The Federal Court considers a lawsuit for the invalidity of {dissolving Parliament for itself}

[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."

[yota691]

A legal expert clarifies Supreme Court decisions to lift immunity and abandon the majority interpretation

•  Time: 05/25/2021 13:23:21
•  
•  Read: 2,327 times

 

  

{Politics: Al-Furat News} A legal expert explained the decisions of the Federal Supreme Court regarding lifting the legal immunity of members of Parliament.

Tariq Harb told Al-Furat News Agency, "The Federal Supreme Court's decision is in accordance with the provisions of the constitution, because the constitution differs between two cases, the first being the case of the witnessed crime, as the constitution did not assign the matter to the House of Representatives, meaning that if there was a crime witnessed by one of the representatives, the court has the right to ... It gives an order to arrest him directly without the need to waive his immunity from the House of Representatives. "

And as for the other cases, they need to lift his immunity from Parliament, after which the court has the right to issue an arrest warrant.

Harb pointed out, "The new thing in the statement of the Federal Supreme Court is a mention to the House of Representatives indirectly, that {you, the House of Representatives, take the necessary measures regarding requests by the judiciary to lift immunity}, indicating that" it follows from that the inspiration to the House of Representatives that Although the lifting of immunity requires a vote by members of Parliament, but you must take into account the requests of the Judicial Council to lift the immunity of some deputies}, because there are transactions of up to twenty or more that are still in place demanding the lifting of immunity for some deputies, but it has not yet been lifted. .

He explained, "We consider these an introduction to cases that will happen in relation to issues of integrity, and that the Supreme Court in its statement today gave a good, accurate and profound signal in this area, and the House of Representatives must take the necessary steps to interpret the statement issued by the Federal Court."

The Federal Supreme Court decided today to revoke previous court decisions regarding obtaining the approval of the House of Representatives in all crimes for which members of the House of Representatives are accused, whether they are felonies, misdemeanors, or offenses. A crime of the type of felony that is not witnessed, except for the impunity of the members of Parliament, and legal measures can be taken against them directly in the event that any of them is charged with a felony, misdemeanor, or contravention.

The court also decided to reverse the court’s previous decision regarding the interpretation of the concept of an absolute majority. The court decided that the concept of an absolute majority wherever it is contained in the constitution is intended to be more than half of the actual number of members of the House of Representatives. As for the simple majority, what is meant is more than half of the number of members of the House of Representatives present after the quorum has been achieved.

He pointed out that "with this decision, the courts can settle corruption cases faster than before, because most corruption crimes apply to the description of misdemeanor crimes, and resolving them depends on lifting the immunity of the accused person, if he is a member of Parliament."

[luvalife]

not sure what movie this is from but this article brings to mind this quote from it...."Get a Rope"

 

Potato head goes first!!!

Things are starting to move forward again.  (last week progression slowed down some) 

I really think this is closer than we know!

See y'all in B.....e

[yota691]

Kurdistan District: We handed over hundreds of wanted people to Baghdad

Wednesday 26th May 2021 134

 

 Baghdad: Hazem Muhammad Habib 

 

The Supreme Judicial Council in the Kurdistan region revealed the handing over of hundreds of wanted persons to the federal Iraqi courts, indicating the existence of high-level coordination and cooperation between the Federal Judicial Council and the Judicial Council in the region.

The head of the Erbil District Court of Appeal, Prime Minister Ismail Khoshnaw, said in an exclusive interview with Al-Sabah: “The Supreme Judicial Council in the Kurdistan Region has handed over to the federal courts hundreds of wanted persons present in the governorate of Erbil during the last period.

He added that «there is great coordination between the two sides to facilitate the procedures for handover and the exchange of wanted persons, whether on the wanted by the federal government or the Kurdistan region».

Khoshnaw pointed out that «the Judicial Council in the region applies the federal judicial laws, because it is part of the Iraqi state», pointing out that «there is cooperation at a very high level between the Supreme Judicial Council in Baghdad and the Council in the region, especially in the field of wanted persons as well as training experiences».

Stressing that «the committee formed between the Federal Supreme Judicial Council and the judiciary of the Kurdistan region continues to facilitate procedures for the implementation of arrest warrants against the wanted between the two parties and exchange information and facilitate the process of their transfer to the courts from which the arrest warrants were issued, as well as official correspondence».

