Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Federal: members of the parliamentary opposition exercise full constitutional guarantees


yota691
 Share

Recommended Posts

NT-236583-636618868750734864.jpg

Federal Supreme: The Cabinet issued an amendment to the Protocol

In the policy of  May 14, 2018 to the Supreme Federal: Cabinet issued an amendment to the closed protocol system 92 visits

 

Baghdad / SNG

 Confirmed Federal Supreme Court, Monday, the Cabinet issued an amendment to the protocol system.

 

 

The official spokesman Ayas al-Samuk said in an interview that "the Federal Supreme Court has already issued a ruling on the system of Protocol No. (4) for the year 2016."

"The cabinet went in the same direction as the Federal Supreme Court by issuing an amendment to the protocol," he said.

He explained that "Article II of the amendment provided for the cancellation of the second item, replacing the following text (precedence of the President of the Republic, then the Prime Minister, then to the President Then to the President of the Supreme Federal Court, then to the President of the Supreme Judicial Council, then to the President of the Council of the Union, then to the President of the Territory, then to the President of the Council of Ministers of the region and then to the President of the Council of Representatives of the region

He pointed out that "the amendment was published in the Iraqi facts number (4490) on 7/5/2018."

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • yota691 changed the title to The Federal Court issues an explanation on the constitutional concept of the most numerous parliamentary bloc

The Federal Court issues an explanation on the constitutional concept of the most numerous parliamentary bloc

 

 Since 2018-05-23 at 10:09 (Baghdad time)

sdfsdfg.jpg

Baghdad Mawazine News

The Federal Supreme Court on Wednesday issued an explanation of the constitutional concept of the parliamentary bloc.

"The court has issued an explanation of the constitutional concept of the parliamentary bloc," Ayas al-Samuk, a spokesman for the court, said in a statement received by Mawazine News.

Below is the text of the Federal Court's clarification of the constitutional concept of the parliamentary bloc:

Article (76 / I) of the Constitution stipulates that "The President of the Republic, the candidate of the most numerous parliamentary bloc, shall form the Council of Ministers within fifteen days from the date of the election of the President of the Republic." Through the following:

First: The concept of "the most numerous parliamentary bloc", found by the Federal Supreme Court is clear and explicit in Article (76) of the Constitution.

The text of Article (76) of the Constitution referred to (the parliamentary bloc), a bloc that consists of deputies in a particular assembly to be announced in the House of Representatives, and the deputy is beyond the following stages:

1- Winning in the elections of membership of the House of Representatives.

2 - The approval of the Federal Supreme Court for the availability of conditions in it.

3 - chanted by the section provided for in Article (50) of the Constitution.

The winner of the elections can not exercise the legislative and supervisory role provided for in the constitution. The mere victory alone is not sufficient to take the winner to the rank of " deputy).

Second: - The designation of the parliamentary bloc B (the most numerous) apply to the parliamentary bloc, which surpasses the rest of the blocks in terms of the number of deputies that it includes.

Thirdly: The constitutional legislator's will was not intended to grant the electoral list the right to form a government once it has won numerically in the elections, if he wanted to explicitly stipulate that the text would come as follows: - The President of the Republic nominates the candidate of the winning list or electoral entity The elections of the formation of the Council of Ministers ... ", as is found in the constitutions of some countries, and granting the right to nominate who forms the ministry to the candidate of the parliamentary bloc the most number of deliberately put may concern the circumstances surrounding the writing of the Constitution, and create a kind of balances and understandings between the blocks of the House of Representatives.

Fourth: There is nothing that prevents constitutionally to form the winning list of the elections, the ministry, if it remains the largest bloc and entered the House of Representatives and became the winners of the deputies and a number exceeds the deputies of the rest of the blocks, and then the legal status will be converted from a winning list to the most parliamentary bloc, The formation of the ministry on the basis of the number of deputies.

Fifth: The Federal Supreme Court issued its ruling No. (25 / Federal / 2010), which includes the interpretation of (the parliamentary bloc most numerous), it was based on the frankness and significance of the text of Article (76) of the Constitution and the concept of MP and the conditions of becoming (deputy) To replace its text or concept and can not overcome the intent of the constitutional legislator, which is clear from it; because it is obliged to interpret it based on the competence provided for in Article (93 / II) of the Constitution, and on this basis was assigned d .. Haidar Abadi to form a government in 2014, His candidacy from the National Alliance, which was the most numerous parliamentary bloc.

Sixth: The Supreme Federal Court has placed an officer in regard to the parliamentary bloc, which is formed in the first session of the House of Representatives, which is held under the chairmanship of the oldest member. This bloc is formally registered as the most numerous, and this addresses a very important issue. The claim that it holds this status merely for the announcement in the media, but formally documented it in the House of Representatives.

Seventh: There is nothing to prevent the appointing of the ministry from (the winning list in the elections) if this is so if Article (76) of the Constitution is amended as required according to the mechanisms stipulated in Article (142) thereof.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, yota691 said:

which is held under the chairmanship of the oldest member.

Candidate of the winner of the Civil Alliance as Speaker of Parliament at the next session

 

 Since 2018-05-19 at 13:28 (Baghdad time)

DCVDFG.jpg

Baghdad Mawazine News

The winner of the elections for the civil democratic coalition, Mohammad Ali Zinni, will preside over the first session of the parliament in the next session, which is dedicated to the selection of the speaker and his deputies as the oldest of the winners, as stipulated by the Constitution.

