The Constitutional and Legal Organization of the Supreme Constitutional Court in the Iraqi State for the Year 2005

The constitutional system in Iraq after the overthrow of the previous regime in 2003 witnessed major fundamental changes, which marked the end of a historical era, the advent of the beginning of a new phase of political and constitutional history, and the adoption of the federal (federal) system as a form of the new Iraqi state, where Iraq transformed from a simple state to a complex state. With the adoption of the democratic parliamentary system based on the principle of separation of powers and respect for the constitution by emphasizing the principle of the supremacy of the constitution as a system for the work of state authorities and the management of its various constitutional institutions. If the constitutional distribution of competencies between the federal authorities is one of the essential characteristics of the federal systems, then one of the important features in the design of any federalism and its effective operation is to ensure the rule of law and the constitution as the source of powers, and in contrast, one of the authorities infringes on the powers of the other, which leads to a constitutional imbalance in the federalism And the matter that leads to its disintegration and its end, and in order to preserve this constitutional system, it is necessary to establish a supreme judicial body to ensure respect for the application of the constitutional principles of this system and not to be violated. The federal system is characterized by the presence of a Supreme Constitutional Court that works to monitor the constitutionality of laws and chapters In disputes between the central regions, it has the authority to interpret the Iraqi federal constitution, especially the interpretation of the constitutional rules related to the distribution of constitutional powers between the regions and the federal government. Which is one of the thorny issues in the countries of the union, and on this basis in Iraq the foregoing was the establishment of the Federal Supreme Court, which was granted by the constitution judicial and political competencies in order to exercise its role in preserving the union and the balance of powers within it while preserving the constitution and safeguarding its principles.

Laicidade, gênero e suas implicações no Estado Democrático de Direito: A necessidade de uma ecologia integral | Laicity, gender and their implications for the Democratic Rule of Law: The need for an integral ecology

Em 10 de julho de 2019, Jair Messias Bolsonaro disse: “Muitos tentam nos deixar de lado dizendo que o estado é laico. O estado é laico, mas nós somos cristãos. (...) Por isso, o meu compromisso: poderei indicar dois ministros para o Supremo Tribunal Federal. Um deles será terrivelmente evangélico”. O tema do presente artigo, portanto, é o estado laico na República Federativa do Brasil diante do incitamento político de algumas religiões em detrimento de outras e a notória influência histórica que algumas crenças apresentam com relação ao aspecto do gênero. O objetivo geral é analisar como a violação ao estado laico influencia nas questões do gênero feminino e, consequentemente, viola o Estado Democrático de Direito. Para tanto, os objetivos específicos são: a) analisar o Estado Democrático de Direito e o princípio do estado laico; b) analisar os requisitos para compor o Supremo Tribunal Federal; e c) analisar a influência de crenças religiosas com relação ao gênero feminino. A metodologia a ser utilizada é de pesquisa qualitativa, por intermédio de um método indutivo com análise documental. A presente pesquisa apresentou como resultado a violação ao Estado Democrático de Direito, em 2019, acerca da laicidade do estado, que feriu diferentes princípios constitucionais. On July 10, 2019 Jair Messias Bolsonaro said: “Many try to leave us aside saying that the state is secular. The state is secular, but we are Christians. (...) Therefore, my commitment: I will be able to appoint two ministers to the Federal Supreme Court. One of them will be terribly evangelical.” The theme of this article, therefore, is the secular state in the Federative Republic of Brazil, in view of the political incitement of some religions to the detriment of others, and the notorious historical influence that some beliefs have in relation to the aspect of gender. The general objective is to analyze how the violation of the secular state influences women's issues and, consequently, violates the Democratic Rule of Law. Therefore, the specific objectives are: a) to analyze the Democratic Rule of Law and the principle of the secular state; b) analyze the requirements to compose the Federal Supreme Court; and c) analyze the influence of religious beliefs regarding the female gender. The methodology to be used is qualitative research, through an inductive method with document analysis. The present research presented as a result the violation of the Democratic Rule of Law, in 2019, concerning the secularity of the state, that hurt different constitutional principles.

