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!

The Federal Court rejects a new lawsuit to dissolve the House of Representatives (document)


yota691
 Share

Recommended Posts

The Federation postpones the decision on the claim of dissolving Parliament until the end of this month
 

The Federal Supreme Court decided, on Wednesday, to postpone the date for deciding the case for the dissolution of Parliament to the 30th of this month.

 

  

A source in the judiciary told "Nass" (August 17, 2022), that "the Federal Court has postponed the date for deciding on the claim of dissolving Parliament to the 30th of this month."  

Last Wednesday (August 10, 2022), Al-Sadr had asked the judicial authorities to work on "dissolving the Iraqi parliament within a maximum period of the end of this week," urging at the same time, the President of the Republic of Iraq, Barham Salih, to "set a date for early legislative elections in country".  

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

The Federal Court postpones the date for deciding the case for dissolving Parliament to August 30th
  
{Political: Al-Furat News} The Federal Supreme Court has postponed the date for deciding the case for dissolving the House of Representatives to August 30th..Continue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 2022-08-17 06:01
 

Shafaq News/ The Federal Court (the highest judicial authority in Iraq) postponed, on Wednesday, the date for deciding on the claim of dissolving Parliament until the 30th of this August.

 

Last Wednesday (August 10, 2022), al-Sadr had asked the judicial authorities to dissolve the Iraqi parliament within a maximum period of the end of this week, urging at the same time the President of the Republic of Iraq, Barham Salih, to set a date for early legislative elections in the country.

The political scene in Iraq has been going through a dangerous turn since supporters of the Sadrist movement led by prominent Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr stormed the parliament building in the fortified Green Zone in central Baghdad, and staged a sit-in in protest against Al-Sudani’s nomination for the position of Prime Minister of the next federal government, at first, before the ceiling rose Their demands are to dissolve parliament and hold early elections, after an invitation from their leader al-Sadr.

The Iraqi Prime Minister, Mustafa Al-Kazemi, had called on the leaders of the political forces for a national meeting at the Government Palace, scheduled to be held today, to start a "serious" dialogue, while calling on all parties to "stop the popular and media escalation."

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 2022-08-17 06:31
 

Shafaq News/ The Federal Supreme Court (the highest judicial authority in Iraq), on Wednesday, rejected two lawsuits by former parliament member Mishaan al-Jubouri, and current deputy, Basem Khashan.

The court explained, in a statement received to Shafaq News Agency, that the two lawsuits "the first was filed by Mishaan al-Jubouri regarding his return to Parliament, and the other was filed by the name of Khashan about determining the monthly wage for lecturers."

Earlier in the day, the Federal Court postponed the date for deciding the case for dissolving Parliament until the thirtieth of August.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 2022-08-17 08:25
 

 

Shafaq News/ The Federal Supreme Court (the highest judicial authority in Iraq) responded on Wednesday, rejecting a lawsuit filed by the former deputy in the Iraqi parliament, Ala Talabani from the Kirkuk Governorate Department, in which she challenged how to calculate the women's quota and the validity of the membership of Representative Muhaimin Ali Hussein in the same department.

Federal Court President Jassim Muhammad Aboud considered in the text of the ruling, which he read at the session, that the seats in the quota for women, which amount to 25 percent of the number of parliament members at the level of Kirkuk governorate, were consistent, and that adding one seat to the plaintiff (Ala Talabani) as a complement to the quota for women is not He finds a constitutional or legal basis for him, because the candidate, Dylan Ghafour, won the women’s complex for the first constituency. As for the rest of the constituencies, a woman won her votes, and another constituency allocated the seat according to the women’s quota for a woman, and thus the women’s quota was exhausted in Kirkuk governorate by allocating three seats, and if the quota for women was exhausted at the governorate level Where will there be a replacement?

The court decided to reject Ala Talabani's lawsuit against the validity of the membership of MP Muhaimin Ali Hussain and obligate her to bear the judicial fees.