As stipulated in Article (54) that "the President of the Republic calls the House of Representatives to convene by presidential decree, within 15 days from the date of ratification of the results of general elections, and the meeting is held under the chairmanship of the oldest members to elect the President of the Council and his deputies. "He said.

Zinni, born in Najaf in 1939, won a parliamentary seat on the Democratic Civil Alliance, and holds a master's and doctorate from the University of Colorado in the United States of America in the economics of oil.

The Electoral Commission for elections in Iraq, the dawn of Saturday, the victory of the bloc, "Sawson" led by Muqtada al-Sadr in the parliamentary elections, and get 54 seats, came in second place the block of the opening led by Hadi al-Ameri, got 47 seats, followed by the victory bloc led by Prime Minister Haidar Abadi won 42 seats

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

story_img_5b051520b7e1b.jpg

Federal Court: The largest bloc is the most numerous within the House of Representatives

In the policy of  May 23, 2018 to the Federal Court: the largest bloc is the most numerous within the House closed 23 visits

 
Baghdad / SNG
The Federal Supreme Court issued an explanation of the constitutional concept of the most numerous parliamentary bloc.
"Article (76 / I) of the Constitution stipulates that" the President of the Republic, the candidate of the most numerous parliamentary bloc, shall be formed by forming the Council of Ministers within fifteen days from the date of the election of the President of the Republic. "It is clear that this constitutional provision The issue of the formation of the government and those assigned to form it has been resolved through the following: 
First: The concept of "the most numerous parliamentary bloc", found by the Federal Supreme Court is clear and explicit in Article (76) of the Constitution. 
Article (76) of the Constitution referred to the "Parliamentary Bloc", a bloc composed of deputies in a particular assembly to be announced in the Chamber of Deputies, and the MP is one who exceeds the following stages: 
Winning in the elections of membership of the House of Representatives. 
2 - The approval of the Federal Supreme Court for the availability of conditions in it. 
3 - chanting the section provided for in Article (50) of the Constitution.
And then enjoy the immunity and the rest of parliamentary privileges provided for in Article {63} of the Constitution, before the completion of these conditions can not be the winner of the elections to exercise the legislative and supervisory role provided for in the Constitution, because only winning alone is not enough to take the winner status { deputy}. 
Second: - The designation of the parliamentary bloc B {most number} apply to the parliamentary bloc, which surpasses the rest of the blocks in terms of the number of deputies that it includes.
Thirdly: The constitutional legislator's will was not intended to grant the electoral list the right to form a government once it won numerically in the elections, if he wanted to explicitly stipulate that the text would come as follows: - The President of the Republic nominates the candidate of the winning list or the electoral entity, The elections of the formation of the Council of Ministers ... ", as is found in the constitutions of some countries, and granting the right to nominate who forms the ministry to the candidate of the parliamentary bloc the most number of deliberately put may concern the circumstances surrounding the writing of the Constitution, and create a kind of balances and understandings between the blocks of the House of Representatives. 
Fourth: There is nothing constitutional to prevent the list of winning the elections, the ministry, if it remains the largest bloc and entered the House of Representatives and became the winners of the deputies and a number exceeding the deputies of the rest of the blocks, and then the legal description will be converted from a winning list to the most parliamentary bloc, The formation of the ministry on the basis of the number of deputies.
Fifth: The Federal Supreme Court, when it issued its ruling No. (25 / Federal / 2010), which includes the interpretation of the parliamentary bloc, the most important parliamentary bloc, it was based on the frankness and significance of the text of Article (76) of the Constitution and the concept of MP and the conditions of becoming (deputy) To be replaced by the text or concept and can not overcome the intent of the constitutional legislator, which clarifies it; because it is obliged to interpret it based on the competence provided for in Article (93 / II) of the Constitution, and on this basis was assigned to Haider Abadi form the government in 2014, after being nominated by the coalition Which constituted the largest parliamentary bloc.
Sixth: - The Federal Supreme Court has placed an officer on the «parliamentary bloc the most numerous» that they are formed in the first meeting of the House of Representatives, which is held under the chairmanship of the oldest members, and this bloc officially registered as the most numerous, and this addresses the subject is very important, The claim that it holds this status merely for the announcement in the media, but formally documented it in the House of Representatives. 
Seventh: - There is nothing to prevent the formation of the Ministry of the «winning list in the elections} if so desired if the article {76} amended the Constitution as required in accordance with the mechanisms provided for in Article {142} thereof.
The elections of the House of Representatives, took place on May 12, and the alliance of the Sadrists, led by the leader of the Sadrist movement, Moqtada al-Sadr, with 54 seats followed by the Fath Alliance with 47 seats and then the victory coalition with 42 seats followed by a coalition of state law 26 seats and the Kurdistan Democratic Party 25 seats and the National Coalition 21 seats and the stream of national wisdom 20 seats
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Supreme Court determines the terms of the largest bloc that will form the government

   
 

 
 


24/5/2018 12:00 am 

 Baghdad / Sabah 
The Federal Supreme Court on Wednesday set the constitutional concept of the largest bloc that will be charged with forming the government, indicating that these conditions came because of the circumstances surrounding the writing of the constitution in 2005 and to create a kind of balances and understandings between the blocks of Parliament. 
The court's spokesman, Ayas al-Samuk, said in a statement received by al-Sabah: "The article (76 / I) of the constitution stipulated: (The President of the Republic, the candidate of the most parliamentary bloc, the formation of the Council of Ministers within fifteen days from the date of election President of the Republic), and it is clear that this constitutional article resolved the issue of forming the government and the task of forming the following through:
First: The concept of "the most numerous parliamentary bloc" found by the Federal Supreme Court is clear and explicit in the text of Article (76) of the Constitution, and the text of this article referred to (the parliamentary bloc), a bloc that consists of deputies in a particular assembly announced in the House of Representatives. 
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

Supreme Court sets conditions for larger block will form the Government.