The Brazilian Federal Supreme Court and the Normalisation of Barbarity

This paper aims to explain the legal-political vocabulary that informs the decisions of the Brazilian Supreme Court on prison issues, giving prominence to the dimensions of race, gender, class and sexuality. In particular, it seeks to show the role of judicial action in the reproduction of black genocide, with significant implications for women, and how the Supreme Court acts as an authority over the barbarism installed in the criminal justice system. This article was originally published in Portuguese by the Brazilian journal Revista Direito e Praxis available at https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/revistaceaju/article/view/50270 DOI: 10.1590/2179-8966/2020/50270

The Jurisdiction of the UAE Federal Supreme Court on Constitutional Interpretation

While a Constitution embodies the basic principles and laws of a nation, its language and text may introduce ambiguity or confusion, especially during implementation of its laws. In such situations, interpretation of the text becomes more important than the text itself. The Federal UAE Constitution was issued in 1971 and includes a provision to specify the authority competent to interpret its contents. However, if the constitutional text that cited the interpretation jurisdiction of the Court is brief, then this research only gains important reason to explore the ambiguities of these texts and work. Therefore, this study aims to review and analyze Court rulings according to interpretation requests submitted to it from its inception to date. To the best of our knowledge, our study is the first to attempt to undertake the Court’s interpretative experience into a constructive legal analysis and highlight this genuine constitutional competence, which lacks a detailed discussion.

Current litigation - what can we learn?

This presentation explores the issues raised in the first presentation by examining current cases before European courts: (i) Union of Swiss Senior Women for Climate Protection v. Swiss Federal Council and Others. The application was rejected by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court on legal standing grounds - the heat stress-related aspects were not specific enough. The case has been appealed to the European Court of Human Rights. (ii) Youth for Climate Justice v. Austria, et al The European Court of Human Rights has dismissed a coordinated effort by 33 governments to overturn its October 2020 decision to fast-track the case. Governments had until May 27 2021 to submit their defences. The current status of both cases will be reviewed and the lessons for strategic litigation discussed.

Law, State and Religious Freedom in Brazil: A Historical and Constitutional Analysis of Freedom of Belief and Religion

This research sees to discuss the position of the State regarding Freedom of Belief, under the legal perspective. In other words, as the Brazilian Constitution guarantees freedom and the free exercise of religion in its art. 5, item VI, the question is: May the Brazilian State interfere with the freedom of individual belief, or can it provide legal guarantees so that this freedom is ensured? By the deductive method and by the analysis of recent judgments of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court in cases of extraordinary appeals, the limits of the State of action or inaction in relation to religious freedom will be upheld, concluding that the State must always ensure the sovereignty of secularity and neutrality in religious matters, observing freedom of belief. Keywords: Religious freedom; Brazilian State; Law

Comment: Legitimizing Gerrymandering in the Harari Regional State Contrary to the Principle of Equality of Votes

The National Election Board of Ethiopia (NEBE) had rejected the request to enable ethnic-Hararis who reside outside Harari Regional State to vote in the election of Harari National Council members. The Board stated that it is not bound by prior practices that do not have constitutional foundation. The Board further noted that accepting such demand would jeopardize the fairness and impartiality of the Board against other minority ethnic groups whose members reside outside their national state. NEBE argued that article 50(2) of the Harari Constitution contradicts the provision of article 50(3) of the FDRE Constitution. However, based on the Harari National Council’s petition to the Federal Supreme Court, the decision of NEBE has been reversed, and this has been further affirmed by the FSC Cassation Division. This comment examines the legal foundation and propriety of the decisions of the Federal Supreme Court and the FSC Cassation Division. Inter alia, the FSC Cassation Division has misinterpreted a provision under article 50(2) of the Harari Regional State Constitution that expressly refers to the right to be candidate in elections at place of birth as opposed to voting rights irrespective of residence.

The Swiss Primate Case: How Courts Have Paved the Way for the First Direct Democratic Vote on Animal Rights

A citizens’ initiative was launched in 2016 in the Swiss canton of Basel-Stadt, demanding that the rights catalogue in the Cantonal Constitution be complemented by a fundamental right to life and a right to bodily and mental integrity for non-human primates. This initiative became the subject of a three-year legal dispute that ended with a decision of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court in September 2020, ruling that the initiative is legally valid and must be put to the people for a vote. This case note discusses the key developments in the dispute, including the groundbreaking decision by the Constitutional Court of Basel-Stadt, which held that cantons are free to ‘expand the circle of rights holders beyond the anthropological barrier’. The authors, who were involved in the drafting of the initiative and acted as legal advisers in the judicial proceedings, offer first-hand insights into legal strategies and shed light on the importance of the case in the context of the ongoing efforts to secure rights for primates around the world.