1660739680110.jpg

 

 

1660739708920.jpg

 

1660743076496.jpg

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The judiciary rejects an appeal regarding the membership of MP Miqdam Al-Jumaili, the replacement of Mishaan Al-Jubouri
 

Baghdad - people   

On Sunday, the Federal Court rejected an appeal submitted by Qutaiba Al-Jubouri regarding the membership of MP Miqdam Al-Jumaili, the replacement of the dismissed MP Mishaan Al-Jubouri.  

 

  

  

And the judiciary’s media stated in a statement that “People” received a copy of it, (August 21, 2022), “The Federal Supreme Court, in its session dated today, August 21, 2022, issued its decision, which included a response to the appeal submitted by the plaintiff (Qutayba Ibrahim Turki Al-Jubouri) regarding the membership of the deputy. (Miqdam Muhammad Obaid Ali Al-Jumaili) because there is nothing that would prejudice the validity of his membership.”  

  

And the Federal Court of Cassation, earlier, issued a ruling on the validity of the membership of the election candidate, "Miqdam Muhammad Obaid Ali Al-Jumaili" in the Iraqi parliament as a replacement for Mishaan al-Jubouri.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

ERBIL — The Iraqi Federal Supreme Court is expected to hold a special session on 30 August to rule on a case submitted by the Sadrist Movement regarding the dissolution of the parliament.

The Sadrist Movement of powerful Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has demanded the dissolution of the Council of Representatives and holding an early election.

Hundreds of Sadr's supporters last Tuesday gathered outside the Supreme Judicial Council and set up sit-in tents, where they began pressuring the Council to respond to Sadr's repeated call for dissolving the parliament.

However, the judicial council has previously clarified that dissolving the parliament is not within its jurisdiction.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, horsesoldier said:

Postpone, postpone, postpone, postpone, postpone. :facepalm:

Most toddlers first words might be ' more ' ' please ' ' juice ' & so forth: NOT these folks, no siree Bob. Their first words are " postpone" & " delay "

Oy vey.

 

Not a long wait though on this postponement.  Just a few days.  

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

I’m not an expert on Iraqi politics but I do not believe the federal court has the power to dissolve parliament. Sadr would need to reclaim his seats in parliament, add more seats to vote for the dissolving of parliament. If they hold a session of parliament without any of Sadr’s supporters, they would be able to push through unwanted legislation. Sadr cannot take that chance. Just guessing but it appears that a Shia on Shia civil war will break the dead lock, at the very least a short skirmish to get the Iranians to realize the gig is up. JMO

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Federal Court sets August 30 as the date for a hearing on the grounds of dissolving Parliament
  
{Local: Al Furat News} The Federal Supreme Court has set the 30th of August as the date to consider the case submitted to dissolve Parliament.
 

On the 17th of this month, the Federal Court (the highest judicial authority in Iraq) postponed the date for deciding on the claim of dissolving Parliament to the thirtieth of August.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Democrat stresses the election of a President of the Republic and the formation of a new government before dissolving Parliament
  
{Political: Al Furat News} The Kurdistan Democratic Party stressed the election of a president of the republic and the formation of a government with full powers before the move to dissolve the parliament.

The party's spokesman, Mahdi Abdul-Karim told {Euphrates News}: "If parliament must be dissolved, it must be in accordance with the law and the constitution, and there must be a government with full powers, amending a law on elections with a new law, and allocating funds for re-election, as well as Holding a session of the House of Representatives to choose the President of the Republic and assign the Prime Minister according to purely constitutional mechanisms.
He added, "All of this needs at least a year and a half, and not less than that."
It is noteworthy that the Sadrist movement's supporters have been holding a sit-in since last month in front of the parliament building, and the council's work has stopped.
While the Federal Court set August 30 as the date for a session to consider the case to dissolve parliament, the subject of the lawsuit submitted by the Sadrist movement included the ruling to dissolve parliament and oblige the President of the Republic to set a date for holding legislative elections in accordance with the provisions of Article 64 of the Constitution.
On August 14, the Supreme Judicial Council announced that it did not have the power to dissolve the parliament, in response to a request by the leader of the Sadrist movement, Muqtada al-Sadr, to dissolve the parliament within a period not exceeding a week and to set a date for early elections.

