Parliamentary Legal: Challenging the Khor Abdullah Agreement requires enacting a new law
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Baghdad: Shaima Rashid
The Legal Committee in the House of Representatives considered that the Federal Supreme Court’s recent appeal of the Khor Abdullah Agreement with Kuwait, signed in 2013, is a card of strength and a direct source of support for the Iraqi negotiator in this agreement and other international agreements and treaties, which requires re-enacting a new law. The agreement applies to what was issued after 2015, requiring the approval of a two-thirds majority of members of the House of Representatives. However, the committee acknowledged the difficulty of passing a new law with the same provisions of the contested agreement, but it clarified that the appeal is consistent with the terms and provisions of the Vienna Law.
Committee member Muhammad Jassim Al-Khafaji said, in an interview with “Al-Sabah”: “The court’s decision regarding the unconstitutionality of ratifying the navigation agreement in Khor Abdullah issued a fatwa on the unconstitutionality of the law through which the agreement was signed and not the terms of the agreement itself. That is, the court looked into the form of the agreement that is It was issued and entered into force after its ratification by law. Law No. 42 of 2013 was appealed by the court, and thus the agreement became ineffective with respect to Iraq, because the subject is Iraqi and the judiciary is Iraqi. As a result, this agreement is not in effect and the federal government cannot use the excuse or excuse that this agreement was signed and issued a long time ago. The government must commit to implementing the Federal Court’s decision, which has become final and binding.”
He added, "The Federal Court's appeal against the law pertaining to the agreement is formal, that is, it struck at the origin of the law pertaining to the ratification of the Khor Abdullah Agreement and considered it unconstitutional, because it was not voted on by a two-thirds majority. As a result, the court did not interfere in the terms of the agreement, so it is sound and does not exist." It has constitutional problems, and the solution now is that the Council of Ministers can approve a new law and send it to Parliament for the purpose of legislating a law that would be an alternative to the law that was
He continued, "Approving a new alternative law in Parliament in exchange for the one that was challenged is not possible, because there is popular discontent and there is an opinion on the part of the people of fear of this agreement. As a result, the agreement contains problems and there is a great expansion that came in restricting the terms of the agreement, reaching the point of demarcating borders." Navy, despite the fact that the agreement regulates navigation on both sides,” noting that “the issue is not without problems, as the process of legislating a new law to replace the law that was challenged by the Federal Court is very difficult and almost impossible, and one of the risks of this agreement is that it is still in force.” For an indefinite period, but according to Article 16, the agreement can be terminated by notifying one of the parties, either the Iraqi or the Kuwaiti, six months in advance, but this termination does not take place except with the approval of one of the parties, so this matter is one of the complex matters in this agreement.”
Al-Khafaji stated that one of the benefits of the recent Federal Court decision is that “the government, as an Iraqi negotiator, can negotiate with the Kuwaiti side from a stronger principle and redraw the agreement and amend the provisions that are unfair to Iraq in it, and the negotiation will be based on a strong principle, because there is a fair and binding judicial decision in negotiating with The Kuwaiti side,” noting that “from the international standpoint, copies of such an agreement are placed in the United Nations Secretariat, and Article 15 of the Khor Abdullah Agreement stipulates that a copy of it be deposited with the United Nations, and it is ratified by both parties in accordance with Vienna law.”
He explained, "According to the provisions of the Vienna Law, there is a paragraph that allows reconsideration of the treaty, since the Iraqi side has a clear constitutional and judicial violation to proceed with this agreement. As a result, our argument to negotiate with Kuwait is acceptable, and the Iraqi negotiator deals with wisdom and integrity."
Edited by: Muhammad Al-Ansari
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]