   
 

 
 

24/5/2018 12:00 am 
 
 
Baghdad/morning
Federal Supreme Court, on Wednesday, the constitutional concept of the biggest bloc in forming the Government, indicating that these conditions came about because of the circumstances surrounding the writing the Constitution in 2005 to create the kind of balances and understandings between blocks of Parliament.
A court spokesman, ayas alsamok, the statement «morning»: «article (76/I) of the Constitution stipulates (costing the President, Parliamentary Bloc candidate most numerous, forming the Cabinet, within fifteen days from the date of the presidential election), it is clear that this article Constitutional Government and subject of settled costs formed through:
First: the concept of «the most numerous Parliamentary Bloc» Federal Supreme Court found it clear and explicit in the text of the article (76) of the Constitution, the text of the article referred to (the Parliamentary Bloc), a cluster that consists of deputies in particular gathered announced in the House of representatives, and the Attorney's who skips the following stages :
1. winning election to the House of representatives.
2. authentication of the Federal Supreme Court on the conditions.
3. the claims Department stipulated in article (50) of the Constitution.
Alsamok reported that then characterized the parliamentary status and obtain immunity and the rest of the Parliamentary privileges stipulated in article (63) of the Constitution but before completing these terms cannot winner exercise legislative and regulatory role enshrined in the Constitution, that simply winning. Alone is not enough to take the winning characteristics (mp).
Alsamok pointed out that parliamentary bloc label b (the most numerous) apply to the Parliamentary Bloc excels the rest of blocs in terms of number of the House, pointing out that the constitutional legislator's will was not destined to grant electoral list right form Government once winning numerically in the election And if he wanted to expressly text was as follows: (cost President candidate winning or winning electoral entity list numerically in the elections the formation of Cabinet.» As found in the constitutions of some States to grant a right of nomination of the Ministry is the most numerous Parliamentary Bloc candidate put on purpose may relate to the circumstances surrounding the writing the Constitution and create the kind of balances and understandings between blocks of the House.
And Federal Court spokesman confirmed that there is no constitutionally forbidden to form the winning list in the elections if the Ministry's largest bloc and entered the House where winners become deputies and more than the rest of blocs and deputies then will shift as the winner list of legal (mass The most representative) and the cost formed a Ministry on the basis of the number of Deputies, explaining that the Federal Supreme Court when it ruled (Federal/25/2010) containing the interpretation of (the most numerous Parliamentary Bloc), it was based on the text of the article explicitly and significance (76) of the Constitution and the concept of Vicar and then becoming conditions () and no right to replace text or concept and cannot skip the constitutional legislator intended to clarify; they are obliged to interpret it based on competence provided for in article (93/II) of the Constitution and on this basis was commissioned. Haider Abadi formed Government in2014, having been nominated by the National Alliance Parliamentary Bloc was the most numerous.
Alsamok said that the Federal Supreme Court put an officer on (the most numerous Parliamentary Bloc) are formed in the first session of the House of representatives held the chairmanship of the oldest Member and register the bloc formally more numerous and that addresses a topic so important, it cannot block What they carry such just for advertising in the media but presumably officially documented in the House, pointing out that there is no reason to be in charge of forming the Ministry of (winning the election) if that if you modify the article (76) as required under the Constitution only Lei stipulated in article (142).

http://www.alsabaah.iq/ArticleShow.aspx?ID=157606

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • yota691 changed the title to The federal government is demanding that it not ratify the election results under the pretext of violations

The federal government is demanding that it not ratify the election results under the pretext of violations

 

 Since 2018-05-27 at 12:14 (Baghdad time)

weQWE.jpg

 Baghdad Mawazine News

The Federal Supreme Court on Sunday filed a lawsuit demanding that it not ratify the results of the elections of the House of Representatives on the pretext of the existence of violations accompanied the electoral process.

"The Federal Supreme Court held its session today (27 May 2018) and considered a lawsuit that focused on the electoral violations that accompanied the process of elections to the membership of the House of Representatives, which took place on 12/15 / "2018," noting that "the plaintiff asked to oblige the defendant President of the Federal Supreme Court / in addition to his job, not to ratify the results of those elections in accordance with the text of Article (73 / VII) of the Constitution."

Al-Samok pointed out that "the court confirmed that the judiciary does not contest and does not count against the facts attributed to other persons or entities, as the subject concerns the Independent High Electoral Commission, which is in charge of accepting complaints and objections to alleged violations, which occur during the electoral process , And that its decision is subject to appeal before a judicial body, the judiciary in the Federal Court of Cassation.