Raghad Daham

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 2022-08-26 06:00
 

Shafaq News/ The Federal Supreme Court decided to set the 30th of this month as the date to consider the Sadrist movement's claims to dissolve Parliament.

Nassar al-Rubaie, Secretary-General of the Sadrist bloc, had filed a lawsuit against the President of the Republic, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, to rule to dissolve the House of Representatives for its fifth session, and to oblige the President of the Republic to set a date for holding legislative elections in accordance with the provisions of Article 64/second of the Constitution.

 

The leader of the Sadrist movement, Muqtada al-Sadr, had called on the Supreme Judicial Council to dissolve parliament within a period not exceeding the twentieth of this month, and assigning the President of the Republic to set a date for early elections, but the Council responded to al-Sadr's request to dissolve parliament, saying: "He does not have this authority." .

The content of the lawsuit deals with accusations of failing to elect a President of the Republic and violating the constitutional deadlines for forming the new government.

Since last July 30, the followers of the Sadrist movement have continued their sit-in inside the Green Zone, in refusal to nominate Muhammad Shia Al-Sudani for the position of prime minister by the coordination framework and demand the dissolution of the House of Representatives and to go to early elections.

Disagreements between the political forces that prevent the formation of a new government have continued since the last elections on October 10, 2021.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Federal Court sets August 30 as the date for hearing the case for dissolving Parliament

Baghdad / Obelisk: The Federal Supreme Court has set 08/25/2022, the 30th of August, as the date to consider the case submitted to dissolve Parliament.

The Secretary-General of the Sadrist bloc had filed a lawsuit to dissolve the House of Representatives for its fifth session, and to oblige the President of the Republic to set a date for the legislative elections in accordance with the provisions of Article 64/second of the constitution.

This lawsuit is accompanied by several other lawsuits filed by people against the presidencies of the ministers, parliament and the republic, asking them to dissolve the parliament.

On August 23, 2022, Saleh Muhammad al-Iraqi, Minister of Sadr, directed the demonstrators in front of the Supreme Judicial Council to withdraw while keeping the tents.

  • Upvote 1
  • Pow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

POSTED ON 2022-08-27 BY SOTALIRAQ

Legal expert: The Federal Court bears responsibility for violating constitutional timings

Legal expert: The Federal Court bears responsibility for violating constitutional timings

On Friday, the legal expert, Amir Al-Daami, confirmed that the Federal Court is responsible for violating the constitutional timings in the first place, before the Sadrist movement or the “coordinating framework” bears it.

Al-Daami explained: “When the Federal Court interpreted Article (76) of the Constitution in 2010, it inserted itself into the political equation by deciding that the largest bloc should be registered in the first session of Parliament, and in 2014 the political blocs postponed the issue of registering the bloc, and in 2018 the largest bloc was not registered at all and did not Something happens.” Noting that “the first breach in the constitutional terms occurred with the interpretation of Article (76), which the Federal Court created out of nowhere and stole the victory at that time from the Iraqi List and gave it to the State of Law coalition.”

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

698797.webp

Earth News/ The former head of the Integrity Commission, Judge Rahim Al-Ugaili, presented today, Sunday, a detailed explanation of the constitutional ways to dissolve parliament, and the “confused” texts included in the Iraqi constitution.

In an article followed by Earth News, Al-Ugaili confirmed that the parliament can be dissolved in two ways, the first is through a simple majority, or it can be dissolved at the request of the Prime Minister and with the approval of the President of the Republic.

Regarding Al-Sadr’s request to dissolve Parliament, Al-Ugaili explained that the constitutional text did not mention the dissolution of the House of Representatives, other than the two methods mentioned above, but at the same time, it did not provide for preventing the dissolution by a third way, because it did not use the phrase (the House of Representatives is not dissolved except by an absolute majority). If he used that phrase at the beginning of the text, it would have been forbidden to dissolve the House of Representatives by other than the two methods that it stipulated, but he used another phrase by saying (the House of Representatives is dissolved by an absolute majority) and this formula does not provide for preventing the dissolution by another method.

