Political analyst: The Federal Court has abandoned all acceptable options

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

[size=52]Political analyst: The Federal Court has abandoned all acceptable options[/size]


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

ARCHIVE - DEMONSTRATIONS BY SUPPORTERS OF THE SADRIST MOVEMENT IN FRONT OF THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COUNCIL BUILDING, WHICH INCLUDES THE FEDERAL COURT BUILDING
[size=45]
Political analysts confirmed that the Iraqi judiciary maintained its impartiality by rejecting the case submitted by the Sadrist movement to dissolve the Iraqi parliament, while political analyst Ayman Khaled believes that the Federal Court has abandoned all acceptable options.

According to political analysts, “the court refuses to engage in political activities, adding that “dissolving parliament is the task of the parliament itself or the prime minister through a request to the president of the republic.”[/size]
[size=45]Legal expert Ayman Khaled pointed out that “the decision of the Federal Court is somewhat inappropriate, as it abandoned all acceptable options,” adding that “the Federal Court has, according to Article 94 of the Constitution, the power to adjudicate in matters related to the three authorities. But it resorted to Article 64 of the constitution, which suggests two ways to dissolve parliament, through voting in a parliamentary session or the prime minister’s request to the president of the republic.[/size]
[size=45]Khaled believes that the court’s decision “may be a prelude to making a decision that satisfies the Sadrist movement by returning their deputies to Parliament, although the Sadrist movement still denies the request for his return.”[/size]
[size=45]And on Wednesday, the Federal Supreme Court decided to reject the case for dissolving the Iraqi Council of Representatives, submitted by more than one political party.[/size]
[size=45]The Federal Supreme Court issued its judgment in Case No. 132 and its Units / Federal / 2022. The Federal Supreme Court considers:[/size]
[size=45]1. The members of the House of Representatives, after being elected, do not represent themselves or their political blocs, but rather the people. Therefore, it was necessary for them to work to achieve what they were elected for, which is the people’s interest, not to be a reason to obstruct their interests and threaten their safety and the safety of the people completely.[/size]
[size=45]2. The stability of the political process in Iraq requires everyone to abide by the provisions of the constitution and not to exceed it, and no authority may continue to exceed the constitutional periods indefinitely, because this is a violation of the constitution and the demolition of the entire political process and a threat to the security of the country and citizens.[/size]
[size=45]3. The penalty imposed on the House of Representatives for not carrying out its constitutional duties is to dissolve the House when there are justifications for it.[/size]
[size=45]4. The Constitution of the Republic of Iraq for the year 2005 has drawn up the constitutional mechanism for dissolving the House of Representatives in accordance with the provisions of Article (64/First) thereof.[/size]
[size=45]5. The jurisdiction of the Federal Supreme Court is limited by Article (93) of the Constitution and Article (4) of the Federal Supreme Court Law and does not include the dissolution of Parliament.[/size]
[size=45]6. The Constitution of the Republic of Iraq for the year 2005 did not neglect the regulation of the provisions of dissolving Parliament, and therefore there is no room for applying the theory of constitutional omission.[/size]
[size=45]It is noteworthy that the Federal Court decided on the first of the current month of September to raise its session in the cases of dissolving Parliament, to today Wednesday (September 7, 2022) as the date for issuing the decision.[/size]
[size=45][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]