GORRAN.NET ||

opposition

opposition

Report of constitutional breaches at the 30th of June session of Kurdistan Parliament Dear The representative of the United Nation The representative of the European Union Human rights Organizations in Kurdistan Civil society Organizations Representatives of other states and consulates We - the opposition lists in Kurdistan parliament that have signed this document- from a legal and professional point of view feel it is our responsibility based on the applicable laws of Kurdistan, in particular the procedure of parliament and the law applicable to the presidency-- to inform you that on 30 June 2013, in a meeting of Kurdistan parliament, all the principles of the rule of law were disregarded, and a decision of the politburo of both political parties ( Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and Kurdistan Democratic Party) a day earlier meaning the 29 of June 2013 was analyzed, forced upon the head of parliament, Kurdistani List and their allies in an illegal way. The two motions were (extending the presidential tenure of President Masoud Barzani for two years) and (extending parliament’s time for two more months and 10 days.) both of which are illegal this is while the par and none of regulation and the laws were followed to pass these two pieces of legislations. What follows are the reasons why we believe the passing of these two motions was illegal First: We as the opposition lists, from the beginning of the session wanted to solve the expected issues arising from these motions but the head of parliament went against the parliament’s procedures and did not open the door of negotiation and did not allow the parliamentarians to contribute and express their views. Two: and when the heads of opposition lists were insisting to talk, only the head of the opposition lists were allowed to talk. And when they suggested that the motions be postponed for 10 to 15 days so all the parties can agree on them, the head of parliament went against the procedures’ of the house and did not put the suggestion to a vote. And from there the tension started and the opposition parliamentarians each wanted to talk but the head of parliament neither put the suggestions of the heads of the opposition lists to a vote nor did he allow the opposition MPs to talk. Therefore the oppositions MPs raised their concerns and occupied the front of the president's podium and did not allow the legal committee to continue with such an illegal act. Third: The same day we issued a statement to the public; we revealed the truth of the matter, the irregularities and obvious breaches. We requested that the region’s president office - the highest executive office in Kurdistan- not to sign the motions and refer them back to the parliament as the final solution to that crisis. But unfortunately, despite the political custom and the legal solution, did not reply to our call at all. After 14 days he released a statement in which he did not reject the motions. Fourth: the unconstitutional sides of the parliament’s session of 30 June 2013 in which these two motions were passed, we will summarize the reasons in the following 14 points according to the regulation and procedures of the parliament. 1: According to chapter (7) of parliament’s internal procedure, number (1) of 1992 amended, it is only possible to extend the parliament’s term for one month and that month should be taken from the parliament’s recess and not extending the life of parliament while on 30 of June based on the motion the term was extended for two months, and in breach of the chapter, the recess was not shortened but instead the life of parliament was extended. 2: According to chapter (7) of parliament’s procedure, that extension should be passed with the majority of votes, two thirds of the votes, in fact that day the votes were not counted to see whether the motion obtained the majority. 3: Chapter 8 of parliament’s procedure states :”the term of the assembly is 4 years, it starts with the first session and ends with the last session of the fourth year.” According to this chapter the third parliament’s term ended on 20 of August 2013 because the first session was held on 20th of August 2009 therefore any extension is illegal unless it is specified in Chapter 7 which is to reduce the recess by one month and not extending the term of the parliament “ the assembly can with the majority of votes, tow thirds extend the term of the parliament but not for more than a month.” 4: Chapter 9 of the internal procedure of the parliament states:”the session of the council are public.” But that day, like other days the media were not allowed to cover the session and even the recoding of the session were not passed on to the media and until now the media are asking for the recoding of that session but they have kept it and have not passed it on to the media. 5: According to Chapter 19 section 2, it is the duty of the secretary of the parliament to line up the names of those MPs who want to talk but on the meeting of 30/6/2013 the secretary did not do that and none of the officials of the assembly’s presidency allowed the MPs to talk. Only the heads of the lists and a few members because of their persistence were allowed to talk. 6: Chapter 20 section 1 of internal procedures, in relation to the outcome of the parliament session states: it must “at least two days before the session the members of the assembly and members of the council of ministers should be informed of the session.” This is while on 30/06/2013 when the session started the working paper of that day was placed before the MPs because a day before the decision had been made in the politburo of Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and Kurdistan Democratic Party. Therefore they did not have time to place it in the working paper of the parliament and on that day both motions were put to votes. It received the first reading and the report was written in the afternoon and at 4pm against the internal procedure of the parliament, it was passed because that evening the parliament’s term was coming to an end. 7: According to Chapter 20 section 4 the overall draft of the final session should be read out. But on 30 June that was not done at all. 8: Chapter 54 section 2, regarding the draft of the session it states:”the secretariat directly informs the members” and this is done either via email or in writing format to be put into the letter box of the members of the parliaments or it is published in the parliament’s website. The secretariat did not inform anyone even indirectly. 9: Chapter 54 section 4 states that the name of members who are not present to be read out but on 30 of June like other days that was not done. No reference was made to those who were absent or present. And that is why broadcasting the acceptance of those two motions by the majority of votes does not have any legal or protocol basis. 