استقلالية القضاء العسكري

الملخص EN

The issue of jurisdiction is one of the most important, accurate and most dangerous aspects of the military court issue, the specific jurisdiction related to the type and seriousness of the crime, so that it can affect the military like the civilian, because he questions the crime and turns a blind eye to the perpetrators of the act and crimes close to the military field in which civilians are often involved, either for reasons Political or other.

Although Article 3 was mixed with this fear, it first linked the state of specific jurisdiction to the state of war, and associated it with actions against state institutions, people and funds, and added to it a condition for committing it for the benefit of the enemy, and added an alternative condition to this last condition, which is the effect on the armed forces, and thus this The description of the criminal act is characterized by a kind of frightening expansion, which may violate the principle of no crime and no punishment except with a text, and the assessment of the extent of the impact of these acts on the morale of the army remains for the discretion of the judiciary alone.

However, according to the same chapter that stipulates in the details of the continuation of the institution of the prime minister and parliament in their duties and the continuation of the basic freedoms and rights stipulated in the constitution, the crimes that have jurisdiction over the military court during a state of war do not apply to the state of exception, because it is one of the basic guarantees stipulated Article 59 of the constitution includes the referral of the accused to the ordinary courts and their regular judges.

If the referral is made to the military court in the case of exception stipulated in Article 59, the court will then be transferred from a specialized court to an exceptional court in exceptional circumstances, and because jurisprudence must be observed when we are facing the violation of basic rights, and as it is prohibited to expand the jurisprudence before the guarantees of the conditions of a fair trial, Except when expanding what is in the interest of the person before the courts.

Accordingly, the military judiciary is considered an independent judicial body beside the administrative judiciary in the State Council and the ordinary judiciary.

The State Council does not have the authority to comment on judgments issued by the military judiciary nor is it competent to consider the dispute in the executive procedures issued in implementation thereof, as this affects the aforementioned provisions and is considered a competence The military judiciary after exhausting the methods of challenging its rulings and ratifying them by the competent authority.