The Transformation Impact in The Iraqi Constitutional Judiciary Rulings on Quality of its Judgments –A Comparative Study

It is established that constitutional rules sit at the pinnacle of the legal hierarchy in the state,laying down the principles and foundations upon which the system of government is based,organizing the relationship between the authorities,defining their jurisdictions,setting the boundaries,imposing restrictions on their activities,and establishing rights and freedoms along with their guarantees. Since constitutional judiciary is the body responsible for safeguarding the constitution andthe rules it contains –whether it relates to constitutional review, the interpretation of constitutional provisions, or resolving disputes –it is essential that its rulings are characterized by absolute authority over all. This is referred to as the principle of the "binding force of constitutional precedents. However, at the same time, rulings are issued by judges who, like all humans, are prone to error or deficiency. Thus, judicial decisions may contain errors in reasoning or fail to clarify the meaning or substance, or may be based on outdated societal realities, making them unable to keep pace with the evolution in various aspects of political, economic, and social life. This necessitates the abandonment of a previous ruling in favor of a subsequent one that is more aligned with and responsive to the changes. Such a shift would serve the public interest in general and the rights and freedoms in particular, while still adhering to the principles of legal and judicial security to achieve a reasonable degree of stability in legal relationships and a minimum level of consistency and permanence in different legal positions, with the aim of promoting security and reassurance among the parties involved in legal relationships, whether public or private.