10: Chapter 60 of parliament’s regulation states:”If the order was broken and the speaker of the parliament could not return it to normal, the session should be stopped. And if this was of no use, it should be postponed. “ On 30 June, the order of the session broke down, the speaker did not consider this chapter, he neither stop nor postponed the session. But instead continued the session despite the chaotic state of the session. For that reason no votes were counted and the session was not managed properly. Even if we only take into account this chapter , the session of that day was unconstitutional. 11: Chapter 71, the procedure of the parliament points out that the motion and the decision should be handed out to the MPs and their final draft should be read in the first session without any discussion. And then it will be referred to the specified committee and in normal circumstances within 10 days and in special circumstances a report will be presented within 5 days. On the 30 of June the motions were not given to the MPs and the same day it received its first reading and a report was prepared and it was passed without any discussion and voting. In contravention of this Chapter, the session was under discussion without any MPs being allowed to talk about any sections of the motions. So not 10 days or five days, there was not even five hours in between the first reading and the discussion of the session before the motions were passed. 12: According to Chapter 71 section 4 after the reading of the motion, the parliament speaker’s office should pass it on to the relevant committee so they can prepare the report within 10 days. If the motion was urgent, the report should be prepared in 5 days and delivered to the parliament’s speaker. Chapter 72 section 1 of parliament’s regulation, there must be a report by the legal committee on each motion and decision. The motion and the legal report should be given to all the members by the secretary but on 30 June none of these procedures were followed and before the session no report was distributed. 13: According to Chapter 72 section 3 of the internal procedures of the parliament, the parliament first should discuss the report of the committee about the motion and then to discuss the motion. This point of the procedure was not followed on 30 June. 14: Chapter 77 section 2 states: “the speaker after the votes were counted would announce the result either way” but that day the result was not announced because the votes were not counted. 15: The legal committee has published a report number 153 on 30 June 2013 with the motion which gives tow reasons for the extension to the president’s term: First: because the tenure of the president will come to an end on the day he took oath (20/8/2013) and the election will be held on 21 September 2013 and to avoid a legal vacuum, the tenure should be extended. Second: when the election is held, the president should issue a directive to convene the first session and for the MPs to take the oath. This decision is against the working rules in Kurdistan, for instance: First: in Chapter 10 section 3 and the law number 1 of presidency of 2005 states if the president did not issue a directive within 10 days of announcing the election results, for the first session the parliament will convene the following day. Second: In Chapter 15 of the same law it says if the president’s seat is empty for whatever reason, the speaker of the parliament will perform the president’s duty until a new president is elected within 60 days. We now realize that the two excuses are not legally valid. And if this extension is because there is legal vacuum until the next election, how is it possible in order to fill that gap the president’s tenure should be extended by two years? While the election is to be held in three months time, and why the extension for the parliament is two months but for the president is two years? This proves that the motion and the report are the reason behind this law which is against the applicable laws of Kurdistan region. On 20/6/2013 the speaker of the parliament officially informed the head of the lists and 16 MPs that after that date they should not present any motions because there was no time left and to finish the motions that are already prepared. But the speaker of the parliament and Kurdistani list broke that rule and on 30 June which means 10 days after that rule those two motions were presented. And these are the unconstitutional sides of the decision of 30 June in Kurdistan parliament and infringing 12 internal regulations of the parliament. Regarding extending the tenure if the president of Kurdistan, it has no legal basis and it was passed illegally because the whole of the process and the motion were against the laws governing presidency according to the following legal points: 1: the president of the region should have been chosen by the people and not by the parliament, according to the legal system even if it was for one day. Thus the chapter 2 of the law governing presidency has been breached. 2: According o chapter 3 of the law governing presidency, the tenure of the president is only for 4 years and can run for the second term and that happened. Thus chapter 3 of that law was breached. 3: According to the law governing presidency , the presidential election and the parliamentary election should happen at the same time which means the 21/9/2013 which it has been scheduled and with that they breached chapter 4. 4: The extension to the tenure of the president of the region postpones the process of democracy for the wishes of a political party. At the same time not holding the provincial election which was supposed o be held, while amending the law, was on the request of the electoral commission was amended on the same day as parliamentary elections and with what they did they prove that they don't want democracy to take its organic trajectory and to exchange power through democratic means. This means all the chapters of the law governing presidency have been breached on 30 of June 2013. These are all evidence of the illegality of the session of 30 of June 2013 and the hollowness of the decision. The session was filmed fully and we attribute any censorship of the protocols to the president of the parliament. In the end, we confirm that the content of this report is accurate, and we request that you the friends and patrons of democracy and observers of the Kurdish region not to be quiet in the face of these breaches and support the principle of democracy and freedom and citizens rights and handing over of the power in a peaceful way. And because of the 30TH OF June 2013 coup in Kurdistan parliament all the principle are under the threat of being disregarded. Gorran List Kurdistan Islamic Union List Islamic Group in Kurdistan List Future List Kurdistan – Iraq 19 June 2013 25/07/2013

