Peregraf
In a dramatic and unprecedented development, the President and members of Iraq’s Federal Supreme Court have collectively decided to submit requests for retirement to the Supreme Judicial Council, effectively dissolving the court. The move, which comes amid intensifying internal disputes and political pressures, will necessitate the formation of a new Federal Court just months before Iraq's scheduled parliamentary elections.
A senior source in Baghdad confirmed the news to Peregraf, saying: "Yesterday, the judges of the Federal Court, including the six judges who had already submitted their resignations, met with the President of the Federal Court, Judge Jassim Aboud, to discuss their concerns and the issue of their resignation."
According to the source, the judges expressed grave concern about the ongoing conflicts between the Federal Court and the Supreme Judicial Council: "The judges were concerned about the clashes between the Federal Court and the Judicial Council and said they could not continue like this. The judges insisted that they would not return to their jobs, and the President of the Federal Court was concerned about this and decided to request their retirement together."
The same source confirmed that all Federal Court judges submitted their formal retirement requests to the Judicial Council on Sunday, June 22: "All of them have asked the Judicial Council to retire them yesterday," the source said.
Crucially, the six judges who had previously resigned on June 19 withdrew their resignations in order to become eligible for retirement benefits, as resignation alone does not entitle them to pensions.
The Root of the Conflict: Zidan vs. Aboud
According to Peregraf's investigation, the seismic shake-up within the Federal Court is rooted in a longstanding and intensifying dispute between Faiq Zidan, President of the Supreme Judicial Council, and Jassim Mohammed Aboud, President of the Federal Court.
The deepening rift has alarmed the country’s leading Shiite parties, who exercise considerable influence over the judiciary. These parties reportedly believe that the division is damaging to the state and the legal system. A senior political figure told Peregraf: "The main Shiite parties that control the judiciary believe that the differences in the judiciary have a negative impact and should choose between Faiq Zidan and Jassim Aboud to zero in on the problems and clashes between them."
Sources indicate that the parties decided to retain Faiq Zidan and pressured Jassim Aboud and all members of his court to step aside. Aboud has now formally submitted his retirement request alongside his colleagues.
The Federal Supreme Court is composed of a president, vice-presidents, seven permanent judges, and four reserve judges. According to Iraq’s judicial structure, the President of the Supreme Judicial Council, the President of the Federal Court, the President of the Prosecutor General’s Office, and the President of the Judicial Supervisory Board are to be appointed from among nominated judges—some of whom must represent the Kurdistan Region.
The dissolution of the Court comes at a critical juncture. Iraq’s general elections are scheduled for November 11, 2025, and the Federal Court is constitutionally tasked with ratifying final election results and confirming new members of parliament. With its members retiring en masse, the formation of a new court becomes an urgent national priority.
Retirements Follow Earlier Mass Resignations
The retirement requests follow the earlier resignations of six out of the nine Federal Court judges and three out of its four reserve members, which were submitted on June 19, 2025. At the time, a high-ranking source in Baghdad told Peregraf: "The resignations were submitted to the Supreme Judicial Council, not to the President of the Federal Court himself."
The source added that: "There is a deepening rift between the President of the Supreme Judicial Council and the Head of the Federal Court."
Now, that rift has culminated in the full-scale departure of the court’s leadership.
Political Pressures Behind the Crisis
A judicial source close to the matter told Peregraf that the judges’ move is not purely administrative but deeply political: "The judges’ collective action, which appears politically motivated."
The Federal Court had been expected to issue a ruling soon on whether the Iraqi government should resume sending salaries to public sector workers in the Kurdistan Region. Those employees, many of whom have not received their May wages more than three weeks into June, were looking to the Court for resolution.
The resignation of the Federal Court judges and now the submission of retirement applications comes as the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) salaried employees were waiting for the court to issue a salary order to continue sending salaries by the Iraqi government.
As of now, only four months of salary have been paid in 2025, exacerbating public anger and protests in the Kurdistan Region.
Institutional Breakdown: Federal Supreme Court vs. Judicial Council
The unfolding judicial crisis is a symptom of deeper structural and constitutional tensions between Iraq’s two top judicial institutions: the Federal Supreme Court (FSC) and the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC).
The FSC is charged with interpreting the constitution and adjudicating constitutional issues, while the SJC oversees the judiciary’s operational and administrative functions. But in recent years, the FSC has increasingly expanded its powers, issuing politically consequential rulings that many argue exceed its constitutional remit.
One such ruling invalidated the Kurdistan Oil and Gas Law, asserting exclusive federal authority over natural resources—a decision criticized by Kurdish leaders and legal experts as an attack on Iraq’s federal system.
Another source of controversy was the Court’s intervention in the post-2021 electoral process. It modified mechanisms for presidential elections and altered parliamentary power balances—resulting in accusations that the judiciary was enabling "rule by the losers" following the Sadrist bloc’s electoral victory.
The Court also revoked the membership of Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi in 2023—widely seen as judicial interference in the legislative process.
Compounding matters, an amendment to Law No. 30 of 2005 in 2021 removed the Kurdistan Region’s right to appoint judges to the Federal Court. Critics argue this has stripped the Court of its federal inclusivity and has led to increased politicization.
Most recently, in May 2024, the Federal Court of Cassation overturned a controversial FSC ruling that had granted Judge Ali Binyan Kahat full retirement benefits despite his not meeting the legal service requirement. The Cassation Court declared that the FSC had no authority to amend laws or grant such benefits, and for the first time, asserted that it had oversight over the FSC itself—a move that triggered speculation that past FSC rulings, particularly those affecting Kurdish autonomy, could be reversed.
The retirement of Iraq’s top constitutional judges signals a full-blown crisis in the country’s judiciary, driven by internal power struggles, political pressure, and unresolved constitutional ambiguities. With elections just months away, the urgent need to rebuild a credible, independent Federal Court is paramount.