TNT:

Legal: There is no decision in the hands of the Federal Court and matters will be suspended for 40 days

Legal expert Haider Al-Sufi confirmed today, Saturday, that "the Federal Court does not have any decision related to dissolving Parliament or not choosing the President of the Republic so far."

Al-Sufi said, in a statement to Mawazine News, that "the political procrastination continues, and is considered a continuous constitutional violation due to the failure to elect the President of the Republic," noting that "the Federal Court does not have the authority to take any decision regarding the dissolution of Parliament or others."

He added, "Political events will be suspended until 40 days after the tweet of the leader of the Sadrist movement, Muqtada al-Sadr." link

Tishwash:  Sistani's office announces the first days of Ramadan

The office of the Supreme Reference, Ali al-Sistani, announced that next Sunday is the first day of the blessed month of Ramadan.

And the office stated in a statement received by Mawazine News / a copy of it, that "tomorrow, Saturday, is the completion of the glorified month of Sha'ban, and on Sunday (3/4/2022 AD) is the first of the blessed month of Ramadan for the year 1443 AH. We ask you to pray."

And the Sunni Endowment in Iraq announced that tomorrow, Saturday, is the first day of the blessed month of Ramadan. link

*************

Tishwash:  The Mechanisms Of Dissolving The House Of Representatives In Light Of What Was Presented By Judge Faiq Zaidan

On the occasion of what Judge Faiq Zaidan presented in an article he published on the website of the Supreme Judicial Council on 1/4/2022 regarding the amendment of Article (64/First) of the current constitution in order to facilitate the dissolution of the House of Representatives by the executive authority, I present the following:

First What was presented by Judge Faiq Zaidan is a confirmation of what was advocated by many legal scholars, academic professors, specialists and even the general public. Since 2015, and before it, and many others, and what Judge Faeq Zaidan preferred is an affirmation that the presence of the current and previous parliament composition is the origin of the disease, and it warns of a dangerous situation of unwelcome consequences that may occur later, God forbid.

Second: What Judge Faiq Zaidan presented gives us an important indication that the repercussions of the situation in which the current parliament is in has become intractable to a solution, which called for a search for mechanisms for dissolving the parliament, and indicates to us that the judiciary also seems unable to deal with it. Faeq Zaidan, in his personal name, devoid of any job title. He did not even write as a judge, but as an ordinary citizen because he sensed danger and did not have the ability to treat through his job position or through the judicial institution, but rather looking for a solution within the folds of the constitution.

Judge Faiq Zaidan indicated that the treatment lies in amending the text of Article (64/First) of the Constitution. The authority to dissolve Parliament without referring to the Parliament itself, and if I see that the current constitutional text provides this matter according to its texts and I will present it to it later, but even if Parliament is dissolved, what will happen? The answer is nothing new.

Rather, the same faces and political blocs will be repeated, because the electoral system and the electoral infrastructure consisting of political traditions, societal composition, sectarian division, the availability of weapons outside the state, and the presence of armed groups linked to the parties and blocs involved in the electoral process, are all factors that prevent the existence of a new form of the assembly. Representatives, and evidence of this is the number of times the electoral law has been amended so that no electoral cycle passes unless the law is amended or replaced.

Fourth: The amendment advocated by Judge Faiq Zaidan, I see no need, because the current text provides the possibility of dissolving the House of Representatives at the request of the Prime Minister and with the approval of the President of the Republic without the need for the approval of the members of the House of Representatives, and I have repeated this opinion on more than one occasion.

Including the study that I published on several websites and in some newspapers in the year 2020 and tagged (the dissolution of the House of Representatives by the executive authority and the principle of balance between powers), although some specialists in constitutional jurisprudence have a different opinion, but the reasons that I believe support this opinion I will present briefly according to the following :

The drafting of the text of Article (64/1) of the Constitution did not explicitly resolve the issue of who has the authority, because it began with the self-dissolving mechanism of Parliament and attached the approval of the majority of its members to the request submitted by a third of its members. Then he came up with another sentence in which the Prime Minister granted the request to dissolve Parliament, provided that it be with the approval of the President of the Republic.

Parliament when questioning the Prime Minister, and the reason is to prevent the Prime Minister from requesting the dissolution of Parliament with the approval of the President of the Republic if he is subjected to interrogation with the intention of evading him, otherwise why is this mentioned if the House of Representatives is the one who decides in the end and the request does not affect him during the interrogation period because the decision with the result is up to mechanism.

