Baghdad- The session of the Iraqi Council of Representatives today, Tuesday, witnessed an escalation in disagreements between representatives, against the backdrop of voting on a group of controversial laws. These disagreements led to boycotts and mutual accusations between members, which reflects the depth of the division over these laws and their impact on the political scene.
The House of Representatives completed voting on the three controversial laws: personal status, general amnesty, and returning properties to their owners after disagreements that extended for months and led to the cancellation of many sessions as a result of quarrels and debates over them.
The House of Representatives had previously voted on the articles of the three laws in its session held on the first of last December, but it postponed voting on the draft laws in their entirety until the points of disagreement were resolved, and proceeded with voting today on the laws as a whole without any new amendments, which aroused anger. Many representatives rejected some of its articles.
The matter did not end with rejection or objection, as some went to escalation and targeted the Presidency of Parliament, as Representative Yasser Al-Husseini confirmed the progress of collecting more than 130 signatures to dismiss the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Mahmoud Al-Mashhadani, against the backdrop of what he described as legislative violations that marred the session.
Al-Husseini explained in an interview with Al Jazeera Net that the management of the session “was not successful,” and that its outcomes were “unconstitutional,” as “three laws were voted on at once in an illegal manner and in violation of the controls of the House of Representatives, and it was not confirmed that a quorum was reached to attend the session.” .
He added, “The Speaker of the House of Representatives incorrectly announced the approval of these laws even though many representatives did not agree to them,” stressing that this day is “a legislative catastrophe, and will be remembered as the most failed session in the history of the Iraqi parliament.” We will also go to appeal to the Federal Court over the matter. Session outcomes.
Personal status
In turn, Representative Nour Nafie confirmed that what happened in the parliament session in terms of voting on laws – especially the Personal Status Law – is a “historical farce” of the Iraqi Council of Representatives.
Nafi explained in her interview with Al Jazeera Net that “voting on these laws was done in an illegal and non-transparent manner, as they were passed without even a raise of hands by the representatives, which is unprecedented in any previous session.”
She indicated that she was opposed from the beginning to passing the Personal Status Amendment Law, due to fears that this law would lead to the disintegration of the Iraqi family and the marginalization of the role of women in it, stressing that this law will increase differences within the family, and will lead to bias towards one party at the expense of another, which will have a negative impact. On the stability of Iraqi society.
The representative believed that this law would lead to the abolition of women’s role in managing the family, and that the consequences of this amendment could not be predicted, and that “the future of the Iraqi family became unknown after the passage of this law,” as she described it.
The amendment to the Personal Status Law gives Iraqis, upon concluding marriage contracts, the right to choose to organize their family affairs in accordance with the provisions of the Shiite or Sunni sect, or those stipulated in the Personal Status Law in force and in force since 1959, which is considered “advanced,” according to some.
For his part, Representative Moeen Al-Kadhimi confirmed that the new personal status law “pertains to the Shiite component in Iraq and does not affect the rest of the other components.”
Al-Kadhimi explained in his speech to Al-Jazeera Net that this law came in response to Article 41 of the Iraqi Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of individuals to choose their personal status according to their sects and beliefs.
He pointed out that the new law gives Iraqi Shiite citizens the right to choose to apply the personal status law in accordance with the Ahl al-Bayt doctrine, stressing that this matter does not prevent any Shiite citizen from continuing to apply the old law if he so desires.
The representative pointed out that this law will lead to a decrease in divorce cases, as the old law was the cause of the disintegration of many families. He also stressed that the new law does not affect the rights of other components in Iraq, as an explicit statement was included stating that this law will not be applied to Followers of Sunni doctrine.
Al-Kadhimi concluded his statement by emphasizing that the majority of the Shiite, Sunni, and Kurdish members of the House of Representatives approved this law, out of their belief that this law serves the interest of Iraqi society and achieves social justice.
After voting on the law, representatives and experts in Islamic jurisprudence and law, in cooperation with the Iraqi State Council, will have four months to “present the code of legal rulings” for Sunni and Shiite doctrine, with a vote on it taking place later.
General amnesty
In turn, Representative Muhammad Khalil warned of the danger of passing the general amnesty law in its current form, expressing his belief that this law will lead to “serious repercussions on Iraq.”
Khalil explained in a statement to Al Jazeera Net that “the vote on the law took place in illegal and constitutional circumstances,” noting that the law in its current form includes murderers and stealers of public money, which contradicts the concept of amnesty, which should be limited to innocent people who have been subjected to injustice.
The representative confirmed that the voting session witnessed unprecedented violations and chaos, questioning the existence of an agreed-upon version of the law with the relevant committee, and pointed out that passing 3 laws in one session is a dangerous precedent, especially since this law may lead to the release of terrorists and thieves of public money, Which constitutes a major threat to the security and stability of Iraq.
Khalil expressed his belief that the measures taken to pass the law were not legal, expecting that the political blocs would resort to challenging its constitutionality before the Federal Court. He concluded that the prior agreement between some political forces to pass these laws with one basket is an extremely dangerous matter.
The Iraqi Council of Representatives had previously voted on August 15, 2016 on the general amnesty law, as the law at that time allowed prisoners and convicts to submit requests for a retrial, but it required the approval of a special committee of the Judicial Council for a retrial, while the new amendment allowed a retrial after Submitting a request from convicts, without the need for approval from a special committee as to whether or not to proceed with it.
For his part, Representative Burhan Al-Nimrawi confirmed in his speech to Al-Jazeera Net that the House of Representatives’ vote on the law was for the sake of “justifying a large segment of the Iraqi people who were unjustly detained due to false information or malicious claims,” and stressed that the passage of this law represents a major achievement, as it will allow… The judiciary re-investigates and prosecutes.
Al-Nimrawi added that members of the House of Representatives and the objecting political forces “have the right to express their opinions, but the law was approved by a majority of votes, and thus it became effective from the moment of voting.”
He explained that voting on the paragraphs of the law had taken place in previous sessions, “and that what took place in the last session was to complete the voting on the reasons for approving the law and voting on the laws in a final manner, stressing that all procedures of the session were carried out legally and constitutionally, and that they were recorded and documented.”