The Impact of Judicial Ijtihad on the Development of Disciplinary Legislation in Iraqi, Egyptian, and Iranian Law

Abstract

This research addresses the impact of judicial ijtihad on the development of disciplinary legislation in Iraq, Egypt, and Iran, as a topic that touches the relationship between the judicial and regulatory authorities in the disciplinary field. The research aims to demonstrate the role of the administrative judiciary in interpreting disciplinary texts, filling legislative gaps, and establishing new legal principles, as well as evaluating the effectiveness of these ijtihads in protecting the rights of public employees. The study adopts a comparative analytical methodology by analyzing legislative texts, judicial precedents, and legal opinions in the three systems. The research finds that the Egyptian judiciary, represented by the State Council and the Supreme Administrative Court, has entrenched the principles of disciplinary legality, presumption of innocence, right to defense, proportionality between offense and penalty, and prohibition of double punishment. Meanwhile, the Iraqi judiciary, represented by the Employees Court and the State Shura Council, has strengthened oversight of disciplinary decisions and annulled penalties issued without proper investigation. In Iran, the Administrative Justice Court has played a prominent role in annulling unlawful disciplinary decisions, ensuring the right to defense, and applying the principle of proportionality. The comparison reveals a variation in the application of these principles, with the Iraqi system fluctuating between progress and delay, while the Iranian system reflects a religious-legal specificity. The research also highlights that judicial ijtihad has not been limited to interpretation but has extended to oversight of cause and subject matter, restricting administrative discretion, and protecting the legal positions of employees. The research recommends codifying established judicial principles, unifying judicial practice, enhancing the independence of disciplinary bodies, conducting awareness sessions for judges and employees on disciplinary safeguards, and promoting judicial cooperation among the three countries. The research concludes that judicial ijtihad, despite not being a formal source, plays a pivotal role in developing disciplinary legislation, because the success of the disciplinary model depends on the integration of legislative text with judicial ijtihad.