ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - A senior Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) official warned Monday that proposed amendments to Iraq's constitution could undermine the Kurdistan Region's authority, as a renewed push for revisions exposes disputes over federalism and government formation mechanisms.
Ashwaq Jaff, a member of the KDP's Central Council who served as head of the ruling party’s parliamentary faction in Iraq in previous terms, told Rudaw's Sangar Abdulrahman that Kurdish political parties must “closely scrutinize” any proposed changes, particularly provisions governing the distribution of power between Baghdad and the Kurdistan Region, and be “extremely careful with the provisions, with the Arabic wording - particularly the vocabulary that is used.”
Jaff further underscored that Kurdish representatives had insisted during previous amendment discussions that provisions concerning the Kurdistan Region should remain untouched.
The warning comes amid worry that discussions over possible amendments could concentrate power in the hands of the central government in Baghdad, away from the Kurdistan Region.
While a full list of amendments have not been presented, over the years, Shiite and Sunni Arab politicians have asked to remove Article 140, which is tied to the normalization of the status of disputed territories in Nineveh, Kirkuk, Salahaddin and Diyala provinces. Calls have also been made for a new constitution to grant exclusive authority over oil and gas to the federal government.
The debate follows an appeal by Faiq Zaidan, head of Iraq's Supreme Judicial Council, on Friday for the Iraqi parliament to review and amend constitutional provisions, particularly Article 68 regarding government formation, that have contributed to repeated political deadlocks.
While several Arab lawmakers welcomed the proposal as an opportunity to address disputes over government formation, Kurdish politicians have warned against changes that could weaken the country's federal system - namely, interpretations in parliamentary majorities, the election of the president, identification of the largest parliamentary bloc, as well as potential amendments on articles that impact the power and status of the Kurdistan Region - without seeking Kurdish approval, thereby centralizing power in Baghdad.
Differing interpretations, disputes
Jaff acknowledged that certain provisions require clarification, particularly Article 76 in which the Federal court provided two interpretations - in 2010 and 2022 - which governs the nomination of a prime minister by the largest parliamentary bloc.
In 2010, former Iraqi prime minister Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya coalition won 91 parliamentary seats, narrowly defeating then-prime minister Nouri al-Maliki's State of Law coalition, which secured 89. The Federal Supreme Court subsequently ruled that the "largest parliamentary bloc" entitled to nominate a prime minister could be either the electoral list that won the most seats or a larger alliance formed after the election. The interpretation allowed Maliki to assemble a parliamentary coalition and secure a second term despite Allawi's electoral lead.
The issue resurfaced after the October 2021 elections, when influential Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's movement won 73 seats, more than any other party. Sadr allied with the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and Sunni political factions to pursue a majority government that would exclude his Shiite rivals in the Coordination Framework.
In February 2022, the Federal Supreme Court ruled that the largest parliamentary bloc could be identified even after the election of the president, while a separate interpretation of Article 70 required a two-thirds parliamentary quorum to elect the president.
The latter ruling enabled Sadr's rivals to block the presidential vote by denying parliament the necessary quorum, preventing his alliance from advancing to government formation.
After months of deadlock, Sadr ordered his 73 lawmakers to resign in June 2022, allowing the Coordination Framework to emerge as parliament's largest bloc. The alliance subsequently nominated Mohammed Shia' al-Sudani, who formed a government in October, more than a year after the elections.
Federation councils
One of Jaff's principal concerns was Article 65, which provides for the establishment of a Federation Council representing Iraq's regions and governorates not incorporated into a region.
The council, envisioned as a second chamber of the federal legislature alongside parliament, has never been established, despite being mandated by the constitution adopted in 2005.
Jaff said proposed legislation to establish the council had previously faced opposition from political parties seeking to limit its authority and reduce it to a largely ceremonial institution.
"We want the council to be powerful so that it protects the rights of regions and governorates," she said.
Article 65 requires a two-thirds majority of parliament's members to pass legislation defining the Federation Council's membership, responsibilities and powers, making its establishment dependent on broad political agreement.
Risk of constitutional amendments on systemic safeguards
Jaff also criticized a proposed package of constitutional amendments dating to 2009, which she said would have weakened safeguards for the Kurdistan Region by transferring powers shared between federal and regional authorities to Baghdad.
"According to the Constitution the Iraqi people approved in the referendum, Iraq is a federal country, but the 2009 draft has adopted the mindset of handing all authorities to the central government. This is not compatible with the 2005 Constitution," she said.
She further claimed that the draft sought to replace certain two-thirds parliamentary approval requirements with a simple majority, potentially allowing larger political blocs to pass legislation governing key federal institutions without Kurdish agreement.
The dispute also raises questions about which of Iraq's two constitutional amendment procedures would apply to future changes.
Article 142, introduced as a transitional provision, provides for an amendment committee representing Iraq's principal communities to submit proposals to the parliament. Amendments approved by an absolute majority of lawmakers must then be put to a nationwide referendum within two months.
The article also allows proposed amendments to be blocked if two-thirds of voters in at least three governorates reject them, a provision regarded by Kurdish politicians as an important safeguard against changes imposed without their consent.
Article 126, by contrast, generally requires approval by two-thirds of parliament's members, followed by a nationwide referendum. It also prohibits amendments that reduce regional powers outside the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction without the approval of the affected region's legislature and a majority of its residents in a referendum.
Jaff warned that a future interpretation by the Federal Supreme Court could favor Article 126 rather than the transitional mechanism under Article 142, potentially changing the political and legal hurdles facing proposed amendments.
Federal provisions and the KRG
Concerns over constitutional protections have been echoed by Kurdish lawmakers from across party lines.
Harem Kamal Agha, head of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) bloc in the Iraqi parliament, told Rudaw on Sunday that Zaidan's remarks had not yet been submitted to parliament as a formal proposal.
He argued that constitutional changes would be difficult to advance without agreement among Iraq's communities, particularly the Kurds.
KDP lawmaker Salwan Akreyi similarly questioned the timing of the initiative, saying the country's current circumstances were unsuitable for reopening the constitution.
In contrast, Shakir al-Tamimi, a lawmaker from the Badr bloc, welcomed Zaidan's proposal, arguing that ambiguities surrounding the largest parliamentary bloc repeatedly complicate government formation.
Iraqi judge Wael Abdul Latif, who participated in drafting the 2005 constitution, told Rudaw's Malik Mohammed on Monday that Zaidan's appeal carried no binding legal effect and that constitutional amendments were a matter for the parliament.
Abdul Latif said previous attempts to review the constitution had failed because of political disagreements, casting doubt on the prospects of reaching an agreement under current conditions.
The constitutional debate comes amid longstanding disagreements between Baghdad and Erbil over the implementation of federal provisions, particularly Article 140, which provides for the normalization of disputed territories, a census and a referendum to determine their status.
The provision, covering Kirkuk and other disputed areas, was supposed to be implemented by the end of 2007 but remains unfulfilled. Iraq's Federal Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that Article 140 remained in force despite the expiration of its deadline.
Last week during the Middle East Research Institute (MERI) Forum 2026 in Erbil, Kurdistan Region Deputy Prime Minister Qubad Talabani argued that Baghdad's failure to implement the existing constitution was at the root of disputes with Erbil, citing provisions concerning the Federation Council, Federal Supreme Court, oil and gas, and disputed territories.
Talabani also stressed that the Kurdistan Region needed its own constitution to define the powers of its institutions and regulate governance within the Region.
The Iraqi constitution was approved in a nationwide referendum on October 15, 2005, with 78.59 percent of valid votes cast in favor, establishing the foundations of the country's post-Saddam Hussein federal political system.
