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


    Response to the President of the Judicial Council regarding the nomination of the President and memb

    Rocky
    Rocky
    Admin Assist
    Admin Assist


    Posts : 278405
    Join date : 2012-12-21

    Response to the President of the Judicial Council regarding the nomination of the President and memb Empty Response to the President of the Judicial Council regarding the nomination of the President and memb

    Post by Rocky Tue 02 Jul 2019, 5:25 am

    [size=36]Response to the President of the Judicial Council regarding the nomination of the President and members of the Federal Court[/size]

    Political | 12:47 - 02/07/2019

    [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
    Baghdad - Mawazine News 
    The Federal Supreme Court has filed a lawsuit filed by the President of the Supreme Judicial Council, in addition to its function by objecting to the decision of the Federal Supreme Court, which includes the provision of unconstitutionality of Article (3) of its law No. 30 of 2005. 
    The court's spokesman, "The Federal Supreme Court held its session under the chairmanship of Judge Medhat al-Mahmoud and the attendance of all members of the judges and considered the case of objection of others established by the President of the Supreme Judicial Council / in addition to his job." 
    The Samok, that "the objector objection to appeal the ruling issued by the Federal Supreme Court on 21/5/2019 number (38 / Federal / 2019) by objecting to others as a violation of the rights of the Supreme Judicial Council being the reference judges in the federal judiciary, as that provision is null "He said.
    He pointed out that "the plaintiff stated that the case of the subject of the appeal in question has been set up of no interest in the case and influential in its financial, legal or social status and therefore the dispute is not directed in that case." 
    "The Federal Supreme Court returned to the ruling described in the appeal, and found that it ruled unconstitutionality Article (3) of the Federal Supreme Court Law No. (30) of 2005, including the nomination of the Supreme Judicial Council of the President and members of the Federal Supreme Court on the basis of his authority, which was provided for In paragraph (e) of Article (Forty-fourth) of the Transitional Administrative Law (Interim Constitution).
    Al-Samok added that "the court found that the ruling objecting to the appeal against the unconstitutionality of Article 3 was based on the provisions of articles (91 / II) and (92) of the Constitution of the Republic of Iraq for the year 2005, The Supreme Federal Perspective Project in the House of Representatives, in accordance with the text of Article (92 / II) of the Constitution. 
    Al-Samok explained that "the Federal Supreme Court found that (the objection of others) a way of unusual appeal began to challenge the judgments issued by the courts of first instance, which are mentioned exclusively in Article 224/1 of the Civil Procedure Law No. (83) of 1969 Courts of first instance, personal status courts and appellate courts as the subject court. "
    He pointed out that "the Federal Supreme Court stated that the law may not conduct this appeal to the decisions issued by the Federal Court of Cassation, even if it was dismissed in the case before it as a court subject to the validity stipulated in Article 214 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Paragraph (1) of Article (224) of the Code of Civil Procedure and this is what is settled by the judiciary and jurisprudence in Iraq and in other countries. 
    "The court affirmed that the Federal Supreme Court, which represents the constitutional judiciary in Iraq, is not one of the courts of first instance enumerated in Article 224 of the Civil Procedure Law exclusively by the court."
    "The court said that the verdicts and decisions issued by the court are binding and binding on all authorities based on the provisions of Article (94) of the Constitution and article (5 / II) of this law in formality in relation to the third party objection filed by the plaintiff in addition to his job." 
    The Samok continues, that "objectively, the Federal Supreme Court found that the Constitution of the Republic of Iraq for the year 2005 has increased the competence of the Supreme Judicial Council to nominate the President and members of the Federal Supreme Court starting from the date of entry into force, as established by the provision of Article (61 / V / This authority was the Supreme Judicial Council derived from the provisions of paragraph (e) of Article (forty-fourth) of the Law of Administration of the State of the transitional phase canceled, and the day the President of the Federal Supreme Court under which the President of the Supreme Judicial Council before the issuance of the Law of the Supreme Judicial Council No. (45) 2017 ".
    He also said that "the court stated that, since the Transitional Administrative Law was repealed by the Constitution of the Republic of Iraq and enforced on 28 December 2005. Whereas the powers of the Higher Judicial Council were established by the Constitution in article 91 exclusively, namely the Department of Justice and Supervision On the federal judiciary and the nomination of the President and members of the Federal Court of Cassation and the head of the Public Prosecution and the Chairman of the Judicial Supervisory Authority and submit them to the House of Representatives for approval of their appointment in those judicial positions based on the authority provided for in Article (61 / V / A) of the Constitution, Authorities who (47) of the Constitution, which can not be extended to other jurisdictions other than what is stated exclusively. "
    The Supreme Federal Court confirmed that the exception to the constitutional text is the text of Article (91) and the text of Article (88) and the text of Article (92) which stipulates the independence of the judiciary as an authority besides the legislative and executive authorities, as stipulated in Article (47) It is measured in addition to the validity of the Supreme Judicial Council mentioned above has been authorized Article (91 / III) of the Constitution to propose the draft annual budget of the federal judicial authority and submitted to the House of Representatives for approval.
    "The Supreme Federal Court confirmed that this authority does not include the proposal of the annual budget of the Supreme Federal Court on the basis of the provisions of paragraph (I) of Article (92) of the Constitution and the text of the (Federal Supreme Court judicial body financially and administratively independent) After the text of Article (91) of the Constitution comes to guarantee the independence of the constitutional judiciary represented by the Federal Supreme Court of the Supreme Judicial Council, one of the components of the federal judicial authority provided for in Article (89) of the Constitution and the subsequent text is restricted to the previous text. 
    He added that "the court confirmed that this was ruled by the Federal Supreme Court in the ruling issued by the number (19 / Federal / 2017) on 11/4/2017."
    "The Court found that the presence of Article 3 of the Federal Supreme Court Law, which gave the Supreme Judicial Council the power to nominate the president and members of the Federal Supreme Court, which started under the provisions of the Transitional Administrative Law, has become contrary to the provisions of the Constitution after its entry, The Supreme Judicial Council also provides this authority, but restricts it to certain judicial titles, not including the address of the president and members of the Federal Supreme Court, where this is stipulated in this provision to the law to be enacted by the Council of Representatives in application of the provisions of Article 92 / Which determines how The nomination and appointment of the President and members of the Federal Supreme Court ".
    "The court stated that it ruled unconstitutionality of Article (3) of its law in the ruling issued by the number (38 / Federal / 2019) and the date of 21/5/2019 the subject of appeal in the manner of the objection of others and preceded by a ruling issued by the number (19 / 2017) on 11/4/2017 ruled unconstitutional article (3 / third) of the law of the Supreme Judicial Council and in the case that was established by the Supreme Judicial Council and the same content of Article (3) of the Federal Supreme Court. 
    He added that "the court stressed that the provisions of the Supreme Federal Court as stipulated in Article 94 and Article 5 of its law are binding and binding on all authorities, regardless of who filed the case of unconstitutionality because the claim of unconstitutionality of any law or one of the texts therein is a right exercised by the citizen With regard to the laws expressing his opinion as a right within which the Constitution is in (38 / I) of it and by all legal means. "
    "Based on this, and based on the above, the court decided to respond to the plaintiff's claim in both formality and objectivity and to charge the expenses in addition to his job and the fees of the lawyer of the plaintiff's agents and the amount of one hundred thousand dinars distributed among them according to the law, the agreement was issued based on the provisions of Article (94) Constitution and Article (5) of the Federal Supreme Court Act and follow the decision of public judgment on 2/7/2019 "