Report of constitutional breaches at the 30th of June session of Kurdistan Parliament

Dear
The representative of the United Nation
The representative of the European Union
Human rights Organizations in Kurdistan
Civil society Organizations
Representatives of other states and consulates

We - the opposition lists in Kurdistan parliament that have signed this document- from a legal and professional point of view feel it is our responsibility based on the applicable laws of Kurdistan, in particular the procedure of parliament and the law applicable to the presidency-- to inform you that on 30 June 2013, in a meeting of Kurdistan parliament, all the principles of the rule of law were disregarded, and a decision of the politburo of both political parties ( Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and Kurdistan Democratic Party) a day earlier meaning the 29 of June 2013 was analyzed, forced upon the head of parliament, Kurdistani List and their allies in an illegal way. The two motions were (extending the presidential tenure of President Masoud Barzani for two years) and (extending parliament’s time for two more months and 10 days.) both of which are illegal this is while the par and none of regulation and the laws were followed to pass these two pieces of legislations.

What follows are the reasons why we believe the passing of these two motions was illegal

First: We as the opposition lists, from the beginning of the session wanted to solve the expected issues arising from these motions but the head of parliament went against the parliament’s procedures and did not open the door of negotiation and did not allow the parliamentarians to contribute and express their views.

Two: and when the heads of opposition lists were insisting to talk, only the head of the opposition lists were allowed to talk. And when they suggested that the motions be postponed for 10 to 15 days so all the parties can agree on them, the head of parliament went against the procedures’ of the house and did not put the suggestion to a vote. And from there the tension started and the opposition parliamentarians each wanted to talk but the head of parliament neither put the suggestions of the heads of the opposition lists to a vote nor did he allow the opposition MPs to talk. Therefore the oppositions MPs raised their concerns and occupied the front of the president's podium and did not allow the legal committee to continue with such an illegal act.

Third: The same day we issued a statement to the public; we revealed the truth of the matter, the irregularities and obvious breaches. We requested that the region’s president office - the highest executive office in Kurdistan- not to sign the motions and refer them back to the parliament as the final solution to that crisis. But unfortunately, despite the political custom and the legal solution, did not reply to our call at all. After 14 days he released a statement in which he did not reject the motions.

