Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Welcome to the Neno's Place!

Neno's Place Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality


Neno

I can be reached by phone or text 8am-7pm cst 972-768-9772 or, once joining the board I can be reached by a (PM) Private Message.

Join the forum, it's quick and easy

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Welcome to the Neno's Place!

Neno's Place Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality


Neno

I can be reached by phone or text 8am-7pm cst 972-768-9772 or, once joining the board I can be reached by a (PM) Private Message.

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Many Topics Including The Oldest Dinar Community. Copyright © 2006-2020


    the Federal Court establishes the members of the Commission on Human Rights with the rank of Directo

    Rocky
    Rocky
    Rocky
    Admin Assist
    Admin Assist


    Posts : 269873
    Join date : 2012-12-21
    • Post n°1

    the Federal Court establishes the members of the Commission on Human Rights with the rank of Directo Empty the Federal Court establishes the members of the Commission on Human Rights with the rank of Directo

    Post by Rocky Wed 07 Mar 2018, 4:39 am

    [size=32]
    the Federal Court establishes the members of the Commission on Human Rights with the rank of Director General and is presented to Parliament[/size]
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

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

     one hour ago



    The Supreme Federal Court has appealed the unconstitutionality of Article (7) of the Human Rights Commission Law No. (53) of 2008, asserting that the members of the Board of Commissioners with the rank of Director General and not of special grades, and pointed out that the Board of Commissioners is the one who appoints a president The Commission and his deputy, not the House of Representatives.
    "The Federal Supreme Court has considered a lawsuit to challenge the unconstitutionality of article 7 of the law of the High Commission for Human Rights and to cancel all its consequences on the pretext of violating the provisions of Article (47) of the Constitution, which enumerated the components of the federal authorities The legislative, executive and judicial authorities and exercise their competencies on the basis of the principle of separation of powers.
    The spokesman added that "the prosecutor in his lawsuit the Speaker of the House of Representatives / in addition to his job, and the Prime Minister / in addition to his job."
    He added that "the plaintiff said that the article contested unconstitutionality also opposed Article (61 / V / B) of the Constitution, which concerns the powers of the House of Representatives to approve the appointment of each of the ambassadors and holders of special grades on the proposal of the Council of Ministers, not including the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Commissioners, Minister and Under Secretary ".
    The spokesman said that "the prosecutor also saw that this explains irrefutably that the competence to nominate the Undersecretary of the Minister of the special grades of the functions of the Council of Ministers."
    He added that "the court returned to Article (16 / III) of the law of the High Commission for Human Rights and found that the members of the Board of Commissioners are the rank of Director-General, where the paragraph stated that (enjoy the members of the Board Director General), and they are not special grades.
    He added that "the ruling made it clear that the appointment of a head of the Commission with the rank of minister, and his deputy, the degree of Undersecretary of the Ministry, it comes later and through elections within the Council of Commissioners and not through the Council of Representatives and this is stipulated in Article (8 / III) of the Commission High Commission for Human Rights ".
    He pointed out that "the court responded to the first defendant, the Speaker of the House of Representatives in addition to his job not to rely on the support of the Constitution, and responded to the second defendant, the Prime Minister in addition to his job, where not fit for his dispute in this case.



    [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
    • Back to top
      Current date/time is Sat 11 May 2024, 9:00 am