[Rochester]

17 hours ago, luvalife said:

not sure what movie this is from but this article brings to mind this quote from it...."Get a Rope"

 

Potato head goes first!!!

Things are starting to move forward again.  (last week progression slowed down some) 

I really think this is closer than we know!

See y'all in B.....e

Get a rope? OK

 

[3 bucks new rv rate]

1 hour ago, Rochester said:

Get a rope? OK

 

LOL. too funny.

[yota691]

Representative law explains the reason for the Federal Court’s decision to lift immunity

•  Time: 05/26/2021 15:06:51
•  
•  Read: 312 times

  

{Politics: Al-Furat News} The Parliamentary Legal Committee explained the reason for the Federal Supreme Court's decision regarding lifting the immunity of members of Parliament.

 

Bahar Mahmoud said in a statement that the Euphrates News Agency received a copy of, that "the interpretation of the Federal Court regarding the immunity of the representative came because some deputies exploited their immunity to commit corruption crimes," affirming that "immunity is to facilitate the profession of the attorney and not to legitimize the commission of crimes."
She added, "Article 63 of the constitution is clear like the sun and does not need any explanation, as it is understood that it is not possible to arrest a member of parliament except after the approval of the parliament by an absolute majority or the approval of the president during the legislative recess except in the case of a witnessed felony, in this case it is permissible to arrest him without need Until the approval of Parliament or its president, but the interpretation of the Federal Court says the opposite! .
She added: We are against the immunity peek for any class of both society members of parliament or ministers or presidencies because immunity in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution, which provides for the equality of citizens before the law, and that there are some members of parliament took advantage of immunity to conduct crimes, especially corruption. "
Showed Mahmoud, "On the other hand, when interpreting any article, we must refer to the philosophy or wisdom of the legislation of this article. The wisdom of Article 63 of the Constitution is to facilitate the task of members of Parliament to carry out their legislative and oversight role and not to facilitate and legitimize the commission of crimes and hide behind them. Therefore, we criticize the exploitation of the privilege of immunity by some members." Parliament to commit corruption crimes. "
The Federal Supreme Court decided yesterday to abstain from previous court decisions regarding obtaining the approval of the House of Representatives in all crimes for which members of Parliament are accused, whether crimes are felonies, misdemeanors, or offenses. A crime of the type of felony that is not witnessed, except for the impunity of the members of Parliament, and legal measures can be taken against them directly in the event that any of them is accused of a felony, misdemeanor, or violation.
The court also decided to revoke the previous court’s decision regarding the interpretation of the concept of an absolute majority, as the court decided that the concept of an absolute majority wherever it appears in the constitution is intended to be more than half the actual number of members of the House of Representatives, and what is meant by a simple majority is more than half of the number of members of Parliament present After a quorum is achieved. "
She pointed out that "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 lifting the immunity of the accused person, if he is a member of Parliament."

Ammar Al-Masoudi

[yota691]

The Federal Court gives the green light to prosecute more than 20 deputies accused of corruption

 

Federal Supreme Court. "Internet"

