Abstract

Over the course of a century, the administrative authority in Iraq has enjoyed some important penal powers, and the law has permitted it to impose penalties. In several areas, the Iraqi legislator has differed in their organization. They have varied between the constitution allowing some of them and withholding these powers, while the laws allow some of them and within the framework of the public interest. Because the administration seeks to achieve the public good and bears the burden of caring for some interests and professions, it prioritizes these interests over some rights and freedoms, and this is consistent with the fact that it is a public authority that seeks to achieve the public good. Responsibilities compete with some rights and freedoms, so the most important ones take precedence over the important ones. The administrative authority must enjoy the burdens and responsibilities it bears and some penal jurisdictions to deter attacks on the law and on some of its exclusive rights, especially since it has public authority that gives it this approach. There is no way to perpetuate some interests except with the presence of these penalties. Without them, some values and interests would have been blown away. Some countries range between stipulating these powers in their constitutions and legislative approval in accordance with the laws, provided that these powers remain subject to non-arbitrariness, and the administrative decision associated with the penalty is under the crosshairs of the judiciary, assessing its distortion and applying the rule of law to it. It must be said that these powers represent the minimum of what the administrative authority enjoys, and they change with changing circumstances, expanding in emergency circumstances and shrinking in normal circumstances. These penalties fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the administrative authority, with judicial oversight of those decisions.