Federal Court: The ruling unconstitutionality of articles in the law of the National Oil Company

Wednesday, January 23,


Alsumaria News / Baghdad
On Wednesday, the Federal Supreme Court issued a constitutional ruling on the appeals contained in articles in the Iraqi National Oil Company Law No. (4) of 2018, which ruled unconstitutionality of the section of those articles, including the determination of the objectives of the company and the process of marketing oil.

"The Supreme Federal Court held its session today under the chairmanship of Judge Medhat al-Mahmoud and the presence of all members of the judges and considered the appeals contained in the law of the Iraqi National Oil Company and issued a ruling on them," the spokesman of the court Ayas al-Samuk said in a statement received by Alsumaria News.


Al-Samok added that "the court found that the constitutional articles that directly govern the subject of the case are: Article (5) of the Constitution, which stipulates" the sovereignty of the law and the people, the source of the authorities. "Article 61 (1) of the Constitution, (62 / II) of the Constitution, which provides for (the House of Representatives to move between the doors and chapters of the general budget and reduce the total amounts, and if necessary to propose to the Council of Ministers to increase the total amount of expenditure.

He pointed out that "the articles in accordance with the ruling of the Federal Supreme Court also includes Article (78) of the Constitution, which the Prime Minister was responsible for the direct implementation of the general policy of the State, and Article (80) of the Constitution, which is in the paragraphs (I and IV) Policy and general plans of the state and the preparation of the draft general budget and the final account and development plans.

The court stated in its ruling article (106) of the constitution, which decided the existence of a public body to monitor the allocation of federal imports and the achievement of justice, and Article 110 of the Constitution provided for the exclusive powers of the federal authorities, including the provisions of paragraph (first) of them. The formulation of the economic and trade policy of foreign sovereign), and paragraph (III) of which provided (the drawing of fiscal and customs policy and issuance of currency and regulation of trade policy across the borders of the province and provinces in Iraq and the development of the general budget of the state and the formulation of monetary policy and the establishment of the Central Bank and its administration).

"Article (112) of the Constitution states that the management of oil and gas extracted from the existing fields To be distributed by the federal government with the governments of the producing regions and governorates to distribute their imports in a fair manner commensurate with the population distribution throughout the country, taking into account the affected regions and those that were unfairly deprived by the former regime and subsequently affected to ensure the balanced development of different regions of the country.

He added that "the court mentioned paragraph (II) of the same article provides for the validity of the federal government and the governments of regions and provinces producing together to draw strategic policies to develop the wealth of oil and gas, and Article (114) of the Constitution, which specialized in a statement of common competencies between the federal authorities and regional authorities, Development and general planning and the design and organization of the internal financial resources policy to ensure fair distribution. "

"The Supreme Federal Court found that the inclusion of any text in the law leads to the removal of jurisdiction of the exclusive federal authorities or joint competencies between them and the authorities of the provinces and provinces producing oil and gas is contrary to the provisions of the Constitution and the need to rule unconstitutional."

He went on to say, "The Federal Supreme Court and based on the above decided to rule on the unconstitutionality of the following articles:
Article (3) of the law, because the tasks carried out by its objectives are contrary to the provisions of Article (112) with its paragraphs (1) and (II) and Article (114) of the Constitution. The tasks mentioned in Article (3) The federal government with the governments of oil-producing provinces and provinces.

2 - Paragraph (III and V) of Article (4) of the law and as far as the process of marketing oil, as this is the functions of the Ministry of Oil and the associated company, in contradiction to Article (112) of the Constitution.

Article (7 / I / 1) of the law, which stipulates that "the company shall be headed by an employee with the rank of minister ...", in contradiction to the provisions of Article 62 / II of the Constitution. .

Article (h) of paragraph (2) of Article (7) concerning the making of the oil company (somo) from the formations associated with the status of the company, in contradiction to the provisions of Article (110 / I and III) of the Constitution.

5- Article ( of the law which stipulates the functions of the Board of Directors and that the majority of these functions are the competencies of the federal government with the oil producing regions and governorates together on the basis of Articles (78), (80) and (112) of the Constitution.

Article (11) of the law, which stipulates (first: the company deducts an amount covering all investment and operational costs and not less than the average cost in all fields invested for each barrel of crude oil and gas produced plus a certain percentage of profit and this is determined by agreement between The Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Finance after the end of the financial year of the company and after the completion of the final accounts and ratification ) For its incompatibility with the provisions of Articles (78), (80), (111) and (112) of the Constitution.

Article (12) of the law, which showed the financial revenues of the company and its profits and distribution, in violation of the provisions of Articles (78), (80 / First and Second), (106), (111) and (112) of the Constitution.

Article (13 / second) of the law stipulates that "Excluding the incentives of the employees of the company from the provisions of the law of the salaries of state employees and the public sector No. 22 of 2008 and this shall be determined by a system issued by the Council of Ministers. II) of the Constitution where it included a financial burden not taken in the opinion of the Council of Ministers.

9- Article (16) of the law stipulated in paragraph (1) that the company and the companies owned by it shall be excluded from the financial management law, the public companies law, the customs law, the foreign residency law, the government contracts execution law, Article (5) of the Constitution shall be issued by the Council of Ministers and at the suggestion of the Company to replace the exempted laws provided for in paragraph (1) of this article individually to guarantee the rights of the public treasury. That it is not permissible to annul the law of Ma Bin System or instructions.

10- Article (18 / VI) of the law which stipulates that "the company may contribute to the development of the agricultural, industrial and service sectors ...", in contradiction to the provisions of Articles (78) and (80) of the Constitution.

Al-Samok said that "the Federal Supreme Court decided to respond to the rest of the appeals contained in the consolidated cases mentioned above because they do not conflict with the provisions of the Constitution and with the general policy of the state provided for in Article 80 of the Constitution and because it came as a legislative option for the House of Representatives, (61 / I) of the Constitution. "


http://www.alsumaria.tv/news/81728/ط£ط±ط¨ط¹ط-ظ‚طھظ„ظ‰-ظˆ12-ط¬ط±ظٹط­ط§-ظپظٹ-ط­ط