Impact Assessment of the Absence of Public Dissenting Opinions on Transparency in Constitutional Judgments by the Iraqi Federal Supreme Court

Abstract

The research examines the lack of publicly available dissenting opinions when assessing the implications for the transparency and accountability of constitutional judgments issued by the Iraqi Federal Supreme Court (IFSC). Utilizing an impact assessment approach, the study examines the implications of not having dissenting opinions publicly available, meaning that only the majority opinions of IFSC Justices are freely available for public consumption. The study considered, primarily, how dissenting opinions facilitate transparency of justice through public engagement by the court of first impression in constitutional matters, and how a lack of dissenting views limits the public’s ability to understand the rationale behind judicial decisions fully, and to understand better the implications of the lack of dissenting opinions on transparency of civil constitutional adjudication. The research considers the impact of these market inefficiencies on the independence of judges, public confidence in the judiciary, and the development of legal precedents. The article uses a combination of doctrinal research and qualitative fieldwork as retrospective legal and empirical methods to assess the effect of the absence of public documentation in the judicial process and to explore how dissenting opinions can enhance the transparency of the judiciary. This research primarily discusses various options for strengthening public reporting by reinforcing accountability and engagement within the justice system. In this data, the dissents should be added to provide transparency, pluralism, and public engagement on constitutional issues in court opinions. Overall evaluation, we get the result of impact factor as 4.7, which has public trust, and legal development has the 3.7. It is also concluded that most researchers suggest that the Iraqi judiciary should incorporate dissenting opinions into the democratic structure of governance to improve public perceptions.