التعديلات الدستورية ومدى خضوعها لرقابة القضاء الدستوري: دراسة مقارنة

Abstract EN

This research, under tittle (constitutional amendments, and the possibility of its being a subject to the control of the constitutional judiciary - a comparative study -) came to study the concept of constitutional amendments and the perspective of constitutional jurisprudence and the comparative constitutional judiciary from the legal value of the constitutional restrictions imposed on the authority of the constitutional amendment, and the consideration to being these restrictions as a legal basis for imposing the constitutional judge's control over the constitutionality of constitutional amendments.

The research touched on the most important judicial applications of the constitutional courts in the United States of America, the Federal Republic of Germany and the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the constitutional appeals brought before them regarding the validity of the constitutional amendments.

Through the sections of this research, in which we relied on the method of comparison and analysis, we tried to identify the points that clarify the similarities and differences between the perspectives of constitutions and the judiciary in these countries.

Perhaps the reason for choosing these countries as a topic for comparison as their great constitutional and legal wealth and solid judicial applications that it deepened the experience in the field of judicial control of the constitutionality of laws in general, and the judicial control of constitutional amendments in particular, which can be used to enhance Iraq's early experience in this field.

As a result of our study of the applications of the comparative constitutional judiciary, and our analysis of the texts of the Iraqi constitution for the year 2005, it became clear to us that the principle of constitutional inflexibility and supremacy requires that constitutional amendments be subject to the control of the constitutional judiciary.