The Federal Court refuses to decide the case against Halbousi
11:55 - 16/10/2019
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The Federal Supreme Court, on Wednesday, an objection to the validity of the membership of one of the deputies, noting that it is not competent to consider the administrative actions of the House of Representatives.
"The Federal Court held its session under the chairmanship of Judge Medhat al-Mahmoud and the presence of judges of all members, and considered a lawsuit filed by the candidate, Najm Abboud Ghadhban, in which the speaker of the House of Representatives, in addition to his job," the court spokesman Ayas al-Samouk said in a statement received.
Al-Samouk added that “the plaintiff confined his request to issue a decision requiring the defendant to the Speaker of the House of Representatives / in addition to his job, to submit his appeal to challenge the health of the deputy against the emirate; because he attached her parliamentary seat, in the first meeting of the House of Representatives to complete the quorum of two-thirds and put a veto The agenda of each session of the Council, in implementation of the text (52 / first) of the Constitution.
He pointed out, "The Federal Supreme Court found that the plaintiff's request after the limitation of his claim relates to administrative action relating to a specific challenge governed by a constitutional article which is article (52 / first) of the Constitution."
He pointed out, "The court found that such action is adapted as an administrative action competent to hear the appeal of the court competent to consider administrative actions."
He pointed out that "the Federal Supreme Court confirmed that its jurisdiction in the application of the provisions of Article (52) of the Constitution is confined to the appeal submitted to the decision issued by the House of Representatives in accordance with its competence set forth in Article (52 / I) of the Constitution."
The Spokesman stressed that “the court confirmed that its judiciary has settled in several judgments on this direction, including the decision issued by the number (72 / Federal / 2019) on (23/9/2019).”
He pointed out that "the Federal Supreme Court, and based on the foregoing found that the plaintiff's suit has to respond from the jurisdiction, and ruled her dismissal."