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


    Posts : 278405
    Join date : 2012-12-21

    Response to the President of the Judicial Council regarding the nomination of the President and memb Empty Response to the President of the Judicial Council regarding the nomination of the President and memb

    Post by Rocky Tue 02 Jul 2019, 5:50 am

    Response to the President of the Judicial Council regarding the nomination of the President and members of the Federal Court

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



    The Federal Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit brought by the President of the Supreme Judicial Council / in addition to the function of others to intercept the decision of the [url=https://www.thebaghdadpost.com/ar/Story/t/2988/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%85%D8%A9 %D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9]Federal Court[/url] Supreme containing the ruling unconstitutional Article 3 of Law No. (30) for the year 2005. 

    The official spokesman of the court [url=https://www.thebaghdadpost.com/ar/Story/t/69407/%D8%A5%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B3 %D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%88%D9%83]Illes Acommok[/url] in a press statement that " the Federal Court Supreme Court held its session under the chairmanship of Judge Medhat al-Mahmoud and the attendance of all members of the judges and considered the case of objection of others established by the President of the Supreme Judicial Council / in addition to his job. 

    The Samok, that "the objector objection to appeal the ruling issued by [url=https://www.thebaghdadpost.com/ar/Story/t/2988/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%85%D8%A9 %D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9]the Federal[/url] Supreme Court on 21/5/2019 number (38 / Federal / 2019) by objecting to others as a violation of the rights of the Supreme Judicial Council being the reference judges in the federal judiciary, as that provision is null "He said.

    He pointed out that "the plaintiff stated that the case of the subject of the subject of appeal has been set up of no interest in the case and influential in its financial, legal or social status and therefore the dispute is not directed in that case." 

    "The Supreme Federal Court returned to the ruling described in the appeal, and found that it ruled unconstitutionality Article (3) of [url=https://www.thebaghdadpost.com/ar/Story/t/2988/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%85%D8%A9 %D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9]the Federal[/url] Supreme [url=https://www.thebaghdadpost.com/ar/Story/t/2988/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%85%D8%A9 %D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9]Court[/url] Law No. (30) of 2005, including the nomination of the Supreme Judicial Council of the President and members of [url=https://www.thebaghdadpost.com/ar/Story/t/2988/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%85%D8%A9 %D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9]the Federal[/url]Supreme Court on the basis of his authority, which was provided for In paragraph (e) of Article (Forty-fourth) of the Transitional Administrative Law (Interim Constitution). 

    The Samok, "The Court found that the ruling the subject of appeal against the unconstitutionality of Article (3) mentioned was based on the provisions of Articles (91 / II) and (92) of the Constitution of the Republic of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]For the year 2005, and spent the House of Representatives to legislate an alternative article in the law of [url=https://www.thebaghdadpost.com/ar/Story/t/2988/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%85%D8%A9 %D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9]the Federal[/url] Supreme Court envisaged its draft in the House of Representatives, in accordance with the text of Article (92 / II) of the Constitution.


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

      Current date/time is Tue 01 Oct 2024, 9:28 am