"The court explained that Article (4) of the Civil Procedure Law No. (83) of 1969 stipulated that the plaintiff in the case is an opponent whose approval of the facts of the dispute entails the issuance of a judgment in those facts in favor of the plaintiffs. In obtaining the facts contained in the lawsuit or not because they did not issue these facts in the case of proven, but attributed to the issuance of those attributed to him.

"The Court therefore decided to respond to the claim that the dispute is not directed to the plaintiff / in addition to his function, based on the provisions of Articles 4 and 80/1 of the Civil Procedure Code mentioned above."

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The federal court is suing for not approving the election results

12:09 - 27/05/2018
0
 
  
%D8%A7%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B3-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8

Information / Baghdad ..

The Federal Supreme Court on Sunday filed a lawsuit demanding that it not ratify the results of the elections of the House of Representatives on the pretext of the existence of violations accompanied the electoral process.

"The Supreme Federal Court held its session today (27 May 2018) and considered a lawsuit that focused on the electoral violations that accompanied the process of elections to the membership of the House of Representatives, which took place on 12/15 / / 2018, where the plaintiff asked the defendant to oblige the President of the Federal Supreme Court / in addition to his job, not to ratify the results of those elections in accordance with the text of Article (73 / VII) of the Constitution.

Al-Samok added that "the court confirmed that the judiciary does not contest and does not count against the facts attributed to other persons or parties, as the subject concerns the Independent High Electoral Commission, which is in charge of accepting complaints and objections to alleged violations, which occur during the electoral process, And that its decision is subject to appeal before a judicial body, the judiciary in the Federal Court of Cassation.

He pointed out that "the court explained that Article (4) of the Civil Procedure Law No. (83) of 1969 stipulated that the plaintiff in the case is a deduction that results from his approval of the facts subject of the dispute. A judgment in these facts is issued in favor of the plaintiffs. To acknowledge the occurrence of the facts contained in the lawsuit or not because they did not issue these facts in the case of proven, but attributed to the issuance of those attributed to him.

The court spokesman said that "the court decided to respond to the claim that the dispute is not directed to the defendant / in addition to his function, based on the provisions of articles (4 and 80/1) of the Code of Civil Procedure mentioned above. Ending / 25

http://www.almaalomah.com/2018/05/27/313102/

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Sunday 27 May

 

Search Bigger
 
 
 
 
 

Alsumaria News / Baghdad , 
said a spokesman for the Federal Supreme Court Illes Acommok, Sunday, the court received a suit at the request not to compel ratification of the election results of the House of Representatives "under the pretext of the existence of breaches" accompanied the electoral process. 

Samok said in a statement received by Alsumaria News a copy of it, "The Federal Supreme Court held its session today and considered a lawsuit focused on the electoral violations that accompanied the process of elections to the membership of the House of Representatives, which took place on 12/5/2018, where the plaintiff asked to oblige the defendant President of the Federal Supreme Court In addition to his job, not to ratify the results of those elections in accordance with Article (93 / VII) of the Constitution.

 

 


He added that "the court confirmed that the judiciary does not contest and does not count against the facts attributed to other persons or entities, as the subject concerns the Independent High Electoral Commission, which is in charge of accepting complaints and objections to alleged violations, which occur during the electoral process, and Its decision is subject to appeal before a judicial body, the judiciary in the Federal Court of Cassation. 

"The court explained that article 4 of the Civil Procedure Law No. 83 of 1969 stipulated that the plaintiff in the case is a contrivance arising from his approval of the facts subject to the dispute. A judgment in these facts was issued in favor of the plaintiffs. Since the plaintiff does not have the right to certify the facts In the case or not, because it did not issue these facts in the case of proven, but attributed to the issuance of those attributed to him.

The spokesman of the Federal Supreme Court, that "the court and accordingly decided to respond to the case that the dispute is not addressed to the plaintiff / in addition to his function, based on the provisions of articles (4 and 80/1) of the Code of Civil Procedure mentioned above.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27-05-2018 12:29 PM
image.php?token=66b8d68e221603d1f2046ac3ae476ac0&size=
 


 

 

The Federal Supreme Court on Sunday filed a lawsuit demanding that it not ratify the results of the elections of the House of Representatives on the pretext of the existence of violations accompanied the electoral process. 

The court spokesman Ayas al-Samuk said that the Federal Supreme Court held its session today (27/5/2018) and considered a lawsuit that focused on the electoral violations that accompanied the process of elections to the House of Representatives on 12-15 / 2018, The President of the Federal Supreme Court / in addition to his function, not to ratify the results of those elections in accordance with the text of Article (93 / VII) of the Constitution '.

He added that 'the court confirmed that the judiciary does not contest and does not count against the facts attributed to other persons or parties, as the subject concerns the Independent High Electoral Commission, which is in charge of accepting complaints and objections to alleged violations, which occur during the electoral process, Subject to appeal before a judicial body, the judiciary in the Federal Court of Cassation '. 

He pointed out that "the court clarified that Article (4) of Civil Procedure Law No. (83) of 1969 stipulated that the plaintiff in the case is a deduction that results from his approval of the facts subject of the dispute. A judgment in these facts is issued in favor of the plaintiffs. To admit in the occurrence of the facts contained in the lawsuit or not because they did not issue these facts in the case of proven, but attributed to the issuance of those attributed to him '.

