The Iraqi Writers Organization declared, on Saturday, that the Government High Court dismissed the enticement for change the Columnists Partner Regulation, considering it as per the Constitution and that there isn’t anything that goes against its arrangements.
The association expressed in an explanation got by that “the Government High Court dismissed the enticement for drop the fourth amendment to the Writers Partner Regulation No. 56 of 2017, as it doesn’t struggle with the constitution and there isn’t anything in it that contradicts its arrangements.”
The choice of the Government High Court, No. 24/Government/2024, distributed on its site, expressed: ” The solicitation presented by the offended parties against the Speaker of the Iraqi Chamber of Delegates/notwithstanding his work and the Top of the Iraqi Writers Organization/notwithstanding his work, that the above change is a regulative and established choice and its motivation is to improve at the level of the calling, protecting its nobility, getting its privileges and safeguarding its inclinations.”
The Government High Court demonstrated in its choice that “the fourth amendment to the corrected Iraqi Writers’ Organization Regulation No. 178 of 1969 came to foster the association’s visual, sound, composed and electronic foundations and empower writers to play out their editorial mission with complete opportunity. The change additionally contained authoritative issues, including the appointment of the two VPs and individuals from the gathering and panels.” Discipline, checking, and delegates of the association in the governorates by larger part and by secret decision in favor of a time of four years, as well as the appointment of the president, as per the last correction, for two sequential constituent meetings, the span of which is four years, and that these revisions to the law are predictable and steady with the Constitution of the Republic of Iraq for the year 2005 and the standards of a majority rules system, and that they address no established infringement.
The choice of the Government High Court charged the offended parties the expenses of legitimate work force and attorneys’ charges and excused the previously mentioned claim.
