Election of new experts in the appeal against some budget items and the response of three constitut

Election of new experts in the appeal against some budget items and the response of three constitutional cases



Editorial date: 2017/7/27

The Federal Supreme Court elected five new experts to submit a technical report in the appeal case some articles of the General Budget Law for the current year, while the response of three constitutional cases for lack of constitutional support for them.

A statement issued by the Information Office of the Supreme Federal Court received the agency {Euphrates News} a copy of it today that "the Court held its meeting today and considered a lawsuit concerning the challenge of the Prime Minister / in addition to his function constitutionally {23} material of the Federal Budget Law for the current year" .
The statement added that "the parties to the case asked the court to elect five experts, and may agree on the names put forward by the court in today's session."
He pointed out that "the court elected five indigenous experts and two reserves, and decided to invite them for the purpose of tasking them to prepare a report containing the technical aspects of the subject of appeal."
The statement said that "
Questions the Court will be guided by the experts regarding the statement that what is conducted by the House of Representatives on the draft general budget of the Federal Act of 2017 , submitted by the government from the transfer of funds between the doors or chapters or adjust the amounts of some materials or adding new materials and amounts were not present government project. " She asked the court for It is that "those variables have added a new phenomenon or the phenomenon of financial burdens, but they will appear when the application of the budget items."
He explained that "experts will be assigned to prepare a report that includes an answer to those variables on the subject of the appeal, and whether some of the changes made is like the recommendations of the government can overcome and implement From Lal budgets for years to come? ".
The statement noted that" The court also asked whether the revised budget approved by the House of Representatives during this week includes what intersects or affects the objections to the unconstitutionality, and what is it?
"The court also inquired about the amounts resulting from these variables and whether it would increase the ceiling of the total amounts of the federal budget for the year 2017, from the ceiling contained in the project And the amount of this increase. "
The statement added that" the court listened to the comments of the parties to the case concerning the questions and has taken it and decided to postpone the case until next Monday, 31/7/2017 for the purpose of inviting experts and formally assigned to their mission After swearing in and giving them As long as the experts see fit to submit their report. "
The statement pointed out that"
The second lawsuit outlook concerning the request of judgment regarding the constitutionality of Article {6} section {8} of CPA Order No. {65} authority for the year 2004, which provides that the Board of Appeal decisions {appeal} final decisions of the Council. " He explained that" the court found that The Council of Appeal (Appeal Board) formed by Order No. 65 for the year 2004 consists of three members headed by a judge and represents a competent legal challenge. "
He pointed out that" this Council is competent to consider the appeals submitted to decisions issued by the General Director or the Hearing Committee } In the information and communications body "
He explained that" the decisions issued by the Appeals Board of a special nature requires consideration on the one hand includes in the member "
The court held that" the presence of an appellate body represented by the Appeals Board is in accordance with Article 100 of the Constitution and does not violate it. "
The statement stated that"
"Article 100 of the Constitution did not provide for restricting the appeal of administrative actions and decisions before the judiciary exclusively, but it did not specify that there should be a number of interlocutors to consider the decisions of interlocutors stipulated in the law. A constitutional principle is not to immunize these decisions from the appeal, and left the legislator to challenge the appellant according to the work and administrative decisions issued by the administrative bodies, and according to their nature. "
The statement that" the identification of the appellant identified by the legislator Article 6 of Section {8} of CPA Order No. 65 of 2004 is a legislative option that does not exist For violation of the Constitution. "
He noted that"
So what settled the constitutional judiciary in Iraq in several resolutions, including the judgment to the case No. {50/2017}, 20/6/2017 therefore the court decided to dismiss the claim for lack of constitutional support it will be updated amounts of financial penalties which millions in favor of the state. " The statement continued That "the third lawsuit from the court was set up by Safa al-Din Rabie and requesting the ruling to oblige the defendant the President of the House of Representatives / in addition to his job to cancel and invalidate the decision to exempt him from the post of Chairman of the Information and Communication Authority, issued on 11/4/2017, the lack of legal and constitutional cover it. "
The statement noted that" the pain Punch found that the plaintiff had served as chairman of the media and communications agency, and the face of him questioning according to constitutional assets as chairman and one of the independent bodies agency based on the provisions of Article {60 / VIII / e} of the Constitution. "
Continued the statement that"
The interrogation was conducted in the absence of the plaintiff, who failed to attend several times without excuse is convinced by the House of Representatives, who took a decision to exempt after the conviction of the members of the Board of evidence provided for exemption. "He pointed out that" the House of Representatives to question officials of independent agencies and their absence in accordance with The Constitutional Court in Iraq, where the Federal Supreme Court issued a ruling on this direction on 25/8/2017 and
No. (33/2017) The statement clarified that "the entry into force No. 65 of 2004 does not preclude the application of the provisions of the Constitution provided for in Article 61 (VIII / E) because of the above in the application based on the provisions of Article (13 / first) of the tram Tor, and thus became the plaintiff's claim is missing the constitutional pledge and decided to respond. "
The statement said that"
The Federal Supreme Court also considered a lawsuit brought by Chairman of the Board of Commissioners of the Independent Electoral Commission / in addition to his request for judgment as a vote of no conviction of this, according to data the parliamentary session numbered {28} 25/4/2017 is unconstitutional. " He added that" the court found During the explanatory regulations that the interrogation was submitted in accordance with its constitutional constitution in accordance with the provisions of Article {61 / VIII / e} of the Constitution of the plaintiff "
He explained that" {252} deputies have attended to the hearing of the vote {119} deputy not to be satisfied with the answers plaintiff for {118 } conviction, while declined to {15} deputies from voting by any of the two teams. "
and went on BBC That "the court also found in the payment of the defendant not to the jurisdiction of the court to consider the appeal is not supported by the Constitution that the article (93 / III) of the Constitution provided for the jurisdiction of the Court to consider the appeals submitted to the"

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