خصوصية قواعد المرافعات في الطعون الدستورية الضريبية : دراسة مقارنة

Abstract EN

It is really true that the tax lawmaker skipping to stipulate a certain rule, obliging us to return back to the rules of session law, for knowing this rule, because the session rule is actually considered as the source of all the rules of the procedures .

This includes entirely all rules that are not being stipulated to a certain text .

But, in this case, we do not apply the rule with its flaw and in its form which works inside the certain rule zone.

Therefore , the rule must be applied correspondently and identically with the procedures of the tax law.

As the latter is verily controlled with the principles that could not be over passed.

This affair is clearly presented in the tax constitutional appeals, whereat the constitutional lawsuit is not similar to the normal lawsuit in some of its details.

Thus, it has affected in presenting of these particulars which related to the rules of the sessions applied during checking up of these appeals, such as the styles of reviving the constitutional lawsuit which are not similar to the normal lawsuits.

The constitutional lawsuit in Iraq is reviving in a way of direct lawsuit or sub-suing, or referring to the subject court.

Actually in Egypt the lawsuit normally reviving in a way of sub-suing and the way of referring and spontaneous instituting .However ,the constitutional lawsuit is really considered as an identity lawsuit since the goal of lawsuit suing is determining an identity evidence or certain legal referring.

On this side, the constitutional lawsuit is an lawsuit of identity nature, due the litigation is directly headed into the legal text.

It is viz the litigation therein, the very legal text which is as unlikely as the rules of the constitutional.

On contrary to the normal lawsuit which owns a personal nature, representing the judicial reexamination of setting out in the Egyptian law, whereat it is really unaccepted by Iraqi lawmaker , out of the principle( judgment is required, as there is no interest ,there will be no lawsuit, and Mr.

justice should not judge more than what the litigants asked for).

One should note that the condition of the interest with the tax constitutional appeals used a larger dimension more than of what presenting in untaxed rules.

And the constitutional courts are content of saying that the interest condition is available, just because the one who appealed unconstitutionally of a taxed text( who called for its rules),even the latter has not being processed to the tax procedures.

Although the constitution of the republic of Iraq in 2005 is void of a text determined the legal effect due to the determining of rule and system as constitutional because of its breach to the rules of the constitution.

Nonetheless the rule of cancelling all laws and systems for the constitution is consistent according to the article( secondly-40 ) to the law of the supreme federal court No(30) in 2005 which is still be affected under the constitutional of the Iraqi republic of Iraq in 2005.

Apparently that the federal court has limited the scope of its decisions evidence, making it limited according to the appealed law as unconstitutional, without eliminating its effects.

The federal court has exaggerated in applying the evidence of its decisions , when making it controlled by suing a new lawsuits before second judicial association.

As though the court decisions do not reach up to the level of judicial decisions, which must be implemented voluntary or by force.

And the one who objects of implementing it is really considered as a felony doer according to the rules of penalties, forgotten that its decisions are considered as an evidence confronting all authorities and persons pursuant to the constitution and according of the judicial principle saying( the evidence of the matter being judge for).