money and business Economy News - Baghdad The Federal Court’s recent decision to revoke the immunity of members of the House of Representatives granted the judiciary permission to prosecute more than twenty deputies accused of financial and administrative corruption, without referring to Parliament. She described this step as "part" of the reform process, after the government, through the Anti-Corruption Committee, managed to arrest a number of people accused of corruption. Yesterday morning, the Federal Court issued a clarification regarding the immunity of members of Parliament, and confirmed that they have no immunity except when an arrest warrant is issued for an unmarked felony. In a press release, she stated, "The court decided, by its 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 against which members of Parliament are accused, whether they are felonies, misdemeanors, or offenses." She added: "We 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 unmarked felony, except for immunity for members of Parliament." And the Federal Court continued: "It is possible to take legal measures against them directly in the event that any of them is accused of a felony, misdemeanor or contravention." Bahar Mahmoud, a member of the Parliamentary Legal Committee, says that "the decisions of the Federal Court are categorical and binding on all authorities, and cannot be neglected," calling for "the abolition of immunity for all three presidencies, just like the members of Parliament." She believes that "the immunity that existed means inequality among the Iraqi people before the judiciary," noting that "immunity should not be aimed at protecting the corrupt and thieves, and it grants MPs or anyone the right to practice corruption." In the past, hundreds of arrest warrants were issued against a large number of deputies. The Supreme Judicial Council demanded several times from the Presidency of the Council of Representatives to lift the immunity of MPs accused of stealing public funds. A member of the Parliamentary Legal Committee added, "There are a large number of members of Parliament who have submitted requests to lift immunity, but they have resorted to candidacy in the elections in order to obtain immunity and to evade legal accountability and protection in an unreasonable manner." Article 63 / Second of the Federal Constitution regulates the granting of legal immunity and lifting it from the representative. Paragraph (b) prohibits the arrest of a member during the period of the legislative term unless he is accused of a felony and with the approval of the majority of members. Immunity with the approval of the Speaker of Parliament. Mahmoud stresses that "the number of MPs who will be prosecuted after the decision to revoke immunity is large and that the court's decision came into effect after its announcement." Accused of participating. " For his part, Tariq Harb, a legal expert, explains that “Article 63 of the constitution talks about arrest, and therefore immunity is limited to arrest for a flagrant felony (the crime punishable by more than five years),” stressing that “this immunity exists in The constitution is restricted and not absolute. " Members of the Iraqi parliament enjoyed absolute immunity from all crimes and charges against them, and no judicial or security body has the right to arrest or hold them accountable except after the parliament votes to lift their immunity. He adds that the Federal Court’s decision “revoked immunity and previous cases that were considered immunity and said it was wrong and incorrect,” adding that “most cases of financial corruption are in accordance with Articles (331) and (341) of the Penal Code. Any deputy accused of these two articles. " The specialist in legal affairs adds that "many cases will lead to the issuance of arrest against deputies (...). Twenty deputies may have been arrested based on requests to lift immunity that the Supreme Judicial Council sent to Parliament," indicating that "their cases are varied and different from Person to person. " The Supreme Judicial Council had requested, in a previous statement issued by its media office, to lift the immunity of (21) deputies accused of administrative corruption during their tenure in executive positions. Harb added, "The immunity has ended for those MPs who were previously asked to lift their immunity, and therefore legal measures are supposed to be taken against them." Source: term

Number of observations 155   Date of addendum 05/26/2021

[yota691]

Representative Legal: The Federal Court’s decision eliminated the need for parliament to vote to lift immunity

 Political

 

•  Yesterday, 19:06

+ A -A

Baghdad-Conscious- Wissam Al-Mulla
, today, Wednesday, the Parliamentary Legal Committee determined its position on the Federal Supreme Court’s decision that there is no immunity for deputies except when an arrest warrant is issued for an unseen felony.
A member of the Parliamentary Legal Committee, Bahar Mahmoud, said in a statement to the Iraqi News Agency (INA): "The Federal Court's interpretation of Article 63 of the Constitution yesterday is clear, indicating" There are some MPs or those who possess immunity who exploited it to commit crimes while immunity came in order to carry out the mission. Professional. "
She pointed out that "Article 63 of the Constitution says that a deputy may not be arrested except after the approval of the parliament by an absolute majority or the approval of the speaker in the event of the legislative holiday, except in the case of a flagrant felony." The crime is witnessed, there is no need for the House of Representatives to vote to lift the immunity. "
She added, "There are a number of requests that reached the House of Representatives to lift the immunity of a number of deputies and they are now with the Presidency and we do not know their number and they have the right to present them." Representatives, but the court has the right to take measures against an attorney who committed crimes. "
Yesterday, Tuesday, the Federal Court confirmed that MPs have no immunity except when an arrest warrant is issued for an unexplained felony.
The media office of the court said in a statement received by the Iraqi News Agency (INA), "The court decided, by its 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 the House of Representatives are accused, either." They were felonies, misdemeanors, or infractions. "
He added, "The court decided to obtain the approval of the House of Representatives only in one case, which is the issuance of an arrest warrant for a crime of the type of felony that is not witnessed. Otherwise, there is no immunity for members of the House of Representatives," noting that "legal measures can be taken against them directly in the event of an indictment. Any of them with a felony, misdemeanor, or contravention crime. "