Rather, he could consider the request joint between the Prime Minister and the President of the Republic. But the text is clear that the approval of the request for dissolution and not on referring it to the House of Representatives.

If the text indicates that the approval of the President of the Republic to refer the request to the House of Representatives, what is the wisdom of that, or does the Prime Minister not ask the House of Representatives to dissolve himself without referring to the President of the Republic as long as his approval has no effect, and there is nothing to prevent that Because any citizen has the right to request from any party, as long as it is the one that decides and nothing else, so the purpose of the text is the existence of two mechanisms for dissolving the House of Representatives and not one mechanism with two requests from two different sides.

The Iraqi constitution, in the text of Article (1), considers the system of government in Iraq to be representative and according to the following text (the Republic of Iraq is a single, independent federal state with full sovereignty, its system of government is republican, representative, parliamentary, and democratic, and this constitution is a guarantor of Iraq’s unity) and this description gives it advantages that it has settled upon The jurisprudence of constitutional law since the emergence of parliamentary systems, including the exchange of oversight between the government and parliament.

 Parliament has the right to overthrow the government through the mechanism of withdrawal of confidence from it, which was included in the text of Article (61/8) of the Iraqi constitution in force. Therefore, the executive authority must have a weapon to direct this power, which is the dissolution of Parliament and this What was adopted by all theories related to the system of government in constitutional jurisprudence, and it is almost unanimously agreed upon by all constitutional law jurists in the world.

Tmawi and Dr. Othman Khalil in their tagged book (Summary of Constitutional Law, Cairo Edition 1951 - 544 et seq.), Dr. Muhammad Kamel Abu Laila in his tagged book (Constitutional Law - Second Cairo Edition in 1962 - p. 610) and Dr. Ramzi Taha al-Shaer in his tagged book (The General Theory of Constitutional Law - Third Edition, Dar Al-Nahda Al-Arabiya in Cairo - 1983 - p. 369. Dozens of Arab and foreign references confirm this principle, which has become a given in the jurisprudence of constitutional law.

Fifth: Educating about the lack of an opportunity for the executive authority to dissolve parliament is an opportunity to encourage one party to overpower another party and to maximize the powers of a power over the powers of a parallel power, which lacks the principle of balance between powers, as the constitutional system in Iraq consists of three balanced powers that monitor Each other, and according to what has been presented, and may even give a message that some interpret as other than its goals, for example, some blocs and beneficiaries of the current situation and justification for those opinions raised by Judge Faiq Zaidan and other researchers and specialists in constitutional law, because they are without a doubt They will not go to the Federal Supreme Court because the judiciary's opinion has become clear and evident through what the gentlemen in charge of its affairs present.

Sixth: Treatment:I see that the treatment is not by amending Article (64/first) of the constitution, but rather by reconsidering the constitution as a whole and separating the House of Representatives from controlling the nomination of the President of the Republic or the Prime Minister, and making the executive authority in the hands of one body

Either the President of the Republic or the Prime Minister to prevent duplication and intersection, and that Through his direct election by the people without reference to these complex mechanisms that did not produce for us any presidential, executive or legislative formation commensurate with the country’s need for someone to extricate it from the miserable situation in which it is now, and some may say that this is an assault on the authority of the House of Representatives because it represents the people and acts on their behalf.

Because he is elected, and the response to that is by saying the following, why do we go to the representative and the representative and give him the opportunity to control the fate of the people, while we have the ability to give the people the opportunity to elect their president without a mediator, and this does not constitute any additional financial cost, but it is on the same day that is done The election of the House of Representatives and an adjacent box, and at that time we will remove the House of Representatives from any obstaclesIt prevents it from convening and devote itself to its legislative and oversight work

Therefore, I see that Judge Faiq Zaidan confirmed what we had previously mentioned and sounded the alarm bell again, and called for the necessity of amending the constitution and with easy mechanisms that are available to him now and that members of Parliament, if they are serious, can amend it easily and easily, and this is what I presented in a previous study in which I explained these mechanisms that I published Several newspapers and websites in 2019 tagged (mechanisms for amending the Iraqi constitution in light of its effective provisions).

The Prime Minister can also request the dissolution of Parliament and with the approval of the President of the Republic without any participation of the House of Representatives in that.  link

Mot .... the Daze Were Starting out Soooo Goooood too! ~~~~

Mot: ..... Even on da Ark!! ~~~~~~