مدى دستورية تعديل قانون المحكمة الاتحادية العليا رقم (30)‎ لسنة 2005

الملخص EN

SummaryThe importance of the Constitutional Court in any country is not hidden due to the greatness and importance of the powers it enjoys, including its authority to interpret the constitution and oversee the constitutionality of laws.

Constitutionalism, because it is the one that interprets the constitution and gives it meaning, and to show the importance of the Supreme Constitutional Court, critics of representative democratic governments deny it the trait of democracy, because the final decision, according to their description, is not in the hands of the elected representatives of the people in parliament or the government, but in the hands of a group of specific judges represented in the judges of the Constitutional Court Supreme through oversight of laws and regulations.

The Iraqi political blocs and parties realized the importance of the Federal Supreme Court from the beginning.

Each one of them was trying to pass the court's law according to its views and interests, which was the reason for the failure to get an agreement to issue the Federal Supreme Court's law since 2006 and because passing the law needed a special majority, A majority of two-thirds of the votes of the members of the House of Representatives.

After the federal court was completely paralyzed and its work was completely suspended due to the retirement of one of its members and the death of the other, and the ence of a text in the court law dealing with how to appoint new members, due to the Federal Supreme Court's veto of the text of Article 3 of the Court Law No.

30 of 2003 on the one hand and setting the date for early elections from On the other hand, the constitution stipulates that the Federal Court must ratify the results of the House of Representatives elections, which means that they will not be ratified in the event that the court law is not passed and thus the entire political and constitutional process is disrupted.

It was necessary for the political blocs in the House of Representatives to speed up the issuance of the Federal Supreme Court Law, which is a constitutional entitlement under Article 92 of the Constitution, and the insistence of each block on its demands and the failure to obtain the quorum required to pass the law, which is the two-thirds majority, resorting to a clear constitutional violation represented in amending Law No.

30 of 2005, by a simple majority, not two-thirds, of the number of members of the House of Representatives, as required by Article 92 of the Constitution.