Ahmed Oudah Mohammed AL-Dulaimi (University of Anbar) has posted The Jurisprudential Debate About the Jurisdiction of the Federal Supreme Court in Iraq (Social Sciences & Humanities Open) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
This study addresses the jurisprudential and legal debate accompanying the rulings of the Supreme Federal Court in Iraq in light of the decisions it has issued. The novelty of constitutional judiciary experience and the lack of political stability in Iraq have directly impacted the absence of a clear vision regarding the Court's stance on its rulings. The study aims to provide an in-depth analysis of the most controversial decisions of the Court, focusing on the appropriateness of issuing such decisions and their conformity with the governing constitutional principles. To achieve a profound understanding of these rulings and the controversies surrounding them, it is essential to explore the jurisprudential debate regarding the mechanism of the Court's formation, its composition, and the selection of its members. The controversy surrounding the legitimacy of the Court's formation and its operational mechanism has cast a shadow on the rulings issued by the Supreme Federal Court, leading the debate to extend to its decisions. In pursuit of this goal, the study adopts a jurisprudential analytical approach that contributes to obtaining a clear perspective on all legal and jurisprudential disagreements related to the work of the Supreme Federal Court in Iraq. This is achieved by analysing the most important decisions issued by the Court and their resulting implications. The study concludes that the Supreme Federal Court has exceeded its constitutional boundaries. It has addressed some constitutional issues created by other authorities in an unconstitutional manner, contrary to the powers defined for it.