Iraq nears resolution on freedom of expression law amid political, societal controversy

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

[size=52]Iraq nears resolution on freedom of expression law amid political, societal controversy[/size]

[size=45]The Human Rights Committee of the Iraqi Council of Representatives submitted the draft law on freedom of expression and peaceful assembly to the Presidency of the Council of Representatives in preparation for voting on it in the upcoming sessions.[/size]
[size=45]It is worth noting that the draft law had sparked widespread controversy among political circles and civil society organizations, which called for the need to maintain a balance between protecting freedom of expression and adhering to legal controls to ensure the stability of security and public order.[/size]
[size=45]The members of parliament said in a statement that “the final parliamentary human rights committee, headed by the committee’s chairman, Arshad Al-Salihi, held a meeting attended by its members, parliament members Nisan Al-Zayer, Zuhair Al-Fatlawi, and Fatima Al-Issawi,” and his exit “was during the meeting to raise the freedom of expression law to include it on the council’s agenda for a vote.”[/size]
[size=45]Therefore, “the committee discussed during the meeting its plan in the organizational aspect, including the Access to Information Law, the Guest Reform Law, the Law on Preventing Cooperation and Discouraging Discrimination, and the draft law on combating disappearance, in addition to the amendments in which the committee will have supporting committees.”[/size]
[size=45]She added that “it was agreed to implement workshops and meetings to put them on the bathroom procedures in addition to studying the formation of the Supreme Council for Human Rights to suit the committee and individual representatives,” and that “at the end of the meeting, a vote was taken on a special structure for the work of the Human Rights Committee to proceed with it.”[/size]
[size=45]On February 14, the House of Representatives had completed the first reading of the draft law, pending a session for the second reading and discussion, after which it will be presented in a subsequent session to vote on its articles in succession.[/size]
[size=45]Regarding the points of contention, legal expert Ali Al-Tamimi spoke about the law’s repercussions on freedom of expression and peaceful demonstration, explaining that “his draft did not clarify the branches of the right to assembly, including strikes and sit-ins, as the Egyptian law of 2013 did.”[/size]
[size=45]Al-Tamimi said, “The most prominent thing included in the draft law is the request for prior permission from the responsible authority. It would have been better if it was a notification rather than a permission. He stressed that it is not possible to restrict all meetings absolutely, such as social events, let alone restricting the time for gathering and demonstrating until ten o’clock in the evening, which is unjustified.”[/size]
[size=45]He added that “the law granted the Human Rights Commission the right to receive complaints about administrative decisions resulting from the application of the law, and this violates Article 47 of the Constitution related to the separation of powers.” He also said that “it did not specify the body to appeal decisions issued by the Commission, noting that it did not clarify the difference between criticism and criticism, and did not define public morals and order.”[/size]
[size=45]He added, "The law allows official bodies to enable citizens to view data, and it would have been better to oblige unofficial bodies to do the same."[/size]
[size=45]Al-Tamimi explained that “the law did not stipulate social media and did not specify the body that would monitor it. It would have been more appropriate to assign this task to the Media Commission,” noting that “the term ‘use of force’ in the absolute sense in the law needs to be defined in accordance with international agreements on demonstrations, because the apparent meaning of the text suggests the use of live ammunition, and this is in violation of these agreements.”[/size]
[size=45][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]