The Interpretative Jurisdiction of Constitutional Courts: A Comparative Study Between the Iraqi and Jordanian Models

Abstract

This current study aims to reveal the interpretative power of constitutional courts (using the Iraqi and Jordanian models as examples for comparative analysis). The study employs descriptive analysis and comparative methods. Several conclusions are drawn, the most significant being that Article 93/2 of the 2005 Iraqi Constitution grants the Federal Supreme Court the power to interpret the constitutional text. The 2004 Iraqi Transitional Administrative Law (later repealed by Article 44) defines the Federal Supreme Court's jurisdiction in two areas: adjudicating disputes between the federal government and regional, provincial, municipal, and local administrative bodies, and reviewing constitutional cases. Other jurisdictional powers of the court are explicitly defined by subsequent laws. In the Jordanian model, the legislature explicitly granted the constitutional court the power to interpret the constitutional text in the 2011 constitutional amendment. This study recommends a comprehensive review of the relevant provisions of Iraqi Federal Supreme Court Law No. (30) of 2005, which clearly lacks explicit provisions on the interpretation of the constitutional text. This oversight has led some legal scholars to question the legal nature of the current Federal Supreme Court.