He pointed out that this wording, which is not conclusive in preventing the solution, by a third way, provides an opportunity, with which many do not agree, to say that the solution is possible, by virtue of a ruling from the Federal Supreme Court, when the House of Representatives violates the constitution, disrupts its provisions and is unable for any reason to carry out its legislative and oversight duties.

Here is the text of the interpretation:

Dissolution of the House of Representatives by virtue of..

The dissolution of the elected Legislative Council is one of the most important and dangerous provisions that the constitution should deal with, with a comprehensive text that is not subject to interpretation and interpretation, however! The 2005 constitution dealt with the dissolution of the House of Representatives with a confused text, “the bearer of aspects” in the text of Article (64/First) of the constitution, which states: - (The House of Representatives is dissolved by an absolute majority of its members, at the request of one-third of its members, or a request from the Prime Minister, With the approval of the President of the Republic).

This text has two contradictory interpretations:

First: The dissolution of the House of Representatives can only take place in one way, which is: The House of Representatives dissolves itself by voting by an absolute majority, and voting is based on a request submitted in one of two ways:

1- The request of one-third of the members of the House of Representatives.

2- The request of the Prime Minister approved by the President of the Republic.

That is, this opinion says in a single way to take the decision of dissolution (voting by an absolute majority), that is, the House of Representatives is not dissolved, unless it dissolves itself by itself (self-dissolution).

Second: The dissolution of the House of Representatives takes place in two ways:

1- The House of Representatives dissolves itself by a simple majority at the request of one-third of the members of the House of Representatives.

2- The House of Representatives is dissolved at the request of the Prime Minister and with the approval of the President of the Republic.

That is, this interpretation says: There are two ways to take the decision of dissolution, namely (the absolute majority of the members of the House of Representatives and the decision of the President of the Republic), meaning that the second interpretation says: With the self-dissolution of the House of Representatives, as he says by dissolving it through the executive authority.

The Iraqis differed in adopting one of these two interpretations, and both interpretations are borne by the text, because it is a confused, mixed text and is far from being accurate and definitive in meaning and application.

With the Sadrist movement demanding the dissolution of the House of Representatives by a decision of the Federal Supreme Court, another dilemma arose in the text, which is: Can the House of Representatives be dissolved by virtue of a ruling?

The truth is that the constitutional text did not mention the dissolution of the House of Representatives, other than the two methods it stipulated, but at the same time, it did not stipulate preventing the dissolution by a third method, because it did not use the phrase (the House of Representatives is not dissolved except by an absolute majority of the number of its members). The phrase at the beginning of the text, it was not forbidden to dissolve the House of Representatives by other than the two methods that it stipulated, but he used another phrase by saying (the House of Representatives is dissolved by an absolute majority) and this formula does not provide for the prevention of dissolution by another way.

It seems that this wording, which is not conclusive in preventing the solution, through a third way, provides an opportunity, with which many do not agree, to say that the solution is possible, by virtue of a ruling from the Federal Supreme Court, when the House of Representatives violates the Constitution, suspends its provisions and is unable for any reason to carry out its legislative and oversight duties, Because the parliament’s paralysis of the constitution makes him a son who disobeys him (that is to the constitution) deserves to be killed, like Ghulam Musa, which is what some constitutional courts around the world have adopted, including a historic ruling of the Palestinian Supreme Federal Court in 2018 No. 10/2018, although some consider it a political decision rather than a constitutional one.

However, it remains to adopt this opinion or the other opinion, which says that the solution is to be prevented, except in the two ways stipulated by the constitution, in Iraq, a matter that the Federal Supreme Court decides in the light of political controls and conditions, and very difficult and complex realistic, but this drafting gap may be in a constitution, No one respected him, it is the rescue ship from sedition that does not remain or leave.”