The court spokesman said that "the court therefore decided to respond to the claim that the dispute is not directed to the defendant / in addition to his function, based on the provisions of Articles 4 and 80/1 of the Code of Civil Procedure mentioned above.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Federal Court to respond to the appeal of the unconstitutionality of articles in the law of the provinces

 

 From 2018-05-28 at 12:33 (Baghdad time)

28.jpg

Baghdad Mawazine News

On Monday, the Federal Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit against the unconstitutionality of articles in the Third Amendment Law to the Law on Governorates in Region No. 21 of 2008, pointing out that the abolition of district councils does not interfere with the federal system of the Republic of Iraq.

"The Federal Supreme Court held its session under the chairmanship of Judge Medhat Al-Mahmoud and the presence of all the member judges, and considered three cases to challenge the unconstitutionality of what is stated in Law No. 10 of 2018 Law of the Third Amendment Of the law of governorates that are not organized in the region 21 of 2008 ".

Samok added that "the third amendment law included in its articles the abolition of the district councils, and the plaintiffs cited the reasons for the appeal that the court examined, and stood on whether the cancellation is contrary to the Constitution or not."

He added that "the court found that the amendment does not affect the federal system of the Republic of Iraq provided for in Article 116 of the Constitution, which consists of the capital, the province, and decentralized provinces, and local administrations, and does not affect the components of the provinces provided for in Article 122 / I of the Constitution, Districts and villages, which are the basis of administrative decentralization. "

"The court's ruling stressed that the existence of the district council in each area as the plaintiffs want is baseless from the constitution. The only requirement stipulated by the constitution is the existence of the provincial council under article 122 / IV," the spokesman said.

The Samok, that "the Supreme Federal Court stated that the abolition of the Council of the province under the Third Amendment to the Law of Governorates not organized in the province is a legislative option of the House of Representatives under the legislative powers provided for in Article (61 / I) of the Constitution, and not in any violation of the Constitution, The response of the three cases being not based on a provision of the Constitution "

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Federal Court: The abolition of the district council does not contradict the Constitution

12:07 - 28/05/2018
0
 
  
%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%85%D8%

Information / Baghdad ..

On Monday, the Federal Supreme Court responded to the appeal of unconstitutionality of articles in the Third Amendment Law to the Law of Governorates in the Region No. 21 of 2008, confirming that the abolition of the district councils does not interfere with the federal system of the Republic of Iraq, .

"The Federal Supreme Court held its session under the chairmanship of Judge Medhat al-Mahmoud and the presence of all the member judges," said Ayas al-Samuk, a spokesman for the court, in a statement received by al-Maaloumah. "Three cases were heard challenging the unconstitutionality of what is stated in Law No. 10 of 2018, Law of the Third Amendment) to the Law of Governorates not organized in the region (21) for the year 2008.

"The third amendment law included in its articles the abolition of (the district councils), and the plaintiffs cited the reasons for the appeal that the court examined, and stood on whether the cancellation is contrary to the Constitution or not."

The Federal Supreme Court found that the amendment does not affect the federal system of the Republic of Iraq provided for in article 116 of the Constitution, which is composed of a capital, a province, a decentralized governorate, and local administrations. It does not affect the components of the governorates stipulated in Article 122 / Of the Constitution, namely, districts, districts, and villages, which are the basis of administrative decentralization. "

The spokesman added that "the court's ruling stressed that the existence of the district council in each area as the plaintiffs want is baseless from the Constitution, as the only requirement stipulated by the Constitution is the existence of (the Council of the province), under article (122 / IV) of it "He said.

He added that "the Federal Supreme Court stated that the abolition of the district council under the Third Amendment to the Law of Governorates not organized in the province is a legislative option of the Council of Representatives under the legislative powers provided for in Article (61 / I) of the Constitution, and no violation of the Constitution, The three being not based on the support of the Constitution. " Ending / 25

http://www.almaalomah.com/2018/05/28/313363/

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
BAGHDAD / Al-Ghad Press: The 

spokesman of the Federal Supreme Court, Iyas Samok, how to hold the first meeting of the elected House of Representatives, and the accompanying constitutional legal procedures. 

With the approaching date of the end of the third parliamentary session, should be referred to the first session of the House of Representatives for the fourth session and what should be included in the procedures as provided by the Constitution, and the provisions of the Federal Supreme Court related.

First: The first session, which is called by the President of the Republic within (15) days from the date of ratification of the Federal Supreme Court on the results of elections to the membership of the House of Representatives. 

This session will be opened under the chairmanship of the oldest member in accordance with Article (54) of the Constitution. Adnan Pachachi for the first parliamentary session, and in the second session was chaired by Dr. Fouad Masum, and the third session was chaired by the late Dr. Mahdi Hafiz.

Second: The winners approved by the Federal Supreme Court in accordance with their competence stipulated in Article (93/7) of the Constitution shall enter into the first session to repeat the section stipulated in Article (50) of the Constitution so that everyone becomes deputies. The mandate is to be submitted within fifteen days from the date of the election of the President of the Republic, in the hope that the commissioner will complete the task of forming the ministry within thirty days from the date of the commissioning. This is what was stated Article (76 / II) of the Constitution. 

Fourth: The task of the head of the basic age is to run the first session, and open the door to run for the post of Speaker of the House of Representatives and his deputies by secret ballot and direct members, to deliver the meeting to those who were elected and can also run as other MPs.
This means that the head of the age does not have the right to end the first session as Article (55) was explicit by the text "The Council of Representatives elected in the first session of the President, and then the first deputy and second deputy, by an absolute majority of the members of the Council, 54), which stipulates that "... the meeting shall be held under the chairmanship of the oldest member to elect the President of the Council and its two Vice-Presidents, and no extension may be allowed for more than the aforementioned period." This means that the President and his deputies must be elected at the first meeting exclusively.