Fourth: the unconstitutional sides of the parliament’s session of 30 June 2013 in which these two motions were passed, we will summarize the reasons in the following 14 points according to the regulation and procedures of the parliament.

1: According to chapter (7) of parliament’s internal procedure, number (1) of 1992 amended, it is only possible to extend the parliament’s term for one month and that month should be taken from the parliament’s recess and not extending the life of parliament while on 30 of June based on the motion the term was extended for two months, and in breach of the chapter, the recess was not shortened but instead the life of parliament was extended.

2: According to chapter (7) of parliament’s procedure, that extension should be passed with the majority of votes, two thirds of the votes, in fact that day the votes were not counted to see whether the motion obtained the majority.

3: Chapter 8 of parliament’s procedure states :”the term of the assembly is 4 years, it starts with the first session and ends with the last session of the fourth year.” According to this chapter the third parliament’s term ended on 20 of August 2013 because the first session was held on 20th of August 2009 therefore any extension is illegal unless it is specified in Chapter 7 which is to reduce the recess by one month and not extending the term of the parliament “ the assembly can with the majority of votes, tow thirds extend the term of the parliament but not for more than a month.”

4: Chapter 9 of the internal procedure of the parliament states:”the session of the council are public.” But that day, like other days the media were not allowed to cover the session and even the recoding of the session were not passed on to the media and until now the media are asking for the recoding of that session but they have kept it and have not passed it on to the media.

5: According to Chapter 19 section 2, it is the duty of the secretary of the parliament to line up the names of those MPs who want to talk but on the meeting of 30/6/2013 the secretary did not do that and none of the officials of the assembly’s presidency allowed the MPs to talk. Only the heads of the lists and a few members because of their persistence were allowed to talk.

6: Chapter 20 section 1 of internal procedures, in relation to the outcome of the parliament session states: it must “at least two days before the session the members of the assembly and members of the council of ministers should be informed of the session.” This is while on 30/06/2013 when the session started the working paper of that day was placed before the MPs because a day before the decision had been made in the politburo of Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and Kurdistan Democratic Party. Therefore they did not have time to place it in the working paper of the parliament and on that day both motions were put to votes. It received the first reading and the report was written in the afternoon and at 4pm against the internal procedure of the parliament, it was passed because that evening the parliament’s term was coming to an end.

7: According to Chapter 20 section 4 the overall draft of the final session should be read out. But on 30 June that was not done at all.

8: Chapter 54 section 2, regarding the draft of the session it states:”the secretariat directly informs the members” and this is done either via email or in writing format to be put into the letter box of the members of the parliaments or it is published in the parliament’s website. The secretariat did not inform anyone even indirectly.

9: Chapter 54 section 4 states that the name of members who are not present to be read out but on 30 of June like other days that was not done. No reference was made to those who were absent or present. And that is why broadcasting the acceptance of those two motions by the majority of votes does not have any legal or protocol basis.

10: Chapter 60 of parliament’s regulation states:”If the order was broken and the speaker of the parliament could not return it to normal, the session should be stopped. And if this was of no use, it should be postponed. “ On 30 June, the order of the session broke down, the speaker did not consider this chapter, he neither stop nor postponed the session. But instead continued the session despite the chaotic state of the session. For that reason no votes were counted and the session was not managed properly. Even if we only take into account this chapter , the session of that day was unconstitutional.

11: Chapter 71, the procedure of the parliament points out that the motion and the decision should be handed out to the MPs and their final draft should be read in the first session without any discussion. And then it will be referred to the specified committee and in normal circumstances within 10 days and in special circumstances a report will be presented within 5 days. On the 30 of June the motions were not given to the MPs and the same day it received its first reading and a report was prepared and it was passed without any discussion and voting. In contravention of this Chapter, the session was under discussion without any MPs being allowed to talk about any sections of the motions. So not 10 days or five days, there was not even five hours in between the first reading and the discussion of the session before the motions were passed.