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An adviser predicts the federal ruling on “dissolving Parliament” .. the ball may be returned to the court of political forces
 

Baghdad - people  

Today, Monday, the head of the Iraqi Consultative Council, Farhad Ala Al-Din, suggested that the Federal Court would respond to the lawsuit to dissolve parliament.  

  

  

  

Aladdin said in a blog post, followed by "Nass" (August 29, 2022), that "attention is directed towards the Federal Court and their ruling in the issue of dissolving Parliament," adding that "the dismissal of the case is the greatest possibility, but what is written in the ruling decision is the most important."  

  

He explained that "the court may return the ball to the arena of political forces."  

  

me_ga.php?id=40742  

  

Earlier, the former head of the Integrity Commission, Judge Rahim Al-Ugaili, gave a detailed explanation of the constitutional methods for dissolving parliament, and the "confused" texts contained in the Iraqi constitution.  

  

 

  

Al-Ugaili confirmed in an article followed by "Nass" (August 28, 2022), that "the parliament can be dissolved in two ways, the first is through a simple majority, or it can be dissolved at the request of the Prime Minister and with the approval of the President of the Republic."    

  

Regarding Al-Sadr’s request to dissolve Parliament, Al-Ugaili explained that the constitutional text did not mention the dissolution of the House of Representatives, other than the two methods mentioned above, but at the same time, it did not provide for preventing the dissolution by a third way, because it did not use the phrase (the House of Representatives is not dissolved except by an absolute majority). If he used that phrase at the beginning of the text, it would have been forbidden to dissolve the House of Representatives by other than the two methods that it stipulated, but he used another phrase by saying (the House of Representatives is dissolved by an absolute majority) and this formula does not provide for preventing the dissolution by another method.    

  

He pointed out that this wording, which is not conclusive in preventing the solution, by a third way provides an opportunity, with which many do not agree, to say that the solution is possible, by virtue of a ruling by the Federal Supreme Court, when the House of Representatives violates the Constitution, suspends its provisions and is unable for any reason to carry out its legislative and oversight duties. .    

  

The following is the text of the article, citing the Iraq Observer:  

  

The House of Representatives was dissolved by ruling...    

  

The dissolution of the elected Legislative Council is one of the most important and most dangerous provisions that the constitution should address, with a comprehensive text that is not subject to interpretation and interpretation, however! The 2005 constitution dealt with the dissolution of the House of Representatives with a confusing text, “the bearer of aspects” in the text of Article (64/First) of the constitution, which states: - (The House of Representatives is dissolved by an absolute majority of its members, at the request of one-third of its members, or a request from the Prime Minister, With the approval of the President of the Republic).    

  

This text has two opposing interpretations:    

  

First: The dissolution of the House of Representatives can only take place in one way, which is: The House of Representatives dissolves itself by voting by an absolute majority, and voting is based on a request submitted in one of two ways:    

  

1- The request of one-third of the members of the House of Representatives.    

  

2- The request of the Prime Minister approved by the President of the Republic.    

  

That is, this opinion says in a single way to take the decision of dissolution (voting by an absolute majority), that is, the House of Representatives is not dissolved, unless it dissolves itself by itself (self-dissolution).    

  

Second: The dissolution of the House of Representatives takes place in two ways:  

1- The House of Representatives dissolves itself by a simple majority at the request of one-third of the members of the House of Representatives.    

  

2- The House of Representatives is dissolved at the request of the Prime Minister and with the approval of the President of the Republic.    

  

In other words, this interpretation says: There are two ways to take the decision of dissolution, namely (the absolute majority of the members of the House of Representatives and the decision of the President of the Republic), meaning that the second interpretation says: With the self-dissolution of the House of Representatives, as he says to dissolve it through the executive authority.    

  

The Iraqis differed in adopting one of these two interpretations, and both interpretations are borne by the text, because it is a confused, mixed text and is far from being accurate and definitive in meaning and application.    

  

With the Sadrist movement demanding the dissolution of the House of Representatives by a decision of the Federal Supreme Court, another dilemma arose in the text, which is: Can the House of Representatives be dissolved by virtue of a ruling?    

