Legal: The court authorized Saleh to choose the prime minister without referring to the largest bloc

Information / Baghdad ..
Legal expert Ali al-Tamimi, Sunday, interpreted the statement of the Federal Court regarding the designation of the largest parliamentary bloc, indicating that the statement authorized the President of the Republic to choose the next prime minister without referring to the largest parliamentary bloc.
Al-Tamimi said in a statement to "Information" that "the Federal Court statement interpreted Article 76 of the Constitution regarding the assignment of the largest bloc to head the government according to the first session, which was done and has been nominated by the largest bloc, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ."
He added that, according to paragraphs 3/4/5 of Article 76 of the Constitution, the President of the Republic has the right to assign the candidate for prime minister without referring to the largest bloc.
Al-Tamimi said, "The statement means that the Federal Court authorized Barham Saleh to go freely and choose who he deems appropriate to head the government without referring to any political bloc." Finished / 25 d

Information / Baghdad ..
The Federal Supreme Court issued, on Sunday, a press statement regarding the largest bloc after the President of the Republic Barham Salih submitted a request to clarify its previous interpretation regarding the largest bloc.
A spokesman for the Federal Court, Eyas Al-Samouk, said in a statement that he received / the information, a copy of it, “The President of the Republic asked the Supreme Federal Court to determine the largest bloc mentioned in Article (76) of the Constitution of the Republic of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] for the year 2005, and the court received the request on Thursday, coincidentally ( 19/12/2019), and accordingly the court held a hearing to consider the application, on the morning of Sunday, 22/12/2019, with all its members.
The Samuk added that the court issued the following decision: The above-mentioned application was put under scrutiny and deliberation by the Federal Supreme Court in its session held on December 22, 2019 and reached after deliberation and scrutiny and after referring to the priorities for its interpretation of the provision of Article (76) of the Constitution of the Republic of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]For the year 2005, according to its decision issued on the date of 25/3/2010 with the number (25 / federal / 2010), which it affirmed by its decision issued on the date of 11/8/2014 with the number (45 / d. C / 2014) and their contents, that the term (the largest number of parliamentary bloc) ) Contained in Article (76) of the constitution means either the bloc that was formed after the elections through one electoral list, or the bloc that was formed after the elections from two or more lists from the electoral lists and entered the House of Representatives and became seats after it entered the Council and its members took the constitutional oath in the first session The largest number of the rest of the blocs, so the President of the Republic assigns its candidate to form a cabinet In accordance with the provisions of Article (76) of the Constitution and during the specified period therein, and this is what the Supreme Federal Court decided upon in accordance with its decisions mentioned above in the interpretation of Article (76) of the Constitution and by clarifying the concept of the largest number of parliamentary blocs.
The Samuk asserted that “the decisions of the Federal Supreme Court are final and binding on all legislative, executive and judicial authorities stipulated in Article (47) of the Constitution, and since the Federal Supreme Court is one of its components according to the provisions of Article (89) of the Constitution, it is bound by the rulings and decisions issued and accordingly the court decides The Federal Supreme Court is committed to its aforementioned decisions, which are attached to this decision to interpret the provision of Article (76) of the Constitution in accordance with what was stated in them. This decision was issued in full and binding agreement in accordance with the provisions of Article (94) of the Constitution and Article (5) of the Supreme Federal Court Law and Repeat at the meeting of December 22, 2019). Ended / 25