Federal election of the President of the Bar prohibits more than two

Federal election of the President of the Bar prohibits more than two

 Baghdad / term

Federal Court announced on Tuesday, answer a lawsuit to challenge the unconstitutionality of Law No. 48 of 2017 , which prevents the election of the President of the Bar for more than two consecutive terms .
According to a statement issued by the court received the "long" version of it, that " the Federal Supreme Court heard today a lawsuit to challenge the unconstitutionality of Law No. (48) for the year 2017 , which canceled the decision of the Revolutionary Command Council (defunct) had authorized the re - election of President of the Bar for more than two - with reference to the new law has stipulated effect retroactively since 4.9.2017. "
The statement noted that " the court found that the original mechanism in the election of the Captain and the duration of his occupation for the post is reported Article (84) law Law No. 173 of 1965 as amended and initiated in accordance with the constitutional contexts and in normal conditions."
He pointed out that " the decision of the Revolutionary Command Council (dissolved) Notwithstanding the provisions of law the law of circumstances came and the need no longer exists now, and necessity should not be exaggerated than necessary things returned to normal and under the provisions contained in the law law , " the court .ookdt that " the law challenged him was issued by the House of Representatives to exercise its legislative role as provided for in Article 61 / I of the Constitution, and that this law did not include financial pleura, and intersects with public policy in the state, and does not constitute a violation of the independence of the judiciary in order to submit the draft form provided by the executive branch " the statement added that" this trend is what settled on Elimination of the Federal Supreme Court in several rulings in a statement means of legislation, including the judgment of the case 21 / Federal / 2015 dated 04.14.2015. "
He cited that " the contested law does not conflict as well as with democratic principles that the Constitution stipulated, but systems how the exchange of power through democratic means pursuant to the provisions of Article VI of the Constitution , " the statement .ohdd that "devolution of power is required to be through democratic means and under judicial supervision of the guarantor this process and the impartiality and professionalism , and this is what needed to be at the election of the new captain. " He went on that " the retroactive effect of the application of the contested unconstitutional law , starting from (04/09/2017) is a legislative option delegated Article 129 of the Constitution , the legislator , " the statement .okhls that " the court received a request to stop the implementation of the law , the subject of the appeal for these reasons , as decided suit not being unconstitutional is not based on the support of the Constitution. "


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]