Fifthly: The President of the Age shall not be entitled to interrupt the session and keep it open by any argument, because this contravenes the ruling of the Federal Supreme Court, which is responsible for the oversight of the constitutionality of laws and legislations. Article 55 of the Federal Law No. 24 of 2010 / 2010, to "make the first meeting of the House of Representatives (open) and to an unspecified time without the support of the Constitution has constituted a violation of its provisions and confiscated the concept of the first meeting and the objectives of which Article 55 intended." 
This provision contributed at the time to the end of the open session, and the need for the House of Representatives to convene and the election of the President of the House of Representatives and his deputies and the President and then the formation of the ministry after the breakdown of those procedures for months.

Sixth: - Based on this offer, we reach the conclusion that the first meeting of the House of Representatives should begin with the President of the age, and ends with an elected president and his deputies and may not be lifted or made open without completion of these procedures, as provided for in the aforementioned constitutional articles, Federal High.
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Federation outlines the new parliamentary sessions and warns against the open session

Since 31 minutes

2952018142956606e370b736644e95baa4bb8d5a2bcff.jpg

+ -

Baghdad / NRT

On Tuesday, the Federal Court issued a clarification specifying the stages of the first session of the parliament, noting that the session begins with the head of the age and raises the president and his deputies elected by the deputies, warning that "the old man is not entitled to interrupt the session and keep it open by any argument."

A statement issued by the Court on 29 May 2018 that " with the approaching date of the end of the third parliamentary session, should be referred to the first session of the House of Representatives for the fourth session and what should be included in the procedures as provided by the Constitution, and the relevant Federal Supreme Court .

The statement added that the first session, which is called by the President of the Republic within (15) days from the date of ratification of the Federal Supreme Court on the results of elections to the membership of the House of Representatives .

He explained that "the first session will be opened under the chairmanship of the oldest member in accordance with article 54 of the Constitution, which was headed by Dr. Adnan Pachachi for the first parliamentary session, the second session was headed by Dr. Fuad Masum, the third session was chaired by the late d. Mahdi al-Hafiz . "

The statement confirmed that "the winners approved by the Federal Supreme Court in accordance with its competence stipulated in Article (93 / VII) of the Constitution, enter the first meeting to echo the section provided for in Article (50) of the Constitution to become all deputies, The blocs are officially to know the parliamentary bloc most responsible for presenting the candidate in charge of forming the ministry based on the provisions of Article (76 / I) of the Constitution, and the commissioning within fifteen days from the date of the election of the President of the Republic in the hope that the official will complete the task within thirty days from the date of commissioning , That's what Article by St (76 / II) of theConstitution .

The statement continued: " The task of the head of the basic age is to run the first meeting, and open the door to run for the post of Speaker of the House of Representatives and his deputies by secret ballot and direct members, to deliver the meeting to those who were elected and can also run as other MPs .

He added that the president of the age does not have the right to end the first session because Article (55) was stated by the text "The Council of Representatives elected in the first meeting of the President, then the first deputy and second deputy, by an absolute majority of the number of members of the Council, by secret secret ballot," and before Article 54 ), Which stipulates that "... the session shall be held under the chairmanship of the oldest member to elect the President of the Council and his deputies. No extension may be allowed for more than the aforementioned period." This means that the President and his deputies must be elected at the first meeting exclusively .

"The President of the Age is not entitled to interrupt the session and keep it open by any argument, because this contravenes the ruling of the Federal Supreme Court - which is responsible for monitoring the constitutionality of laws and legislations - where its provision No. (55 / Federal / 2010) issued on 24/10/2010, 2010, to "make the first meeting of the House of Representatives (open) and to an unspecified time without the support of the Constitution has constituted a violation of its provisions and confiscated the concept of the first meeting and the objectives of Article 55 of it ."

He pointed out that " this provision contributed in his time to end the open session, and the need for the House of Representatives to convene and the election of the President of the House of Representatives and his deputies and the President and then the formation of the ministry after the breakdown of those procedures for months .

The statement concluded that "Based on this offer, we come to the conclusion that the first meeting of the House of Representatives should begin with the President of the age, and ends with the President of the elected and Vice-Presidents may not be lifted or made open without completing such procedures, as provided for in the above constitutional articles , And the directions of the Federal Supreme Court . "

http://nrttv.com/Ar/News.aspx?id=873&MapID=2

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • yota691 changed the title to A Federal Court spokesman explains how to hold the first session of the next parliament
  • yota691 changed the title to Documents .. Infallible The cancellation of election results is contrary to the Constitution and requests the opinion of the Federal Court
story_img_5b0ee929477a4.jpg

Documents .. Infallible The cancellation of election results is contrary to the Constitution and requests the opinion of the Federal Court

In Uncategorized  30 May, 2018 on documents .. Infallible The cancellation of election results is contrary to the Constitution and requests the opinion of the Federal Court closed 66 visits

 
 Baghdad / SNG
The President of the Republic Fuad Masoum, the decision of the House of Representatives on the cancellation of the election results for some provinces and re-counting and sorting "contrary to the Constitution."
Masoum asked the Federal Supreme Court to give its opinion on the decisions of the Council of Ministers and the Council of Representatives regarding the parliamentary elections held on 12 May.
Resized Image
Resized Image
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2018/05/31 11:50

Number of readings 30

Section: Iraq

The Federal Court will not ratify the election results until the dissolution of the objections

 

 

 

BAGHDAD / Massila: The head of the Kurdistan Islamic Group, Ahmed Haji Rashid, Thursday, 31 May 2018, that the Federal Court will not ratify the results of the elections announced until the resolution of objections to them. 

