The other thing that really matters is that the White House actually agrees to obey the law this time. Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee held the first of three hearings scheduled this week on this issue, and the early results were mixed. Most of the senators, including key Republicans, said they were committed to drafting legislation that did more than merely rubber-stamp the way Mr. Bush decided to set up Guant á namo Bay.

      The government’s witnesses, including top lawyers from the Justice and Defense Departments, seemed   most   interested   in   arguing that   the   military commissions were legal.   They argued for what would be the worst possible outcome: that Congress just approve what Mr. Bush did and enact exceptions to the Geneva Conventions.

      But Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift of the Navy, who represented Salim Ahmed Hamdan, the prisoner whose case was before the Supreme Court, provided damning evidence about how utterly flawed those commissions were — from military prosecutors. He quoted one, Capt. John Carr of the Air Force (since promoted to major), who condemned “a halfhearted and disorganized effort by a skeleton group of relatively inexperienced attorneys to prosecute fairly the low-level accused in a process that appears to be rigged. ”

     The administration has professed its allegiance to the humane treatment of prisoners and to the rule of law before. But repairing the constitutional balance of powers and America’s profoundly damaged global image demands more than lip service.

Questions 21-25 are based on Passage Five.

21. Which of the following adjectives can best describe the author’s attitude towards the Supreme Court’s act?

A. Doubtful.

B. Approving.

C. Neutral.

D. Concerned.

22. The author argues that______.

A. all the three hearings on the issue are very fruitful

B. Geneva Conventions should be obeyed by all nations

C. Supreme Court has the lightest authority over the military