Home
Judiciary: the Federal Court Act requires Representative has members of parliament vote
Sat, 02 May two thousand and fifteen
BAGHDAD - News Today / Federal Supreme Court, confirmed on Saturday that the vote on the law must be two-thirds of the members of the House of Representatives to the terms and the law in general, pointing out that going to another interpretation means emptying the contents of the constitutional text. A spokesman for the federal judiciary Judge Abdul Sattar Bayrakdar in a statement received "News Today" a copy of it, "The House of Representatives sent an explanatory request to the Federal Supreme Court about the vote on the law mechanism". Bayraktar said that "the vote and under interpretation should be two-thirds of the members of the House of Representatives on the provisions of the law, and the law in general as well." Bayrakdar and pointed out that "the court found that going to another interpretation means emptying the constitutional text and exceeded and to maintain the provisions of the rules of procedure it." He stressed interpretation according to Bayrakdar on "privacy provisions of the Federal Supreme Court and in view of what it represents as the highest judicial body in the justice of peace, and the judiciary of the Federal given its constitutional competence and which extends to the regions and governorates not organized province, all under Article (92 / I of the Constitution)."
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Sat, 02 May two thousand and fifteen
BAGHDAD - News Today / Federal Supreme Court, confirmed on Saturday that the vote on the law must be two-thirds of the members of the House of Representatives to the terms and the law in general, pointing out that going to another interpretation means emptying the contents of the constitutional text. A spokesman for the federal judiciary Judge Abdul Sattar Bayrakdar in a statement received "News Today" a copy of it, "The House of Representatives sent an explanatory request to the Federal Supreme Court about the vote on the law mechanism". Bayraktar said that "the vote and under interpretation should be two-thirds of the members of the House of Representatives on the provisions of the law, and the law in general as well." Bayrakdar and pointed out that "the court found that going to another interpretation means emptying the constitutional text and exceeded and to maintain the provisions of the rules of procedure it." He stressed interpretation according to Bayrakdar on "privacy provisions of the Federal Supreme Court and in view of what it represents as the highest judicial body in the justice of peace, and the judiciary of the Federal given its constitutional competence and which extends to the regions and governorates not organized province, all under Article (92 / I of the Constitution)."
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