[yota691]

Support the Federal Service Council

Saturday May 29, 2021 167

 

Thamer Al Himas

 

In order for words to be associated with actions and to put an end to the excesses of exceptional circumstances, it is necessary to proceed with the activation of the federal agencies first, so yesterday the Federal Court, and today the Federal Service Council determines the categories covered by employment within the Federal Budget Law for the current year, and we hope that the rest of the federal institutions will proceed to unify their coverage as defined by the constitution and not The reality, which brought us to where we are

The Federal Service Council is a national symbol first, and it has rolled up its sleeves to implement the principle of the right man in the right place, to get the public office out of the tunnel of balance and quotas into the space of competence and specialization, as a single standard, and take into account the considerations of achievement and adherence to the standards and criteria associated with it, which avoids the country’s development failure as a whole. . First, what is required of the service council is not to become a mere device for accepting the employment form in order to accept it according to traditional standards, since it is now surrounded by influence surrounding it, and not to gradually creep towards extreme decentralization and open it wide. These challenges will remain evident for a short period of time because their factors prevail according to the de facto situation, in exchange for the increase in unemployment and the methods of dealing with it from the problem of graduates, which rises directly with the population momentum, and this cannot be addressed

B (the top ten or lots) if you don't push the pressure more often. The movement of the owners, filling the vacancies of the retired and the deceased, and the resignation, will be the ground on which the service council plays the opposing team, on the condition that it is even in decentralization, which has been misapplied and diverted the objectives of public service from its path to become a nest for favoritism and its astronomy. There are those who ask: But the constitution calls for decentralization ?, Yes, and in order for us to be in harmony with the constitution, the ground must be prepared for decentralization according to objective criteria that do not intersect with the constitution, which focuses on the basics of citizenship, justice and equality, so it must be recognized that there are social structures even in cities. A phrase about pre-state societies.! In order for the service council to pass through these structures, it must achieve the results drawn by the central plan of the state. Without the plans, the public office and its comprehensive service would be swallowed up to become a mere omission of an obligation. Here comes the role of the Ministry of Planning to make the national goal in light of the available and realized capabilities of SOMO's sales, and its expectations as the sole central authority for more than 90 percent of our resources to establish our central facilities that seek to compensate for the imbalance between oil or agriculture and industry. The concern that remains characteristic of the Federal Service Council is to neutralize or freeze it, since the means to defend it are still intruding, and for the purpose of protecting it, to expand its activities and activities, it is necessary to activate its role in the processes of promotion, promotion, reward and punishment in special ranks first, and to become a public allegation for public service employees, In addition to the possibility of appeal and objection by all elements of the public office. Finally, the council must not be subject to any considerations other than the public service in all its pillars and defend it, and not be indebted to a party other than its competence and sincerity, in order not to pay the bills of its nominee, and to speak with a loud voice that we understand The concern that remains characteristic of the Federal Service Council is to neutralize or freeze it, since the means to defend it are still intruding, and for the purpose of protecting it, to expand its activities and activities, it is necessary to activate its role in the processes of promotion, promotion, reward and punishment in special ranks first, and to become a public allegation for public service employees, In addition to the possibility of appeal and objection by all elements of the public office. Finally, the council must not be subject to any considerations other than the public service in all its pillars and defend it, and not be indebted to a party other than its competence and sincerity, in order not to pay the bills of its nominee, and to speak with a loud voice that we understand The concern that remains characteristic of the Federal Service Council is to neutralize or freeze it, since the means to defend it are still intruding, and for the purpose of protecting it, to expand its activities and activities, it is necessary to activate its role in the processes of promotion, promotion, reward and punishment in special ranks first, and to become a public allegation for public service employees, In addition to the possibility of appeal and objection by all elements of the public office. Finally, the council must not be subject to any considerations other than the public service in all its pillars and defend it, and not be indebted to a party other than its competence and sincerity, in order not to pay the bills of its nominee, and to speak with a loud voice that we understand All.

