Abstract
The mechanism for forming the Federal Court is one of the issues that greatly affected the work of the Court, especially after the Federal Court recognized the unconstitutionality of Article 3/Third of Judicial Council Law No. 45 of 2017, which stipulated the authority of the Supreme Judicial Council to nominate members of the Federal Court, and Article 3 of the Federal Court Law. No. 3 of 2005, which also stipulates the authority of the Supreme Judicial Council to nominate members of the Federal Court, as the decisions of the Federal Court had a significant impact on the work of the Court, especially after the retirement of one of its members, the lack of a quorum in the work of the Court, and the Court resorting to replacing the original member with a reserve member, in contravention of the constitution that was challenged. It was subsequently canceled, which disrupted the work of the court, disrupted its quorum, and disrupted its work. Therefore, the House of Representatives resorted to issuing the first amendment to Federal Court Law No. 25 of 2021, which specified the mechanism for selecting members of the Federal Supreme Court in a way that conflicts with what was stipulated in the Constitution. It also stipulated: That the President of the Judicial Council, the President of the Federal Court, and the Head of the Supervisory Body shall be responsible for selecting the President, Deputy, and members of the Federal Court. Thus, the House of Representatives has violated the decisions of the Federal Supreme Court by repealing Article 3/Third of the Supreme Judicial Council Law and Article 3 of the Federal Court Law, in which it took away the Judicial Council’s right to Choosing the president and members of the court, and if the court’s decisions are also unconstitutional, which of them is more likely to apply? The decisions of the Federal Court, which are considered final and binding according to the Constitution, or the first amendment to the Federal Supreme Court law, which conflicts with the Constitution and the decisions of the Federal Court? There is a clear contradiction and confusion between the decisions of the Federal Court and the first amendment. Federal Supreme Court Law No. 25 of 2021. Therefore, given the above, we find that the first amendment to the Federal Supreme Court Law No. 25 of 2021 also violated the Constitution, and we do not find that it came with a real treatment for the issue of the formation of the court and the lack of a quorum, especially in the Federal Supreme Court’s enjoyment of independence and impartiality, so the President of the Federal Court and the Head of the Judicial Oversight Service were involved in The selection of the judiciary was contrary to the Constitution and violated the independence of the court, especially when it stipulated the jurisdiction of the President of the Federal Court, which raises surprise and question in the event that the President of the Court nominates himself as a member of the new court. Therefore, it can be said that the above amendment constitutes a violation of the Constitution and violates the court’s impartiality and independence, which reflects this. This negatively affects the work and jurisdiction of the court, especially in protecting the rights and freedoms of individuals, which disturbs the balance between the authority of the state and the freedom of the individual.