Shafaq News
With each change of government in Iraq, a recurringpattern resurfaces: the incoming administration seeks to erase the policyfootprint of its predecessor. Decisions adopted by the state are oftenwithdrawn, frozen, or subjected to broad review, not necessarily because theyviolate the law, but because the political mood has shifted and a new name nowoccupies the prime minister’s office.
This dynamic has returned to the forefront asdiscussions intensify within the Shiite Coordination Framework (CF), the largest parliamentary bloc, overthe phase following Prime Minister Mohammed Shia Al-Sudani.
Statements from figures inside the State of LawCoalition led by Nouri Al-Maliki have openly pointed to the possibility of asweeping reversal of the current government’s decisions should Al-Maliki returnto the premiership. A similar course unfolded in 2022, when Al-Sudani’s cabinetreviewed and annulled several decisions taken by Mustafa Al-Kadhimi’s caretakergovernment.
Between what is framed as “correction” and whatcritics describe as institutional dismantling, a new reality has taken holdwithin the Iraqi state: no decision appears guaranteed to endure beyond thelifespan of the government that issued it. The consequences extend beyondpolitics, affecting public projects, administrative performance, and financialand job stability.
Analysts and observers of Iraqi governance interviewedby Shafaq News, warn that this cycle, in a country where crises accumulatefaster than solutions, has become a formula for producing administrativedisorder. Governance, they argue, is driven by a mindset of negation ratherthan institutional accumulation, undermining long-term planning and continuity.
They agreed that successive waves of decisioncancellations have often served narrow political objectives. By overturningprevious measures, prime ministers send messages to public opinion that earlierpolicies were flawed or illegitimate, despite the broader disruption suchreversals cause to state institutions.
The result, they say, is a system in which everygovernment starts from scratch, adopting a “demolish and rebuild” approachinstead of building on prior frameworks —an approach that systematically delaysnational development.
: Iraq begins 90-day countdown to formgovernment as political fault lines re-emerge
Administrative Chaos
“Dangerous behavior and a state of political andadministrative chaos across successive Iraqi governments,”
Political analystand former diplomat Ghazi Faisal described the phenomenon.
Faisal explained that cabinet decisions, under anygovernment, are supposed to align with the constitution and with the political,economic, and social program approved by Parliament and the governing politicalblocs, stressing that decisions taken during Al-Sudani’s tenure were made withthe knowledge and coordination of the State Administration Alliance that formedthe government. If such decisions had conflicted with the constitution or theapproved government program, Faisal argued, Parliament should have objected atthe time and moved to block or suspend their implementation.
“If there was no objection from Parliament, noobjection from the State Administration Alliance, and no objection from the CF,and the measures were implemented within the constitutional powers of the primeminister, then there is no legal problem, and later objections are unfounded.”
Faisal warned that the repeated pattern of objection,dismantling, and reversal undermines any genuine opportunity for initiative ordevelopment. “Canceling or suspending projects, starting new ones, and thenending parliamentary terms leaves the country trapped in poverty, hunger,illiteracy, and the spread of informal settlements.”
He questioned the logic of such confrontations, notingthat successive prime ministers have emerged from the same political camp andideological school. “The government is not shifting from a socialist party to aliberal one,” he said. “The prime minister comes from the same CF and the samepolitical orientation. So who is objecting to whom?”
Drawing a comparison with other political systems,Faisal pointed to the United States, where policy reversals typically reflect“clear ideological shifts.” He noted that Republican administrations oftenchallenge Democratic positions on issues such as abortion and healthcare, whileDemocratic governments may move to reverse Republican policies on immigrationand related matters. “Such ideological alternation,” he said, “is absent inIraq.”
: A Lost Term: Iraq’s weakest parliament since 2003
State of Law stance
For her part, State of Law bloc MP Ibtisam Al-Hilaliconfirmed that Al-Maliki, if tasked with forming the next government, wouldmove to cancel all decisions issued by the caretaker government, including whatshe described as improper tax and customs measures, as well as decisionsrelated to suspending leave, scholarships, and employee transfers.
“Measures taken by the outgoing cabinet and its primeminister lack constitutional legitimacy,” she argued.
Recent precedent reinforces the controversy. Afterassuming office in 2022, Al-Sudani reviewed and canceled a range of decisionstaken by Al-Kadhimi’s caretaker government, particularly senior-levelappointments. At the time, Al-Sudani held a press conference affirming hiscommitment to a Federal Supreme Court ruling that limited the powers ofcaretaker administrations.
Days ago, Al-Sudani himself sparked widespreadcriticism and public backlash after issuing several decisions while hisgovernment was transitioning into caretaker status. These included imposingtaxes on thousands of imported goods, approving senior appointments, among thempositions within the Communications and Media Commission, and issuing decisionsaffecting civil servants, such as study leave and the sale of state-ownedvehicles.
Decisions without Guarantees
Political analyst Mujashaa Al-Tamimi argued that thisemerging norm does not constitute reform but instead exposes the absence ofstrategic planning and the weakness of the state as an institution independentof individuals and parties.
Al-Tamimi said Al-Hilali’s remarks about revisitingall of Al-Sudani’s decisions if Al-Maliki returns to power “are not anexception, but an extension of a recurring approach, one that Al-Sudani himselffollowed.”
“The result is one outcome,” he said, adding that“decisions taken without any guarantee of continuity, public policies withoutinstitutional memory, and a state managed through demolition and rebuildingrather than accumulation.”
Al-Tamimi also rejected the notion that this reflectsnormal political competition, describing it instead as “a systematicobstruction of the idea of the state.” As long as there is no cross-governmentcommitment to public policy, he warned, chaos will remain the rule rather thanthe exception.
Legal perspective
From a legal standpoint, expert Aqeel Ouki pointed outthat canceling previous government decisions is a flawed approach rooted inpolitical targeting rather than public interest, noting that institutionalsystems worldwide rely on legal frameworks that ensure decisions serving thepublic and the state remain effective and binding, something he said is absentin Iraq.
Ouki said that some decisions issued by the dissolvedRevolutionary Command Council during Saddam Hussein’s era remain in forcebecause they addressed legal gaps and administrative deficiencies. “The statestill suffers from legislative shortcomings that force it to rely on decisionsto address urgent needs.”
While the practice is legally unsound, according toOuki, there are currently no constitutional or legal remedies to prevent it. Under Iraq’s existing framework, governments retain the authority to cancel,amend, or uphold previous decisions, as there is no explicit legal orconstitutional text prohibiting such actions.
: Iraq’s Presidential Race: Kurdish candidates competing for the post
Written and edited by Shafaq News staff.