12:

According to Chapter 71 section 4 after the reading of the motion, the parliament speaker’s office should pass it on to the relevant committee so they can prepare the report within 10 days. If the motion was urgent, the report should be prepared in 5 days and delivered to the parliament’s speaker. Chapter 72 section 1 of parliament’s regulation, there must be a report by the legal committee on each motion and decision. The motion and the legal report should be given to all the members by the secretary but on 30 June none of these procedures were followed and before the session no report was distributed.

13: According to Chapter 72 section 3 of the internal procedures of the parliament, the parliament first should discuss the report of the committee about the motion and then to discuss the motion. This point of the procedure was not followed on 30 June.

14:

Chapter 77 section 2 states: “the speaker after the votes were counted would announce the result either way” but that day the result was not announced because the votes were not counted.

15: The legal committee has published a report number 153 on 30 June 2013 with the motion which gives tow reasons for the extension to the president’s term:

First: because the tenure of the president will come to an end on the day he took oath (20/8/2013) and the election will be held on 21 September 2013 and to avoid a legal vacuum, the tenure should be extended.

Second: when the election is held, the president should issue a directive to convene the first session and for the MPs to take the oath.

This decision is against the working rules in Kurdistan, for instance:

First: in Chapter 10 section 3 and the law number 1 of presidency of 2005 states if the president did not issue a directive within 10 days of announcing the election results, for the first session the parliament will convene the following day.

Second:

In Chapter 15 of the same law it says if the president’s seat is empty for whatever reason, the speaker of the parliament will perform the president’s duty until a new president is elected within 60 days. We now realize that the two excuses are not legally valid. And if this extension is because there is legal vacuum until the next election, how is it possible in order to fill that gap the president’s tenure should be extended by two years? While the election is to be held in three months time, and why the extension for the parliament is two months but for the president is two years? This proves that the motion and the report are the reason behind this law which is against the applicable laws of Kurdistan region.

On 20/6/2013 the speaker of the parliament officially informed the head of the lists and 16 MPs that after that date they should not present any motions because there was no time left and to finish the motions that are already prepared. But the speaker of the parliament and Kurdistani list broke that rule and on 30 June which means 10 days after that rule those two motions were presented. And these are the unconstitutional sides of the decision of 30 June in Kurdistan parliament and infringing 12 internal regulations of the parliament.

Regarding extending the tenure if the president of Kurdistan, it has no legal basis and it was passed illegally because the whole of the process and the motion were against the laws governing presidency according to the following legal points:

1: the president of the region should have been chosen by the people and not by the parliament, according to the legal system even if it was for one day. Thus the chapter 2 of the law governing presidency has been breached.

2: According o chapter 3 of the law governing presidency, the tenure of the president is only for 4 years and can run for the second term and that happened. Thus chapter 3 of that law was breached.

3: According to the law governing presidency , the presidential election and the parliamentary election should happen at the same time which means the 21/9/2013 which it has been scheduled and with that they breached chapter 4.

4: The extension to the tenure of the president of the region postpones the process of democracy for the wishes of a political party. At the same time not holding the provincial election which was supposed o be held, while amending the law, was on the request of the electoral commission was amended on the same day as parliamentary elections and with what they did they prove that they don't want democracy to take its organic trajectory and to exchange power through democratic means.

This means all the chapters of the law governing presidency have been breached on 30 of June 2013.

These are all evidence of the illegality of the session of 30 of June 2013 and the hollowness of the decision. The session was filmed fully and we attribute any censorship of the protocols to the president of the parliament.

In the end, we confirm that the content of this report is accurate, and we request that you the friends and patrons of democracy and observers of the Kurdish region not to be quiet in the face of these breaches and support the principle of democracy and freedom and citizens rights and handing over of the power in a peaceful way. And because of the 30TH OF June 2013 coup in Kurdistan parliament all the principle are under the threat of being disregarded.

Gorran List
Kurdistan Islamic Union List
Islamic Group in Kurdistan List
Future List
Kurdistan – Iraq

19 June 2013

25/07/2013

More...

PageFrom‌ 1

Number