"The results announced by the Commission previously can not be considered frozen as long as the amendment of the election law was not voted on, but if they abide by the resolution issued by the parliament earlier, it is possible to consider the results declared frozen, especially in Kirkuk And the Kurdistan region. " 

He added that "the Federal Court takes into account the political circumstances in Iraq and therefore is keen not to aggravate things or create new problems, which means that it will not go to ratify the results of the elections announced until the existing objections are resolved and what goes to the House of Representatives in the amendment of the election law." 

The House of Representatives completed its extraordinary session held last Wednesday, "May 30, 2018" the first reading of the second amendment to the Electoral Law No. 45 of 2013.

Follow the obelisk
http://almasalah.com/ar/news/138534/المحكمة-الاتحادية-لن-تصادق-على-نتائج-الانتخابات-حتى-حسم-الاعتراضات

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • yota691 changed the title to The Federal Court will not ratify the election results until the dissolution of the objections

"Hassan"....the John Hancock of Iraq. But he forgot to write from right to left. Then there's

      Prez Masoum, live from the grave. I never know which eye is looking at me?? LOL.

      The Land of Misfit Iraqis. What a group. Now let's all get together and argue about

                                             the elections for 7 months.

                                                                                          ;)

      Related image

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, King Bean said:

  The Land of Misfit Iraqis.

 

In spite of all the advances made under the Abadi leadership the "misfits" are still running the show. If Sadr doesn't produce a magic rabbit real soon this has the potential of a rapid downward spiral.....just what Maliki and his goons want and need.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Thursday 31 May
 
   
 
Search Bigger
Advertise Alsumaria
 
 
 
 

Alsumaria News / Baghdad

 

The coalition of Iraqi forces, on Thursday, expressed confidence in the decisions of the judicial to consider the appeals of the election, as the price of the position of the presidency of the Republic protector of the Constitution.
 

"We trust the decisions of the Iraqi judiciary and the discriminatory body to consider the electoral appeals after the announcement of the Independent Electoral Commission for elections end of the appeals period with results," the alliance of forces said in a statement received by Alsumaria News.

 


He added that "the Electoral Commission has met its efforts and procedures and said its technical opinion in the appeals and ball now in the arena of the Iraqi justice just, and no doubt, his decisions are Faisal and governance." 

He praised the alliance of forces in his statement "the patriarchal role exercised by the Presidency of the Republic represented by President Fuad Masum and his role to maintain the constitutionality of the political process and respect for the rule of law in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of Iraq in force." 

The results of the May 12, 2018 parliamentary elections led to widespread debate, prompting the House of Representatives to convene an emergency session on May 28, 2018, during which it decided to recount 10% of the votes and cancel the results of the elections abroad.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A political settlement to resolve the election file could include canceled ministries for losing parties

A political settlement to resolve the election file could include canceled ministries for losing parties
 
 



 Twilight News    
 2 hours ago

A political source revealed that the response of the Iraqi judiciary may delay in resolving the appeals related to the results of the elections until the establishment of what he called a "political settlement" between the winning and losing parties. 
"There are persistent attempts by prominent Iraqi parties to restore balance and preserve the political process and democracy after the results of the last elections," the source told the news agency, who declined to be named because of his sensitivity. 
He pointed out that "the consensus and the process of distribution of government positions will be able to close and resolve all the files of appeals and electoral problems and results." 
The source did not rule out that "the new cabinet reshuffle includes the return of some ministries that have been dissolved in the government, whose mandate is nearing completion, to satisfy some parties."
It is noteworthy that Iraq has witnessed parliamentary elections on May 12, 2018 and did not ratify the results of the Federal Supreme Court because of the appeals filed on the results of blocks and leaders of losers.

Keywords: 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • yota691 changed the title to Federal: members of the parliamentary opposition exercise full constitutional guarantees
  • Adam Montana locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Similar Content

