The President of Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council, Judge Faiq Zidan, has issued a detailed legal advisory underscoring the critical necessity of adhering strictly to the constitutional timelines governing the nation’s parliamentary elections, a pivotal democratic achievement since 2003. This authoritative statement directly addresses potential deviations from the prescribed electoral cycle, serving as an explicit warning that holding the upcoming Council of Representatives elections in 2025 earlier than the legally mandated period would constitute a clear constitutional infringement. This position reinforces the fundamental principle enshrined in Article 1 of the Constitution, which defines the state’s political architecture as a republican and parliamentary system where the legislature remains the sole foundation for governmental legitimacy, as further delineated by Article 49.
The specific constitutional prescription for the timing of legislative polls is detailed in Article 56 (Second). Given that the current legislative term officially commenced on January 9, 2022, and is established to run for four full calendar years under Article 56 (First), the statutory requirement dictates that elections for the succeeding Council of Representatives must be conducted no later than 45 days preceding the term’s conclusion. Based on this precise constitutional schedule, the appropriate date for the elections is calculated to be November 24, 2025. Consequently, the setting of an alternative date, such as November 11, 2025, is explicitly cited as lacking any demonstrable constitutional or legal foundation, representing a direct contravention of the established supreme law.
Beyond the initial election date, the judiciary’s analysis also meticulously charts the mandatory post-election constitutional sequence for the formation of a new government. This process initiates with a tightly sequenced legal review framework, including a three-day period for voter appeals, followed by the Independent High Electoral Commission’s seven-day review and forwarding of responses to the Electoral Judiciary, which subsequently has ten days to issue definitive rulings. Following final ratification by the Federal Supreme Court under Article 93 (Seventh), the President of the Republic must call the new parliament to convene within fifteen days. Subsequent steps, anchored in Articles 55, 72, and 76, involve the election of the parliamentary speaker and deputies, the election of the President of the Republic within thirty days, and the designation and subsequent approval of the Prime Minister and cabinet, a multi-stage process that can constitutionally span approximately four months from the announcement of results. The analysis notes, however, that the Constitution’s use of the term “within” grants political actors the legal flexibility to expedite this transition, potentially concluding the government formation by early January 2026.
Crucially, the senior jurist cautioned against the persistent historical pattern of political actors failing to respect these constitutional deadlines in the selection of the three presidencies—the Speaker, the President, and the Prime Minister. Such systemic delays, which have exceeded legally permitted periods, inherently constitute recurring constitutional violations. Given the current absence of defined legal penalties or explicit consequences for failing to adhere to these prescribed timelines, the analysis concludes with an urgent call for constitutional reform. Respecting these established constitutional deadlines and embedding definitive consequences for their breach are posited as essential institutional safeguards necessary to preserve the rule of law, sustain democratic stability, and ensure the orderly and peaceful transfer of governmental authority.