  

The truth is that the constitutional text did not mention the dissolution of the House of Representatives, other than the two methods it stipulated, but at the same time, it did not stipulate preventing the dissolution by a third method, because it did not use the phrase (the House of Representatives is not dissolved except by an absolute majority of the number of its members). The phrase at the beginning of the text, it was not forbidden to dissolve the House of Representatives by other than the two ways that it stipulated, but he used another phrase by saying (the House of Representatives is dissolved by an absolute majority) and this formula does not stipulate the prevention of dissolving by another way.    

  

It seems that this wording, which is not conclusive in preventing the solution, by a third way, provides an opportunity, with which many do not agree, to say that the solution is possible, by virtue of a ruling from the Federal Supreme Court, when the House of Representatives violates the Constitution, suspends its provisions and is unable for any reason to carry out its legislative and oversight duties, Because the parliament’s paralysis of the constitution makes him a son who disobeys him (that is to the constitution) deserves to be killed, like Ghulam Musa, which is what some constitutional courts around the world have adopted, including a historic ruling of the Palestinian Supreme Federal Court in 2018 No. 10/2018, although some consider it a political decision rather than a constitutional one.    

  

However, it remains to adopt this opinion or the other opinion, which says that the solution is to be prevented, except in the two ways stipulated by the constitution, in Iraq, a matter that the Federal Supreme Court decides in the light of political controls and conditions, and very difficult and complex realistic, but this drafting gap may be in a constitution, No one respected him, it is the ship of salvation from sedition that does not remain or leave.”    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Federal Supreme Court decides to consider cases tomorrow without pleading

Baghdad - people  

The Federal Supreme Court decided, on Sunday, to consider the cases tomorrow, Tuesday, 30/8/2022, without pleading.  

  

  

  

A Federal Court statement, a copy of which was received by “NAS” (August 29, 2022), stated that “in view of the fact that the number of plaintiffs in the lawsuits scheduled to be heard on Tuesday, 30/8/2022 amounted to (1036), claiming, “in addition to their attorneys’ number ( 43) and the inability of the courtroom and its building to accommodate the aforementioned numbers.  

  

He added, "As the principle, based on the provisions of Article (21/Third) of the Court's Rules of Procedure No. (1) of 2022, is that the cases are considered without pleading, unless the court deems it necessary to conduct a plea in the presence of the parties."  

  

And he indicated that "for the aforementioned reason, the court decided to consider the cases without pleading and the court completes its procedures in accordance with the provisions of item (fifth) of Article (21) of the aforementioned internal system. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With documents.. Al-Kazemi’s advisor sends two requests to the Federal Court regarding the dissolution of Parliament and the conduct of elections
  
{Political: Al-Furat News} The legal advisor to President Mustafa Al-Kazemi sent two requests to the Federal Supreme Court regarding the complaint against the Prime Minister regarding the dissolution of the House of Representatives and the holding of new early parliamentary elections.
 

In the review of Counselor Haider Sofi, the representative of the Prime Minister regarding the complaint, {Euphrates News} obtained a copy of it, in which he indicated that "the dissolution of the House of Representatives must take place at the request of a full-fledged government and not a caretaker as is the case now."
He added, "Also, holding new elections requires amending the electoral law, and this requires legislative intervention from the House of Representatives and the adoption of a manual counting system instead of electronic. In addition, going to early elections will be by virtue of the above-mentioned election law, and this would be contrary to the rationale of the Federal Court's decision.
And the legal advisor to the Prime Minister asked the Federal Court to rule to dismiss the appeal in form and substance, including the above, and to charge the plaintiffs with expenses, fees and attorneys' fees.

dcaf2a90da9b969145a3c20a54f9e00c.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Federal Court decides to consider the case for dissolving Parliament for tomorrow without pleading
  
{Political: Al Furat News} The Federal Supreme Court decided to consider the case for dissolving Parliament for tomorrow, Tuesday, and the rest of the case without pleading.

