THE ROLE OF ADMINISTRATIVE COURTS IN IMPOSING OVERSIGHT ON DISCIPLINARY PENALTIES IN IRAQI, EGYPTIAN, AND IRANIAN LAW.

Abstract

This research aims to demonstrate the role of the administrative judiciary in overseeing disciplinary penalties, ensuring that the administration does not act arbitrarily in imposing these penalties and protecting employee rights. The administrative judiciary aims to ensure that disciplinary decisions are legitimate, based on sound legal grounds, and that the imposed penalty is proportionate to the violation committed. The role of the administrative judiciary in overseeing disciplinary penalties includes monitoring the legality of the penalty. The research reached the following conclusions:

1. The right to defense is a mechanism inherent in the nature of things and enshrined in law to enable the accused to prove the falsity of the accusations against them.
2. Investigation safeguards are a set of procedures and controls that must be observed during the investigation of an employee accused of misconduct. These safeguards aim to reveal the truth and protect the employee's rights.
3. While the amended State and Public Sector Employees Discipline Law No. 14 of 1991 does not explicitly stipulate the right of an accused public employee to access their investigation file or other related rights, this does not negate these rights, as they are established as general principles of law.
4. The purpose of granting an accused employee the right to legal counsel is to prevent the potential loss of rights due to the employee's limited legal knowledge and lack of understanding of how to handle their situation.
5. Iraqi law stipulates what is known as interrogation, which is the process of directing accusatory questions by the administrative head authorized to impose disciplinary penalties to the public employee accused of committing a disciplinary offense. The employee is then confronted orally with witnesses, evidence, and proof to arrive at the truth, which is the employee's conviction and the imposition of disciplinary penalties.
6. Violations of the accused's right to defense encompass numerous forms, whether related to the accused's exercise of their rights to a defense or to the methods they use to refute the accusation.
7. Iraqi, Egyptian, and Iranian legislation alike lack a comprehensive and inclusive definition of disciplinary and criminal liability for public employees. Legislators in Iraq, Egypt, and Iran have merely outlined the features of this liability without explicitly defining it. Keywords: Administrative judiciary, disciplinary sanctions, Iraq, Egypt, Iran