Differences between two Cassation Court verdicts

This news has been read 22346 times!

At the end of last week, the Court of Cassation issued a verdict to restore the nationality to a group of citizens and more such verdicts are expected to be issued in favor of some individuals.

The recent verdicts caused some confusion because of the fact that the Board of Courts of Cassation issued a decision one year back stating that judging the cases concerning citizenship is not part of the judiciary tasks since it falls within the jurisdiction of the sovereignty authority.

I consulted a specialist friend who considered my confusion and stating that both rulings are correct namely the one issued last week by the Court of Cassation and the one issued one year back by the Board of Courts of Cassation.

In the past, there were disagreements between the different heads of the discriminatory departments. There is a head of a department who believes that nationality issues, especially withdrawals, are not a matter of sovereignty, and that his department has the right to decide on them. Other heads of departments see the opposite. Therefore, it was necessary to unify the position of the different circles of discrimination on this issue. Therefore, the “General Commission for Discrimination Chambers, the Commission for Unifying Principles,” met and ruled that all nationality issues are acts of sovereignty.

Meanwhile, a group of nationality cases, the number of which is not known, were being considered by the courts, and one of them reached the Cassation circuit headed by Counselor Muhammad Al-Sayed Youssef Al-Rifai, who is a supporter of the principle that cases of withdrawal of nationality are subject to judicial oversight.

Upon examining the case file, it was found that the Court of First Instance had ruled to restore the nationality of the plaintiffs. As for the Court of Appeal, it ruled to annul the ruling of the Court of First Instance, and ruled that it lacks state jurisdiction, meaning that it is not competent as a court to consider the application or the case, and this prompted Counselor Al-Rifai to return the case to appeal to change its ruling.

Thus, the case returned to appeal, and then to the counsel of Al-Rifai in Cassation, who decided to postpone the judgment in it, pending the issuance of the ruling of the “Cassation Chambers Authority”, which was issued indicating that nationality decisions are acts of sovereignty, and the judiciary has no right to interfere in it, by earning, withdrawing, overturning or re-establishing and so the matter ended, and the door was closed.

Later on, the case came back to Al Refai who decided to adjourn the ruling until the decision of the Board of Courts of Cassation is issued. Afterwards, it was decided that the cases which have been heard by the court before the issuance of the decision of the Board of Courts of Cassation not to be subject of that decision since the cases have been filed earlier than the issuance of the decision. The case which was judged last week is one of those cases.

e-mail: [email protected]

By Ahmad alsarraf

This news has been read 22346 times!

Back to top button

Advt Blocker Detected

Kindly disable the Ad blocker

Verified by MonsterInsights