    • By yota691
      Iraq FEDERAL COURT SETTLES THE CONTROVERSY OVER THE IMMUNITY OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT
      Tuesday, May 25, 2021 1:56 PM        
        Baghdad / National News Center
      Today, Tuesday, the Federal Supreme Court issued a clarification that settled the debate over the immunity of members of the House of Representatives.
      A statement of the court, which was received by the National News Center, stated that “The Federal Supreme Court decided, by Court Decision 90 / Federal / 2019, on 4/28/2021, to revoke previous court decisions regarding obtaining the approval of the House of Representatives in all crimes for which members of Parliament are accused, either. They were crimes of felony, misdemeanors, or offenses, and the court decided to limit obtaining the approval of the House of Representatives in one case only, which is the issuance of an arrest warrant for a crime of the type of felony that is not witnessed, except for the immunity of the members of the House of Representatives, and legal measures can be taken against them directly in the event that any of them are accused of a felony crime A witness, a misdemeanor, or an offense. ”
      The statement added: “The court also decided to revoke the previous court’s decision regarding the interpretation of the concept of an absolute majority. The court decided that the concept of an absolute majority wherever it appears in the constitution is intended to be more than half of the actual number of members of the House of Representatives. As for what is meant by a simple majority, it is more than half of the number of members of the House of Representatives present after the quorum has been achieved.
      He continued, "With this decision, courts can settle corruption cases faster than before, because most corruption crimes apply to the description of misdemeanor crimes, and resolving them depends on the immunity of the accused being lifted if he is a member of Parliament."
    • By yota691
      Iraq FEDERAL COURT SETTLES THE CONTROVERSY OVER THE IMMUNITY OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT
      Tuesday, May 25, 2021 1:56 PM        
        Baghdad / National News Center
      Today, Tuesday, the Federal Supreme Court issued a clarification that settled the debate over the immunity of members of the House of Representatives.
      A statement of the court, which was received by the National News Center, stated that “The Federal Supreme Court decided, by Court Decision 90 / Federal / 2019, on 4/28/2021, to revoke previous court decisions regarding obtaining the approval of the House of Representatives in all crimes for which members of Parliament are accused, either. They were crimes of felony, misdemeanors, or offenses, and the court decided to limit obtaining the approval of the House of Representatives in one case only, which is the issuance of an arrest warrant for a crime of the type of felony that is not witnessed, except for the immunity of the members of the House of Representatives, and legal measures can be taken against them directly in the event that any of them are accused of a felony crime A witness, a misdemeanor, or an offense. ”
      The statement added: “The court also decided to revoke the previous court’s decision regarding the interpretation of the concept of an absolute majority. The court decided that the concept of an absolute majority wherever it appears in the constitution is intended to be more than half of the actual number of members of the House of Representatives. As for what is meant by a simple majority, it is more than half of the number of members of the House of Representatives present after the quorum has been achieved.
      He continued, "With this decision, courts can settle corruption cases faster than before, because most corruption crimes apply to the description of misdemeanor crimes, and resolving them depends on the immunity of the accused being lifted if he is a member of Parliament."
    • By yota691
      Another member of the Federal Court dies, for lack of three members
       Time: 10/30/2020 13:47:16    Read: 2,730 times    {Baghdad: Al Furat News} A member of the Federal Supreme Court died, the second this month. In a statement, the Al Furat News Agency received a copy of it, the court dismissed "with more pain and regret, retired judge {Farouk Al-Sami}, member of the Federal Supreme Court."
      The statement added, "He was full of honorable judicial history before his appointment as a member of the Federal Supreme Court, including a judge in the Federal Court of Cassation and President of the Administrative Court, and he died as a result of an incurable disease that may God protect him in Elyin, and his residence is spacious. ".
      On the 11th of this month, the Federal Supreme Court declared that one of its members, Judge Abboud Al-Tamimi, had an incurable disease.
      It is noteworthy that the Federal Supreme Court has become vacant of three members (two deaths and one vacancy), which makes it unable to decide on constitutional disputes or certify the results of the upcoming early elections without completing their quorum.
      The House of Representatives intends to legislate the Federal Court’s law amid political debate over amending the law and other new legislation, in addition to a disagreement over jurists and clerics in the court’s membership.
      Ammar Al-Masoudi
    • By Butifldrm
      2019/07/30 12:26 Number of readings 163 Section: Iraq   The Federal Court provides for the maintenance of article 140 of the Constitution
      The Supreme Federal Court ruled on Tuesday, July 30, 2019, that article 140 of the Constitution of the Republic of Iraq should remain in force, stressing that this will continue until the implementation of its provisions and achieve the objective of its legislation. 

      "The Supreme Federal Court held its session under the chairmanship of Judge Medhat al-Mahmoud and the presence of all members of the judges and considered the request of the House of Representatives to interpret Article 140 of the Constitution in terms of whether or not." 

      "The Supreme Federal Court found that Article 140 of the Constitution of the Republic of Iraq for 2005 called on the executive authority to take the necessary steps to complete the implementation of the requirements of Article 5 of the Transitional Administrative Law in all its paragraphs, "Of the Constitution".

      He pointed out that "the court found that this is to achieve the objectives stated in Article" 58 "of the Iraqi Transitional Administrative Law aimed at achieving justice in areas that have been subjected to a change in the demographic situation through deportation and exile and forced migration, according to the steps outlined in Article "58" mentioned ANVA ". 

      The spokesman said that "the Federal Supreme Court found that these steps have not been completed and that the section has not been taken, and remains the goal of the development and legislation of Article" 140 "of the Constitution is required and the duty of implementation from all. 

      He added that "the Court affirmed that the date specified in the implementation of Article 140 of the Constitution has set the regulatory issues and urge the concerned to implement them and do not affect the essence and achieve its goal."

      "The Supreme Federal Court and therefore decided to stay the entry of article" 140 "of the Constitution of the Republic of Iraq at the present time and until the implementation of the requirements and achieve the goal of legislation in accordance with the steps outlined in Article" 58 "of the law of the Iraqi state of transition" . 

      Follow the obelisk
      http://almasalah.com/ar/news/175748/المحكمة-الاتحادية-تقضي-ببقاء-سريان-المادة-140-من-الدستور
       
  • Testing the Rocker Badge!

  • Live Exchange Rate

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.