Substantial Case on the Merits This case is mainly about statutory construction and the proper exercise of executive discretion.

Some in the Bush administration have fixated on this question of executive discretion, insisting that the successful prosecution of the war on terror requires strong executive power - power they see as eroding since Watergate.

But in considering its next move, the Bush administration should mark well that what lives by executive discretion also dies by executive discretion.

It means that there is an executive discretion.

In order to determine the law on judicial review of the exercise of executive discretion under the ISA, it is necessary to ascertain the exact decision laid down in Lee Mau Seng.

"But I will not have you interfering with the exercise of executive discretion."

In California, a clemency review by the governor's office is a matter of executive discretion.

Although sections 8 and 10 of the ISA concern matters of national security, the Court held that this concern does not preclude the objective review of executive discretion.

This group argues that, the determination of public purpose should be matter of executive discretion and should not be contestable at law.

There is furthermore a long-standing presumption that a prosecutor has legitimate grounds for the actions he takes, supported by the Court's position that "judicial intrusion into executive discretion of such high order should be minimal."