[yota691]

The Federal Court recognizes the unconstitutionality of the continuation of the work of the provincial councils after the end of their electoral cycle

political| 01:54 - 02/06/2021

 

 

 

 

Baghdad - Mawazine News
, Wednesday, the Federal Court decided that the work of the provincial councils after the end of their electoral cycle was unconstitutional, contrary to the provisions of the constitution and the will of the people.  
The Media Center of the Supreme Judicial Council stated in a statement, of which / Mawazine News / received a copy, that "the Federal Supreme Court issued today 6/2/2021 its decision in the 155 / Federal / 2019 case, which includes that the existence of provincial councils is a constitutional fact that cannot be bypassed, and therefore the legislative authority is not permitted to To legislate a law that includes the abolition of these councils because it contradicts the provisions of the constitution, the principles of democracy and the peaceful transfer of power. However, the continuation of the work of the elected councils, whether they are national councils or local bodies after the end of their electoral cycle, represents a violation of the people’s right to vote, elect, and nominate, and exceeds the will of the voter. 
The statement added that "the period specified for the work of the provincial councils is obligatory and cannot be exceeded, as this is the right of the people and is exercised by them in direct periodic elections."
He pointed out that "what was stated in the third paragraph of Article 1 of Law No. 27 of 2019 the second amendment to the Provincial and District Council Elections Law No. 12 of 2018 does not mean canceling the existence of the provincial councils as a local constitutional body, but rather stopping the continuation of the work of those councils for exceeding the specified period for them, and that this represents Back to the people's will to renew her election."  
The statement stated that  
And the Al-Qassa Council indicated that “the provincial councils are administrative and local bodies entrusted with the implementation of financial and administrative powers only within the principle of administrative decentralization, and the constitution did not authorize them to exercise legislative powers. Thus, Law No. 27 of 2019 is the second amendment law to the Provincial and District Councils Elections Law No. 12 of 2018 amended, which He ended the continuity of the work of the provincial councils in accordance with the constitution, and on the basis of that the court decided to dismiss the case." Ended 29/A 43

[yota691]

The Federal Court issues a decision on the mechanism of objection requests to the validity of the membership of the House of Representatives

•  Time: 09/30/2021 12:00:34
•  
•  Reading: 676 times

  

{Political: Al Furat News} The Federal Supreme Court issued a decision on the mechanism of requests to object to the validity of the membership of the House of Representatives.

A court statement, which was received by {Euphrates News} a copy of it, stated, “The Federal Court, by its decision No. 91 / Federal / 2021 on 24/8/2021, obligated the Iraqi Council of Representatives to receive and register objection requests against the validity of the membership of its members in accordance with the text of Article (52) of the Constitution".

And it indicated that "the failure to decide on the objection by the House of Representatives regarding the validity of membership within thirty days from the date of registering the objection submitted during the legislative term is considered a rejection of the objection."

It also clarified that "the person submitting the objection may appeal before the Federal Supreme Court against the decision issued by the House of Representatives within thirty days from the date of its issuance or from the date on which the non-resolution was considered a refusal, and that those periods are inevitable and entail the forfeiture of the right to appeal."

And she pointed out that “the decision issued by the House of Representatives that the membership of one of its members is not valid has acquired its final form by the expiry of the appeal period stipulated in Article (52) or the issuance of a decision by the Federal Supreme Court that his membership is invalid, entails stripping him of the status of Parliamentary Prosecution and not allowing him to enjoy any of the rights And the privileges granted to members of the House of Representatives as of the date on which the Council’s decision acquires its final form or from the date of the issuance of the decision of the Federal Supreme Court.

[yota691]

Former MPs emigrate for fear of prosecution after lifting immunity

by Editor Iraq news 48 Minutes ago

A government official in Baghdad revealed that there are judicial files against at least 12 deputies in the outgoing parliament, and said that some of them left through Baghdad airport to different destinations.

 

He said that the Abu Ragheef Committee has confessions from current detainees on corruption charges, indicating that they provided deputies with sums of money in exchange for facilitating investment work, and others to stop legal procedures against them, and there is a deputy involved in extorting an official in exchange for not raising files related to him that involve crimes of damage to public money. He expected that Lieutenant-General Ahmed Abu Ragheef's committee would initiate recruitment and arrest procedures against a number of them soon, noting that the demise of the immunity of members of the dissolved parliament would facilitate raising the files of some former MPs, whether it was in the Integrity Commission, or in the investigation committee on corruption cases, indicating that The follow-up to this file will be carried out in coordination with the judicial authority, which will have the final say in this, based on the available evidence.