The court had set tomorrow, Tuesday, as the date to consider complaints submitted by leaders in the Sadrist movement calling for the dissolution of Parliament, "for its failure to perform its tasks and complete the constitutional dues over a period of 9 months."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 2022-08-28 13:07
 

 

Shafaq News/ A source familiar with the movement of al-Hanana, the residence of the leader of the Sadrist movement Muqtada al-Sadr in Najaf governorate, said on Sunday that thousands of cases submitted by the Sadrists to the Federal Court to dissolve the House of Representatives "fulfill the conditions."  

The source told Shafak News Agency, "The Federal Court was looking at the cases submitted to it impartially," expressing his hope that it "will be far from any political pressure."

And he indicated that "the lawsuits submitted by the Iraqi people, including the Sadrists, are estimated at thousands," stressing that "they meet the legal requirements, and we hope that the decision will be to dissolve the Parliament."

The Sadrist leader said, "There is a very clear perversion of the constitutional oath, by not adhering to the constitutional timings."

The Federal Court (the highest judicial authority in Iraq) set the thirtieth of August as the date for deciding on the claim of dissolving Parliament.

On August 10, 2022, al-Sadr had asked the judicial authorities to work on dissolving the Iraqi parliament within a maximum period of the end of this week, urging at the same time the President of the Republic of Iraq, Barham Salih, to set a date for early legislative elections in the country.

Also on the tenth of this August, a person known as “Al-Sadr’s Minister” directed the supporters of the Sadrist movement to fill out a form to file a lawsuit against (Presidents of the Republic Barham Salih, Ministers Mustafa Al-Kazemi and Parliament Muhammad Al-Halbousi).

The form included two points, the first of which was to call the defendant (Al-Halbousi) in addition to his job after carrying out the legal requirement and ruling to dissolve the House of Representatives in its current fifth session, and notifying the President of the Republic to set a date for the legislative elections in accordance with the provisions of Article 64 II of the Constitution, while the second paragraph included charging the defendant in addition to all his job Expenses, court fees and attorneys' fees.

Later, the "Minister of Al-Sadr" issued a new form that included the defendants, in addition to Parliament Speaker Muhammad Al-Halbousi, (Presidents of the Republic Barham Salih and Ministers Mustafa Al-Kazemi).

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judicial Council: The Federal Council did not consider the claim to dissolve Parliament due to the curfew
 

Baghdad - people   

Today, Tuesday, the Supreme Judicial Council announced that the Federal Court did not hold its session to decide on the case for dissolving Parliament, due to the curfew.   

  

It was scheduled to hold the Federal Court today, a special session to consider the case, to dissolve the House of Representatives.   

  

Earlier, the Federal Supreme Court decided to consider the cases on Tuesday 30/8/2022 without pleading.  

  

A Federal Court statement, a copy of which was received by “NAS” (August 29, 2022), stated that “in view of the fact that the number of plaintiffs in the lawsuits scheduled to be heard on Tuesday, 30/8/2022 amounted to (1036), claiming, “in addition to their attorneys’ number ( 43) and the inability of the courtroom and its building to accommodate the aforementioned numbers.    

  

He added, "As the principle, based on the provisions of Article (21/Third) of the Court's Rules of Procedure No. (1) of 2022, is that the cases are considered without pleading, unless the court deems it necessary to conduct a plea in the presence of the parties."    

  

And he indicated that "for the aforementioned reason, the court decided to consider the cases without pleading and the court completes its procedures in accordance with the provisions of item (fifth) of Article (21) of the aforementioned internal system. 

  

   

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judicial source: There is no Federal Court session today to consider the claim to dissolve Parliament
  
{Political: Al Furat News} A judicial source said that there is no session for the Federal Court, today, Tuesday, to consider the claim of dissolving the House of Representatives.

The source told {Euphrates News} that the court did not convene today "due to the official holiday and security developments near the Green Zone."

And he indicated that "the session will be held when things return to normal in terms of security."

It was scheduled to hold the Federal Court today, Tuesday, its session to consider the claim to dissolve the House of Representatives, but the recent developments in Baghdad and the imposition of a comprehensive curfew prevented that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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