Iraq's High Court crisis threatens November 2025 elections

Shafaq News

3 days ago

Shafaq News/ A judicial crisis is unfolding in Iraq after nine members of the Federal Supreme Court—six full judges and three alternates—submitted collective resignations, citing political pressure. While these resignations have not yet been formally received by Chief Justice Jassim al-Amiri, the move has triggered political tremors and widespread concern about the fate of Iraq's upcoming elections.
A Threat To Electoral Legitimacy
The Federal Supreme Court plays a pivotal role in Iraq's electoral process, with sole authority to certify parliamentary election results. The court's paralysis due to mass resignations could derail the November 11, 2025, vote, extending the term of the current government and plunging the country into constitutional uncertainty.
Political analyst Aed al-Hilali told Shafaq News the resignations may be linked to issues such as the Kurdistan Region's budget or the legal dispute over the Khor Abdullah maritime agreement with Kuwait. "There may also be internal, regional, or international pressure," he said, while ruling out any connection to Iraq's Election Law.
An informed source told Shafaq News that the resignations reflect growing frustration with the management style of Chief Justice al-Amiri. The source warned that without swift resolution, the crisis could delay the elections indefinitely.
A Fragile Democratic Framework
Khaled Walid, spokesperson for the Nazil Akhudh Haqqi Movement (Going To Take My Right), said the resignations highlight long-standing political interference in the judiciary. He pointed to a recent letter from the chief justice to the Speaker of Parliament, requesting a meeting of national leaders—a request that was declined in the name of judicial independence.
"The resignation of six primary and three alternate judges is unprecedented," Walid told Shafaq News. "It should prompt political parties to end their meddling, especially amid heightened regional tensions."
He urged Iraq's executive, legislative, and judicial institutions to identify and expose the forces destabilizing the judiciary before making new appointments or pushing for reversals.
MP Mohammed Anouz, a member of the Legal Committee, described the resignations as "a dangerous indicator" of institutional fragility. "This shows a lack of constitutional adherence and undermines democratic mechanisms within state institutions," he said.
Anouz added, "Whether it's Khor Abdullah or Kurdistan salaries, these are merely pretexts. The root problem is systemic. Unless we address it courageously and comprehensively, this crisis will persist."
Why The Court Matters
Since Iraq's 2021 elections, the Federal Supreme Court has become a critical arbiter of electoral legitimacy. It dismissed early challenges from the Shiite Coordination Framework and upheld the election results, allowing government formation after a prolonged deadlock.
One of its most consequential decisions came in 2010, when the court interpreted the term "largest bloc" to mean the coalition formed after the elections, not the one that won the most seats. This paved the way for Nouri al-Maliki to form a government, bypassing former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.
The court has also ruled on the legality of electing the president and removed prominent figures such as former Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi and former Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari from office.
"The Federal Supreme Court is the only authority empowered to ratify parliamentary election results," said Imad Jameel, head of the media team at the Independent High Electoral Commission. "If these resignations are accepted, the electoral process will be directly affected."
Hazem al-Rudaini, head of the Strategic Center for Human Rights in Iraq, echoed that concern. "Approving these resignations would derail the electoral process," he warned.
With the November 2025 vote fast approaching, the political standoff at the top of Iraq's judiciary has injected fresh uncertainty into an already fragile system. If the court fails to regain full capacity, the country could face a legal vacuum—one that threatens to stall democratic transition and prolong the tenure of the current government.