[yota691]

The Federal Court ruled that 9 articles of the Public Prosecution Act were unconstitutional

•  Time: 10/11/2021 11:28:48
•  
•  Reading: 910 times

  

{Local: Al Furat News} The Federal Supreme Court issued its decision in the case No. 112 / Federal / 2021 on 9/11/2021 unconstitutional of a number of articles contained in the Public Prosecution Law No. 49 of 2017.

The Federal Court ruled unconstitutional the phrase (enjoys financial and administrative independence) in Clause (First) of Article (1).

And the unconstitutionality of Clause (Second) of Article (1).
The court also ruled unconstitutional the phrase (and the assistants of the public prosecution) mentioned in item (first) of Article (3).

Also, the unconstitutionality of the phrase (and for a period of four years) and the phrase (and may be renewed for one time based on a proposal from the Supreme Judicial Council and the approval of the House of Representatives) contained in item (first) of Article (4).

And it issued its decision that the phrase (for a period of four years, renewable once) contained in item (Second) of Article (4) was unconstitutional.

It also issued its ruling unconstitutional of the phrase (or of lawyers or jurists who are not over fifty years old and have experience in their field of work for a period of no less than (10) ten years) mentioned in Clause (Third) of Article (4).

The Federal Supreme Court also ruled unconstitutional Item (Seventh/1, 2 and 3) of Article (4).

And the court declared the items (twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth) of Article (5) unconstitutional.

It also issued its decision that the phrase (and to the House of Representatives) contained in item (Second) of Article (13) was unconstitutional.

The court decided to reject the lawsuit of the plaintiff, the head of the Supreme Judicial Council, in addition to his job regarding the challenge to the unconstitutionality of the remaining articles of the aforementioned Public Prosecution Law.

 

 

[ronscarpa]

It seems they did a good job removing caveats...! 

[yota691]

The Federal Court considers a lawsuit for the invalidity of {dissolving Parliament for itself}

Saturday 27 November 2021 252

 

 Baghdad: Shaima Rashid

 

The President of the Bar, Diaa Al-Saadi, announced that the Federal Supreme Court will consider on the first of next December the lawsuit filed by the Syndicate regarding the unconstitutionality of “dissolving Parliament for itself” after it was postponed, indicating that the Syndicate filed this lawsuit before holding the elections as a constitutional violation.

Al-Saadi told “Al-Sabah”: “The appeal submitted by the Bar Association before the Federal Supreme Court turned to the unconstitutionality (dissolving the House of Representatives on the seventh of last October, and that the elections will take place on the tenth of the same month) that the postponed and conditional solution is to hold the elections on the same day. Certain violates the second paragraph of Articles (64 and 47) of the Iraqi constitution for the year 2005,” explaining that “the filing of this lawsuit by the Bar Association was prior to the holding of the last elections for the House of Representatives and not in the interest of any party, bloc or any other political party except the interest of the constitution.”

He added that "the Federal Supreme Court is still under consideration in the case, which was postponed to the first of next December," noting that "the constitution is clear in the mechanisms (dissolving the House of Representatives) and Parliament has no right to set a day to dissolve itself and to set a date for holding elections, and this A clear violation of the constitution,” noting that “the motive behind the lawsuit is not in the interest of a party, a list, or a political party, but rather the application of the constitution in a way that correct".

[yota691]

Older Thread and GM DV

 

 

 

[HowieC]

This is potato head all the way. He has always tried in the past to manipulate the constitution. He's crying in his wheaties because all his Iranian buddies that were in parliament were able to stop Iraq from moving forward. He can whine to the judges all he wants.

[ronscarpa]

1 hour ago, HowieC said:

This is potato head all the way. He has always tried in the past to manipulate the constitution. He's crying in his wheaties because all his Iranian buddies that were in parliament were able to stop Iraq from moving forward. He can whine to the judges all he wants.

 

I totally agree with you HowieC - There has to be some way the others in government can get rid of the rotten Potato (Maliki)...! We have them here in the USA as well ... Pelosi, Schumer, Ocasio-Cortez, Ilian Omar, Talib, Pressley, and others...