Q21

[deedubbew]

Why not A?

[ohthatpatrick]

In short, (A) is too narrow to be the main point, and only the citizens were said to have a posture of opposition to law (whereas this answer accuses lawyers and judges of similarly distrusting the legal system).

But here's a complete explanation:

Before answering a Main Point question, I normally remind myself of any important sentences (big, purpose-driven claims) I found during my first reading. I also remind myself of my Passage Map.

The Purpose of this passage is to discuss the challenges that lie ahead of South Africa as it transitions to a rights-based legal system in a constitutional democracy. It's hard to find any one sentence that provides an overarching summary, so I would tally up the big claims.

P1 - Parliament used to have the final say, but now judges will be able to judge the constitutionality of Parliament's laws by considering whether the laws impinge on guaranteed rights

P2 - Since the constitution is written so generally, and there are no legal precedents, South Africa will need to consider how other countries have handled similar questions (without copying other countries too much or ignoring unique characteristics of South Africa's situation)

P3 - Since the citizens used to oppose and distrust the legal establishment / government, it will take some time/adjustment for them to start to see the legal system as a friendly tool that can protect/help them.

(A) This only addresses P3, and it is inaccurate to say that lawyers and judges previously had a posture of opposition to law.

(B) This sounds like P2 topics but it inaccurately says that citizens should challenge parliamentary decisions. That never was said in the passage.

(C) This sounds true-ish, but too narrow to be the Main Point. It's not actually accurate to say that parliament was the 'arbiter' of laws previously. The legal system arbitrated laws, but parliament could write new laws to trump the court's decisions. That's doesn't mean that parliament arbitrated laws.

(D) Wow, this hits all 3 of the big points. "Lack of relevant legal precedents" is the main point of P2. "The public's antagonistic relation to the law" is the main point of P3. The rest of the answer choice is the main point of P1. Looks good!

(E) This is too narrowly P2.

Correct answer: (D)

Hope this helps.

[WaltGrace1983]

I gotta say, I eliminated all 5 before re-assessing and selecting (D). I really thought the correct answer would be more opinionated ala "If this is going to succeed, we have to solve these two issues!"

Oh well, (D) IS the best but a bit stale in my opinion. It made the passage sound 100% neutral when I think the author did have an opinion in there: "significant change...If a rights-based culture is to succeed..."