
not become the precedents and the judge may rule one way today and the other way
tomorrow without explaining why.